Most Reliable Hosting Company Sites in May 2010

Rank Company site OS Outage hh:mm:ss Failed Req% DNS Connect First byte Total
1 New York Internet FreeBSD 0:00:00 0.011 0.155 0.085 0.182 0.441
2 INetU unknown 0:00:00 0.015 0.080 0.060 0.133 0.335
3 DataPipe FreeBSD 0:00:00 0.022 0.059 0.011 0.023 0.033
4 Multacom FreeBSD 0:00:00 0.022 0.219 0.082 0.164 0.396
5 Rackspace Linux 0:00:00 0.022 0.106 0.088 0.175 0.175
6 One.com Linux 0:00:00 0.026 0.369 0.083 0.166 0.166
7 www.navisite.com Linux 0:00:00 0.026 0.244 0.092 0.185 0.378
8 iWeb Technologies Linux 0:00:00 0.030 0.096 0.064 0.128 0.128
9 www.acens.com Linux 0:00:00 0.030 0.221 0.097 0.423 0.735
10 www.aruba.it Windows Server 2003 0:00:00 0.034 0.858 0.089 0.180 0.180
See full table

The most reliable hosting company site in May was New York Internet, responding to all but three of Netcraft's requests. It was served by Apache running on FreeBSD.

Established in 1996, New York Internet is located near Wall Street and maintains its own data centers. The company's core services include dedicated servers, colocation and virtual web hosting.

INetU came a close second with just four failed requests.

INetU is an enterprise managed hosting company located in Allentown, PA. They have been in business since 1996 and notably offer a 100% uptime service level guarantee. Managed services provided by INetU include MySQL and MS SQL database clusters, Exchange servers, virtualization and firewalls. Their clients include Fortune 500 companies such as Microsoft, Intel, Northrop Grumman and Canon.

Five of May's top ten most reliable sites used Linux, while three ran on FreeBSD and one on Windows Server 2003.

Netcraft measures and makes available the response times of around forty leading hosting providers' sites. The performance measurements are made at fifteen minute intervals from separate points around the internet, and averages are calculated over the immediately preceding 24 hour period.

From a customer's point of view, the percentage of failed requests is more pertinent than outages on hosting companies' own sites, as this gives a pointer to reliability of routing, and this is why we choose to rank our table by fewest failed requests, rather than shortest periods of outage.

Information on the measurement process and current measurements is available.