27 Apr, 2011, Twisol wrote in the 1st comment:
Votes: 0
So I'm at my weekly Ruby meetup, and someone just mentioned prgmr.com to me. It struck me as a great potential MUD host. What does everyone else think about the service, and how viable would it be for running a MUD?
27 Apr, 2011, Idealiad wrote in the 2nd comment:
Votes: 0
At first glance it looks a little expensive, though with vps providers you kind of get what you pay for. For example my vps is 512 mb, 20 gb disk, and 500 gb bandwidth for $6/mo. You could make a case though that if you're not going to use that extra disk or bandwidth, or really test if the provider can give you that reliably, it's more of a marketing tactic than anything.

Maybe check up on them over at web hosting talk, that's a pretty good forum for web and vps providers.
27 Apr, 2011, Runter wrote in the 3rd comment:
Votes: 0
Looks reasonably priced to me when compared to traditional "mud hosts" and what they give you. I think the xen as the virtualization technology make this a plus as well. I've had bad experiences with the performance of shared resource boxes.
27 Apr, 2011, Rojan QDel wrote in the 4th comment:
Votes: 0
Seems overpriced for what they give you. Why not get something from Linode.com or Tektonic.net? You get a lot more for your money.
27 Apr, 2011, Kayle wrote in the 5th comment:
Votes: 0
I've got a Linode 768, the closest they have to that is their $20 packge which would be an increase in RAM for me, but would cut my transfer quota almost in half. Not to mention the uptime, stability, and other great services Linode offers.

I dunno. I just don't see the merit in going with something like this when you can get the same thing from other more well known companies with almost double the transfer quotas.
27 Apr, 2011, Runter wrote in the 6th comment:
Votes: 0
Rojan QDel said:
Seems overpriced for what they give you. Why not get something from Linode.com or Tektonic.net? You get a lot more for your money.

Linode costs 20 dollars per month and you get about the same thing at the site linked for 20 dollars a month. Additionally, most muds don't need 20 dollars worth of linode. They only need about 6. Which is what this site basically offers.

re transfer quota:

I'd venture a guess you wouldn't be anywhere near the quota in any event.


upon looking more into the pricing, you're paying 30 dollars a month and the plan you're comparing to is only 20 dollars a month. 30 is 50% more than 20. That's considerable. Their plan at 36 dollars a month is actually closer to what you're paying and triple than ram, 25% more storage space, as well as more transfer per month. Also, if you pay 6 or 12 months in advance it's less than 30 dollars a month.
27 Apr, 2011, Twisol wrote in the 7th comment:
Votes: 0
Thanks for the analysis, guys. :cool: I'm not actually interested in running a MUD at this time, I just wanted to share it in case someone else found it useful.

When I heard about it I went to compare it to Linode, and my first instinct was that it was much more in line with what a MUD likely needs, especially if you're just getting off the ground. Plus, $5 is a lot easier to make an excuse for than $20! :biggrin:
28 Apr, 2011, Kayle wrote in the 8th comment:
Votes: 0
Yes, but they're still a no-name company, and I have no idea how reliable their service is. I _know_ Linode is reliable.
28 Apr, 2011, Runter wrote in the 9th comment:
Votes: 0
Kayle said:
Yes, but they're still a no-name company, and I have no idea how reliable their service is. I _know_ Linode is reliable.

Well, I didn't dispute that part of what you said. :)

But for most mud hosts that are using like mudmagic or what not with shared boxes but don't want to spend 20 a month on linode, this may be a superior option to "mud hosts."
28 Apr, 2011, Twisol wrote in the 10th comment:
Votes: 0
For what it's worth, an acquaintance at the aforementioned Ruby meetup recommended it to me. Word of mouth tends to rank pretty well on the scale of initial trust.
28 Apr, 2011, Chris Bailey wrote in the 11th comment:
Votes: 0
I'm a fan of word a mouth. Give them a try, what is the worst that can happen?
13 Jul, 2011, Kline wrote in the 12th comment:
Votes: 0
Small thread necro…Sorry!

When this thread was started I was actually in the market to relocate my VPS due to stability issues (DreamHost: great shared hosting…don't use their sorry excuse for a VPS) and decided to give prgmr.com a try. Loving it since I moved there.

I selected a 512MB RAM, 12GiB disk, and 80GiB transfer package for $12/mo. This meets my needs for "hosting not in my basement" well. I was previously paying $5/mo for a $15/mo (due to being an early adopter) plan at DreamHost that provided about 300MB RAM, unlimited disk, and unlimited transfer…But it was terribly unstable. I'm still coming in below the cheapest Linode package as I don't need the extra disk or transfer they provide, but I still get the same RAM which is great.

I'm happy to report only one minor stability issue when they had a router dropping packets like crazy which led to intermittent latency spikes and disconnects, but that has since been resolved and everyone was credited a few days worth of service for the hassle.

They split CPU time based on your RAM share, with bursting any unused CPU allowed. So, if the server I am on had 8192MB RAM (I believe it has more, can't SSH in to check exactly from work) then I would have a guaranteed 6% CPU usage but can burst up to 100% depending on what other users are doing.

The recovery console they provide into the hypervisor is nice to have, but I haven't had to utilize it to start/stop/restart my instance since my initial signup.

Their website states all accounts get "$5/mo worth of support" and that is very true. They assume you know what you are doing and while they will provide some assistance if you ask, but it's mostly limited to pointing you to Google terms or useful packages unless you can prove you have a higher level issue. So if you're uncomfortable with that you may be best served by Linode or another well-known VPS provided that offers support as part of its core business model :).

The only complaint I can offer is due to how they provision instances, if you decide to upgrade your package your new disk space will be left as an unallocated lump that is not mounted. You are free to mount it and use it as is, or you can choose to tear down your mount points and try to manually merge it with your existing space. Either choice is left as an exercise for you, but hey, they fairly state this upfront and have a good wiki guide for either if you truly get lost.

Overall I'm very happy with the service and would recommend them to anyone who would like to get a good deal on RAM/CPU usage and does not have very large disk/transfer requirements. IPv6 is also supported!