Most Reliable Hosting Company Sites in January 2010

Rank Company site OS Outage
hh:mm:ss
Failed
Req%
DNS Connect First
byte
Total
1 www.theplanet.com Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.005  0.687 0.074 0.218 0.602
2 Hosting 4 Less Linux  0:00:00  0.005  0.130 0.090 0.189 0.498
3 www.navisite.com Linux  0:00:00  0.010  0.773 0.034 0.528 0.631
4 DataPipe unknown  0:00:00  0.010  0.294 0.036 0.053 0.070
5 INetU unknown  0:00:00  0.014  0.233 0.036 0.089 0.135
6 Pair Networks FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.014  0.278 0.045 0.093 0.223
7 New York Internet FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.019  0.069 0.032 0.070 0.186
8 Swishmail FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.024  0.558 0.033 0.068 0.173
9 www.memset.com Linux  0:00:00  0.024  0.658 0.081 0.164 0.164
10 Verio Linux  0:00:00  0.024  0.186 0.098 0.196 0.196

See full table

The first month of 2010 saw The Planet and Hosting 4 Less have the most reliable hosting company sites. Both sites responded to all but one of Netcraft's requests in January.

The Planet provides dedicated servers, managed hosting and colocation services to more than 20,000 businesses. The company has more than 10 million websites in Netcraft's Hosting Provider Analysis and uses Windows Server 2003 to run its own website.

Hosting 4 Less offers a 99.9% uptime guarantee, with its own OC48 Sonet Ring connecting their secure data center to the internet. Hosting 4 Less has been running since 1998 and currently uses Apache on Linux to serve its own website.

Four of the most reliable hosting company sites in January were identified as running Linux, while three were using FreeBSD and one was using Windows Server 2003.

Netcraft measures and makes available the response times of fifty 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.

Further information on the measurement process and current measurements are available.