I can only sympathize here because I have those exact issues with some of our customers
They don't want our hosting solutions but insist on using their own hosting partners
The result are similar:
- its at least five times more expensive on pure hosting costs
- we lose a considerable amount of time dealing with the hosting partner (which we bill to the customer)
- it's always a security nightmare, either because they put so much "safety protections" in place that it's unusable (think about the customer wanting an Internet-facing website, but the servers are private...) or because they don't put any safety settings in place so the servers are regularly taken down through awfully simple exploits (think about SSH root access with "passw0rd" as password...)
- customer keep complaining about performances to us, but what can you do when the servers are sharing a 100Mbps connection, or the filesystem is on an NFS with <20Mbps bandwidth
Yes. For these reasons I now have a policy that if you want me maintaining your website / web app, then I manage the hosting. I use something I'm familiar with that I know works.
They don't want our hosting solutions but insist on using their own hosting partners
The result are similar:
- its at least five times more expensive on pure hosting costs
- we lose a considerable amount of time dealing with the hosting partner (which we bill to the customer)
- it's always a security nightmare, either because they put so much "safety protections" in place that it's unusable (think about the customer wanting an Internet-facing website, but the servers are private...) or because they don't put any safety settings in place so the servers are regularly taken down through awfully simple exploits (think about SSH root access with "passw0rd" as password...)
- customer keep complaining about performances to us, but what can you do when the servers are sharing a 100Mbps connection, or the filesystem is on an NFS with <20Mbps bandwidth