New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
I just looked at the ispconfig demo for the first time in years... since when did they build in an OpenVZ panel? That's odd and cool at the same time.
from 3.4 version..
around Q4 2011 - Q1 2012 and i like this feature, (since i use ISPConfig from version 2) very user friendly..
for OP, my recommendation use ISPConfig or Froxlor..
Out of your two options I tend to favor IspCP, no real reason other than I prefer the way it is set out and how the end user interacts with it.
Otherwise froxlor with nginx or lighttpd seems to be coming along.
http://www.froxlor.org
ispconfig is really great. it is not so easy to install (but I have only tried kloxo)- but afterwards everything just works. and there are a lot of good documentation for different installs
I have ISPConfig3 for my dev server at home. In testing it there, it does fall under the "It Just Works" premise.
From an end user standpoint however, it can be a downside for say an unfamiliar interface if they are used to cPanel. Not only that, but there are AFAIK no user installable scripts to put their favorite blogging platform or CMS.
With that said though - if you are managing your own VPS and your client's sites and they don't manage their site's accounts, then this is a good contender in the free arena.
After looking at the ispcp's demo site, I might test that next week though, forgot about that one and it is intriguing to me now.
I've run IspCP before, it's pretty smooth and easy going.. but as others have recommended Foxlor is also good, I've used it briefly and it seemed good but I'm not really a fan of control panels.
I'm using i-MSCP, it's more updated than ispCP.
I mean absolutely no disrespect to your choice, however "here we go again."
From a small FAQ on i-MSCP:
Due to some disagreements with the project managers
There was VHCS, then a fork to ispCP, now a fork to i-MSCP.