Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DanMcS" data-source="post: 1192849" data-attributes="member: 6530">I'm seeing figures kicked around like 150 gigs a month transfer.&nbsp; Bandwidthwise, $400+ a month sounds high for that, though I guess there are colo costs there too.For instance, <a href="http://www.pair.com/pair/highvolume/hv3.html" target="_blank">pair.com</a> has a &quot;high-bandwidth&quot; plan that's $180/month for 120 gigs of transfer, and $4/gig extra, so 150 gigs on a medium plan like that would run $300ish dollars, which is at least a step down.Really, I don't consider 150 gigs a month exceptionally high usage, but I'm used to thinking in terms of good-sized info companies like the one I work for, which does tens of gigs/day of transfer, more or less.&nbsp; For webhosting, 150/month probably high.Wait, I was looking at the wrong section.&nbsp; <a href="http://www.pair.com/pair/quickserve/qs1.html" target="_blank">Here</a> is a dynamic server plan with 200 gigs a month of transfer for $250 a month.&nbsp; That is more in line with what you'd be looking for for a site like this.&nbsp; Insufficient hard drive though (what on earth is this site doing filling 80 gigs of hard drive?).I don't think pair has what enworld needs, this site needs co-location (which it has, but it needs it cheaper), but this is an indication that it can probably be done cheaper than it currently is, at least.Then there's always fat-trimming, which Morrus already did a bit, removing a bunch of images from the front page.&nbsp; People complained about that, I don't know why.&nbsp; If the front page is the major bandwidth sink, it might need an enforced diet though.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DanMcS, post: 1192849, member: 6530"] I'm seeing figures kicked around like 150 gigs a month transfer. Bandwidthwise, $400+ a month sounds high for that, though I guess there are colo costs there too. For instance, [url=http://www.pair.com/pair/highvolume/hv3.html]pair.com[/url] has a "high-bandwidth" plan that's $180/month for 120 gigs of transfer, and $4/gig extra, so 150 gigs on a medium plan like that would run $300ish dollars, which is at least a step down. Really, I don't consider 150 gigs a month exceptionally high usage, but I'm used to thinking in terms of good-sized info companies like the one I work for, which does tens of gigs/day of transfer, more or less. For webhosting, 150/month probably high. Wait, I was looking at the wrong section. [url=http://www.pair.com/pair/quickserve/qs1.html]Here[/url] is a dynamic server plan with 200 gigs a month of transfer for $250 a month. That is more in line with what you'd be looking for for a site like this. Insufficient hard drive though (what on earth is this site doing filling 80 gigs of hard drive?). I don't think pair has what enworld needs, this site needs co-location (which it has, but it needs it cheaper), but this is an indication that it can probably be done cheaper than it currently is, at least. Then there's always fat-trimming, which Morrus already did a bit, removing a bunch of images from the front page. People complained about that, I don't know why. If the front page is the major bandwidth sink, it might need an enforced diet though. [/QUOTE]

Verification