Why No Windows Servers?

[Pawel Kowalski]

I'm just curious about this, why do you guys not offer Windows 2003 dedicated servers? Seems like you are missing out on a big market by doing this. I am thinking of moving my Windows 2003 server here because I will probably want to move to linux anyway but if you guys had Windows 2003 options a few years back I might be hosting a server here already since the prices are much better than what I currently pay.

[Vin DSL]

I've already told them about this...

Alternate control panels, clustering, load balancing

Jag seemed interested, but is having a hard time getting off the pot...

[Rob]

i sometimes wonder this myself but there is another jpc company who do offer windows vps and dedicated servers

[JPC-Greg]

I've already told them about this...

Alternate control panels, clustering, load balancing

Jag seemed interested, but is having a hard time getting off the pot...

We can, just no public plans yet. and getting setup as an official reseller takes forever. In all other venues we can find a soluion, subscribe, and be dishing out licenses in hours or days. For windows it takes 6 weeks to complete the reseller side of things, paperwork, etc.

Nonethless, we do have an offering under another brand and Im bringing it here in a few short weeks.

[Spathiphyllum]

...if you guys had Windows 2003 options a few years back I might be hosting a server here already since the prices are much better than what I currently pay.

Isn't it the fact that they aren't carrying Windows IIS the reason that Jaguar remains so competitively priced? The licensing for Microsoft products, particularly its servers, is generally (much?) higher than its Linux-based counterpart. Higher licensing fees equals more expensive plans. That's not to say Jag couldn't get a package using MS servers and try to compete with other MS server providing services, but I imagine the overall expenses for maintaining both Linux and MS would drive up overall maintenance contracts such that all plans are affected regardless of any licensing fees which could be separated by plan.

Besides, Apache is the best server in the world and was just designed for Linux. Let's not get the Borg more interested in suggesting that new, proprietary snippets would be useful for Apache to incorporate to make it run better on any OS.

[Pawel Kowalski]

Isn't it the fact that they aren't carrying Windows IIS the reason that Jaguar remains so competitively priced? The licensing for Microsoft products, particularly its servers, is generally (much?) higher than its Linux-based counterpart. Higher licensing fees equals more expensive plans. That's not to say Jag couldn't get a package using MS servers and try to compete with other MS server providing services, but I imagine the overall expenses for maintaining both Linux and MS would drive up overall maintenance contracts such that all plans are affected regardless of any licensing fees which could be separated by plan.

Besides, Apache is the best server in the world and was just designed for Linux. Let's not get the Borg more interested in suggesting that new, proprietary snippets would be useful for Apache to incorporate to make it run better on any OS.

I agree, if I am going to host web sites here I will go linux hands down. But in today's world servers aren't just for web sites anymore. I personally use it for game servers but there are lots of other uses like exchange, sharepoint and ASP without having to run chilisoft.

The windows CAL pricing is a little expensive. I know that datacenters and other providers work out a special deal with microsoft, I just have no clue how that works. The current company I have my dedicated server with they charged me $30 a month extra to have windows instead of linux, not a terribly high cost if you really do need it.

[Vin DSL]

IIS works fine! In many ways, IIS is better than Linux...

I ran IIS for 2-3 years, at another mass web host. I just got tired of the crappy sql db (ODBC) they offered. I came here because I thought they offered BSD hosting. 4 years later, I'm still waiting! Whatever!

Truth be told, I don't know why I'm still here. I guess it's 'cause I like the Chief, Masood, & Smith, et cetera.

Anyway, I think it would be smart of them to offer IIS hosting, but who cares, really?

[the_ancient]

IIS works fine! In many ways, IIS is better than Linux...

I ran IIS for 2-3 years, at another mass web host. I just got tired of the crappy sql db (ODBC) they offered. I came here because I thought they offered BSD hosting. 4 years later, I'm still waiting! Whatever!

Truth be told, I don't know why I'm still here. I guess it's 'cause I like the Chief, Masood, & Smith, et cetera.

Anyway, I think it would be smart of them to offer IIS hosting, but who cares, really?

Vin you did not just post that? IIS and Linux are totally Differant, IIS is a WEB SERVER developed my Mircosoft, Linux is a OPERATING SYSTEM

[the_ancient]

I'm just curious about this, why do you guys not offer Windows 2003 dedicated servers? Seems like you are missing out on a big market by doing this. I am thinking of moving my Windows 2003 server here because I will probably want to move to linux anyway but if you guys had Windows 2003 options a few years back I might be hosting a server here already since the prices are much better than what I currently pay.

because Windows is GREAT for DESKTOPS, but sucks royal monkey balls for Servers

[Ron]

I've often wondered: How can anyone tell if they are Royal?

[Pawel Kowalski]

because Windows is GREAT for DESKTOPS, but sucks royal monkey balls for Servers

People that work for companies that run Microsoft Exchange, SharePoint, and Quickbooks Server tend to disagree with that statement.

[JPC-Greg]

You can expect windows services will cost more , without a doubt.

[Frank Broughton]

People that work for companies that run Microsoft Exchange, SharePoint, and Quickbooks Server tend to disagree with that statement.

And said market will increase with Office 2007 out. I actually like it (never thought I would EVER say that) and just bought 7 Office 2007 Professional Plus licenses for the office. Vista looks to be a winner also.

[Pawel Kowalski]

And said market will increase with Office 2007 out. I actually like it (never thought I would EVER say that) and just bought 7 Office 2007 Professional Plus licenses for the office. Vista looks to be a winner also.

Haven't had a chance to check out Office 2007 yet, we just finished our upgrades to office 2003 around here. Our budget always leaves us a little behind. Hell, some of the older machines still had office 97 on there :P. But looking at its features it will be very interesting running it with sharepoint though Im not sure how big of an imporvement it will be over 2003.

I also haven't played with Vista betas yet as I don't think I will upgrade to it for a while. I will try to convince my company to buy a couple upgrade copies next week so I can give it a test drive.

[Frank Broughton]

thehotweb...

You can download Office 2007 for free and give it a run for 60 days: http://www.microsoft.com/office/grea...l/default.mspx

Or sign up to be a Microsoft Partner (tis free) and download the Install CD which allows you to run office 25 times before having to license it.

My only beef (so far!) is that they did not get the ribbon system setup for Publisher yet.