Most Reliable Hosting Company Sites in June 2014
2nd July, 2014
|2||Netcetera||Windows Server 2012||0:00:00||0.008||0.064||0.071||0.156||0.293|
|4||Hosting 4 Less||Linux||0:00:00||0.008||0.196||0.125||0.247||0.435|
|5||Hyve Managed Hosting||Linux||0:00:00||0.012||0.241||0.063||0.125||0.128|
|6||Kattare Internet Services||Linux||0:00:00||0.012||0.194||0.126||0.253||0.530|
Datapipe had the most reliable hosting company site in June, with only two isolated failed requests. This is Datapipe's third victory so far this year, and the company also achieved second place in May. Datapipe has accrued an outstanding 100% uptime record over the past eight years, and consistently exhibits very fast connections times, regularly being one of the fastest sites we monitor. The only other hosting company to have reached first place this year is Qube who did so three times, equalling Datapipe.
Netcetera came second in June, also with only two failed requests, giving it the most reliable Windows-based hosting company site. Netcetera has been in the hosting business since 1996 and offers a 99.9% uptime guarantee, although in practice its site actually reached 99.99% uptime over the past year and 99.96% over nine years.
Pair Networks had the third most reliable hosting company site in June. Like Datapipe, their website is served using FreeBSD. As well as hosting websites, Pair Networks recently hosted a Girl Develop It workshop in Pittsburgh, which is where their own custom-built data centres reside.
Netcetera had the only Windows-based hosting company site to appear in the top ten in June, while three sites used FreeBSD and the remaining six used Linux. Downtime is only recorded when all of Netcraft's performance monitors simultaneously record an outage, hence why it is still possible to achieve 100% uptime even if a site fails to respond to an individual performance monitor.
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. In the event the number of failed requests are equal then sites are ranked by average connection times.
Information on the measurement process and current measurements is available.