Re: [cobalt-users] Considering a RAQ3

["Lorraine Egsit" <legsit@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Owen Lees wrote:

> reading this list recently I note that there seems to be
> more problems with the Raq3 than the Raq2, this however is possibly likely
> to be that there are expotentially more Raq3 than 2 users out there now..
>
> Is this a sort of correct hypothesis or is the Raq3 besieged with issues?


I think you will find that there is not a vast difference between these 
models (problem wise!).

If it seems to you that the raq3 has more problems it could be more to do 
with it's (IMO!) more advanced hardware, capabilities etc. it is therefore, 
in general, more likely to be asked about because of it's more complex 
features.

You should look at these "problems" more as part of an on going learning 
procedure, most of the posts here relate to the efficient, smooth running of 
the servers etc, rather than un provoked hardware / op system failure.

So in answer to your question: <is the Raq3 besieged with issues?>
I would answer; no more than the raq2.

BTW, (slightly off topic but;) I notice that you are in the UK, if you do 
decide on raq3's my UK based colleagues are extremely happy using Raq3's, 
colocated, from UK2.net at a very good rate (even for US standard) of £29 
per month! (I think you have to pay 3 years in advance but at £1044 it's a 
steal. This is what they boast about their connection:

"100 mbit bandwidth sustained rate (not burst rate)

Some of our Powerraq.com users have reported downloads
of well over 900kb per second to their servers (10mb=11sec)
which means that our system delivers some of the fastest
downloads you could possibly get."

See for yourself here:  http://powerraq.com/

--

Lorraine Egsit



_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.