We have a hosted dedicated server, and we're looking at adding another one. We think our current provider is a touch expensive, so I'm also gathering quotes from other providers. I was asked if we should leave our original machine with the original provider and get a new machine with a new provider -- the idea being a kind of risk management.
My impulse is to say no, because then you've got two bills to pay and two admin consoles to use. Plus, there are services on the first machine (database, webservices) that we'll want to call out to from the second, not to mention copying large files back and forth occasionally.
Is there any argument for splitting machines across providers, apart from the convenience factor of not having to reconstruct the original machine at the new site?