Disadvantages of Virtual Private Servers
12 January 20071. Server failures. With many processes, users, nonstandard kernel, VPS might have more server failures.
2. VPS need more time for administrators. Many administrators are not used to VPS related technologies and they need more time and maintenance expenses are larger.
3. Capacity management expenses rises. Maintaining more storage, RAID disks, network file systems (NFS), etc.
3 Responses to “Disadvantages of Virtual Private Servers”
December 28th, 2007 at 6:49 am
VPS isn’t suitable for every site owner.VPS hosting packages are more expensive than shared hosting but the cost difference isn’t all that significant – usually less than an extra $200 a year. So, yes, higher costs are one downside. There are a couple of others.
April 18th, 2008 at 6:34 am
Well, I don’t see any disadvantage actually. Shared hosting is one thing, but Virtual Private Servers are much better and can be as powerful or more powerful than a full dedicated server. However, if you need something absolutely custom like Kernel etc, then dedicated server is the way to go. VPS’s can get pretty complex, but if you need more, than I don#t think a VPS will cut it.
May 4th, 2008 at 7:58 am
vps is usually more reliable than dedicated since it runs on better hardware. You rent a ferrari instead of owning a yaris. If you only drive once in a while its a better deal.