Fair Use: Please note that use of the Netcraft Blog is subject to our Fair Use and Copyright policies. For more information, please visit http://news.netcraft.com/fair-use-copyright, or email info@netcraft.com.
  1. Hosting Provider Performance Comparison Available

    Buying a dedicated server or moving a site to a new network provider can be a stab in the dark in that it is often not easy to see the quality and reliability of the provider’s network performance until after the purchase has been made.

    Netcraft’s view is that lack of transparency on network performance and outages harms the whole industry, both consumers and providers.

    Just as the customer suffers from not being able to make an informed choice between suppliers taking into consideration network response times as well as price, vendors with fast and reliable networks have no easy way of empirically showing the prospect the relative quality of service of their network relative to other players in the market.

    Ignorance plays into the hands of the companies investing less in their networks, since they will be better able to discount, and their longer response times and network outages will be less obvious to the customer.

    More widespread knowledge helps the industry as a whole, because better informed customers are more willing to pay more for superior connectivity, and the extra revenue coming into the industry can be invested in further improving resilience, performance, and support creating a virtuous circle.

    Key metrics include;

    • fewer outages – no one wants to be on a network that suffers frequent loss of connectivity.
    • Shorter outages - customers will be more tolerant of short outages which may be operationally difficult to avoid;
    • faster response times - the shorter the response times, the better.

    Netcraft is measuring and making available the response times of fifty leading hosting providers' sites to give an indication of the relative and absolute response times currently available in the industry. The performance measurements are made at fifteen minute intervals from four separate points around the internet, and averages are calculated over the immediately preceding 24 hour period.

    Ranking by failed requests and connection time, 14:00 GMT, June 24th
    performance-graph-4.png

    Using the performance of a hosting providers own site to determine the performance of the hosting companies network is only indicative. By default the sites are ranked in order of fewest failed requests, and shortest time to connect, in order to give the clearest indication of network capacity and congestion, with the least impact from the performance of the companies’ own web servers, though it is possible to sort by any column by clicking on the column heading.

    If you are using the table as a guide when choosing where to locate a dedicated or collocated server, remember that connection times fluctuate continually, and only hundredths of a second separate the top companies. Avoiding companies showing prolonged outages is likely to be a better strategy than necessarily going for the company with the fastest connection time.

    Factors other than network performance, including quality of support and price will also be important. If you are considering shared hosting then the load on the shared hosting system will likely be a greater constraint on the performance of your site than network connection time.

    If you represent a hosting company and would like to be included in the table, or if you are researching prospective hosting locations and would like more detailed performance information please mail us.

    Posted by Netcraft Admin on 24th June, 2003 in Hosting, Netcraft Services Share

  2. Cable & Wireless site shows outages

    Cable & Wireless, which recently announced that it would sell or close its North American operations, suffered several hours of outages on its main web site earlier today. Ironically, the site is still hosted in the US, presumably by the very same operations that it is trying to divest.

    Posted by Mike Prettejohn on 15th June, 2003 in Hosting Share

  3. Speedera gains sites, reaches operating profitability

    Speedera, which recently announced that it has reached operating profitability, has seen some impressive site gains in the last few weeks. Sites starting to use the Speedera caching service include NASA, Hewlett Packed, AMD and the India Times.

    With Cable and Wireless announcing that its Global division, which includes the Digital Island business, is to be sold or closed, Speedera will be hopeful of making further gains within the next few weeks.

    Posted by Mike Prettejohn on 10th June, 2003 in Hosting Share

  4. Explosion and Fire at Rackshack

    Rackshack had a large transformer explode and start a fire today. Amazingly, given the pictures of the fire they seem to have prevented it from affecting their network performance which, at least for rackshack's own site, is no different from any other day.

    Posted by Mike Prettejohn on 3rd June, 2003 in Hosting Share

  5. Where are the Windows Server 2003 sites hosted?

    Some people expressed surprise that there could be thousands of sites running on Windows Server 2003 before it went on sale. The main reason for this is that some shared hosting providers who were part of the Windows Server 2003 beta program were prepared to run part of their sites on Windows Server 2003 prior to launch. The three providers with the largest number of active sites on Windows Server 2003 are all Microsoft Certified Partners while the fourth largest is Microsoft itself. No one else had more than 1000 active sites running on Windows Server 2003 at the start of May.

    Top Microsoft Windows Server 2003
    hosting companies by Active sites, May 2003
    CompanyActive Sites
      Interland4,996
      Schlund3,125
      Fasthosts2,250
      Microsoft811

    For comparison, Schlund and Interland [primarily due to its acquisition of Dialtone Internet] are also two of the largest Linux hosting providers, along with specialist Linux hosting providers Rackshack and Alabanza.

    Top Linux hosting companies by Active sites, May 2003
    CompanyActive Sites
      Schlund1,450,868
      Rackshack234,740
      Alabanza150,180
      Interland144,488
      About118,287
      Valueweb109,998
      Verio102,696

    Posted by Netcraft Admin on 5th May, 2003 in Hosting Share

  6. Who are the Fastest Growing Hosting Providers?

    Over the last two years the most common reason for a Hosting Provider making the news was when the company went bust. Hoswever, outside of the mainstream newsflow, some companies have been growing strongly.

    A table of the Hosting Providers who grew the fastest during 2002 is provided as an excerpt from our Hosting Provider Server Count. Companies are included in the filter if they started 2002 with more than 500 servers, finished with at least 1000, and grew at a rate of better than 33% year on year. This removes hosters which can show a significant percentage increase simply by virtue of starting small.

    Fastest Growing Hosting Providers by % Increase in Web Visible Servers
    December 2001 to December 2002
    Parent CompanyDec 01Dec 02% ChangeMain Business Area
    1&1 Internet AG 8127,203787%Mixed Hosting
    Rackshack 1,2087,356 509%Dedicated
    Colt 9992,049105%Telecoms & Colocation
    Host Europe 1,6063,248102%Mixed Hosting
    Tele Danmark Communications 7561,46994%Telecoms
    Global Media Online Inc6421,19085%Mixed Hosting
    Korea Telecom2,1783,67569%Telecoms
    Rackspace2,8074,51861%Dedicated
    Datapipe7461,13152%Dedicated
    Deutsche Telekom1,8692,82451%Telecoms
    Speakeasy1,1521,70648%Broadband
    Advance Technology Works1,1611,68145%ISP
    Interland1,9902,85143%Mixed Hosting
    Sprint Communications2,2773,23842%Telecoms
    Dialtone Internet2,2433,18242%Dedicated
    Qwest Communications2,5203,54641%Telecoms
    Telecom Italia1,9802,66234%Telecoms

    Of the top 4 companies in the table 3 have recently issued their financial results for 2002 which confirm their continued growth. (1&1 Internet , Colt , HostEurope ).

    The top of the table shows that fast growth in the hosting industry is closely linked to providing good value at a low price. 1&1 and Host Europe both offer extremely cheap shared hosting packages, while Rackshack has more or less defined the market for low-cost dedicated servers. Colt is often amongst the cheapest quotes for bandwidth in the cities in which it operates.

    Several of the leading dedicated server companies have produced annual growth over 40%. Additionally, many of the larger telecoms companies are showing good rates of growth of web servers on their networks, in part from Hosting Resellers and DSL and Cable connections as well as their own hosting operations.

    Limitations of the Hosting Provider Server Count include the following;

    • Only sites found by the Web Server Survey will be included. The number of hosts found running internet web sites by the Web Server Survey is large [over 40 million in April 2003], but not exhaustive.
    • Sites are attributed to companies by performing a reverse DNS lookup on each responding ip address in the Web Server Survey. If reverse DNS lookups have not been configured or otherwise fail, the count for the company will correspondingly reduced. To mitigate this we provide an additional view of the data compiled by Netblock registration. In practice the most successful hosting companies seem to set up reverse DNS correctly.
    • Backend machines such as database servers not running web sites will not be counted, as they are unseen from the Internet.
    • At most one server will be counted for each site. Round robin DNS, reverse web proxies, load balancing products like Cisco Local Director and BIG-IP and some connection level firewalls hide multiple web servers behind a single hostname.

    Full details of the Hosting Provider Server Count are available.

    Posted by Mandy Davis on 14th April, 2003 in Around the Net, Hosting Share

Page 36 of 36« First...1020303233343536