I have been using Santrex shared hosting for some time due to their low prices - below 3$ per month. And it has been quite good quality/price ratio. But now it's time to upgrade, so my question is - has anyone got experience with their dedicated servers and support?
quality shared hosting solution for a WordPress-powered multi user blog. The blog currently has around 1000 posts, 5000 comments and around 2000 unique visitors every day, but those numbers will grow grow exponentially in future, so the hosting in question needs to be expandable since I will eventually have to move to a dedicated server.
Right now, however, I want a quality US-based hosting company that has good connection to EU, with fast support and basic features: PHP5, MySQL5, shell access, ~10GB HD space and ~50-100GB traffic.
First and foremost I am looking for quality and am prepared to pay as much as $25-30 per month.
I've seen a lot of discussion regarding low budget providers and am surprised I haven't seen many mentioning Wholesale Internet. I'd like to give my personal review.
I've used them several times over the past two years, and currently have two boxes with them. Support has always been professional and fair.
It has been my experience that they tend to go above and beyond what the customer expects, which seems rare for budget hosts. I have never been nickel and dimed over a small upgrade or service.
Uptime is as good as it gets. Hardware seems reliable. Delivery time is fairly quick. Their prices on servers with DirectAdmin are impressive.
I would wholeheartedly reccomend them to anyone in need of a budget box. Their prices are extremely competitive, and they can do seem to give extremely good custom quotes if nothing they offer quite meets your needs.
I am about to open a third web site and am looking for a good place to host it. My two existing sites are currently with a local (Croatian) The Planet reseller which has quite good support (and are partly sponsoring me), but tend to be a bit too weak when it comes to high load peaks (when sites get dugg mainly).
So for a third site I am considering something else. Having read some discussions I can conclude that these days the actual amount of space and bandwidth isn't such a good measure of actual quality and these numbers are mainly used for marketing.
I also learned that best web hosting depends on specific needs and desires. So here is what I want and I hope you can make some good suggestions.
I want a reliable, high uptime, fast web hosting with great customer support (24/7, quick, knowledgeable and friendly) which wont impose bad mysql limits and will not crash when slashdotted or dugg.
It would be good if it would use some sort of a reliability boosting system like clustering (although I guess it doesn't have to be clustering necessarily).
I also need it to have at least 2GB of web space and more than 100GB of monthly bandwidth but with an option of extending this if need arises *without downtime*.
If it would anyhow be possible for it to be Free Open Source Software friendly, possibly offering a webmin control panel in addition to or instead of cpanel. Of course, it has to run on GNU/Linux. I don't need *anything* Microsoft related on it.
It needs to have a good track record. Please don't advertise your own hosting companies here. I'd like to hear recommendations from real people with real experience.
My budget is up to $10 a month or $120 a year. I believe I should be able to get roughly the above with a good host for that price these days. It's a competitive market. Someone honest has got to fit the bill.
I'd like to ask for some help in choosing a webhost. I want to host a website that will be a sales database. It will use a MySQL database and PHP. I will not need large amounts of disc space (I can't estimate exactly but probably less than 10GB) and relatively low amounts of bandwidth. What's important is a high uptime and security and quality bandwidth. I am very sceptical with all the webhosts offering unlimited services since I know they are overselling. Do you know of any quality webhosts suitable with the above characteristics?
Used ThePlanet for ages and well not to impressed with them in the past 6 months. Not reading tickets fully is a big issue or not following instructions. Response times to tickets absolutely unacceptable with some being 3-4 hours others ranging in the days and most requiring calls to get responses. It really seems like they're more focused on their dedicated server market.
So any suggestions on quality providers for people in need of a few cabs and 45mbit or so and want actual decent response times and knowledgeable staff who read tickets fully?
Some applications are of the ping sensitive nature while others are just your normal web, mail, misc services. So things like cisco guards available and friendly with regards to fixing bad routes would be nice.
I've heard people suggest Colo4Dallas but are there any other suggestions?
After researching a lot of the webhosts that are more geared towards quality in a shared server, I've narrowed it down to a few different providers. I haven't been able to find much in the way of reviews on Utropicmedia and wanted some input on them. I see they have phone support, not sure if they have a ticket system also. They don't have a forum on their site to check feedback either.
I like the fact that their servers are close to me and the majority of my customers (Detroit). They also seem to be concentrating on quality, so I'd like to find out more about them. Any first hand input would be appreciated.
The short list also includes Medialayer, Precision Effect and Rochen. I want reliability and fast page loads for my customers. Medialayer seems to be about twice the price for equal bandwith and disk space. The others are quite comparable. I'm sure there are several more that would do fine, but I decided to quit looking and choose from this group.
We've browsed/searched a lot these last years and I believe fdcservers has the best bandwidth deal, with stability and a good service.
We've been searching the last days and found some other companies (ex 10TB.com). Are there any other companies that would offer something as 'good' as fdc regarding bandwidth?
10TB says they use softlayer's DC but it seems they don't use their network (got that information on a chat with SL's sales) so in my opinion there is no benefits to be on SL's DC if we don't use their network which is really good/stable. We've found that 10tb.com is a new company and their site has 404 and incorrect contact e-mails address which made we 'quit' the signup process.. (and because it is hard to 'trust' a new company with lot of bandwidth - and errors on their website - when there are others on the market for a long time that couldn't offer it).
What do you think about 10tb.com? Other options? What about fdc? Is it worth going with them to host streaming ? We need as much bandwidth as possible, but we also need quality.
I visited the colo space (1 cabinet) we obtained through an Equinix reseller. There was some confusion as initially we were going into DC2, but they put us into DC3 as that's where they had the space (they have a lot of cages in both DCs).
In the past, I had visited DC2 and it's clear the facility was purpose-built for Equinix. You can tell just by looking at it from the outside, but also inside.
Driving up to DC3 (on Chillum Place), I was first surprised to notice glass windows on the outside of the building (they have the reinforced walls inside of that I was told).
Apparently, the building was some other company's datacenter or offices, which Equinix then refitted their standard-build datacenter inside the building. They also have different man-traps (like a rotating door) compared to DC2, raised flooring (which is not used I was told), and lower ceilings.
I drove around the DC3 building, and the other half of it appears to be some other company's datacenter (based on the generators on the roof). Any idea who that is?
Is DC3 the same quality as DC2? It didn't quite "feel" like the quailty of DC2, but that's just an impression and not based on any empirical evidence. It's also a bit further out there, while DC2 and its new "siblings" (DC4/5) are all adjacent to each other (on Filigree Court).
With the reseller we are using, most of their bandwidth in DC3 cross-connects to their network equipment in DC2, and that's where they peer. That's another thing that makes me feel like DC3 is quite secondary.
Are my feelings unfounded, or should I push our reseller to find a cabinet for us in DC2?
I'm about to start a premium VPN service provider, i've found that far too many people in this area are content with providing 100kb/s download speeds and poor reliablity, and think I can provide something better.
I'm currently evaluating options for the hosting i'll need. Initially i'd only be looking at 1 or 2 high bandwidth servers from a quality provider(in the US), on a monthly contract - obviously with the capacity to increase this as and when business becomes a little more established.
I've looked at 10tb.com, and a few uncapped 100Mb providers (Sharktech and others). Obviously I can see the 10tb cap on a gigabit port being a potentially expensive issue - how do they measure this bandwidth? I've noticed that several companies are now only counting the upload which would help me alot, is this standard? Additionally, and considering that i'm specifically NOT going to permit p2p usage in my TOS, would I be correct in assuming that providers will have no issue with this form of service over their network?
Finally, to the more experienced folk here, who would you choose... and why?! Given that i'm marketing this as a premium service, cost isn't the most important factor, but obviously it is one of the considerations.
I want to do a "near-lossless" video conversion, if that is even possible, in keeping the proportion of the original video. Veoh seems a little bit better / at a higher quality than youtube, and I want to achieve higher quality than that. Literally speaking, I want the converted flv video's quality to be as close as the original video. What ffmpeg command exactly do I need to achieve this? I currently use ClipShare and is experimenting with Ostube for the php script. The default "high-quality" setting for both scripts are not that good of a quality either, with choppy images.
I'm currently hosting my website on core2duo / 2GB RAM dedicated server. Thing is, programmer did a VERY good job optimizing scripts and this server is way too much than I need. The average server load is usually 0.00 - 0.20. I'm thinking of switching to either a cheaper dedicated server or VPS.
We use 300GB-1TB of bandwidth per month though. 90% of our traffic is from US. Do you know any good VPS solution for this?
it was quite a while since the last time i was using some of the shared/reseller hosts. As far as i can see, there's A BUNCH of new shared/reseller hosts here at WHT everyday. So i can't really distinguish what host to choose.
This shared account will be used to host just one site/one domain. The site is very light, diskspace and traffic can be very low. It can be plesk or cpanel control panel. Linux OS, PHP5.
What i'm actually looking for is a European host WITHOUT overselling, with high quality bandwith and uptime, accepting paypal/moneybookers payments. This website does not require a lot of traffic, less than 1gig a month, but it really needs to be fast europe bandwith with HIGH uptime.
The host does not need to be years in business, it can be new host as long as the quality of service is very high.
There are no price limits, as far as the price justify what host has to offer.
I've looked at some shared offers from europe hosts in which i usually rent dedi's, such as leaseweb, netrouting, eurovps, hetzner... Does anyone have experience with their shared hosting offers?
For learning purposes, I'd like to purchase a switch to network at least 4 servers. Based on your knowledge of switches and the ones you currently use in production, could you recommend some switches that, while initially for development use, could be transitioned to production?
I'd like a switch that specifically isn't meant for home use, because a big part of the reason for purchasing it is to get experience configuring, using, and troubleshooting a production-quality switch that has anywhere from 8-32 ports.
For those of you that actually network 32 devices together in production, do you have one mega 32-port switch, or multiple smaller (e.g. 8-port) switches? What setup, in your experience, have you determined to be ideal?
What criteria are very important to consider when purchasing a switch that, as a newbie to this area, I may not have otherwise considered? Most resources on this topic give pretty basic information, but don't highlight the real 'gotcha' areas.
I have very sad experience with solarvps and their support quality these days. I'm their user for over year now. Minor problems appeared rarely, but in those cases support reacting time and quality was simply excellent.
Now something wrong happened with them. To problem ticket, which priority is defined as emergency, they answer after 4 hours. Now i'm waiting for last answer already 11 hours.No answer till now. And server is not usable, our customers ar ready to eat us alive. It's going third day as we suffer from problem.
Ok, lets say their support staff is unable to solve this complex problem. But they should at least inform customer what is done to solve problem, what means are used and what's the current situation and problem solving progress. At first problem day they used to reply godaddy-style short zero-valuable comments, that have nothing to do with problem essence and solution. They simply don't try (or unable) to understand problem deeply enough.
This message to forum has mainly two targets. Primary is to get problem solution from all of you, who may have experienced same problem as me, since i already lost my hope to get problem solution from solarvps. Second - to kick *** solarVPS a bit for poor service quality.
And here is the problem.
VPS system: windows OS, 384mb of ram (venusX package).
As soon as i start apache server, or IIS server, or whatever server that is listening to port 80, same moment TCP connection count (measured by windows 'performance' tool) rises to more than 300, usually 600. Then all http requests are rejected, website is completely down. It is notable, that problem is clearly not caused by heavy http server loads. Problem appears on even low load. Stopping http server causes connections to fall to normal level, nearly 0. Starting again suddenly causes problem again. Connection count jumps rapidly to >300.
This problem appears about 30% of all time. There are periods problem does not appear, server functions normal. No problem regularity found.
It seems that connections are stuck at OS or physical level, they are not even handled by apache. Apache logs show no or little activity when problem happens, CPU usage is very low. Only very small part of requests are passed to apache. Others are just gone, although large amount of connections are shown by system. Seems they are somehow 'hung' and stay too long not disconnected.
When trying to reach website through browser, firefox says 'connection interrupted' at same moment. This again shows that requests are not even processed by apache. In case of heavy load 'time out' would appear after several seconds only.
At early stages of problem i suspected two causes: apache server software problem or DoS attack. Both of these were denied. Apache was reinstalled (and IIS, lighthttpd 'causes' the same problem too). DoS as cause was denied too, as traffic does not seem suspicious.
At this moment i do not know what to suspect, but its almost clear it's solarvps problem, not mine. As long as they did not deny it and got full understanding of problem. I could suspect virus, making DoS in their network, router physical disorder, what else? Anyway their problem, not mine. But his becomes my problem, as i have no service for third day.
I do not blame solarVPS for problem. Problem is realy mystical and interesting, it may happen to anyone. I just say that their support reacting time and quality is pathetic in this situation. And i miss adequate work to find problem cause.
Anyway they have work around to solve problem - move my whole VPS account to another physical server. But they don't answer about this.
My question relates to large corporate hosts vs new upcoming providers, Do customers prefer to stay with known upcoming small providers or prefer to go to large corps. From what i have observed recently it seems like the bigger the company grow the more service quality detoriates, and seems like things kind of get out of hands.