ASP Hosting

purejamie · 2 Nov 2006 at 14:57

Afternoon all,

I am currently writing an ASP web service that screenscrapes basketball scores, classes them up then makes them available on a web page to settle whatever basketball related bet me and my friends have at the time.

I am looking for an ISP to host this service on. I would like obviously ASP (version 2 if possible), seeing as it is just a screenscraper that will be viewed by a small number of people I do not need much space or indeed much bandwidth. Currently my hosting is with web-mania (linux based) so I can not run this stuff on their servers. Also I would like if poss for any ASP ISP recommended to do cheap transfers of my existing domains (2 of them). Obviously, for this purpose I would like the hosting to be as cheap as possible. I've looked around on the OCUK ISP review site but there are no recommendations for this kind of stuff on there.

Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

Jamie.

Beansprout · 2 Nov 2006 at 16:06

Fairly sure Catalyst2.com offer ASP hosting, not sure on the specifics though

Moley · 2 Nov 2006 at 16:10

1 and 1's MS Home package would probably do it for you.

1and1

Cybershot · 2 Nov 2006 at 16:14

Reccomendation for Catalyst2 here - got a couple of reseller accounts and a dedi with them - top guys!

purejamie · 2 Nov 2006 at 17:55

Thanks very much for the replies,

Jamie: I would have to get a business account with them to support ASP.net - thanks anyways.

Catalyst 2 looks like it could be a winner - .net 2.0 support and what should be plenty of bandwidth for 15 quid a year.

Cheers all!
Jamie.

purejamie · 2 Nov 2006 at 22:59

Thanks again for the catalyst recommendation, I have sent them a couple of pre-sales questions to which they have replied in a speedy and professional manner!

Jamie.

blade007 · 2 Nov 2006 at 23:45

soz for a bit of hijack

but are windows IIS server hosting a lot more money than linux ones?

is it to do with licensing ?

purejamie · 3 Nov 2006 at 10:38

From what I have seen MS hosting is always more expensive than the equivilent linux hosting. As far as I am aware it is a licensing issue.

Adz · 3 Nov 2006 at 10:48

It's partly licensing (Windows 2003 and MS SQL) and partly because a Windows shared hosting server is a whole heap more hassle to manage than a Linx shared hosting server. As such, not many companies choose to offer it and the competition in that sector is less.