[Hcoop-discuss] Next steps for HCoop

[Tanveer Singh]

On 12/2/05, ntk at hcoop.net <ntk at hcoop.net> wrote:
>
> I'd like to make some notes on this whole thread.
>
> I'd also like to throw out the idea of looking beyond the typical "Linux
> geek" type of audience (of which I and most of our current users probably
> qualify as members) for new users.  Certainly we are currently a good fit
> for such users, but I do not agree with the sentiment that they are the
> only ones we should target or even the only ones that we are currently
> useful to.  More on this in a moment.


Cant do that. To accommodate we need to have a control panel style of
interface like the other providers are offering. But with our current
security setting where even sending attachments via email is not possible,
the only way to upload stuff to fyodor is ssh, and this is where non-geek
idea gets thrown out of the window.

Also a couple of people have proffered that we can't compete on cost with
> the lowest-cost providers out there and instead should emphasize
> flexibility and other advantages.  Actually, looking at all of the
> services linked to so far, all of the plans that are actually cheaper than
> our base dues have severe limitations compared to HCoop (in terms of
> numbenr of domains, disk space, applications, etc.)  I submit that due to
> not taking any profit we are already cheaper or as cheap as any other
> commercial provider providing the same level of service (in terms of
> unlimited domains, amount of disk space, cost of bandwidth, shell access,
> CGI & other web apps, databases, etc.)  Moreover, as we add MORE users we
> will only continue to get LOWER cost.  Adam already estimated that we can
> accomodate up to 300 users at current usage levels on fyodor.  This would
> at most only moderately increase our marginal costs (bandwidth, basically)
> while reducing our dues by a factor of 6.  Moreover, once we DO get to the
> point of leasing a whole block of units or a whole rack, our monthly costs
> per U will be significantly lower, providing yet another level of savings.


Yes, if we have 300 members, then we can compete. Currently there are
provers offering 50GB transfer/mo + 2.5GB for  $5/mo with only limitation of
one website/account. Can we offer that? Maybe in the future, yes but not now

So, even users who do not take advantage of all the "geeky" things that
> hcoop has to offer benefit from HCoop and provide a benefit.  By
> increasing our volume they increase our efficiency, providing savings to
> them and us.  There are plenty of people out there with basic computer
> skills who, once they learned to synchronize their web directory and check
> email (either plugging a few settings into Outlook or better, Thunderbird,
> or simply using squirrelmail), would be satisfied customers.  In fact, I
> contend that such "neophytes" are actually LOWER maintenance than
> potential "UNIX wizards" who come along and want to do amazing dynamic
> things but end up needing a lot of assistance getting their Postscript web
> server running and proxying their backend cluster running Plan9 in
> Kazakhstan.  A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.  Either way, the
> "neophytes" certainly use fewer server resources than the power users,
> which means either lower costs for everyone, or an opportunity to provide
> an even cheaper low-cost alternate plan for such users.
>
Neophytes will be a suport headache. We currently do not have ny provision
of actual support
"Admin, my site does not work", Look at the apache logs etc., etc.,
Currently its tailored towards people who have "Actually used Linux". If you
go after newbies who have been fed on a windows diet, you are in trouble.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.hcoop.net/pipermail/hcoop-discuss/attachments/20051202/ad00c41c/attachment.htm