Running your own server is asking for trouble
As someone who has been on both sides of the hosting fence there are few times that I would recommend a client trying to run and manage their own server. Generally, it sounds like a good idea, especially when you look at the cost of managed hosting. It is important to remember that although it may appear cheap to host your own server, using Linux and other open source technologies, the costs can be deceptive and not always be directly tied to money. Most often if careful and honest assessment is done the managed services turn out to be the cheaper option in the end. What am I talking about? Lets see.
Let me clarify that when I talk about running your own server I am not referring to some guy running a Linux web server on an old PC in his basement. I will be comparing both options for the same level and quality of service.
Up front costs
Let’s compare the up front costs for managed hosting and running your own server.
A typical dedicated server will probably start around $175 per month and gives you a modest server with lots of bandwidth and unless you are running heavily used sites or applications then it will most likely be more than enough. So at $175 per month that will cost you $2100 for the year. That may sound like a lot but really it is not because you get a fully functionally server out of the box with operating system and software per installed based on the package you chose. You also get power redundancy because your server is part of a data center. Also the hosting company still owns the hardware and is responsible for replacement if any hardware fails.
If you were to host your own server and you had the same $2100 budget for the first year. Well it would be impossible to build your server, install power redundancy (modest UPS at a minimum), buy the operating system (if you wanted Windows), and buy any backup and protection software. Also on top of that you are going to need a static IP address (you get that as part of the managed services) which can easily run you $100 per month from your ISP which alone eats up over half your budget.
Server administration
Another important thing to consider is server administration. Who is going to run and maintain your server? Who is going to troubleshoot your server when it goes down at 2 in the morning and you start getting panicked calls from your clients.
Most hosting companies will also administer your server for you as part of your managed hosting package, well, for a bit more money of course. This means that if something goes wrong you just call up technical support and they take care of it. This also means they are on the hook for the protection of your data and making sure the backup routine is in place and functioning.
Let’s consider that compared to you having to maintain your own server. If you are a person that is knowledgeable about computers than chances are you could manage to run your server fairly smoothly. On the other hand consider that if you are busy keeping the server running optimally then who is running your business and generating revenue? You can’t do everything and out sourcing your server administration is one of those things you should let go.
Now even if you paid your hosting company double to include server administration into your package ($350 per month or $4200 per year) this is considerably less then a salary for a fulltime IT person which will run you a minimum of $40,000 per year for someone decent and if you decided to use Linux to save money on your OS costs that salary just took a big jump.
Conclusion
The long and short of this post is to say if you need dedicated hosting then go with a professional company because when you stop to consider all the costs involved whether it be money or just peace of mind running your own server will cost you way more.
RSS ?
8 comments on this post
This makes little sense. Cost wise, there is no competition in cost between running a server from the home and paying to have a server.
A computer, even purchased new, fully decked out to host could cost less than $500 with upc, software, back up hard drive, and everything else if the buyer was moderately savvy.
I would drop any ISP that charged for a static IP address in a heartbeat.
After that, there is little-to-no maintenance required, assuming everything was done right the first time.
Of the 2 choice of ISP in my area a business connection iwth a staic IP is $100 per month. Maybe things are different where you are.
Can you link to a server that is $500 and comes with the a UPC? The machine I speced out would cost over $500 without the UPC and that;s with me building myself. Again maybe rices are better where you are.
@Rob
You’re right, you could get a $500 (w/out a UPC) computer but nothing that couple handle even a large site.
A lot of ISPs don’t allow you to run a web server from home and those that do, won’t give you the bandwidth you need to run more than a medium site.
Having a managed server is generally much cheaper than running your own. But its just not the same as having your own.
I just built a new server to host my client’s off-site backups. It’s the aforementioned linux server in some geek’s basement. It cost me $324 after shipping and is more power than I’ll ever need for backups. My clients provide their own backup drives so only a small 500GB was included in that cost.
The hard part is getting a static IP. Nobody here offers one unless you want to pay serious money for it, or at best they offer “semi-static” which still involves a DHCP lease and will change whenever their systems reboot.
So far the cheapest way for my clients has been to lease a machine at some datacenter and then hire me & my team as their ‘on site’ remote admin. I’ve seen remote administration services sell for less than $5/hour but keep in mind you’ll be talking to Pradnesh over in India. Quality administration goes for at least $20/hour, you really do get what you pay for though.
One of the biggest issues not touched by the article is that of service. Some giant corporation will treat you like a number and will do little to customize things for your specific needs. You service will be exactly like everyone else’s. Smaller operations have the time to ensure things are exactly how you want them as if you were the one doing the work yourself.
I guess it boils down to what’s worth more to you: your time, or your money?
It makes sense for large sites to get a proper server at a host, if you are just running a site with sub 2000 views per day then it makes sense to have an old pc doing it, but if you have 10000s of views per day/cpu intensive things like video hosting then a proper server is the way to go
I agree with rob. Any slightly out of date computer can become a webserver without even breaking a sweat. So if you have an older computer you just buy a cheep backup hard drive. Reinstall windows on it and put xmapp on it. Then all thats left is a cheep ups and static ip. But with the static ip I agree with rob also. I wouldn’t even consider a isp that dosen’t come with a static ip. And even then there is the option of using dynamic dns.
I have a pentium 3 600mhz with 512 of ram that I got for free running windows xp pro and xmapp with a 50$ ups. It hosts 7 or 8 different websites and still never goes above 40% cpu usage. It has been running for 3 mounths now without a reboot and it still shows no sign of needing one soon.
@Frosty, Oddly enough I have run my own webserver before and I used a P3 600 with 512 of ram with WinXP and WampServer it ran great for over a year before it just shoutdown and wouldn’t reboot. Turns of the harddrvie died and somehow took the backup drive with it. In this case I guess it was my fault for not having an off site backup.
@all I am not saying that you can’t run your own server and if you can get all the necessary equipement fairly cheap then that is great. The article is just my opinion based off my experiences.
I still hold to the belief that for large heavy traffic sites you can’t beat managed hosting dollar for dollar when you have to get into having static IPs and dedicated connections.