Linux or Mircosoft hosting?

[Sabolin]

Web hosting by Webhost4life.com, .NET, ASP, PHP, MySQL, SQL Server, ASP.Net, Windows web hosting - All the technology you want to host any web sites through to advanced web applications at discount prices: domain hosting, domain registration, web sit linux hosting.

updated-read below

[Vorph]

Cool... it should only take about 3 weeks of non-stop uploading on a cable modem to do it all. :P

Originally Posted by Sabolin

linux hosting.

That's a pretty blah deal, they only offer 1-5GB of storage. Admittedly, most people will never use anywhere near 100+GB of web space, but 1&1 and Dreamhost are still better value.

After looking over Dreamhost, they seem even better than 1&1, since their mySQL databases are unlimited and just count against your disk quota. At 1&1, the database is limited to 100MB. Though I have my doubts whether you could run a site with enough traffic to create a database larger than that on a shared host in the first place...

[Tripamang]

Originally Posted by Vorph

Cool... it should only take about 3 weeks of non-stop uploading on a cable modem to do it all. :P




That's a pretty blah deal, they only offer 1-5GB of storage. Admittedly, most people will never use anywhere near 100+GB of web space, but 1&1 and Dreamhost are still better value.

After looking over Dreamhost, they seem even better than 1&1, since their mySQL databases are unlimited and just count against your disk quota. At 1&1, the database is limited to 100MB. Though I have my doubts whether you could run a site with enough traffic to create a database larger than that on a shared host in the first place...

My vbulletin database was around 1 gig after a couple years *shrugs*

[prescient63]

I don't know if it is just my experience but dreamhost consistently seems to have either fucked up db's (offline) or slow as shit db's on a regular basis. Unless you are going to end up with something fairly large and need the unlimited space I can't say I would use them. I would much rather have smaller databases that actually ran faster. Or you could just buy a server

[Seth]

Super later on the topic buttttt

At 1&1, the database is limited to 100MB. Though I have my doubts whether you could run a site with enough traffic to create a database larger than that on a shared host in the first place...

It's my understanding that this is a pretty standard limit among webhosts. If for some reason you had a project that will likely need a db bigger than 100mb you will probably have to get a dedicated (or virtual) server (or get lucky and find one that doesn't have that limit). Most people will never really have that issue and most well designed databases stay fairly small (barring data collection/large forums) so it probably wont come up. However a while back I was looking into the issue and had read a lot of threads concerning the 100mb issue with hosts.

One in particular was someone using 1&1 who needed a larger one but they wouldnt do it. They wouldn't budge on it. He even offered to pay for 2 packages just to try and combine the db limit from both packages into one, but they wouldn't go for it.

One major caveat for Dreamhost in the past was their limitation of 60 CPU minutes a day. This was primarily a problem dynamic sites with a lot of traffic. Obviously shitty web apps eating a lot of resources due to poor design or code should be taken into consideration when thinking about this limit. However for a lot of sites this was a glass ceiling purely based on traffic which was rather shady of them to do, given their enormous limits on their packages. Anyways they supposedly removed the CPU minutes limit on all packages recently but supposedly still monitor the server for the resource hogs (which for everyone else I guess is a good thing, depending on their definition of "resource hog"). Just something to keep in mind.

[Tripamang]

Originally Posted by Seth

Super later on the topic buttttt



It's my understanding that this is a pretty standard limit among webhosts. If for some reason you had a project that will likely need a db bigger than 100mb you will probably have to get a dedicated (or virtual) server (or get lucky and find one that doesn't have that limit). Most people will never really have that issue and most well designed databases stay fairly small (barring data collection/large forums) so it probably wont come up. However a while back I was looking into the issue and had read a lot of threads concerning the 100mb issue with hosts.

One in particular was someone using 1&1 who needed a larger one but they wouldnt do it. They wouldn't budge on it. He even offered to pay for 2 packages just to try and combine the db limit from both packages into one, but they wouldn't go for it.

One major caveat for Dreamhost in the past was their limitation of 60 CPU minutes a day. This was primarily a problem dynamic sites with a lot of traffic. Obviously shitty web apps eating a lot of resources due to poor design or code should be taken into consideration when thinking about this limit. However for a lot of sites this was a glass ceiling purely based on traffic which was rather shady of them to do, given their enormous limits on their packages. Anyways they supposedly removed the CPU minutes limit on all packages recently but supposedly still monitor the server for the resource hogs (which for everyone else I guess is a good thing, depending on their definition of "resource hog"). Just something to keep in mind.

From my experience legit traffic that runs on well done code is fine with them, I've done upper level support at a similar firm and I can say the kind of shit people come up with for custom scripting is just mind boggling. PHP scripts that will read a database in an endless loop, 50 database queries to add fields rather then doing it all in one query... all sorts of stupid shit like that.

I'm pretty sure their cpu limitation came off when PHP had an execution time variable added same deal with mysql. I know when our versions had those implemented server cpu usage hardly went outside of norm.

[Mir]

Another late addition but I've used Hostgator before and they always been reliable and good bang for your buck in my experience. You can do ruby on rails with them too (which probobly a lot of hosts can do these days so I guess it's not a big deal). They also offer unlimited SQL within the limits of your disk space. Another thing too they have GhostScript and ImageMagic installed on servers so you can run image functions command line in your scripts. Maybe that's not huge for a lot of people, but it's pretty slick if you're doing any kind of cool dynamic web apps that incorporate image work. I think a lot of hosts can have that or will have that set up though.

[Sabolin]

I no longer recommend linux webhosting from webhost4life.com. Terrible customer service on the linux side, my entire site has gone down for over 12 hours at a time twice in the past three days. FTP has gone down twice in the past week for over 24 hours each time. When my site went down I was unable to access the control panel to submit a support ticket so I went to livechat, gave them all the info they needed, and they asked me "are you sure you have hosting with us" wtf? My support tickets, when I can submit them, go 14+ hours with no response and when they do respond I get no explanation of the problem. FTP is very slow, it is very common for my transfers to go at 0.5KB/S

I have a second site on their windows side that has not experienced any of these problems.

I just registered with dreamhost and am migrating my site over.

[Sabolin]

I don't think I would recommend Dreamhost either.. since moving over my site has gone down at least 3 times for several hours each time. Used 1&1 long time ago, had problems with them. Are there any GOOD RELIABLE web hosts out there anymore?

[Slide]

I use textdrive for small scale hosting, they dont give you a huge amount of diskspace or bandwidth for your money but the servers are run by people that seem to care and the quality of service is great. They back that up with a full on techy type play, every technology you could want is available, and if it isnt ask them and they'll sort it out.

[Cryptin]

Originally Posted by Sabolin

I don't think I would recommend Dreamhost either.. since moving over my site has gone down at least 3 times for several hours each time. Used 1&1 long time ago, had problems with them. Are there any GOOD RELIABLE web hosts out there anymore?

Give Bluehost a try. My friend loves by them.

[Druixx]

Originally Posted by Sabolin

Are there any GOOD RELIABLE web hosts out there anymore?

You get what you pay for in a shared hosting environment.

Honestly, how do you think these companies can offer all those fancy specs at the low prices they do and still make money?

Answer = cram as many accounts as humanly possible on the same box without seeing 0% idle all day every day or having the mail queue back up too badly. Trust me, I work for one of the biggest webhosting companies in the world.

Move to a virtual server if you want better uptime. Or better yet, buy a cheap server and send it to a colo data center for $50 a month.