OVH plans massive cloud expansion
enterprisetimes.co.uk
enterprisetimes.co.uk
However the WORST company I've ever dealt with for support is Amazon AWS which I was using for backup (S3). My account got locked due to a card expiry problem. I had updated my card details when I got a new one and their UI confirmed that the details were updated but nope, they weren't. Eventually consistent - not! Took over 48 hours to get a support contact.
Host Europe (circa 2005, Beeston) are just in front of them when we rolled up to extract some dead kit and found that our colo'ed kit was just piled up in the bottom of a telecoms rack, not a proper server rack. Cables everywhere 2 inches deep. Try getting the bottom HP DL380 G3 (27kg a piece) out of a pile of 8 DL380s without taking your site down or dinking some other poor sod's network cables or power trailing everywhere. Four people and piles of O'Reilly books to act as makeshift jacks. Total fucktards.
For their lower products OVH's support is pretty terrible. But for their professional solutions the support is good and reactive, but you need to get a premium support contract.
It's an option that you have to select when you choose the product and that the reason why they are able to offer such low costs for naked hosting solution (like super cheaps dedicated servers).
6 days to change a blown disk for example...
Online.net (the other big french hosting company) has the same problem, you can get cheap servers but if you don't also susbscribe to a support contract you are screwed. :-/
I use online.net for the http://www.online.net/en/dedicated-server/dedibox-xc Its a dedicated 8core machine for £15 a month (including extra IPs)
What you don't get is fancy hand holding. So if you're not comfortable provisioning machines, they are not for you.
However if you are able to run real steel, then this is the shop for you. Faster and cheaper than amazon, but no real s3 offering.
I think it depends on your offering, I understand that different parts of the company (online.net appears to be a subsidiary of OVH) have different specs.
They do have a rather sexy graph though:
CDN - nearest location:
Download speed from Cachefly: 95.0MB/s
America - United States:
Download speed from Softlayer, Dallas, TX: 13.5MB/s
Download speed from Softlayer, Seattle, WA: 12.1MB/s
Download speed from Softlayer, San Jose, CA: 11.7MB/s
Download speed from Softlayer, Washington, DC: 20.8MB/s
Asia:
Download speed from Linode, Tokyo, Japan: 4.32MB/s
Download speed from Softlayer, Singapore: 10.3MB/s
Europe:
Download speed from i3d.net, Rotterdam, Netherlands: 54.2MB/s
Download speed from Leaseweb, Haarlem, Netherlands: 88.5MB/s
They currently have connectivity issues to Coloat (Atlanta). I raised a issue ticket and they responded that they have "already contacted Coloat to change the route on their side and use better route but they don't do the modification".Bandwidth to the US sucks, but I didn't expect much more. 10Mb/s on this low spec machine.
Two months later, massive OVH breach. Grrr.
Seriously how big of a monthly bill did you have at ovh that was the problem? Are we talking thousands, tens of thousands or something like a personal $20/mth account?
I've been with OVH for years and my main concern is that my monitoring service reports my server being inaccessible for hours a month. Luckily this isn't a critical server but there's no way I'd use them for an actual business.
Note: The large outage in the middle is actual maintenance. The others are just OVH's network being unresponsive.
If they really don't take any loans to build 12 data centers at once, that's really impressive. Or does that only mean "without taking investments"?
Let's say it takes 40M USD to build and stock a data center, built over the course of 3 years, that would be an extra drain of 120M USD per year.
Of course there is huge variabilty here: if they don't start from the green field, but buy/rent/lease existing buildings, they can go to market much faster. And it all depends on the size of the new centers, which hardware they stock it with etc.
UPDATE: Just found http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/google-data-center-faq-pa... which claims that some Google data centers cost USD 600M each, so it seems there's not much of an upper limit, and/or my estimates were hopelessly low.
I worried they'd try to spend all their money on distractions, like an AWS competitor, an ISP in France, a conference, a magazine with a headshot of the founder, ..., which they're all still doing. Now I can hope most of the money is used for scaling the good part.
They really have issues with product bloat, always adding new stuff, never cleaning things up. For instance, their previous admin web UI lasted for like a decade. It was full of icons for obscure features (but icons are so user-friendly, you know) and hyperlinks were javascript-activated because DHTML was all the rage back then. The new UI is better but already suffering from the dozens of things it has to support to reach parity with the previous feature set.
They seem to be pretty good with building datacenters and getting peering/transit deals, not so much with software. I hope they realize it.