[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Simon Waters wrote: >> That said, I'm sure there's a very big market for people who are very >> happy with 99% uptime > Come have a web server that is down 3.5 days a year isn't a good sales > pitch. So you don't say that :) My point is that not everyone needs 100% and all the extra costs required for that. Personal websites, placeholders, community servers, assistance servers, backup servers etc etc. Things were downtime is an annoyance, not a disaster. Would I pay two or three times as much for 100% instead of 99%? Maybe, maybe not, depends on the job. (Especially when 100% uptime contracts generally have small print guaranteeing nothing close to 100% :) ) -- Simon Avery -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html