ColoCrossing
Hosting Websites on Bare Minimum VPS/Dedicated Servers

ChicagoVPS – $6.45 512MB XEN VPS in Chicago

Tags: , , , Date/Time: May 7, 2012 @ 2:26 pm, by mikho

ChicagoVPS

ChicagoVPS goes XEN again … Same offer as in February this year, but the openVZ packages are priced a little lower then last time. ChicagoVPS has been around for a long time, first offer in October of 2010 and perhaps the most featured provider on LEB? I haven’t done any scientific research about it so I might be wrong.

However they have many happy customers and a few not so happy customers, but who hasn’t?

Chris, who e-mailed their latest offer had their yearly Professional OpenVZ price a little to high for the LEB price plan, nothing an email with Chris couldn’t sort out.

Don’t forget that anyone who has service with them also get a free 25 slot mohawk Voice Server.

You can order it here after you picked up one of these packages:

XEN VPS Starter

  • 256MB Guaranteed RAM
  • 10GB Hard Disk Storage
  • 500GB Data Transfer
  • 1 IPv4 Address
  • SolusVM/XEN
  • $5.45/Month (Normally $6.95)
  • Promo Code: LEBstarter
  • Order HERE
XEN VPS Standard

  • 512MB Guaranteed RAM
  • 20GB Hard Disk Storage
  • 1TB Data Transfer
  • 1 IPv4 Address
  • SolusVM/XEN
  • $6.45/Month (Normally $9.95)
  • Promo Code: LEBstandard
  •  Order HERE

OpenVZ packages

  • Professional
  • 1024MB memory
  • 30GB storage
  • 1500GB/month data transfer
  • $6/month (Coupon code 1024)
  • $48.00/year (Coupon code1024yr)
  • Order HERE
  • Standard
  • 512MB memory
  • 20GB storage
  • 1000GB/month data transfer
  • $4.50/month (Coupon code 512)
  • Order HERE

Test files can be found here.

 

191 Comments

  1. Jack:

    YAY it’s not the 2GB offer again.

    May 7, 2012 @ 3:10 pm
    • They kept sending 2GB offers but we just kept replying “NO” until they sent us this one. (J/K of course. :P)

      May 7, 2012 @ 3:28 pm
      • Jack:

        I thought Chris would never give up haha.

        Oh well I might try this as it seems more realistic.

        May 7, 2012 @ 3:48 pm
      • Legendlink:

        The coupon “2048” still works for the 2GB plan.

        May 7, 2012 @ 4:43 pm
        • Was supposed to be a secret ;-)

          May 7, 2012 @ 7:58 pm
        • Legendlink:

          Ahh dangit, and I’m the quiet one too.

          Ah well, I picked up another one just the other day.

          May 7, 2012 @ 11:12 pm
      • Ray:

        Is there some thing wrong with 2GB, I kind of new to all this, so would appreciate an explanation.

        May 17, 2012 @ 8:19 pm
  2. Spo0lsh:

    No IPv6 :(

    May 7, 2012 @ 3:35 pm
    • @Splo0sh: not as of yet. Still waiting on our provider.

      Regards,

      Chris

      May 7, 2012 @ 4:39 pm
  3. jbroome:

    They certainly do like to email passwords in plain text. All of them.

    May 7, 2012 @ 3:37 pm
    • they are generally pretty sketchy from my experiences. just do a search for chicago/buffalo vps in the history search and you’ll see how professional chris is…

      May 7, 2012 @ 5:40 pm
      • @Laughing, Im laughing at you. I dont need to hide who I am. Our services speak for themselves. Please go flame someone else.

        @jbroome, we already had this conversation and Jeremiah explained to you how it is secure and you are wrong. If you would still like to debate about it email us directly at billing@chicagovps.net

        Regards,

        Chris

        May 7, 2012 @ 7:42 pm
        • Mike:

          Guys this is such a simple issue. If you are frightened just reset your password once you get your VPS.

          Stop making a fuss about something that doesn’t exist.

          Simple Solution = Reset your password. End of Story.

          May 7, 2012 @ 8:08 pm
        • I agree with Mike. In fact, all of the vps providers I have dealt with will send you the password via email, you just need to use common sense and change the password.

          May 10, 2012 @ 11:47 pm
        • Pastarooni:

          I was under the impression that it was best practice that they not even store my password, but rather a salted hash. The fact that they can email me my password does put a damper on my trust, and reasaonably so.

          May 20, 2012 @ 11:06 am
      • Ivan:

        I agree in that the hosts are an incredibly unprofessional bunch.

        On two separate occasions (both times on Sunday evenings), they have taken my account offline.

        The worst part is, they don’t hestitate to take you offline, and remove all of your files so you had better have a backup hosted somewhere else.

        I refer you to an exchange with Jeremiah via the ticketing system:

        ...
        How do I get my files off the server so I can save you the headache of dealing with these emails and so I can find a VPS that actually gives me some measure of uptime and doesn't disable my account all the time?
        ...
        

        Jeremiah’s response:

        Ivan,
        
        Right now there is no way to "recover" files. We take it down when we get the notifications.
        
        ---------
        Jeremiah Shinkle
        jshinkle@chicagovps.net
        Chief Networking Officer
        

        Moral of the story, buyer beware.

        May 14, 2012 @ 2:01 am
        • Sorry Ivan, I’m trying to understand what you are saying here, please clarify for us. Is it that ChicagoVPS deletes your entire data set if they receive a complaint? Or do they just delete the file that is complaint is being made for. Personally, I would be alarmed if they deleted my whole dataset if the complaint is being made to one specific file… please clarify. Thanks

          May 14, 2012 @ 2:05 am
        • Jonathan:

          Wait, ColoCrossing == ChicagoVPS? Same staff?

          May 15, 2012 @ 8:25 am
        • Ivan,

          Thanks for your complaint and bringing it to the public light.

          1. The complaints we received are in violation of our ToS/AUP that you agreed to.
          2. The complaints are from legitimate sources
          3. You have lied and continue to lie about the content and downloading it.

          It doesn’t matter if someone else did it on your VPS, or if you did it on your VPS, the content is still the same, and you are still responsible for it.

          We have a right to suspend the VPS for the violations of our ToS/AUP at anytime and even cancel them if we feel that is how we want to proceed..

          There is nothing here to sustain “buyer beware” other than maybe seller beware about you.

          Thanks,

          Jeremiah

          May 16, 2012 @ 3:53 pm
        • @Jonathan,

          ChicagoVPS is not equal to Colocrossing.

          While I do work for ColoCrossing, ColoCrossing has no control and/or power in the affairs of New Wave NetConnect, LLC (ChicagoVPS Brand) in any way, shape or form. The only way ColoCrossing has any direct dealings with ChicagoVPS is the suppliers we utilize thanks to ColoCrossing and extending that hand to us, but as our upstream as well.

          What happens at ChicagoVPS, stays at ChicagoVPS.

          Jeremiah

          May 16, 2012 @ 3:56 pm
        • Ivan:

          Risharde: They take the VPS offline, removing all ssh access, all of your websites and all access to your files. Essentially they hold your account hostage.

          Kind Regards,
          Ivan

          May 21, 2012 @ 1:37 pm
        • Ivan:

          Jeremiah, I’ve replied to you further in the thread.
          TL;DR: Thanks for your service, good luck with your business, I won’t be renewing my account.

          Chris Fabozzi, re-think your customer service.

          May 21, 2012 @ 1:52 pm
        • Ivan,

          I actually was the quarterback here. I told him to suspend your account. Also, your account was never deleted, your files are STILL there so please do not lie to make us look bad.

          You broke the ToS multiple times after we gave you chance after chance hoping that maybe you were telling the truth.

          Good luck in the future.

          Regards,

          Chris

          May 21, 2012 @ 3:35 pm
        • Sam W.:

          Not sure what’s going on in here exactly, but they are indeed very unprofessional and not to mention, extremely impolite.

          Ivan probably did something wrong, but that isn’t a justification of being a total douche like Jeremiah and Chris are being here. They bring that attitude to customer service as well, no matter if you have done something wrong or not. Asking for help is enough.

          “Our services speak for themselves” indeed they do – your customer service is horrible. So horrible it caused me to cancel. It’s a shame because – to be fair – the server was quite stable (and that’s the only part that was NOT unprofessional).

          I thought Jeremiah was just one accidentally promoted bad apple on the team, but I didn’t know Chris was aware of his attitude and actually defending him.

          And before you accuse me of this: I am NOT Ivan.

          And yes, I was their customer once. Unfortunately. I’d definitely go with “buyer beware”.

          Kind of reminds me of an old case someone had with EZZI customer service… Perhaps Google it up: “Ezzi rude tech support”

          May 31, 2012 @ 11:47 pm
        • Bojan Markovic:

          I don’t usually do this, I believe that if you’re happy with the service tell the world, if not, tell the business, but this is not about the core service so:

          I opened account in order to make use of the great 2GB offer to finally move my company’s website off my internal server. I was not aware that there was an automated system that’s going to call me on the phone so that I can enter some PIN.

          Chrome auto-fill wrote my phone number without “+” or “00” before the country code, and I just moved on, not giving it much thought. But, due to that, the automated call never came in, and now my account is locked and I’m marked as “Fraud”.

          But that’s not the best part. They refuse to do anything about it, but insist that I SCAN MY GOVERNMENT ISSUED ID CARD AND MAIL IT TO THEM, in order to resolve the issue, and then when confronted, hide in a frighteningly bureaucratic manner behind “their policy”, as if they’re not a two-men show but some huge org that needs layers of approval to do something.

          Mr. Fabozzi also took offence that I consider them to be a relatively new, small business (go figure) and therefore untrustworthy (oddly, he does not object to this part). He also claims he goes through 3-4 cases of this daily, yet he sticks to his guns. I for one, consider this practice abusive, and doubt the legality of it very much.

          Overall the tone of conversations, especially initial response by Mr. Shinkle, is rather rude, giving me further reason to doubt their business ethics.

          So their offer and servers might be stellar (I’ve used 2GB plan for testing once before and it delivered to my needs) but their attitude and business practice leave a lot to be desired, depending on what kind of stuff irks you.

          Caveat emptor.

          June 12, 2012 @ 11:08 am
        • Manfre:

          @Bojan: Standard business practice is to require verifiable proof of identity if there is a hint of fraud. Failure to do so opens the company to liability and might also pierce the corporate veil and open them personally up to liability and criminal charges. It’s also reassuring that they consistently follow their stated policy.

          I’m sure your input error and subsequent account locking was frustrating, but ridiculing a company you want to do business with generally doesn’t encourage them to do you a favor and ignore their policy.

          While reading your post, I imagined you opening a ticket along the lines of, “My account was locked as fraud because I entered the wrong information in the form. You’re a small, inexperienced company that I can’t trust enough to prove my identity. Ignore your stupid policy and unlock my account, please.”

          -Happy Customer

          June 12, 2012 @ 2:08 pm
        • Bojan,

          You must really be that naive, or you really do not know how business works. If you really wanted the service its as easy as scanning in your license.

          Also my response was very professional, and stated that if you really want the service just send us a a scan if not then I wish you luck with another provider. What is so bad about that?

          How big of a company do you think we are? Why make assumptions that you know nothing about? All it does it make you look dumber than you are,yes I just insulted you and do not care because your post is irrelevant and I do not need you $7 when I have thousands of other clients that are much nicer and understanding than you and want to follow RULES set in place.

          Regardless if your not fraud, these rules are set in place for a reason for the real scammers. In one month we lost thousands of dollars because we let people like you pass through the fraud check and ended up being fraud. So to ensure that our prices and quality stay at the top, we have these rules and will NOT break them for anyone or any reason.

          A simple scan was all that was needed here and you just refused. To me your a scammer, or too arrogant to want to follow rules. Unfortunately neither of those things mesh well with me and will not happen.

          Again, I wish you luck with a new provider

          Regards,

          Chris

          June 12, 2012 @ 2:17 pm
        • Bojan;

          To be honest, I’d require the same ID verification at BuyVM; were you using a VPN/Proxy/Corporate ISP that reported your geolocation quite a ways away from your billing address? That’s sufficient enough reason for me to verify someone’s identity. I do request that after scanning they censor out SSNs, account numbers, etc for their own safety (and to help assure any doubts), but I still require the ID.

          As far as legality… there’s no law in place that states you must provide ID to a provider. But there is also no law stating that a provider cannot make positive identification a requirement for service; in most cases, the matching geodata from Address, Phone, and ISP is enough. But when you’re billing address is in Sweden, and you’re connecting from a German ISP (example of a case I dealt with this morning), I’m going to need some proof that you are who you claim.

          Many companies don’t take fraud prevention seriously… they could care less what name, address, etc you give them so long as you get paid. I say hats off to ChicagoVPS for being one of the ones that actually strives to keep things legit.

          As far as ‘hiding behind policy’… whether a company has 2 employees or 2000, established policy is a must. This isn’t so much to protect the company as to protect the clients; for example, why should I waive late fees for one guy when thousands of other clients have to follow the rules? Policy is important, and when you start making exceptions you devalue your own integrity as well as your company’s reputation.

          June 12, 2012 @ 2:44 pm
        • Bojan Markovic:

          @Manfre: Err.. no.

          It was more like: I tried to do this and that but I got a lockout, could you please let me edit the phone number so that your automation system can recognize it OR try to contact me on THE PHONE I INITIALLY DID ENTER (because a human being can infer the phone number correctly and add country code when dialing).

          Which was then reacted to with: Scan and send us your ID, no way in hell will we do anything.

          Which was formed in a rather rude way, and then it triggered a rude response from me in which I said that I would not give a scan of my ID to a small business half the world away.

          I’m still shocked that being a small business is an insult, or somehing to be ashamed off. I’m certainly not ashamed of being in a small business.

          June 12, 2012 @ 3:00 pm
      • Point is we are not small, maybe that is why you lack the understanding of large business rules and ethics of not bending.

        The famous saying is, Give someone an inch they take a mile. Same applies here.

        Give someone a pass, then everyone will want a pass. I am over this. Its $7, and not worth my time.

        June 12, 2012 @ 3:59 pm
        • Spirit:

          Of course you’re relatively small and pretty much young company. Telling us anything else will be lie. Beside that it’s nothing wrong with being relatively new (less than two years is from business perspective still young company) on hosting scene.
          I know that you like to brag around about your success, etc.. but your illusions about yourself aren’t necessary true. You’re small business. Period.

          June 12, 2012 @ 4:39 pm
        • Spirit,

          Do you know anything about us? Please enlighten me on what you think we are. VPS is only a branch of our business. We have been in hosting far before that, and this is only a fraction of what we are.

          You guys all think you have us nailed down, but you dont. You know nothing, and I did not get this sort of attitude for no reason. We are what we say we are, and I have nothing to prove to you and will act any way I want because I know where we are and what it took to get here.

          Think what you want, but your highly mistaken.

          June 12, 2012 @ 5:22 pm
        • Spirit:

          Of course I know you :) After all you’re the guy which (ab)used LEB to increase own sales in last two years the most as you have the biggest number of “special offers” here. Your spamming LEB inbox must be terrific regarding http://www.lowendbox.com/?s=ChicagoVPS&searchsubmit=Find and as I follow those threads from beginning and as I read your constant self-bragging arrogant responses.. of course I know you a bit.
          You’re not so special as you like to believe about yourself, you know. And often you’re just an ordinary web prick who give to hiself bigger credit than truth is. On moments you remind me on some LEB guy from Cyprus and his mails when he was talking about his “big” company.
          I will repeat once again… ChicagoVPS is relatively new and small company in hosting business. You don’t like it? I don’t care, but that’s the truth.

          June 12, 2012 @ 5:52 pm
        • Spirit:

          The thing is that you can’t stand any criticism. You act like offensive little barking terrier everytime when someone says that you’re wrong. And you don’t miss opportunity to tell us how important and big your company is which is obvious lie. And with those statements you only make buffoon from yourself.
          If ChicagoVPS doing well that’s good. Good for you and for your clients. I am ok with that. I am also pretty sure that there’s potential for further growth. However don’t come here just to tell us how big and important you and your company are because you’re not. ChicagoVPS is young hosting company which aggressively use LOWENDBOX to increase sales from beginning and also thanks to that most likely doing well. You should show sometimes some more respect to community used to earn your bread and butter instead acting like an arrogant prick whole time.

          June 12, 2012 @ 6:14 pm
        • Again your wrong. ChicagoVPS is not the name of our business, like I said its only a branch. We have 5 other hosting sites 3 of which are VPS providers. You may even know those other sites, but dont know it is us.

          I love getting people to go off like yourself. I have explained it to people more, I act the way I do because I love when the haters come out and try and prove me wrong. I get my jollies off watching and sitting back laughing.

          LEB is simply just another market we wanted to get into and will eventually try and take over.

          I am done, you will just have to watch and see

          June 12, 2012 @ 6:27 pm
        • Spirit:

          Sure thing, maestro.

          June 12, 2012 @ 6:40 pm
        • vedran:

          I don’t see why you get offended if someone calls your business small. Unless you have 50+ employees, you are small, even if you are larger then some/most of the providers here. I guess it’s just a matter of definition.

          And you are also relatively new since your initial operations began in 2009 and company formed in 2011 (as stated here: http://www.nwnx.net/). Btw, you might want to fix those testimonials.

          June 12, 2012 @ 6:56 pm
        • Spirit:
          June 12, 2012 @ 7:21 pm
        • a:

          lol Jeremiah is a guy and he is an ass

          June 12, 2012 @ 11:39 pm
    • Mike:

      Guys this is such a simple issue. If you are frightened just reset your password once you get your VPS.

      Stop making a fuss about something that doesn’t exist.

      Simple Solution = Reset your password. End of Story.

      May 7, 2012 @ 8:09 pm
      • Agreed, no need to make a big issue over this. It doesn’t take but a minute to change your password.

        May 7, 2012 @ 8:11 pm
      • to be honest it’s also a simple issue to fix. A REALLY quick way is to just edit the email template so instead of $ENTERED_PASSWORD it’s just “(hidden)”. Although ideally it would be stored on the server as a one way hash so for example to reset the password they have to generate a random one and not just email you the old one. At the very least I hope the database with those passwords is well protected.

        But all that being said, it’s not a huge issue. nor is it restricted to just these guys. If you really want to make an impact, contact the maker of the admin portal all these sites use. If they change it there then all companies that use it will eventually be updated. Really this discussion should go to LET since everyone that uses this management portal is affected by this.

        May 7, 2012 @ 9:52 pm
      • Jarrod:

        How can I change/hide the password that appears in plain text on my “Product Details” page in the client area? It appears to be the password I initially set for the control panel login, but I have since changed it.

        May 12, 2012 @ 1:56 am
    • I don’t understand what the big deal with clear text passwords are with VPS accounts.

      Is your issue the clear text or that you use that super secret banking password for your VPS accounts too?

      May 8, 2012 @ 7:16 am
  4. ThatPlayer:

    I’ve been using their 2 GB from that deal for a couple of months now and works fine for me. Been thinking about getting another.

    May 7, 2012 @ 4:16 pm
  5. Tommy:

    Hi Chris, I would like to know if the coupon code for $48.00/year (Coupon code1024yr) is only effective for a 1 year period or is this for the lifetime of the plan?

    May 7, 2012 @ 7:53 pm
    • When I entered the code it said recurring discount, so I sure hope it’s for the life of the plan.

      May 8, 2012 @ 3:44 am
  6. MF:

    I ordered two chicago VPS’s and two VPS’s at another provider i will not name here and all i can say is from what i can see now the service at Chicago VPS is better, i asked to change a few small things like a reverse dns and both of the times i got a response within an hour or so that it has been set, by Chris himself.

    The servers are fast, connection is good and i didnt find any cheaper VPS. What more can you ask for this money ?

    May 7, 2012 @ 9:43 pm
    • Thanks for the comment MF!

      Jeremiah

      May 9, 2012 @ 7:02 pm
    • Mike:

      Is the offer for the Mohawk server still there?
      Thanks

      June 1, 2012 @ 7:37 pm
  7. I’ve been using their 2gb offer for a few months. My only complaint is that they don’t accept Amex.

    May 8, 2012 @ 1:29 am
  8. whoa they are very great.
    Always have offer like that.
    But in my past experience my vps speed is a bit slow there. So I stop them.
    Well, If someone want to fast windows VPS in Europe, you can visit at onedhost.com
    Their Windows VPS is awesome.

    May 8, 2012 @ 3:08 am
    • innya:

      I have 2gig openvz with then since Nov,2011. They are not that bad as people thought.

      [root@~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
      16384+0 records in
      16384+0 records out
      1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 12.8698 seconds, 83.4 MB/s

      May 8, 2012 @ 6:52 pm
    • Are you referring another host on our ad? :P

      We have Windows VPS’s as well. It falls under our Xen HVM Package.

      Jeremiah

      May 9, 2012 @ 7:01 pm
  9. Jack:

    I’d like to apologise to Chris for Judging them before trying , I’m going to get a 2GB Plan off them now and report back :)!

    May 8, 2012 @ 3:30 am
  10. Jack:

    The first thing I saw that it wasn’t there ARIN block..

    [root@mybox ~]#  dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 6.08435 seconds, 176 MB/s
    [root@mybox ~]#
    

    Not Amazing IO to what I have seen from other providers but Clearly a RAID10 config.

    CPU I got

    3 x 3392.472 MHz of an E3-1270

    Not a bad CPU.

    It’s a shame the port’s only giving out 100mbps I guess its neither capped or the nodes only 100mbps?

    100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 11.2M/s   in 9.0s
    
    2012-05-08 07:44:22 (11.1 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
    
    
    May 8, 2012 @ 3:45 am
    • hi jack, so far they seem to have the highest io throughput i’ve seen, can you tell me the highest you have seen in your vps experiences? Would appreciate such information to have an idea on server performance. Thanks

      May 10, 2012 @ 11:53 pm
      • Jack:

        This IO was from there vz node 2048 promo code.

        The XEN node I got moved to was around 80MB/s compared to this.

        The server was very fast , I liked the fact they use new CPU’s compared to some of the older ones.

        May 10, 2012 @ 11:54 pm
  11. Finally got vps setup. Unfortunately they don’t have ubuntu 12.04 yet but hopefully that will be soon. I (and probable a lot of us) were setup on a new server and I think the I/O speed can attest to that :)

    Mon May  7 23:42:47 EDT 2012
    
    CPU model:                      Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz
    Number of cores:      4
    CPU frequency:        3392.472 MHz
    Total amount of ram:  1024 MB
    Total amount of swap: 0 MB
    System uptime:         23:42:47 up 57 min,  1 user,  load average: 0.11, 0.07, 0.02
    
    Beginning I/O test:   163 MB/s
    
    Beginning ping tests:
    google.com, US
    --- google.com ping statistics ---
    5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4001ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 2.438/2.772/3.178/0.303 ms
    
    linode.com, US
    --- linode.com ping statistics ---
    5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4002ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 34.993/40.960/46.278/3.951 ms
    
    Rakuten, Japan
    --- rakuten.co.jp ping statistics ---
    5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4002ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 160.284/160.322/160.355/0.439 ms
    
    BBC, UK
    --- bbc.co.uk ping statistics ---
    5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4003ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 92.337/92.493/92.557/0.208 ms
    
    Gumtree, Austrailia
    --- gumtree.com.au ping statistics ---
    5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4000ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 107.253/107.325/107.391/0.362 ms
    
    Beginning download speed tests:
    CacheFly:  11312 KB/sec
    Linode, Atlanta GA, US:  12254 KB/sec
    Linode, Dallas, TX, US:  9419 KB/sec
    Linode, Tokyo, JP:  2236 KB/sec
    Linode, London, UK:  4968 KB/sec
    Leaseweb, Haarlem, NL:  4403 KB/sec
    Softlayer, Singapore:  990 KB/sec
    Softlayer, Seattle, WA, US:  5341 KB/sec
    Softlayer, San Jose, CA:  1939 KB/sec
    Softlayer, Washington, DC:  9064 KB/sec
    OVH, France:  4516 KB/sec
    

    I/O is very impressive. Also all the pings are consistent. another vps provider had really long delays when pinging a couple sites

    May 8, 2012 @ 3:49 am
    • Yan:

      How did you get all that information? Is there some sort of script? If so, could you refer me to it? Thanks!

      May 9, 2012 @ 4:56 am
      • It’s based off this one I found in the wiki. I took it and improved it by adding pings and such. Latest version is on github. The way to run this:

        apt-get install curl  # or yum install curl if centos
        wget https://raw.github.com/vrillusions/bash-scripts/master/bench/bench.sh
        bash bench.sh
        
        May 9, 2012 @ 7:02 pm
  12. adrian:

    Hi, sorry for my ignorance, i know hear about managed and unmanaged but what’s Semi Managed?

    May 8, 2012 @ 6:21 am
  13. jcaleb:

    from their site: All packages are “Semi Managed” which means we’ll offer help with common tasks and provide suggestions based on our expertise.

    May 8, 2012 @ 7:22 am
    • adrian:

      Thank jcaleb.

      May 8, 2012 @ 8:09 am
  14. Checkmate:

    For the Xen Package, can I install Windows Server on it or would you provide one? (no activation necessary). I want a Windows Server as a sandbox

    May 8, 2012 @ 8:01 am
    • Xen HVM supports windows and those are not discounted, but to answer the question, yes, we install windows server.

      May 8, 2012 @ 12:43 pm
  15. Ben:

    I’m liking the performance however the ticket reply was a little slow..

    around 8-10 hours but Hey it was $7 who cares you’re probably not going to get that off linode however never tried them.

    May 8, 2012 @ 1:35 pm
    • Ben,

      Last night was an off night since I went to bed earlier than normal because of final MBA exams I had today.

      Regards,

      Chris

      May 8, 2012 @ 3:13 pm
  16. vpsxxx:

    thank blogger!

    May 8, 2012 @ 3:30 pm
  17. Joe Merit:

    Anyone seen any reviews of their Chicago Xen VPS? A good in depth review like 96mb.com does is what I am interested in.

    May 8, 2012 @ 7:05 pm
    • We have had several done on our OpenVZ and Xen Platforms.

      I will have to dig up the links. I believe one of them is posted on the dreadful WHT.

      Thanks,

      Jeremiah

      May 9, 2012 @ 7:00 pm
  18. I only say ChicagoVPS very good, uptime, IO … I’m happy with ChicagoVPS.

    May 8, 2012 @ 7:17 pm
  19. I get the sense that ChicagoVPS is one of the largest hosts around LEB. They seem to have a ton of customers.

    May 8, 2012 @ 9:32 pm
  20. Zim:

    Chicago VPS is amazing. If you need reliable affordable virtual hosting this is the place.
    I run a high traffic website, with peak traffic reaching ~11MB/s (91mbit), almost no downtime, and for 7$/month
    Can’t be beat.

    May 9, 2012 @ 12:28 am
  21. Adrian Lee:

    Grrr I’m too tempted to get one and ditch my sshvm account. so far I’m ok with sshvm but with the kind of specs for the price of $7, seems so unbeatable.

    May 9, 2012 @ 4:45 am
  22. cosmicgate:

    i run 4 websites on CVPS 2GB ovz, the uptime is amazing unfortunately i think the I/O leaves room for improvement but overall still can’t complain for the $ i paid for it.

    May 9, 2012 @ 4:52 am
    • We are working on that. We know we have some issues there and growing pains to work out.

      Thanks for the constructive criticism! :)

      Jeremiah

      May 9, 2012 @ 6:58 pm
  23. Any test IP and test files?

    May 9, 2012 @ 5:33 am
    • See the opening response for the ad :)

      It is already there.

      Thanks,

      Jeremiah

      May 9, 2012 @ 6:58 pm
  24. vpsxxx:

    Can we change the links?

    May 9, 2012 @ 8:25 am
  25. zeng:

    Hi Chris,

    If I go for the monthly and decide to pay-up for the whole year is the annual discount still valid?

    May 9, 2012 @ 10:55 am
  26. zeng:

    And also when I order the VPS box can I specify where the box is host? e.g: Germany or US?

    May 9, 2012 @ 11:43 am
    • Chicago is a major city in central US in the state of Illinois. There is only one location: Chicago

      May 9, 2012 @ 1:01 pm
  27. mikel:

    where i put this coupon code ?
    i did not found any place to put the coupon code

    May 9, 2012 @ 12:28 pm
    • Mikel,

      It is where you checkout on the left side

      Regards,

      Chris

      May 9, 2012 @ 4:49 pm
  28. I’ve got a question. What if I’m an existing customer using the 2GB OpenVZ for $7/mo deal and want to downgrade to the 1GB OpenVZ for $48/yr deal. How can I do it? When I click Upgrade/Downgrade under My Services on the site, it only gives me Xen VPS’.

    May 10, 2012 @ 12:42 am
  29. cosmicgate:

    Hi, sorry to spam again. Do you guys at CVPS offer discounts for XEN VPS Standard if we pay yearly? Just wondering.

    May 10, 2012 @ 8:24 am
  30. zer:

    Unixbench results for one of my 2GB VPS’s:

    BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 4.1-wht.2)
    System — Linux serv 2.6.18-308.el5.028stab099.3 #1 SMP Wed Mar 7 15:56:00 MSK 2012 i686

    i686 i386 GNU/Linux
    /dev/simfs 52428800 625932 51802868 2% /

    Start Benchmark Run: Thu Apr 19 17:45:09 MSK 2012
    17:45:09 up 6:52, 1 user, load average: 1.04, 1.01, 1.00

    End Benchmark Run: Thu Apr 19 17:57:46 MSK 2012
    17:57:46 up 7:05, 1 user, load average: 16.69, 7.46, 3.93

    INDEX VALUES
    TEST BASELINE RESULT INDEX

    Dhrystone 2 using register variables 376783.7 4257744.0 113.0
    Double-Precision Whetstone 83.1 1347.2 162.1
    Execl Throughput 188.3 2032.3 107.9
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 2672.0 57527.0 215.3
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1077.0 16260.0 151.0
    File Read 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 15382.0 423582.0 275.4
    Pipe Throughput 111814.6 392355.4 35.1
    Pipe-based Context Switching 15448.6 127127.8 82.3
    Process Creation 569.3 6186.6 108.7
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 44.8 386.5 86.3
    System Call Overhead 114433.5 399736.5 34.9
    =========
    FINAL SCORE 104.8

    May 10, 2012 @ 8:29 am
    • Your benchmarks should not be considered valid since your UnixBench version is way out of date

      May 11, 2012 @ 2:17 am
      • zar:

        Sorry about that. New results with the latest version, during general off hours:

        
           BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 5.1.2)
        
           System: serv: GNU/Linux
           OS: GNU/Linux -- 2.6.18-308.el5.028stab099.3 -- #1 SMP Wed Mar 7 15:56:00 MSK                                                                                         2012
           Machine: i686 (i386)
           Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap="ANSI_X3.4-1968", collate="ANSI_X3.4-1968")
           CPU 0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz (6785.0 bogomips)
                  Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT,                                                                                         SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization
           CPU 1: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz (6784.5 bogomips)
                  Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT,                                                                                         SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization
           CPU 2: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz (6784.6 bogomips)
                  Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT,                                                                                         SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization
           CPU 3: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz (6784.5 bogomips)
                  Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT,                                                                                         SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization
           15:32:39 up 16 days,  5:20,  1 user,  load average: 0.36, 0.15, 0.04; runleve                                                                                        l 2
        
        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Benchmark Run: Fri May 11 2012 15:32:39 - 16:01:20
        4 CPUs in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests
        
        Dhrystone 2 using register variables       20888579.6 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        Double-Precision Whetstone                     3503.4 MWIPS (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        Execl Throughput                               4068.1 lps   (29.9 s, 2 samples)
        File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks        500517.1 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks          141412.4 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks       1275340.3 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        Pipe Throughput                              954659.5 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        Pipe-based Context Switching                 141925.0 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        Process Creation                              12810.6 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                   5251.6 lpm   (60.1 s, 2 samples)
        Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                   1027.5 lpm   (65.2 s, 2 samples)
        System Call Overhead                         725821.5 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        
        System Benchmarks Index Values               BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
        Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0   20888579.6   1789.9
        Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0       3503.4    637.0
        Execl Throughput                                 43.0       4068.1    946.1
        File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks          3960.0     500517.1   1263.9
        File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1655.0     141412.4    854.5
        File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks          5800.0    1275340.3   2198.9
        Pipe Throughput                               12440.0     954659.5    767.4
        Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0     141925.0    354.8
        Process Creation                                126.0      12810.6   1016.7
        Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4       5251.6   1238.6
        Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0       1027.5   1712.4
        System Call Overhead                          15000.0     725821.5    483.9
                                                                           ========
        System Benchmarks Index Score                                         973.9
        
        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Benchmark Run: Fri May 11 2012 16:01:20 - 16:30:00
        4 CPUs in system; running 4 parallel copies of tests
        
        Dhrystone 2 using register variables       54507253.8 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        Double-Precision Whetstone                    13071.8 MWIPS (10.1 s, 7 samples)
        Execl Throughput                              10725.0 lps   (29.7 s, 2 samples)
        File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks        451911.5 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks          125789.9 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks       1233585.4 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        Pipe Throughput                             2610051.2 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        Pipe-based Context Switching                 720168.0 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        Process Creation                              32761.7 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                  15923.2 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
        Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                   1837.8 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
        System Call Overhead                        2233006.8 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        
        System Benchmarks Index Values               BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
        Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0   54507253.8   4670.7
        Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0      13071.8   2376.7
        Execl Throughput                                 43.0      10725.0   2494.2
        File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks          3960.0     451911.5   1141.2
        File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1655.0     125789.9    760.1
        File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks          5800.0    1233585.4   2126.9
        Pipe Throughput                               12440.0    2610051.2   2098.1
        Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0     720168.0   1800.4
        Process Creation                                126.0      32761.7   2600.1
        Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4      15923.2   3755.5
        Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0       1837.8   3063.1
        System Call Overhead                          15000.0    2233006.8   1488.7
                                                                           ========
        System Benchmarks Index Score                                        2127.3
        
        May 11, 2012 @ 12:49 pm
        • summat:

          :( … I’m jealous

             BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 5.1.3)
          
             System: host: GNU/Linux
             OS: GNU/Linux -- 2.6.32-308.el5.028stab099.3 -- #1 SMP Wed Mar 7 15:56:00 MSK 2012
             Machine: i686 (unknown)
             Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap="ANSI_X3.4-1968", collate="ANSI_X3.4-1968")
             CPU 0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz (6785.0 bogomips)
                    Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization
             CPU 1: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz (6784.4 bogomips)
                    Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization
             CPU 2: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz (6784.7 bogomips)
                    Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization
             CPU 3: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz (6784.6 bogomips)
                    Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization
             14:27:06 up 21:08,  1 user,  load average: 0.00, 0.63, 1.01; runlevel 2
          
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Benchmark Run: Sun May 27 2012 14:27:06 - 14:55:18
          4 CPUs in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests
          
          Dhrystone 2 using register variables        5030535.4 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          Double-Precision Whetstone                     1348.2 MWIPS (10.2 s, 7 samples)
          Execl Throughput                               1164.9 lps   (29.7 s, 2 samples)
          File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks        113723.7 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
          File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks           30383.5 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
          File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks        415029.5 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
          Pipe Throughput                              351028.9 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          Pipe-based Context Switching                  86338.8 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          Process Creation                               3401.4 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
          Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                   1327.0 lpm   (60.1 s, 2 samples)
          Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                    208.8 lpm   (60.2 s, 2 samples)
          System Call Overhead                         277371.7 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          
          System Benchmarks Index Values               BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
          Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0    5030535.4    431.1
          Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0       1348.2    245.1
          Execl Throughput                                 43.0       1164.9    270.9
          File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks          3960.0     113723.7    287.2
          File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1655.0      30383.5    183.6
          File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks          5800.0     415029.5    715.6
          Pipe Throughput                               12440.0     351028.9    282.2
          Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0      86338.8    215.8
          Process Creation                                126.0       3401.4    270.0
          Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4       1327.0    313.0
          Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0        208.8    348.0
          System Call Overhead                          15000.0     277371.7    184.9
                                                                             ========
          System Benchmarks Index Score                                         290.3
          
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Benchmark Run: Sun May 27 2012 14:55:18 - 15:27:39
          4 CPUs in system; running 4 parallel copies of tests
          
          Dhrystone 2 using register variables        7463606.7 lps   (10.1 s, 7 samples)
          Double-Precision Whetstone                     5104.8 MWIPS (10.2 s, 7 samples)
          Execl Throughput                               1656.6 lps   (29.6 s, 2 samples)
          File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks        138508.4 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
          File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks           40405.4 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
          File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks        442338.5 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
          Pipe Throughput                              491981.9 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          Pipe-based Context Switching                 179623.6 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          Process Creation                               3626.9 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
          Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                   1757.7 lpm   (60.1 s, 2 samples)
          Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                    258.7 lpm   (60.3 s, 2 samples)
          System Call Overhead                         444123.3 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
          
          System Benchmarks Index Values               BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
          Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0    7463606.7    639.6
          Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0       5104.8    928.1
          Execl Throughput                                 43.0       1656.6    385.3
          File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks          3960.0     138508.4    349.8
          File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1655.0      40405.4    244.1
          File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks          5800.0     442338.5    762.7
          Pipe Throughput                               12440.0     491981.9    395.5
          Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0     179623.6    449.1
          Process Creation                                126.0       3626.9    287.9
          Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4       1757.7    414.5
          Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0        258.7    431.2
          System Call Overhead                          15000.0     444123.3    296.1
                                                                             ========
          System Benchmarks Index Score                                         430.3
          
          
          May 28, 2012 @ 4:28 am
  31. kala:

    Hello! How long is the setup, after payment?

    May 10, 2012 @ 4:43 pm
  32. jam:

    Any plans for Debian 6.0 image?

    May 10, 2012 @ 6:13 pm
    • KM:

      Looks like they pulled the older OS’s, Debian 6 is there.
      Here is the fill list my Control Panel is pulling:

      May 11, 2012 @ 6:48 am
  33. Hanafiah:

    I’ve been using this VPS since I read review from here (11/01/11). Their support is good, and Chris himself provide the support. Very stable VPS. I would recommend for anyone to buy it. Value for money. Their server up-time also good. I think evidence speaks better :)

    cat: /pro/cpuinfo: No such file or directory
    [root@vpn8 ~]# cat /proc/cpuinfo 
    processor       : 0
    vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
    cpu family      : 6
    model           : 30
    model name      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU           X3450  @ 2.67GHz
    stepping        : 5
    cpu MHz         : 2666.700
    cache size      : 8192 KB
    fdiv_bug        : no
    hlt_bug         : no
    f00f_bug        : no
    coma_bug        : no
    fpu             : yes
    fpu_exception   : yes
    cpuid level     : 11
    wp              : yes
    flags           : fpu de tsc msr pae cx8 sep cmov pat clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht nx constant_tsc up aperfmperf unfair_spinlock pni ssse3 sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt hypervisor ida
    bogomips        : 5333.40
    clflush size    : 64
    cache_alignment : 64
    address sizes   : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
    
    [root@vpn8 ~]# wget http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test -O /dev/null
    --2012-05-10 22:41:55--  http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
    Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net... 205.234.175.175
    Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net|205.234.175.175|:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream]
    Saving to: `/dev/null'
    
    100%[=========================================================================>] 104,857,600 11.2M/s   in 9.0s    
    
    2012-05-10 22:42:04 (11.2 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
    
    [root@vpn8 ~]# 
    
    [root@vpn8 ~]# cat /proc/meminfo
    MemTotal:        1029008 kB
    MemFree:          817036 kB
    Buffers:          135036 kB
    Cached:            36780 kB
    SwapCached:            0 kB
    Active:           163196 kB
    Inactive:          17312 kB
    Active(anon):       8700 kB
    Inactive(anon):      120 kB
    Active(file):     154496 kB
    Inactive(file):    17192 kB
    Unevictable:           0 kB
    Mlocked:               0 kB
    HighTotal:        313352 kB
    HighFree:         266040 kB
    LowTotal:         715656 kB
    LowFree:          550996 kB
    SwapTotal:       3145712 kB
    SwapFree:        3145712 kB
    Dirty:                20 kB
    Writeback:             0 kB
    AnonPages:          8704 kB
    Mapped:             5412 kB
    Shmem:               128 kB
    Slab:              23276 kB
    SReclaimable:       6020 kB
    SUnreclaim:        17256 kB
    KernelStack:         464 kB
    PageTables:          896 kB
    NFS_Unstable:          0 kB
    Bounce:                0 kB
    WritebackTmp:          0 kB
    CommitLimit:     3660216 kB
    Committed_AS:      54012 kB
    VmallocTotal:     122880 kB
    VmallocUsed:        1784 kB
    VmallocChunk:     120888 kB
    HugePages_Total:       0
    HugePages_Free:        0
    HugePages_Rsvd:        0
    HugePages_Surp:        0
    Hugepagesize:       2048 kB
    DirectMap4k:      735224 kB
    DirectMap2M:           0 kB
    [root@vpn8 ~]# 
    

    Thumb Up to Chris and Team.

    May 11, 2012 @ 2:50 am
  34. Randy:

    I’ve been through many VPS providers featured here on LEB and I’d have to say that Chicago is one of the good guys. The $7/2GB deal is insane, so not sure how they’re pulling that off but you’ll get no complaints from me.

    I’d buy another if I had the need.

    Thanks Chris and crew!

    May 11, 2012 @ 4:23 am
  35. KM:

    VPS 1 – Gentoo 04102012 x86

    Fri May 11 06:33:09 Local time zone must be set--see zic manual page 2012

    CPU model: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz
    Number of cores: 4
    CPU frequency: 3392.466 MHz
    Total amount of ram: 2048 MB
    Total amount of swap: 0 MB
    System uptime: 06:33:09 up 5 days, 15:05, 1 user, load average: 1.82, 1.64, 1.64

    Beginning I/O test: 141 MB/s

    Beginning ping tests:
    google.com, US
    --- google.com ping statistics ---
    5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4002ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 2.188/2.370/2.692/0.194 ms

    linode.com, US
    --- linode.com ping statistics ---
    5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4001ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 24.309/24.454/24.726/0.248 ms

    Rakuten, Japan
    --- rakuten.co.jp ping statistics ---
    5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4000ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 160.621/160.644/160.693/0.025 ms

    BBC, UK
    --- bbc.co.uk ping statistics ---
    5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 3997ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 93.480/93.542/93.591/0.337 ms

    Gumtree, Austrailia
    --- gumtree.com.au ping statistics ---
    5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4005ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 100.616/100.685/100.847/0.296 ms

    Beginning download speed tests:
    CacheFly: 11585 KB/sec
    Linode, Atlanta GA, US: 7119 KB/sec
    Linode, Dallas, TX, US: 6664 KB/sec
    Linode, Tokyo, JP: 6773 KB/sec
    Linode, London, UK: 7234 KB/sec
    Leaseweb, Haarlem, NL: 3555 KB/sec
    Softlayer, Singapore: 2302 KB/sec
    Softlayer, Seattle, WA, US: 6628 KB/sec
    Softlayer, San Jose, CA: 2788 KB/sec
    Softlayer, Washington, DC: 10396 KB/sec
    OVH, France: 6940 KB/sec

    May 11, 2012 @ 6:56 am
    • KM:

      VPS 2 – Gentoo 04102012 x86

      Fri May 11 06:34:41 Local time zone must be set--see zic manual page 2012

      CPU model: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz
      Number of cores: 4
      CPU frequency: 3392.482 MHz
      Total amount of ram: 2048 MB
      Total amount of swap: 0 MB
      System uptime: 06:34:41 up 14 days, 23:54, 1 user, load average: 0.64, 0.70, 0.69

      Beginning I/O test: 130 MB/s

      Beginning ping tests:
      google.com, US
      --- google.com ping statistics ---
      5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4006ms
      rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 2.222/2.798/3.355/0.371 ms

      linode.com, US
      --- linode.com ping statistics ---
      5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4001ms
      rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 27.679/27.808/27.885/0.225 ms

      Rakuten, Japan
      --- rakuten.co.jp ping statistics ---
      5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 3997ms
      rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 160.368/160.515/160.625/0.516 ms

      BBC, UK
      --- bbc.co.uk ping statistics ---
      5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4001ms
      rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 93.174/93.364/93.601/0.305 ms

      Gumtree, Austrailia
      --- gumtree.com.au ping statistics ---
      5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4002ms
      rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 107.094/107.253/107.390/0.114 ms

      Beginning download speed tests:
      CacheFly: 10853 KB/sec
      Linode, Atlanta GA, US: 10014 KB/sec
      Linode, Dallas, TX, US: 8610 KB/sec
      Linode, Tokyo, JP: 4281 KB/sec
      Linode, London, UK: 6969 KB/sec
      Leaseweb, Haarlem, NL: 4123 KB/sec
      Softlayer, Singapore: 2011 KB/sec
      Softlayer, Seattle, WA, US: 8734 KB/sec
      Softlayer, San Jose, CA: 2372 KB/sec
      Softlayer, Washington, DC: 9842 KB/sec
      OVH, France: 5107 KB/sec

      May 11, 2012 @ 6:57 am
      • KM:

        VPS 3 – Ubuntu 11.10

        Fri May 11 10:39:20 MSK 2012

        CPU model: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31270 @ 3.40GHz
        Number of cores: 4
        CPU frequency: 3392.472 MHz
        Total amount of ram: 2048 MB
        Total amount of swap: 0 MB
        System uptime: 10:39:20 up 3:30, 1 user, load average: 0.02, 0.09, 0.13

        Beginning I/O test: 151 MB/s

        Beginning ping tests:
        google.com, US
        --- google.com ping statistics ---
        5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4000ms
        rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 2.138/2.331/2.548/0.163 ms

        linode.com, US
        --- linode.com ping statistics ---
        5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4004ms
        rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 28.124/28.177/28.224/0.214 ms

        Rakuten, Japan
        --- rakuten.co.jp ping statistics ---
        5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 3997ms
        rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 157.806/158.002/158.261/0.459 ms

        BBC, UK
        --- bbc.co.uk ping statistics ---
        5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4001ms
        rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 93.683/93.870/94.026/0.296 ms

        Gumtree, Austrailia
        --- gumtree.com.au ping statistics ---
        5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4000ms
        rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 100.387/100.527/100.718/0.118 ms

        Beginning download speed tests:
        CacheFly: 12059 KB/sec
        Linode, Atlanta GA, US: 7201 KB/sec
        Linode, Dallas, TX, US: 7989 KB/sec
        Linode, Tokyo, JP: 3209 KB/sec
        Linode, London, UK: 6663 KB/sec
        Leaseweb, Haarlem, NL: 5771 KB/sec
        Softlayer, Singapore: 1203 KB/sec
        Softlayer, Seattle, WA, US: 6045 KB/sec
        Softlayer, San Jose, CA: 1846 KB/sec
        Softlayer, Washington, DC: 8940 KB/sec
        OVH, France: 5026 KB/sec

        ^ setup today. All are OpenVZ. Any chance I can get a 2GB Zen for $7? :3

        May 11, 2012 @ 7:01 am
        • hahaha. No Xen for $7. Sorry.

          Are you liking that gentoo template? Pretty custom one I made up.

          Thanks,

          Jeremiah

          May 16, 2012 @ 3:18 pm
    • teki:

      “Gumtree, Austrailia
      — gumtree.com.au ping statistics —”

      This site is in Netherlands. (I get 500ms+ from Au to that site.)

      May 13, 2012 @ 2:20 am
      • doh, OK thanks I’ll look for something else. I just went through the top sites in alexa for austrailia and that’s the first with a reasonable ping from us.

        May 13, 2012 @ 6:26 am
      • Updated the script so now it checks whirlpool.net.au which has an australian ip.

        May 13, 2012 @ 6:36 am
  36. Hasanul:

    Any Xen 1GB promo? :D

    May 13, 2012 @ 7:33 am
  37. That’s a cheap a xen.

    May 15, 2012 @ 3:23 am
  38. What about xen package?
    Why no one that review xen package?

    May 15, 2012 @ 4:59 am
  39. Jonathan:

    Shame MaxMind hates me..

    May 15, 2012 @ 8:28 am
  40. Cirium:

    When might IPv6 be available?

    May 15, 2012 @ 10:30 pm
    • I just got an ipv6 tunnel going which was quite the chore (first one I’ve setup in a openvz container). Key things are to enable TUN/TAP interface via the control panel and use http://code.google.com/p/tb-tun/ to setup the tunnel. The delay from being a tunnel isn’t too bad. I’m using tunnelbroker.net and using the chicago endpoint. From the VPS I get a response from the endpoint in around 5msec and can ping ipv6.google.com in like 7msec. Another example is to my server at ovh in france (has native ipv6). ipv4 response is 101msec and ipv6 it’s 103msec.

      May 16, 2012 @ 4:33 am
      • Todd, how did you get this working!??

        I keep trying to run this, 1st on Ubuntu, then Debian 6, and I just get ‘permission denied’ when trying to start the tb_username binary.

        ~sss/tb_userspace henet 209.51.181.2 any sit
        tun_create: Permission denied

        Can you give me some hints? which distro are you running??

        regards, Stefan

        May 16, 2012 @ 2:35 pm
        • If you need SIT, we have to activate it for you.

          Thanks,

          Jeremiah

          May 16, 2012 @ 3:16 pm
        • Well, thanks for this, but still doesnt work. :( ‘Permission denied’

          Hopefully Todd will give some insight on what he did to get working.

          Sorry, I know this shouldnt be a support forum.. shutting up now. :)

          May 16, 2012 @ 5:21 pm
        • Good thing I check on here, I never get any of the replies in email. Think the sending server doesn’t resolve to a valid ip or something. At any rate here’s my exact config (with ip’s removed of course)

          #!/bin/bash -e
          # couldn't figure out how to do this in /etc/network/interfaces so just a basic
          # shell script
          
          setsid /usr/local/sbin/tb_userspace sit0 209.51.181.2  sit >/dev/null &
          sleep 1
          ifconfig sit0 up
          ifconfig sit0 inet6 add 2001:aaa:bbb:ccc::2/64
          ifconfig sit0 mtu 1480
          route -A inet6 add ::/0 dev sit0
          route -A inet6 del ::/0 dev venet0
          
          exit 0
          

          Some important things I had to do on there. Sleep for a second after starting tb or else I’ll get interface doesn’t exist. At the bottom I have to remove the ipv6 default route on venet0. I can’t modify /etc/network/interfaces because it gets overwritten on reboot. I then have in my /etc/rc.local: /root/ifup-sit0.sh >/dev/null

          This is on ubuntu 10.04. More than likely if you’re getting permission denied it’s either because you need that tun/tap interface enabled or you’re not root. do `sudo su -` to get a full root login if normally login as a regular user.

          May 16, 2012 @ 7:21 pm
        • Hi Todd:

          well, I am doing everything you are doing, and its not working.

          yes, I am running this binary/commands as root, and TUN/TAP and ‘sit’ device have both been enabled on my OpenVZ container. So there is something else going on that you didnt have.

          Thanks for your help and message, tho.

          May 16, 2012 @ 8:03 pm
        • Stefan Chex:

          Hello Todd: well, I got a different OpenVZ account tonight , and I was able to make this process work perfectly, I have IPv6 running now.

          Thanks for all your efforts.

          – stefan

          May 17, 2012 @ 1:59 am
        • Robert:

          @Todd Eddy

          Thanks for that. I had ChicagoVPS enable SIT support in my VPS and I went and used your instructions as a template for my interface profile… I know you said you couldn’t figure it out but I got it. The sleep was probably the key this whole time. Add it to /etc/network/interfaces.tail and it will be included into the main interfaces file on reboot. Replace [Server IPv4] with the one for your tunnel and replace [Client IPv6] the same way. Don’t include the /64 bit.

          Note: This is for SIT configurations. I have no idea if this will work for TAP/TUN configurations or if it works the same way.


          auto sit0
          iface sit0 inet6 manual
          pre-up setsid /usr/local/sbin/tb_userspace sit0 [Server IPv4] any sit >/dev/null &
          pre-up sleep 1
          up ifconfig sit0 up
          post-up ifconfig sit0 inet6 add [Client IPv6]
          post-up ifconfig sit0 mtu 1480
          post-up route -A inet6 add ::/0 dev sit0
          post-up route -A inet6 del ::/0 dev venet0
          down ifconfig sit0 down
          post-down route -A inet6 del ::/0 dev sit0
          post-down killall tb_userspace

          June 30, 2013 @ 12:05 pm
        • Robert:

          For my above you do want to add the /64 or /48 to the ipv6 address that is provided by your provider. For me it is /64. If you don’t the server will assume /128.

          June 30, 2013 @ 12:09 pm
  41. Michael O.:

    Been using ChicagoVPS for a few months now, up to around 8 VPSs. Don’t think I could rep enough…

    May 16, 2012 @ 9:56 pm
  42. Woody:

    I ordered a XEN over 12 hours ago and still have no access to it. Opened a ticket and got no reply. Not very happy with them so far. I’m only a couple hours away from filing a paypal dispute.

    May 17, 2012 @ 1:53 pm
    • Woody,

      All tickets regarding setup have been answered so I dont know what your talking about. As explained via ticket, we are waiting on a new node to arrive so we can install new orders. We sent 3 more to our data center and stopped installing orders to avoid over subscription.

      Regards,

      Chris

      May 17, 2012 @ 9:32 pm
  43. libro22:

    Any promos for a 1gb or even a 2gb XEN? =)

    512mb doesn’t seem to fit me with cPanel and all that caching :(

    May 19, 2012 @ 12:26 pm
  44. vpspool:

    I like their’s product, so far so good.

    May 21, 2012 @ 5:04 am
  45. felipe:

    BE CAREFUL WITH THEM!!!!

    After 7 months with ChicagoVPS i have lost my VPS content.

    They offer a backup tool (Central Backup) for your VPS (1 backup file, not downloadable), so i decided to use it and reduced my backup scripts.

    History of my problem:

    1. Make backup
    2. In Central Backup appears a green text (Complete), No errors.
    3. I worked with VPS and decided to restore backup
    4. Restore backup
    5. VPS doesn’t start, always offline

    I have opened a ticket and they answered:

    “The backup itself is corrupted at from the beginning. There is nothing to recover”

    “At this point reinstall unfortunately”

    Conclusion:

    I have lost all my work.

    May 21, 2012 @ 8:02 am
    • Manfre:

      That’s unfortunate that you lost your work. Given your statement “…reduced my backup scripts”, it seems you share as much blame as ChicagoVPS. A single backup is never enough. Always make sure you have multiple copies in different locations to prevent a single failure. It’s also important to verify the integrity of all backups when they are made to avoid the problem you experienced with restoring from a corrupted backup.

      May 21, 2012 @ 1:21 pm
      • felipe:

        Users are the ultimately responsible for keeping VPS content backed up, but if you offer an option (Central Backup) must be updated and working properly. (Probably i am not the first user who has lost the VPS).

        May 21, 2012 @ 3:18 pm
        • Felipe,

          Out of the thousands of backups being made, we have only had a handful of clients with your problem. Like said above, backups are not always 100% perfect and things do happen. I am sorry that this happened to you.

          Regards,

          Chris

          May 21, 2012 @ 3:40 pm
  46. faizan:

    ya i also waiting for promo 2gig XEN VPS hosting, try to use the coupon code but not working

    May 21, 2012 @ 8:09 am
    • Unfortunately, we likely will not discount our Xen 2GB package.

      Thanks,

      Jeremiah

      May 29, 2012 @ 7:08 am
  47. Ivan:

    Jeremiah,

    Thanks for your response to my complaint, and let me address it so other customers are aware of how you do business.

    1. The complaints we received are in violation of our ToS/AUP that you agreed to.
    The complaint was received by ChicagoVPS, and my account was taken offline on a Sunday night prior to any consultation with myself.
    After several days of downtime for my customers and my websites, ChicagoVPS reinstates my account I login, search for the infringing files as specified in the DMCA and am completely unsurprised when they are not there. I explain this to Jeremiah, the one who labels his customers liars that the infringing file was not and is not on my account.

    2. The complaints are from legitimate sources
    Legitimate sources make mistakes and can be incorrect.

    3. You have lied and continue to lie about the content and downloading it.
    Case in point, you’re a legitimate source representing your company, you call your customers liars. Thanks for demonstrating your professionalism so bluntly.

    >We have a right to suspend the VPS for the violations of our ToS/AUP at anytime and even cancel them if we feel that is how we want to proceed..
    Yes and given that there were no violations of your ToS/AUP, we could have continued our business relationship, instead, I have the ChicagoVPS team asking me why I’m using so much of my disk quota?

    Clearly anyone that uses their disk space is only using it for copyright infringement.

    >There is nothing here to sustain “buyer beware” other than maybe seller beware about you.
    ChicagoVPS, what happened here is minor issue that could have been resolved easily. I’m shocked at how quick you took down my account and called me a liar.

    Good luck running a business while calling your customers liars and taking them offline.

    1. I am in the process of moving to another provider
    2. I won’t be renewing my services at the end of my billing period.
    3. I hope you get a takeaway from this entire experience, I certainly have.

    Kind Regards,
    Ivan Kruchkoff

    May 21, 2012 @ 1:48 pm
    • hmmmmm Ivan, I read what you said… I have to tell you that you sound rather convincing in what you say. Of course, I’m a customer and would be concerned if this is really what happened. On the other hand, you could just be a liar which means ChicagoVPS is right so its hard for a customer like myself to conclude based on the information since it would be tremendously hard for you to prove your statements.

      With all that being said, most websites are community based and if a user upload infringes upon copyrights, the provider should make this information to you the customer so that you can comply by taking it down. Especially since it is very well possible for this to occur more than once due the nature of community based sites. Therefore, if this in fact did occur as you said it did, ChicagoVPS should give the customer (yourself) time to remove the said content thereby complying. I hope this is a learning experience for any incidents that may occur later on (if this actually happened)

      May 21, 2012 @ 2:53 pm
    • Thanks for the info Ivan, I have not taken this into consideration and will forget this even happened once I am done typing this reply.

      Multiple chances, multiple complaints.

      Good luck in the future. And as how our business it doing…. its doing better than ever, so we must be doing something right :-0

      May 21, 2012 @ 3:44 pm
      • Thanks for further clarification Chris (in subsequent post).

        May 21, 2012 @ 6:42 pm
      • tiyray:

        Thank you for the clearance, Chris.

        May 21, 2012 @ 6:57 pm
      • Chay:

        This post again shows your unprofessionalism towards your customers. He makes a valid point and you respond with malice.

        This is by far the worst support I have seen for service one is paying for.

        I can see everyone currently liking their server on Chicago VPS changing their minds after running into simplest disagreement with Chris or Jeremiah which could be easily resolved by 1-2 emails and much, much friendlier way (I’m looking at you, Risharde ;)

        Fortunately, I never got suspended myself but was subject to similar hostile attitude as Ivan here. Glad I’m not their customer anymore. They have indeed fast servers, but those can be found elsewhere.

        June 1, 2012 @ 1:29 am
        • Hi Chay, I do actually agree with you in the sense that sometimes the responses I see via LEB providers are borderline unprofessional (even sometimes rude) and rest assured that if i am ever the recipient of such responses, I will pack my bags and move to another provider. I have not experienced such responses form chicagovps so let’s just say that I look at both parties as fair as posible considering the limitation of proving allegations brought forth :)

          June 1, 2012 @ 8:16 pm
        • Chay:

          Thanks for your response Risharde! Your attitude is respectable and I would probably act the same way.

          I hope you will have a good run with CVPS and that you never have to face similar unreasonable hostility as me and Ivan did.

          June 2, 2012 @ 3:05 pm
  48. I am new to VPSs and had recently been struggling to find a good deal to start with. Based on the comments here, I ordered the 1024 deal. So far I am very impressed. It was provided very quickly on a Saturday. My questions about adding ram and converting to yearly where quickly answered, yes you can add more for a small fee, and yes you can convert, they send you a new invoice to pay.

    In trying to get started I messed up by installing webmin, when I really wanted Virtualmin. The OS reinstall went well, and the image is reasonably fresh, only a few updates needed. I think I am going to buy a few more. Thanks, LEB and ChicagoVPS.

    May 21, 2012 @ 7:48 pm
    • Hello,

      Glad to hear your happy with our services, and if you need anything else just open up a ticket :)

      Enjoy!

      Chris

      May 22, 2012 @ 12:58 am
  49. Nope:

    This is one of the worst providers I’ve used. 2GB OpenVZ server couldn’t handle an extremely simple setup that runs on a 128MB XEN box with room to spare. It was acting as though the network was dropping, so who knows how poorly they’ve configured them. You’d be better off sticking with one of the other providers on here.

    May 23, 2012 @ 10:49 pm
    • @Nope,

      Do you have proof or ticket ID or even Client ID? What your saying does not fit and really makes no sense since non of it is true.

      Without verification I would have to say your last statement is null and void.

      Thanks,

      Chris

      May 24, 2012 @ 2:34 pm
  50. Anyone having issues with them? My VPS on their VPS45 node already down more than 5 hours. I’m not able to login to their SolusVM as well :(

    May 25, 2012 @ 12:55 pm
    • Sonic vibe:

      Mine has been down off and on since last night. Down right now. Very disappointing.

      May 25, 2012 @ 2:20 pm
    • Ahm… ticket?…

      May 25, 2012 @ 2:31 pm
      • Oh, finally got reply from Chris. They are working on it now. Seems like a DDoS attack.

        May 25, 2012 @ 2:52 pm
        • Also note, VPS’s were only down for a few minutes not 5 hours. Some VPS’s did not have SSH access which is now fixed.

          May 25, 2012 @ 4:00 pm
  51. chine:

    my status is offline and i cant seem to get support on it……and i have barely used my VPS for two weeks..

    May 25, 2012 @ 2:42 pm
  52. chine:

    sorry…i ve got to take that back….chris has excellent support! i hope this continues…

    May 25, 2012 @ 7:45 pm
  53. Josh:

    Considering the VPS’s are unmanaged and are cheap I would have to say they have excellent support as well.

    May 25, 2012 @ 8:34 pm
  54. Shane:

    Used them for quite a while and they are simply amazing! Great prices, lightning fast support and an all around good company. Soon will be purchasing another :)

    May 27, 2012 @ 2:37 pm
  55. Frank:

    I haven’t been able to access my VPS for 2 months, because I chose an “over secure password” according to Jeremiah. I am footing the bill for this, which isn’t a big deal, because I should have submitted a ticket sooner.

    Chicago VPS says I chose a bad password (which their system accepted). I have asked for written password guidelines, but have not received a response. I guess it is my fault for not submitting a ticket earlier, but the root cause (“over secure password”) is stunning.

    Regardless, your password will be emailed in plain text (meaning everyone who has access to their database has access to your VPS). And, their ”
    There is little we can do about it. I don’t fault you for utilizing strong password(s) but understand provisioning systems generally fault with over secure passwords.” Don’t use it for anything TOO important!

    May 28, 2012 @ 6:40 am
    • paul:

      I just use “passwd -d” to get rid of the passwords on my VPS’s (i.e. so there is no password that will work, and the only way to log in is with an ssh public/private key pair). Passwords just aren’t good technology any more.

      May 28, 2012 @ 9:15 am
    • Frank:

      I would love to remove this comment or at least the last paragraph. Somehow, I screwed up and pasted a whole message into the comment box, and that’s really not fair to ChicagoVPS

      May 28, 2012 @ 2:40 pm
  56. Don:

    So far I’ve had my service for two – three weeks and all I can say is they’re awesome. They perform this business well and the support has been very helpful. I haven’t had a single problem with them that the support hasn’t cleared up for me so personally, I think they’re pretty damn good and will definitely be using them for my future projects as well.

    Thanks Chris!

    May 28, 2012 @ 2:06 pm
  57. demize:

    I noticed this deal after paying my invoice for June… I don’t suppose there’s a chance I could get the discount for the 512mb Xen? :p

    June 1, 2012 @ 12:29 am
  58. Wood:

    They claim to have 24/7 support, but there is no support phone number. Just an online chat which doesn’t look like it is online all the time… http://i.imgur.com/jzhlw.png

    June 3, 2012 @ 7:32 pm
  59. Mike:

    Where can I find the info on the Mohawk Voice Server?

    June 5, 2012 @ 3:05 am
    • Don:

      contact their support once you send in the order. They’ll provide you with the link to get the free Mohawk Voice Server

      June 6, 2012 @ 2:06 am
  60. faizan:

    does code 2048 still valid for this xen package?

    June 10, 2012 @ 3:45 pm
  61. I’ve had an account with Chicago VPS since last year. I now have three containers running on their servers and have nothing but good things to say about them.

    Example. Last month my credit card expired on my PayPal account (oops.) and PayPal started sending Echecks (which take forever to clear payment) to everyone including ChicagoVPS. Long story in short form. My accounts were terminated because the payments didn’t reach them in time (Totally, completely MY FAULT)

    But….

    I communicated with Jeremiah and he had me up and running in no time flat!

    Thanks Jeremiah and ChicagoVPS.

    June 13, 2012 @ 4:13 pm
  62. Gena:

    I bought their VPS. At the same moment I check ip, it was in 5 blacklists. I wrote to support and support was 2 days in silence. Even Burst where you take the servers solves such problems faster. I open dispute in Paypal, and what I heard in seller comment there? Ip blasklisted as a result of my actions. What actions?? )) I had not time to do any actions.

    June 14, 2012 @ 9:51 am
  63. Sarim:

    Their support is unresponsive, ticket id 581870 can you check @Chris

    June 16, 2012 @ 1:43 pm
  64. Duke E. Love:

    I just wanted to convey my experience with chicagovps concering multiple failed restores from back up.

    I had my restore from back up fail twice. Having to restore 7 domains manually, from scratch. All the while chicagovps knew it was an issue but never told me. When I asked them about it this is what they said to me

    ————-
    There is no particular reason why we have to tell everyone. Its been a known issue with SolusVM since the 1.9.00 update. It is nothing we cannot manually restore.

    If you want to complain and let everyone know, feel free to. There is no reason to threated us here, its out of our control.

    I do not keep up on the bugs with SolusVM. Nor should I have to. And yes there IS “a reason why we have to tell everyone”

    ————–

    Your backups fail and you knew about it and you never told your customers.

    That is BAD business. That is being DISHONEST by withholding critical information from your clients.

    If you refuse to tell your clients that you back ups fail I will

    If you need to restore from backup your backup WILL fail.

    June 17, 2012 @ 3:48 am
    • breton:

      I wonder why didn’t they turn the backup feature off if they new it was buggy.

      June 17, 2012 @ 8:41 am
  65. zijo:

    I had a same problem with backup.
    When i restored it the server wouldn’t boot.
    I thought at some stage they fix it but it looks as it is still here.

    Other way the server is ok for last 2-3 months i have it.

    June 26, 2012 @ 12:08 pm
  66. zijo:

    I would like to know why with Chicagovps $7 buys 2G openVZ and only 0.5 xen.
    As a customer which one i should chose to run Kloxo and few small sites with 2-3 gb of trafic.

    June 26, 2012 @ 12:11 pm
    • zar:

      You can oversell OVZ, but you can’t oversell Xen without the cooperation of guest kernels.

      June 27, 2012 @ 5:12 pm
  67. Mark:

    are there any deals for the 1GB xen?

    August 14, 2012 @ 11:58 pm
  68. Shubham:

    are there any deals for: Xen Enterprise

    August 19, 2012 @ 1:10 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.