Speed required for a small business site?

Hi everyone,

I am looking to install a website at home and wonder what sort of connection
I would need upload wise.
I'm not expecting huge amounts of traffic. If it got to the stage where more
than 2 or 3 users were using the site at the exact same time, then I'd be
pretty chuffed. So, any ideas on the minumum requirements and cost?

The other related question is what are our options in terms of getting an
above 256K connection up the way rather tha down the way. 2meg down the way
is fine, but we need a decent upload speed as well.

Thnaks everyone
Kind regards
Simon

Simon Harvey wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I am looking to install a website at home and wonder what sort of
> connection I would need upload wise.
> I'm not expecting huge amounts of traffic. If it got to the stage
> where more than 2 or 3 users were using the site at the exact same
> time, then I'd be pretty chuffed. So, any ideas on the minumum
> requirements and cost?
>
> The other related question is what are our options in terms of
> getting an above 256K connection up the way rather tha down the way.
> 2meg down the way is fine, but we need a decent upload speed as well.
>
> Thnaks everyone
> Kind regards
> Simon

Please combine your questions into one post as I dont know how to coordinate
my answers otherwise.
You say your exchange is not enabled for ADSL and are asking about
alternatives. How does that go with a typical ADSL package of 2MB down &
256KB up ?
As for the uplink speed required, it depends very much on the content you
wish to serve, is it streaming video or static html or even a dynamic
database driven site ?
For a standard static site or a dynamic one with few users, ADSL would
suffice, however if you wish to stream to more than 2 users at a time you
will most likely struggle. I cant give you estimates on numbers but as I
said more detail as to your intended application is needed.
If you do want higher uplink see if you can get any form of SDSL ( it falls
foul of the cost criteria though ) or search Google Groups for the
discussion in htis group about bonded uplink over the past 3 months.
For a simpler answer , try Andrews & Arnold, they might be able to help you
with the bonding enquiry.

S. Althaf

"Simon Harvey" <sh856531@microsofts_free_emal_service.com> wrote in message
news:4gxVa.50707$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi everyone,
>
> I am looking to install a website at home and wonder what sort of
connection
> I would need upload wise.
> I'm not expecting huge amounts of traffic. If it got to the stage where
more
> than 2 or 3 users were using the site at the exact same time, then I'd be
> pretty chuffed. So, any ideas on the minumum requirements and cost?

If you want my advice, website at home is bad idea as you got only 256
kbit/sec upload. 30 users on your website and it's unable to respond.
Much cheaper would be to keep home broadband for web browsing and just buy a
decent web hosting instead.

1&1 offers those on both MS and Linux platforms, for example - that's where
I registered my domain.
You can have your domain & hosting in one place - or choose the separate.

I think that solution with real webhosting will be cheaper for you then
wasting money for extra downstream bandwidth at home - and still getting 256
kbit/sec upload even on 2 Mbit/sec line...
On a real webhosting your site visitors will get much better downloads than
they would from your home broadband.
>
> The other related question is what are our options in terms of getting an
> above 256K connection up the way rather tha down the way. 2meg down the
way
> is fine, but we need a decent upload speed as well.

Some people manage to bundle 2 phone lines with ADSL enabled, and can get up
to 4Mbit/sec down and 512 kbit/sec up.
Expensive and still doesn't provide good download speed for your website
users.

>
> Thnaks everyone
> Kind regards
> Simon

You could use our Virtually Leased lines.

We have one company with 30 users accessing the net on a 128k 1:1 so two or
three users would be fine on less than that. Public IPs are not possible but
dynamic IP routing can get round that.

We could provide hosting which would be far cheaper
http://www.iwight.biz/windows.html

Or we could provide a dedicated server or colo
http://www.iwight.biz/dedicated.html

Paul


"Simon Harvey" <sh856531@microsofts_free_emal_service.com> wrote in message
news:4gxVa.50707$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi everyone,
>
> I am looking to install a website at home and wonder what sort of
connection
> I would need upload wise.
> I'm not expecting huge amounts of traffic. If it got to the stage where
more
> than 2 or 3 users were using the site at the exact same time, then I'd be
> pretty chuffed. So, any ideas on the minumum requirements and cost?
>
> The other related question is what are our options in terms of getting an
> above 256K connection up the way rather tha down the way. 2meg down the
way
> is fine, but we need a decent upload speed as well.
>
> Thnaks everyone
> Kind regards
> Simon
>
>

Hi there Ham,

The reason that i'd prefer to use our own server and premises is because one
and ones offerings and policies are to restrictive. Even using there "rent a
server" style solutions, I'm not allowed to install SQL Server and god only
knows what else. I need a flexible solution based on JSP and SQL Server.

The other thing is that I'm not in the least bit impressed by one and ones
record. They proudly boast about being the best customer service company but
frankly, thats Bollo%ks. I've been wanting to purchase a very high end
solution from them for the 3 weeks and its taken them between 3 and 5 days
for them to reply to the simplest questions. Even then they cant answer them
right. Shower of monkeys there. 5 days for a crappy response to a simple
question from who claim to be and were awarded acalaides for the best
customer service in this industry. God save us all.

We need the american attitude towards customer service ie, actually provide
some. Its not that frigging hard, but would be such a novelty

Simon

Thanks all.

All advice taken on board

Thanks again

Simon

Simon Harvey wrote:
> Hi there Ham,
>
> The reason that i'd prefer to use our own server and premises is because one
> and ones offerings and policies are to restrictive. Even using there "rent a
> server" style solutions, I'm not allowed to install SQL Server and god only
> knows what else. I need a flexible solution based on JSP and SQL Server.

There are alternative co-location facilities available. It is often
better than running on the end of a local link (ADSL or leased line).

--
_ Rev. Adrian Kennard, Andrews & Arnold Ltd / AAISP
(_) _| _ . _ _ ADSL, fixed IP, monthly contract http://adsl.ms/
( )(_|( |(_|| ) SpliceCom VoIP based PABXs http://aa.gg/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Bond two ADSL lines? http://www.FireBrick.info/