The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant Anonymous - The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine Winston Churchill, 1944 - Never argue with a fool. Onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. Mark Twain
I'm trying to find a hosting company. My existing host is having terrible networking problems and support levels are dropping drastically.
But trying to find a UK-based (or at least UK-hosted) Windows hosting company (shared hosting, supporting ASP.Net + php + MySql + Sql Server, with multiple domains + subdomains included) seems to be nigh-on impossible. I'd looked a month or two ago when my current host's service levels were falling, and found Brixly - which seemed ideal. But trying to sign up with them yesterday - they no longer offer Windows hosting. Today I found A2: US based, but with Netherlands-based servers; not 100% perfect, but the deal and reviews were good. Spent 40 minutes checking they did everything I needed; clicked "buy" and got "This service is out of stock". Email to support - "We no longer provide Windows hosting". FastHosts are rubbish and despite a bargain-basement headline price, I can't host the multiple domains + subdomains at a sensible price. GoDaddy likewise - they support unlimited domains + subdomains - but only a single email account (and that's only free for the first year); no free backup; REALLY expensive SSL certs (no free LetsEncrypt). UKHosting (in their various aliases, of which there are lots) couldn't even tell me what version of php they support, and I left their sales and tech teams having an argument over whether they still sold MS Sql Server hosting!
In short, I just can't find anything at a decent price. This worries me, not only from the point of view of hosting my own sites, but for the future of ASP.Net in the UK; if I can't host it at an economic price, how can I recommend it to my clients? Will I have any clients if they can't host their sites? (Tho' I'm semi-retired anyway - but I do need to support my existing clients).
FYI, I'm hosting my own company site, a hobby site of my own, a small Wordpress site for my wife's home business, a potential money-making "side project"; and then a sub-domain for each of my clients, hosting a demo/development version of their sites. I also have a couple of live clients who access webservices hosted on my server, and these are the most critical (though least resource intensive). Nothing is what you would call "high throughput"... Though mainly ASP.Net, some of these sites also include Classic ASP or php; some use MySql and some MS Sql Databases. Am currently with Fast2Host - they were brilliant about 10 years ago, but have become increasingly unresponsive (and surly) to support requests; done un-announced "upgrades" to databases and system software that have fatally broken my apps on more than one occasion; and as above have now had a run of lengthy outages due to network problems (no network redundancy, it would seem...)
In short, I just can't find anything at a decent price.
Not sure if this is allowed in the lounge but the cheapest dedicated servers I've found is at Kimsufi/OVH. If you wanted to run a Windows operating system then you would need to install the hypervisor option. You would need to administer everything yourself.
I don't know any good ASP.NET hosts, but I don't think it's dying (or dead), in fact, it's very much alive!
Hosting ASP.NET apps using a hosting company probably isn't very popular among ASP.NET users.
I can imagine a lot do self hosting or use Azure.
Perhaps ASP.NET is "too professional/corporate" compared to something like PHP, which is probably waaaaay more popular for hosting companies.
Not saying that's it, just saying it's a possibility.
I can imagine that if ASP.NET was profitable enough, hosting companies would offer it, but the problem is not the lack of ASP.NET users
Yes, it's true that Linux hosting has always been more readily accessible than Windows. What I've noticed though, during this search and over the past years in response to requests from clients, is that it's (rapidly) getting harder and harder to find cost-effective Windows hosting plans. So much so, that the great majority of UK hosts don't even bother to state that their solution is Linux-based - it's now a safe assumption. This certainly wasn't the case 10 years ago. Hosting companies are pulling out of Windows hosting at a rate of knots. That I've come across 2 in 2 days who still advertise Windows hosting but have actually stopped offering it (and not yet updated their own websites) seems to be a symptom of that.
I guess you're right that a lot of users are moving their sites into the Azure cloud. I have investigated that a couple of times, but found the pricing model to be incredibly complex, to the point of being unfathomable. Combine that with separate / additional costs for d/b hosting and a very different model for managing hosting services etc, moving hosting to the cloud (at least to Azure) is definitely non-trivial.
Self-hosting is all very well, perhaps for development / demo sites, but for production sites - even low volume ones - raises issues about network speeds, reliability, power supply resilience etc; and that's without the time involved in managing the server + op.system and configuring routers, security etc (and a self-hosted internet-accessible site must be a prime target for hackers, who could potentially wreak havoc on my home network).
Your observation that if there were profit in ASP.Net hosting then more companies would be doing it, is well made!