On-Rev: How about a "free" or "micro" plan?

[sritcp]

Currently, On-Rev has only a single plan: $250/year for 100GB/500GB storage/transfer
(It says 100GB on the home page, but 50GB on the features chart)
Unaffordable for any but professional or business sites.

How about a "micro" plan at $25/year (one-tenth price) for 1GB/5GB (one-hundredth load factor)?
["free" is even better, but I guess I'm dreaming! ]

It will encourage a whole lot of people to dip their toes and play with the LC server side scripting.

No doubt in my mind that it will lead to greater subscription for the regular plan over a period of time, as people get hooked on it!

What do you think?

Regards,
Sri.

[Mark]

Hi Stri,

Economy-x-Talk rents server space for 11 euro per year. It isn't compatible with LiveCode Server or LC CGI, but it has all common features, including a complete CPanel, PHP, databases, e-mail etc. and 1 GB disk space. If you're looking for a cheap server with sufficient space for one or two websites or forums, we might have a good offer for you.

Kind regards,

Mark

[FourthWorld]

How about a "micro" plan at $25/year (one-tenth price) for 1GB/5GB (one-hundredth load factor)?
["free" is even better, but I guess I'm dreaming! ]

It will encourage a whole lot of people to dip their toes and play with the LC server side scripting.

The LiveCode Server engine is compatible with a great many hosting services, not at all limited to RunRev's on-rev.com service.

The value of on-rev.com is that the engine is pre-installed and the server maintained to ensure compatibility with it, along with some other conveniences like real-time debugging.

But anyone with a license for LiveCode Server can install it on any compatible hosting service. While I don't know for certain which of the hosting companies who offer plans in the price range you noted are compatible, I do know of several hosting companies whose current configuration is compatible, some with inexpensive VPS options allowing you the control to maintain ensured compatibility. You're welcome to write me at ambassador@fourthworld.com for recommendations if you like.

Also, the only incompatibility I've seen with LiveCode Server on any system has been on specific 64-bit implementations using the XFS file system. RunRev is aware of the issue, and they report that a fix for that is in progress, to be made available in a future release soon.

LiveCode Server runs well today on many hosts, and with the new fix forthcoming I'm not aware of any other issues which would prevent its use on any common Linux/Apache system.

[Mark]

Richard,

Since you seem to be confused about why LiveCode Server may not run on many servers: many hosting companies don't allow this, unless you hire a dedicated server or some kind of special, expensive hosting plan.

Kind regards,

Mark

[FourthWorld]

Richard,

Since you seem to be confused about why LiveCode Server may not run on many servers: many hosting companies don't allow this, unless you hire a dedicated server or some kind of special, expensive hosting plan.

I appreciate your helpful reply, Mark.

Admittedly, my own knowledge of such things is limited to my modest experience on a half-dozen hosting companies I've used personally, that of other LiveCode developers who are running LiveCode Server on their shared-hosting plans, and my thousands of WebMerge customers who've been asking me for a server edition of my product, a majority of whom use shared hosts.

As we can see in posts elsewhere on this forum, some of the hosting companies that allow precompiled third-party CGIs on their shared hosting plans include Dreamhost, HostGator, JaguarPC, InterServer, TierraNet, Bluehost, GoDady, HostMonster, iPower, JustHost, WebHostingHub, HostMetro, AT&T, EasyCGI, WebHostingWorld, and others.

All of those sites have multiple redundant T3 lines, on-site generators, 24/7 on-site admins, and the other basics one would expect from a hosting service, with shared hosting plans ranging from $0 to $24/mo, many below $10/mo.

In fact, while shopping for new hosting options recently I don't recall seeing any that prohibit custom CGI installs, though I'm sure there are still some in 2013.

Since you seem to be unusually knowledgeable about the wide range of hosting services available, perhaps you could tell us which ones you've found don't allow third-party CGIs on their shared servers.

[Mark]

Richard,

I doubt that all companies you mention in your list allow for uploading a LiveCode Server engine in the user folder. I also wonder about Rev CGI scripts, which aren't pre-compiled CGI's. No, I'm not going to compile a list myself. I have more important things to do.

Kind regards,

Mark

[FourthWorld]

Richard,

I doubt that all companies you mention in your list allow for uploading a LiveCode Server engine in the user folder. I also wonder about Rev CGI scripts, which aren't pre-compiled CGI's.

Scripts are just files; they can be run on any system which allows execution of a compiled app which can understand them. The association of such files with an engine is done through the shebang at the top of the script, or via mod_rewrite directives in the .htaccess file (the recommended method for LiveCode server).

All of the hosting companies I listed above claim such CGI support on their sites. I've personally used LiveCode on TierraNet, Dreamhost, Bluehost, InterServer, and others. Andre has used LiveCode on JaguarPC and others. The rest are among those my WebMerge customers tell me can run CGIs like LiveCode Server.

Many years ago, it was more difficult to find hosting companies which offered such support. But being the competitive space it is, in my own shopping I've rarely come across such a limitation in recent years.

[Mark]

Richard,

Claiming compatibility with third-party CGI's isn't the same as allowing people to install the LiveCode engine.

Kind regards,

Mark

[FourthWorld]

Claiming compatibility with third-party CGI's isn't the same as allowing people to install the LiveCode engine.

What leads you to believe the actual services offered by the companies would differ from their claims, or that they would somehow choose to single out LiveCode for exclusion?

[Mark]

Richard,

The services don't differ from the claims. It comes down to your interpretation, which I suspect to be wrong in a few cases (but not all). Third-party CGI's usually must be in a language already available on the server, such as Perl or Python.

Best,

Mark

[FourthWorld]

The services don't differ from the claims. It comes down to your interpretation, which I suspect to be wrong in a few cases (but not all). Third-party CGI's usually must be in a language already available on the server, such as Perl or Python.

Hence my inclusion of the qualifier "pre-compiled", to distinguish LiveCode Server from text files like Perl and Python scripts.

Like I said, I'm sure there are still some hosting companies with such a limitation, but I haven't personally come across them in years.

I've already noted that all of the hosts I've listed above have been reported to me as allowing precompiled CGIs like LiveCode Server, and LiveCode specifically has been run on at least a majority of them, either by myself or by very experienced members of this community whom I trust to be telling me the truth.

So unless you have something specific to offer in terms of hosting companies one might want to avoid, those noted above as running LiveCode Server well would seem a helpful starting point for the OP or anyone else looking for a useful server solution.

Moreover, most hosting companies today offer a refundable trial period, so even those not listed above may be worth trying LiveCode Server on to see how well it works out.

[Mark]

Richard,

"Have been reported to me" sounds a bit vague. Did you check it yourself?

Best,

Mark

[FourthWorld]

"Have been reported to me" sounds a bit vague. Did you check it yourself?

I appreciate your concern, Mark, but in all honesty I have far too many customers to personally open accounts with each of their hosting providers to double-check their claims. Most of them are professional web developers so I have little reason to doubt them, but I haven't tested every one of those hosts myself.

Instead, I've had to rely on my own direct experience with the half-dozen or so hosts where I've used LiveCode, and on the experience of members of our LiveCode community like Andre Garzia and many others. This level of direct experience with LiveCode specifically provides us with more than a dozen hosting companies verified to be able to run LiveCode.

And since the service descriptions a those verified hosts generally match that of the others I noted, and there's nothing particularly unusual about LiveCode Server as a CGI, until I come across good reason to doubt the web professionals who've recommended those other services to me I see no reason to.

Besides, with so many hosting plans offered month-to-month, the worst possible outcome is an investment of a few dollars to experiment with one of the unverified services where we may not have seen LiveCode run before but it's reasonably likely to.

LiveCode Server is a capable engine that runs on many if not most popular hosting solutions. I see no benefit to raising doubts about LiveCode Server unless you have any specific info which might warrant it.

There are enough of us who've used LiveCode successfully on a great many hosts that anyone interested should have no trouble finding a good system to work with.

[jacque]

I think the relevant issue here is that a forum member is trying to advertise his company's services on the RunRev forums.

[bangkok]

In any case, to buy a LiveCode Server licence would explode the budget that Sritcp was talking about : 25 USD / year.


However, the good news is... with the opensource version, it might convince regular hosting companies to offer to their customers LiveCode server as an alternative to PHP.

And users will be able to install themselves LiveCode Server on many cheap regular web hosting plans, am I right ?