shared-virtual private or dedicated servers

[Steve Sardell]

need some help on this one.

I have some linked sites looking for new host

Other than cost what are the advantages of a dedicated server compared to a virtual private or even a shared server?

It seperately owned but theme related sites are on a shared or virtual sever and link to one another-could there be a potential problem?

Has anyone had any experience with a company called OLM?

Any help is appreciated. I am very naive in these areas.

[Blue]

Other than cost what are the advantages of a dedicated server compared to a virtual private or even a shared server? Bandwidth would be the main advantage, in that you would not be sharing it (dedicated), nor would you be in danger of being shutdown due to overages (VPS), nor would you be shutdown due to resource hogging (shared).

Keep in mind that you'll need either the knowledge yourself to manage the dedicated server, or hire a sysadmin, or go with a managed dedicated.

I haven't heard of OLM.

I'll leave the other question for someone else.

[Steve Sardell]

As Always Blue,

Thank you. I was thinking it might be the bandwidth,but was not sure. It is great folks likeyou are willing to share the know-how. Much appreciated.

[Yixe]

For our dedicated server, we use rackshack.net, now called www.ev1servers.net and manage it ourselves. I believe that they do offer a management option at a very minimal price. They are based in Texas.

We're happy to recommend their service (and aren't affiliated in any way except for being one of their many customers). Look for one of their 'special deals' on a server whose contract has ended and you will save a little more money.

[Steve Sardell]

Thanks Andy, I will take a look. Appreciate your time.

[polarmate]

It seperately owned but theme related sites are on a shared or virtual sever and link to one another-could there be a potential problem?
If a search engine implements the Hilltop algorithm (http://www.cs.toronto.edu/%7Egeorgem/hilltop/) in which they eliminate links from affiliated sites by looking at IP addresses as well as domain names, then there could be a problem. But then this could happen whether or not you own the shared server but link (unknowlingly) to sites that have similar IP addresses as yours or are hosted on the same web host as you. This is the part I have not been able to understand about the Hilltop algo and why IP addresses would be used to determine affiliated sites in today's scenario where host header web hosting is very common and there can be multiple web sites on the same IP.

[Webmaster T]

Originally posted by polarmate
This is the part I have not been able to understand about the Hilltop algo and why IP addresses would be used to determine affiliated sites in today's scenario where host header web hosting is very common and there can be multiple web sites on the same IP.Agreed Manisha, I know of a host with over 6,000 domains on a single IP, some of which are major brands in Canada! That and the fact that "hilltop" doesn't handle sites with no ODP listing very well is a problem. Although I don't see proof of "hilltop" being used I have seen evidence of a problem with the present Google algo if there is no ODP listing. For instance the hotwired article in the query for "search engine optimization" sometimes occurs twice, in the top ten without a parameter and in the top thirty with a parameter (10 results at a time). This seems to be an orphaned URL in the index and it usually appears for a while after an update before it is removed.

[bwelford]

Originally posted by Webmaster T
... the fact that "hilltop" doesn't handle sites with no ODP listing very well is a problem.
I think that Google probably only looks at its own directory, which is updated infrequently (? monthly) from the ODP directory. There's an additional problem in getting relevant results from Google.

[Steve Sardell]

Originally posted by polarmate
If a search engine implements the Hilltop algorithm (http://www.cs.toronto.edu/%7Egeorgem/hilltop/) in which they eliminate links from affiliated sites by looking at IP addresses as well as domain names, then there could be a problem. But then this could happen whether or not you own the shared server but link (unknowlingly) to sites that have similar IP addresses as yours or are hosted on the same web host as you. This is the part I have not been able to understand about the Hilltop algo and why IP addresses would be used to determine affiliated sites in today's scenario where host header web hosting is very common and there can be multiple web sites on the same IP.

This is the part I also am not understanding. Are we in a position where sites hosted on the same server should not link to one another? What and how is the affiliation deternined? Is it simply because we share the same host? If I have site A on a shared server and am linked to site B who unbeknownst to me is on the server, is this a NO NO? If so, what does it do to all the resellers of who place sites on shared servers?

[polarmate]

Steve, personally, I link to sites because it is relevant to my target audience or it augments/supplements/is relevant to my content. If the search engines don't like it or disapprove of it, that's really too bad. I don't think the search engines can dictate to me that I can only link to sites that are not in the same Class C as my site and/or are not hosted with the same web host. <end of rant>

Then again, the Hilltop algo disqualifies links as affiliated sites when determining "expert" pages which are "pages that have been created with the specific purpose of directing people towards resources." If your site does not fall within that premise then your site does not qualify to be an expert page in any case and so who cares who you link to! Just make sure the sites are not spammy or using bad SEO tactics. So I would say that if the link is relevant to your content and to your target audience, go ahead and link to the page concerned regardless of where it is hosted.

[Steve Sardell]

Originally posted by polarmate
Steve, personally, I link to sites because it is relevant to my target audience or it augments/supplements/is relevant to my content. If the search engines don't like it or disapprove of it, that's really too bad. I don't think the search engines can dictate to me that I can only link to sites that are not in the same Class C as my site and/or are not hosted with the same web host. <end of rant>

. So I would say that if the link is relevant to your content and to your target audience, go ahead and link to the page concerned regardless of where it is hosted.

Thanks Polarmate,

That is exactly what we have been doing, and have not seen any reason to cease, at least not yet.