Question

I have seen this question pop-up on stackoverflow a few times but haven't found a good solution yet. I am looking for recommendations on Virtual Private Server Hosting featuring Windows Server 2008 plus MS SQL database capabilities.

I have seen people suggest webhost4life.com, hostmysite.com and others but they do not offer windows server 2008 hosting, only 2003. I have also looked at mosso and aspnix.com. Mosso seems like a good move, but an hoping to find something below $100 a month and I have heard extremel mixed reviews on aspnix.com.

Thanks for the help.

Was it helpful?

Solution 4

I think I have found one that will be very promising. Applied.net just came out with a VPS package for server 2008. I have also looked into discountasp.net which also looks like it might serve my purpose/application (they allow you to modify the trust level, which I need)

OTHER TIPS

Here is the best deal that I have found: ASPNix

Other notable VPS hosting companies that you might look at:

  1. VPSLand
  2. Server Intellect
  3. HostMySite
  4. GoDaddy

Charles, are you using ASPNix currently? How has there "product" been as far as uptime, support and features. I currently have GoDaddy (shared hosting), it is reliable but...

KristoferA, unless I am missing something Server Intellect does not offer Virtual Private Server hosting with Windows Server 2008 only 2003

Update 2: Since this was posted back in 2008 I have switched to dedicated servers from Serverloft ( http://www.serverloft.com/ ) where I get dedicated hardware for less money than shared/VPS at ServerIntellect...


Original answer:

Update: They currently offer Win2008 for dedicated servers only, virtual servers are all 2003... That aside:

I'm using Server Intellect and I am very happy with them. Great bandwidth, excellent support (usually responds within a few minutes of submitting a ticket) etc. In addition to Windows and SQL Server their VPS also comes with 'Helm' (I don't use that) and SmarterTools mail + web statistics + ticket system (I use all of those).

The only [potentially] negative thing I can think of is that their backup service backs up individual files so a "full system" image can't be done. (Or couldn't last time I asked them - maybe has changed since then). A full system image would be neat since it would mean a much faster restore if the server would die...

Licensed under: CC-BY-SA with attribution
Not affiliated with StackOverflow
scroll top