On Sat, 22 Mar 2008, Joe Greco wrote:
Charging substantially less for rack space, even offset by higher costs for
power, would encourage a lot of colo customers to "spread the load" around
and not feel as obligated to maximize the use of space. That would in turn
reduce the tendency for there to be excessive numbers of hot spots.
I wonder if we're to the point yet where we should just charge for power
and give the space away "free"....
When I'm shopping for colo that's pretty much the way I look at it. Power
determines space. I need 80,000W of power at the breaker, so I need
800sqftx15$ in facility A, and [EMAIL PROTECTED] in facility B.
I can fit my 8 racks into either the 320sqft or into the 800. If I'm
doing the 800, I'll probably spend a bit more up front and use 12 or 14
racks, to keep my density down. A bit more cost up front, but in the
grand scheme of things 4 or 6 extra racks ($6 to 10,000$) don't directly
hurt to much. (80kW worth of power usually means you've got well north of
$2M worth of hardware and software being stuffed into the space in my
experience..but maybe that's because we're an Oracle shop. ;)
Of course, I suppose for those customers still doing super-low-density
boxes (webhosting with lots and lots of desktops), I suppose that model
wouldn't work as well.
ramble.
.d
---
david raistrick http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.expita.com/nomime.html