Benefits collocation servers

[gmotech003]

Hello,

What are the benefits of collocated servers?

Regards,
Raquel Marasigan

 

[net.rookie]

Cheaper, more security and can be customized to your needs.

 

[gmotech003]

Collocation Server you own your server. But how about the cloud computing?

 

[MilesGeek]

Purchasing hardware and colocating it in a datacenter would be too costly option. The cost effective solution would be to consider a fully managed dedicated server provider with offsite backup solution.

 

[Brian_R]

Co-location can bring benefits but it carries risk as well. A few areas worth thinking about:

Flexibility - you can have any config you can build, no matter how odd or lopsided or unsaleable. Dedicated servers tend to be more mainstream, even when customised.

Hardware fixes - with rented dedicated servers you generally don't have to worry about the hardware other than being sure that the provider fixes things that break. With colo, you do. Who will carry the stocks of spares? Where will you get items from if they aren't in your stock. Do you need a third party to warrant and support the hardware?

Networks: often sold as 95% commits for colo, as opposed to the per-TB pricing common for dedicated servers. This can be an opportunity to save a lot of money as bandwidth use is generally pretty predictable across a providers user base, but you have to get it right.

Costings: if you are putting in, say, 10-20 servers, you should be able to save relatively significant amounts against dedicated servers if you do things right - but it needs capital and getting it wrong means a lot of wasted cash.

Commitment: buying kit means you are signing up for the long term - there's no cheap way out with £20k of server capex to pay for. There is also no-one else to blame for the vast majority of problems, if it's broke YOU need to fix it.

Risk - small scale colo (a couple of servers) can work but is much riskier as the cost impact of one of your servers dying from eg a bad motherboard is much higher than you might think - parts replacement, travel to datacentre or remote hands, long downtime etc. If you are unlucky (or have bought abused old kit) and get hit with bad hardware failures, it can wipe your annual profits out in a single stroke. Over a larger server base this will tend to even out, but a small/single server base makes for big peaks and troughs.

You'll notice I don't mention ownership anywhere as a good or bad point - I personally don't see it as anything other than an emotional or maybe a marketing issue. As long as you have use of the servers, does it matter if they sit on your balance sheet or someone else's?

 

[easyhostmedia]

Collocation Server you own your server.

Yes you may own the hardware, but you rent the rackspace, also if the hardware breaks it is you who has to have the spares available to repair this.

depending on your business it will be cost effective just to rent a dedicated server.

 

[CaroNetTanya]

Collocation is a good choice for Big projects, but it will be very costly to do this for 2-3 servers.
You needs to pay for rack space, bandwidth,KVM /Remote Hands and etc.

 

[DJAB Hosting]

If you have a strong understanding of depreciation rates on hardware, networking experience, system administration abilities, and a solid amount of servers, colocation makes a lot of sense.

I am personally a big fan of colocation because it gives you more control over upgrades and other major decisions. There is a lot of credibility to owning your own hardware and gives you a piece of mind.

Many people call this a "tier 1" provider. I'm not sure if that's an official term but people will call "tier 1" hosts who own and manage all aspects of their infrastructure from the security, hardware, software, and end network.

Colocation is a numbers game and the key to colocation: buy in bulk.
Get the same server but 5, 10, 20, 50, etc at a time. This will allow you to use the same parts when hardware fails and will also allow you to properly predict your depreciation rate on the server. Also some companies will give discounts when you purchase the same server in a quantity.

 

[Natcoweb.]

Colo service is good if your project is big and you have enough money for that.

 

[CrystoneHosting]

Colocation Provides Reliable Uptime
Better Network Speed and Reliability
Better Power RedundancyRedundant and Improved Cooling / AC Environment Conditioning
Significantly Lower Setup and Monthly Cost For Services
Colocation Opens Up New Possibilities and Business Opportunities
physical security

 

[Collabora]

Colocated server is much less expensive than dedicated server, especially if you have several. But if you are colocating keep in mind you will be responsible for your hardware.

 

[web-project]

collocated servers - you will be able to host your own server, which much better as you can create your own solution.

 

[easyhostmedia]

collocated servers - you will be able to host your own server, which much better as you can create your own solution.

true, but as others have stated

you will be responsible for your hardware.

so you will need to know all about the hardware and how to fix this etc. if anything goes wrong.

 

[monovm]

the monthly prices decreases very much
and its very nice solution for hosting companies

 

[tecsys]

You control your own hardware basically. However, with reduced costs there are some disadvantages too. You have to be very proactive with hardware monitoring as well as maintain extra hardware stock for failures and stuff. Its a gamble for persons who are not very well versed with the technical side of hosting servers.

 

[incloudibly]

Colocation is more efficient for powerfull servers. If you collocate weak hardware, the savings gap won't impress you.

 

[Epidrive]

Just so you know, its colocation not collocation.
For the benefits: of course you get to host the server to the country you choose to colocate your server, you get better security, faster connections, and hardware conditioning

 

[skdedicated]

In most cases the bandwidth is more expensive on colocation compared to dedicated servers, if you have hardware issues you have to take care of them yourself or pay remote hands instead.
Depending on the hardware you wish to locate you have to consider if it's worth the costs.

 

[ServerDeals]

Colocation if you have the budget and have the drive to sell your product is the better way to go in hosting. Most start with buying used hardware which is low amperage and watts so that you get the most out of your money. Filling a rack with server less then 1AMP provides you with a cheaper alternative to lets say reselling; which, although good, provides you with smaller profits. Reselling is excellent if your just starting or learning, or if you just don't wish to manage all the ins and outs.

Colocating with the right company is where the work comes in, along with managing amps and space. You set your own prices and that's where the true bargain comes in. If you provide excellent service second to none with all the bells and whistles of larger hosts, then customers will come and they will pay the price for happiness. You can also provide servers cheaper if you think you can wait on the longer ROI.

All and all, Colocation is just another form of hosting, but you own the product and put it in a place where you know its going to be treated well.

 

[Iniz]

You own the server, the start up cost of the hardware will be high for good piece of hardware but in the long run the monthly cost will be much lower then if you rented the server from the DC but it's key you have some backup memory sticks etc sent as well if something fails and is a critical machine especially if you don't live close to the DC