PDA

View Full Version : Recommended Host For WP based site?



PayForWords
08-08-2013, 07:11 PM
Okay, so I currently use GoDaddy like an idiot and my blog loads RIDICULOUSLY slow...



The Blog Age - Not The Ice Age (http://www.TheBlogAge.com) loads at around 6-7 seconds.



I've considered buying VPS hosting but don't want to get a dedicated server as it is JUST a personal blog.



Any recommendations for a good host for a WordPress site?



Blue Host? Hostgator? Who?



Thanks!

Brian Altenhofel
08-08-2013, 07:27 PM
Okay, so I currently use GoDaddy like an idiot and my blog loads RIDICULOUSLY slow...



The Blog Age - Not The Ice Age (http://www.TheBlogAge.com) loads at around 6-7 seconds.



I've considered buying VPS hosting but don't want to get a dedicated server as it is JUST a personal blog.



Any recommendations for a good host for a WordPress site?



Blue Host? Hostgator? Who?



Thanks!

After the Endurance International Group issue last week (Hostgator, Bluehost, JustHost, and HostMonster)....

A cloud server doesn't really cost a lot. A personal blog on a Rackspace 512MB server will probably be around $17/mo once bandwidth is figured. What's nice is you could get an even bigger boost offloading stuff to a CDN and only pay a few cents more...

PayForWords
08-08-2013, 08:31 PM
Thanks! I'll look into them! Do they provide a cPanel as well with automatic WP installation on their cloud servers?



I'll give them a look but I think I still prefer a VPS if you know a good provider.



Or even just standard hosting somewhere else. I hear GoDaddy is notoriously bad for WP sites.



Which seems to be the case as this is the first site with this issue (and first WP site).

billbenson
08-08-2013, 09:13 PM
Why not PM MyITGuy on this forum he does hosting.

MyITGuy
08-08-2013, 09:53 PM
Why not PM MyITGuy on this forum he does hosting.

Thanks for the mention Bill! PayForWords, check out the links in my signature to see what hosting services I provide (In all fairness, check out Brian's above as well).

In the event your looking for something more, I'd recommend Burst.net. I currently have a few VPS's with them for my DNS Cluster (Geographically dispersed) and the only issues I've had is a few minutes of downtime in the Chicago location.

If you go with a VPS, be prepared to pay about $15 extra for a cPanel license if you require this control panel. Otherwise you can use the command line, Webmin or some other free control panels that are available (Migrations would not be as easy).

Brian Altenhofel
08-08-2013, 10:01 PM
Thanks! I'll look into them! Do they provide a cPanel as well with automatic WP installation on their cloud servers?

They don't do cPanel - the server is your bare server. They *do* have a deployments feature coming soon, currently in invite-only testing (https://rackspace.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_3WuQo6rpwLH1uyp).

MyITGuy
08-08-2013, 10:02 PM
The Blog Age - Not The Ice Age (http://www.TheBlogAge.com) loads at around 6-7 seconds.

I just tested using Pingdom and your site loaded in 9.02 seconds
Website speed test (http://tools.pingdom.com/fpt/#!/wlXaX/http://www.theblogage.com/)

Try disabling the Yoast SEO Plugin and see how that impacts the load time.[/QUOTE]

WebEminence
08-09-2013, 01:24 PM
I use Hostgator in combination with Cloudflare and get good load times. I like to stick with the big hosting companies and I haven't had any major issues with HostGator over 10+ years.

I just made this video for installing Wordpress on Hostgator cpanel. Most of us know how but this is good for beginners. Install Wordpress On Hostgator Hosting - Under 5 Minutes - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=985g1zjXji0)

Harold Mansfield
08-09-2013, 04:44 PM
Just an FYI, yes Go Daddy sucks...however I have clients on Go Daddy that I haven't been able to talk into moving and I've been able to speed up their sites significantly by using P3 Profiler to find the culprits:
WordPress › P3 (Plugin Performance Profiler) « WordPress Plugins (http://wordpress.org/plugins/p3-profiler/)
And then I think Go Daddy recommends WP Super Cache for sites on their servers. I tried W3 Total Cache on Go Daddy and thier techs told me Super Cache is what they recommend.

But if you have the means to move, then that would be my best recommendation. Pretty much anything ( other than 1&1) will be a step better.

PayForWords
08-09-2013, 11:07 PM
Just an FYI, yes Go Daddy sucks...however I have clients on Go Daddy that I haven't been able to talk into moving and I've been able to speed up their sites significantly by using P3 Profiler to find the culprits:
WordPress › P3 (Plugin Performance Profiler) « WordPress Plugins (http://wordpress.org/plugins/p3-profiler/)
And then I think Go Daddy recommends WP Super Cache for sites on their servers. I tried W3 Total Cache on Go Daddy and thier techs told me Super Cache is what they recommend.

But if you have the means to move, then that would be my best recommendation. Pretty much anything ( other than 1&1) will be a step better.


I ran that tool and it said my total plugin impact time wise was 3.9%. Also, the problem was here before I had any plugins at all.



I've been able to get it down some by enabling caching but it has never been this slow for me before. I wonder if upgrading will help?




I'm on their lowest hosting plan currently.

Harold Mansfield
08-10-2013, 01:20 AM
I ran that tool and it said my total plugin impact time wise was 3.9%. Also, the problem was here before I had any plugins at all.
I've been able to get it down some by enabling caching but it has never been this slow for me before. I wonder if upgrading will help?
I'm on their lowest hosting plan currently.

If you can't get decent load times on a normal site ( not hosting a crap load of audio or video files), with no special functions and relatively low traffic, then it's time to move.
Why even sell the lower plan if it's not good enough for the most basic of websites?

Go Daddy's problem is that they cram FAR too many sites on each server, and they attract total amateurs that don't know what they are installing, and have unsecure sites. One person can screw up the entire server. Now multiply that by how people are on the server....which could be any number as far as we know. It could be 100. It could be 1000.

Combine that with the fact that the very cheapest plans attract the very cheapest webmasters. The "trying to make adsense money from blogging" types who will try every shortcut, script, and plug in that promises instant riches. Plain and simple, too many fly by night amateur webmasters use Go Daddy to trust any shared hosting from them.

I used to recommend Go Daddy until about 2 1/2 years ago. Go Daddy had a 3 day crapfest where a lot of sites were down, and of the ones that were up, they were barely loading. I was on it for all 3 days for clients and just happened to grab about 6 client sites at random (who all signed up months apart) to see what IP addresses they were on. 5 of them were on the same IP which I confirmed with Go Daddy tech support. Either that was one hell of a coincidence, or they cram too many sites together.

I moved to a dedicated server with my host a few years ago and never looked back. I don't have to worry about anyone else screwing with my site's load times, crashing the server, spamming from a shared IP address, and all of the other crap that comes with it. I know my sites are on their own server, have their own IP address and I can run anything I want. For me, it's worth the money.

Do I suggest it for everyone? Not really. Not if you only have 1 or 2, low-med traffic sites. You should be able to find something reliable for a decent rate. I send most of my clients to BlueHost and (with the exception of that freak outage last Friday) have had nothing but good service from them.


As far as upgrading goes...VPS isn't much better to me. It feels like the illusion of control, but it's still shared hosting. If you are going to go VPS, just kick in the extra $20 a month and go dedicated server.

That's just my opinion, which is not neccessarily based on any significant IT knowledge or server side administration. Just my personal preference.

PayForWords
08-10-2013, 02:05 AM
If you can't get decent load times on a normal site ( not hosting a crap load of audio or video files), with no special functions and relatively low traffic, then it's time to move.
Why even sell the lower plan if it's not good enough for the most basic of websites?

Go Daddy's problem is that they cram FAR too many sites on each server, and they attract total amateurs that don't know what they are installing, and have unsecure sites. One person can screw up the entire server. Now multiply that by how people are on the server....which could be any number as far as we know. It could be 100. It could be 1000.

Combine that with the fact that the very cheapest plans attract the very cheapest webmasters. The "trying to make adsense money from blogging" types who will try every shortcut, script, and plug in that promises instant riches. Plain and simple, too many fly by night amateur webmasters use Go Daddy to trust any shared hosting from them.

I used to recommend Go Daddy until about 2 1/2 years ago. Go Daddy had a 3 day crapfest where a lot of sites were down, and of the ones that were up, they were barely loading. I was on it for all 3 days for clients and just happened to grab about 6 client sites at random (who all signed up months apart) to see what IP addresses they were on. 5 of them were on the same IP which I confirmed with Go Daddy tech support. Either that was one hell of a coincidence, or they cram too many sites together.

I moved to a dedicated server with my host a few years ago and never looked back. I don't have to worry about anyone else screwing with my site's load times, crashing the server, spamming from a shared IP address, and all of the other crap that comes with it. I know my sites are on their own server, have their own IP address and I can run anything I want. For me, it's worth the money.

Do I suggest it for everyone? Not really. Not if you only have 1 or 2, low-med traffic sites. You should be able to find something reliable for a decent rate. I send most of my clients to BlueHost and (with the exception of that freak outage last Friday) have had nothing but good service from them.


As far as upgrading goes...VPS isn't much better to me. It feels like the illusion of control, but it's still shared hosting. If you are going to go VPS, just kick in the extra $20 a month and go dedicated server.

That's just my opinion, which is not neccessarily based on any significant IT knowledge or server side administration. Just my personal preference.


I've heard of people saying similar things. One guy even told me there were over 4,000 other sites on his shared server.


This is the first trouble I've had with GoDaddy and the only reason I started using them in the first place was because...


They give me 50% off all my orders. Might be time to go back to Host Gator for me (or try a different provider).


We'll see what happens though. Thanks for the feedback!

Harold Mansfield
08-10-2013, 11:23 AM
Of course you already know My IT Guy is here on the forum and he does hosting, and actually owns the equipment. I always tell people to host with a company that owns the equipment, not a 3rd party reseller.

WPMU did a pretty good set of hosting review articles recently which compares Page.ly, Bluehost, Go Daddy, Dreamhost, and WP Engine. They've done a good job with the articles, I just don't agree with all of their assessments based on my own experiences.

Here's the article, which links to each individual review:
Web Hosting Review: So Just Who is the Best? - WPMU.org (http://wpmu.org/web-hosting-review-so-just-who-is-the-best/)

billbenson
08-10-2013, 05:27 PM
Harold, we know Jeff through the forum an this thread has me thinking about switching to him. I have no problems with my current shared server though.

But in the absence of knowing someone through a forum such as this over a long period of time and developing a trust, how would you find a host that is financially sound and owns their own servers?

Harold Mansfield
08-10-2013, 05:57 PM
Harold, we know Jeff through the forum an this thread has me thinking about switching to him. I have no problems with my current shared server though.

But in the absence of knowing someone through a forum such as this over a long period of time and developing a trust, how would you find a host that is financially sound and owns their own servers?

It's tough. I only know of hosts from having to work with so many different ones. There are a LOT of 3rd party resellers out there who all basically rent space from Go Daddy, Hostgator, and the others who have affiliate programs. I can pick a Go Daddy reseller out easily because they all look the same.


I only know a few stand alone companies outside of that Bluehost/Hostgator/Just Host/WP Engine mashup:

WebAir (the host I use)
Network Solutions
Amazon
iPage ( who I've had problems with in the past and I'm not completely sure they are independent)
1&1 ( not a fan)
AT&T
Century Link
Cox
Earthlink
Rackspace
(Time/Warner probably has business hosting now too)
Pretty much everyone in the Cable/ISP game is now doing some kind of business hosting bundle thing, so anyone who's not sure can at least start there.

And there are a few Enterprise Solutions out there that the average website owner doesn't need.

WordPress actually does Enterprise Level stuff for companies like Time, TED, UPS, Dow Jones and so on. I think it starts at $15k a month. Most people don't need that.

For consumer, Small Business Level stuff, I just know the few that I mentioned.

And then there are companies like Google that do app hosting

Brian Altenhofel
08-10-2013, 11:24 PM
As far as upgrading goes...VPS isn't much better to me. It feels like the illusion of control, but it's still shared hosting. If you are going to go VPS, just kick in the extra $20 a month and go dedicated server.

That's just my opinion, which is not neccessarily based on any significant IT knowledge or server side administration. Just my personal preference.

That depends on the virtualization that is used and also whether or not they "burst". If someone says that they burst CPU or RAM, run. Run far, far away.

For example, at Rackspace each Cloud Server is running on a Xen hypervisor with 32GB RAM. Allocating 2GB for OpenStack, that leaves a maximum of 60 virtualized servers per physical host. On a 512MB cloud server, you also get 1vCPU, which is approximately 1/8 of a physical CPU based on my calculations. Plus each server has it's own dedicated IP address, or you can provision it without a public interface if you don't want it accessible over the Internet.

The only thing that can't reliably be virtualized is disk I/O. But if you're running a properly configured server stack, you really don't care about disk I/O because requests from the outside should rarely hit the disk.

If disk I/O is really an issue, I can "buyout" an entire node with a 30GB cloud server for significantly less than what I'm going to pay to lease the same dedicated server. (Yes, I have considered my own hardware and leasing a rack in a datacenter. Basically, once maintenance, MFRs, and personnel costs are also factored in, I'm better off using Amazon or Rackspace or HP until I'm spending low seven figures in hosting costs.)

And actually, in nearly all categories, the 30GB (full node) and 15GB (half node) are the best bang-for-the-buck, followed closely by the 512MB. The 1GB-8GB don't really make sense on a commodity level. They have their place, but if scaling for a website or app it's better to scale horizontally to ~86 512MB nodes than it is to run two 30GB nodes in my opinion (assuming you're wanting to have at least two nodes so that you if one dies you're still alive - also this is considering only raw cost and not network overhead cost if these web/app servers need to actually communicate with each other).

A while back, I started running into the I/O issue with databases on a cluster of 3 1GB cloud servers. I decided to check into running a dedicated cluster. The "big" option available at the time was an 8GB dedicated server. For a comparable cloud setup (8GB cloud servers - when running DB clusters you base your limits on how many sites you can fit into RAM on average), the cost of the dedicated setup was 350% the cost of the cloud setup. While I lost a little disk I/O available overhead with the cloud servers, I lost immense flexibility with the dedicated servers. Dedicated server dies, and you're SOL until another one can be provisioned, and depending on backlog that could easily be several hours. Cloud server dies, and you just hit the API and spin up another one. If you're doing it the right way, your configuration is under management by Puppet (my preference), Chef, Ansible, or some other config management tool, and none of your data's primary home is a single system. For a 512MB server running as a web or app server, I'm back online in under 6 minutes. 8GB database server is maybe 9 minutes from provisioning request to the point where it joins the cluster, and, depending on time of day and how many calls are actually going to the database, about an hour before it's ready to receive requests again.

How do I know the cloud servers in each cluster are on separate physical nodes? Their metadata gives me a UUID of the host node. Their API does attempt to provision randomly, but I did land two servers on the same node once. But that was pretty easy to check and fix. If I was in a hurry, I could have requested the provisioning of several servers at once and, as soon as they were active, take the first three or so that had different host node UUIDs and destroy the rest.

Harold Mansfield
08-10-2013, 11:41 PM
Now see, I only understand about 10% of that. I base all of my knowledge on the issue on my experience climbing the ladder from shared hosting, to dedicated server...and troubleshooting other people's sites who've had too much or not enough hosting based on their actual needs.

There's just no way I'm ever going to understand all of that. If I had to know that in order to choose the proper VPS plan, then I'm more apt to just go "screw it, just give me a dedicated server plan" which is what I did.

I also do a lot of testing, and usually have at least 5-10 personal sites in various states that I'm always tinkering with. So I felt it was the right move for me.

But there is no way that I have the time or the inclination to learn enough to understand all of that. I don't know how anyone who is not in the business of hosting does.

Anytime I have a cleint with special needs, I just call my host and ask them what's the best way to go. They haven't steered me wrong yet.

MyITGuy
08-11-2013, 12:53 AM
I wonder if upgrading will help?

Upgrading with your current host? Nope - all they will do is allocate you more space, or increase limits on certain features.


I've heard of people saying similar things. One guy even told me there were over 4,000 other sites on his shared server.
The server you are on has 2,657 domains associated to the same IP as yours.
Reverse IP Lookup - ViewDNS.info (http://viewdns.info/reverseip/?host=payforwords.com&t=1)

This only tells a small portion of the story, as a single server can have dozens of IP Addresses assigned to it, each associated with thousands of domains.


But in the absence of knowing someone through a forum such as this over a long period of time and developing a trust, how would you find a host that is financially sound and owns their own servers?

In all honesty, its really difficult to tell as there are many different ways to get into the hosting industry, with/without your own IP Blocks and with/without your own servers. Sometimes you may just have to ask the host basic information (What datacenter, sample IP's and etc) and use this information to perform a basic investigation (Check arin.net to see who really owns/uses the assigned IP's, does this match up with their location and/or DC name they provided?)

Even then, this will not tell you if they actually own the equipment, or if they rent/lease it from someone else who may terminate them at any time due to other clients abuse or etc...

If you have any hosts your interested in, let me know and I'll do some research when time permits.

Harold Mansfield
08-11-2013, 05:03 AM
The server you are on has 2,657 domains associated to the same IP as yours.
Reverse IP Lookup - ViewDNS.info (http://viewdns.info/reverseip/?host=payforwords.com&t=1)

This only tells a small portion of the story, as a single server can have dozens of IP Addresses assigned to it, each associated with thousands of domains.


My Word! On one IP address? Surely those aren't all active websites, or is there any way to tell?

PayForWords
08-11-2013, 08:27 AM
Upgrading with your current host? Nope - all they will do is allocate you more space, or increase limits on certain features.


The server you are on has 2,657 domains associated to the same IP as yours.
Reverse IP Lookup - ViewDNS.info (http://viewdns.info/reverseip/?host=payforwords.com&t=1)

This only tells a small portion of the story, as a single server can have dozens of IP Addresses assigned to it, each associated with thousands of domains.



In all honesty, its really difficult to tell as there are many different ways to get into the hosting industry, with/without your own IP Blocks and with/without your own servers. Sometimes you may just have to ask the host basic information (What datacenter, sample IP's and etc) and use this information to perform a basic investigation (Check arin.net to see who really owns/uses the assigned IP's, does this match up with their location and/or DC name they provided?)

Even then, this will not tell you if they actually own the equipment, or if they rent/lease it from someone else who may terminate them at any time due to other clients abuse or etc...

If you have any hosts your interested in, let me know and I'll do some research when time permits.


I appreciate the info but that isn't the domain in question. That page actually loads as quickly as it should (2 or 3 seconds usually).


I would be THRILLED if the domain in question would load that quickly. It's The Blog Age - Not The Ice Age (http://www.TheBlogAge.com)


I've been thinking about trying Host Gator's Level 1 VPS. Would that be sufficient for a blog? Updated 4-5X a week?

Brian Altenhofel
08-11-2013, 11:01 AM
I've been thinking about trying Host Gator's Level 1 VPS. Would that be sufficient for a blog? Updated 4-5X a week?

WebHostingTalk.com is a great place for finding out about hosts.

https://www.google.com/search?q=hostgator+vps+review+site:www.webhostingt alk.com

Harold Mansfield
08-11-2013, 12:17 PM
Call me crazy but I just don't see why you would need to pay for VPS for 1 low-med traffic blog, unless you just wanted the extra hosting to play with some future projects.

I could see it if you were running a WordPress Network, or were hosting video, or had a lot of traffic. Plenty of people are running 1 or 2 websites are using shared hosting just fine. As I mentioned, never had a problem with Bluehost and have worked on sites on Hostgator that seem to perform well too.

Don't let your experience at Go Daddy cause you to over spend. Just do a little homework, and ask around...just like you are doing.

PayForWords
08-11-2013, 03:43 PM
Call me crazy but I just don't see why you would need to pay for VPS for 1 low-med traffic blog, unless you just wanted the extra hosting to play with some future projects.

I could see it if you were running a WordPress Network, or were hosting video, or had a lot of traffic. Plenty of people are running 1 or 2 websites are using shared hosting just fine. As I mentioned, never had a problem with Bluehost and have worked on sites on Hostgator that seem to perform well too.

Don't let your experience at Go Daddy cause you to over spend. Just do a little homework, and ask around...just like you are doing.


Well, I have 4 or 5 sites that I would be carrying over. One site is already on a dedicated server and gets 30K uniques a month.


The other 4 or 5 probably get in the range of 3,000 to 5,000 visitors a month. Those are the ones that I would carry over.



I'll give someone a test run first though and move one site to normal hosting and see how it does. Thanks.

Harold Mansfield
08-11-2013, 04:03 PM
The other 4 or 5 probably get in the range of 3,000 to 5,000 visitors a month. Those are the ones that I would carry over.

Yeah, then it would definitely be best to go better than shared. Can't your dedicated server handle the other 4 or 5 sites? Is it a consistent 3-5k a month on each?
So we are looking at an average of 46k a month between the 6 sites? 1500 visitors a day between all sites. You should be able to run it all from one account with plenty of room to spare.

Maybe one of the hosting guys can chime in on that one.

Brian Altenhofel
08-11-2013, 04:33 PM
My experience (with my own sites and acquiring hosting customers) is that many shared hosts cut you off between 1500 and 2K visitors/day, or basically 45K-60K/mo. In fact, my most recent development client had a static site on a shared host (but it did have a lot of images) that suspended their account daily as soon as they hit ~1800 visitors that day. Suspended as in email and DNS also failed.

I have a vBulletin site that gets over 3M/mo. It ran just fine on a non-optimized LAMP stack on a 2GB server up to ~900 concurrent users without crashing (except the VPS host kept tripping over the power cord). Two 512MB web servers (with Varnish, Nginx, PHP-FPM, APC, and Memcache) and a 1GB database server (Percona) handle ~1200 concurrent users and still maintain sub-4s load times (though I am cheating by offloading most images, javascript, and css to a CDN).

Basically, at 46K/mo, a VPS will definitely handle it if your application isn't insane.

MyITGuy
08-11-2013, 08:12 PM
I appreciate the info but that isn't the domain in question. That page actually loads as quickly as it should (2 or 3 seconds usually).

In that case, the server is likely to be even more oversubscribed with 6,107 domains on the same IP
Reverse IP Lookup - ViewDNS.info (http://viewdns.info/reverseip/?host=theblogage.com&t=1)


I've been thinking about trying Host Gator's Level 1 VPS. Would that be sufficient for a blog? Updated 4-5X a week?
A good shared host would be more than sufficient...I.E. Avoid GoDaddy/Hostgator anything.

MyITGuy
08-11-2013, 08:15 PM
My Word! On one IP address? Surely those aren't all active websites, or is there any way to tell?

Yep, one IP Address.

You won't be able to tell if they are all active unless you manually visit each one (Or find an automated way), but what I tend to see is a single customer may have a dozen domains on the same account. Some may all point to the same website, others may all have their own websites.

PayForWords
08-12-2013, 03:00 AM
Yep, one IP Address.

You won't be able to tell if they are all active unless you manually visit each one (Or find an automated way), but what I tend to see is a single customer may have a dozen domains on the same account. Some may all point to the same website, others may all have their own websites.

Not even surprised. I've heard this from A LOT of people. Thanks for the info!

Harold Mansfield
08-12-2013, 09:37 AM
Yep, one IP Address.

You won't be able to tell if they are all active unless you manually visit each one (Or find an automated way), but what I tend to see is a single customer may have a dozen domains on the same account. Some may all point to the same website, others may all have their own websites.

I usually try and get everything on it's own IP...2 per at the least. I have an IP address with 4 sites on it and I think THAT'S crowded and have been thinking about breaking one of them off.
With so many sites crammed on one IP, it has to be too easy to end up collateral damage if someone else using the same IP gets banned.

MyITGuy
08-12-2013, 09:47 AM
I usually try and get everything on it's own IP...2 per at the least. I have an IP address with 4 sites on it and I think THAT'S crowded and have been thinking about breaking one of them off.
With so many sites crammed on one IP, it has to be too easy to end up collateral damage if someone else using the same IP gets banned.

You may notice an increase in your costs if you continue down this path. IPv4 addresses are limited right now and the supply will eventually be exhausted, driving prices up (Some DC's are charging $5/IP per month now).

There really isn't much of a benefit to separate IP's for domains now as the popular items that would cause concern are now looking up based on domain, instead of IP Address (I.E. Webfilters, SSL Certificates and etc).

The only service that is a concern would be outbound mail...but in most cases your outbound mail will route over the hosts shared IP address instead of your dedicated IP address anyhow (Unless you have a VPS/Dedicated server and are binding domains to this specific address)

Harold Mansfield
08-12-2013, 10:03 AM
You may notice an increase in your costs if you continue down this path. IPv4 addresses are limited right now and the supply will eventually be exhausted, driving prices up (Some DC's are charging $5/IP per month now).

There really isn't much of a benefit to separate IP's for domains now as the popular items that would cause concern are now looking up based on domain, instead of IP Address (I.E. Webfilters, SSL Certificates and etc).

The only service that is a concern would be outbound mail...but in most cases your outbound mail will route over the hosts shared IP address instead of your dedicated IP address anyhow (Unless you have a VPS/Dedicated server and are binding domains to this specific address)

Yeah, I heard that it's not completely neccessary anymore. It's an old habit. I don't pay monthly for them right now. I have about 10 on my account now and I think additional ones cost me a one time charge of $2, but I haven't needed to add any for a while now.

I've heard about the shortage a year or so ago and have tried to be responsible, hence why I have 4 sites on one now. I think I have my own mail server too....I don't use the hosts web server credentials to set up my email client, I use my own, so I've been under that assumption.

I knew all of this when I set it up, but since I haven't had any problems with it in so long it's hard to recall everything without looking up my account.

Brian Altenhofel
08-12-2013, 01:52 PM
There really isn't much of a benefit to separate IP's for domains now as the popular items that would cause concern are now looking up based on domain, instead of IP Address (I.E. Webfilters, SSL Certificates and etc).

Users on Windows XP will be told there is a certificate error when accessing sites taking advantage of SNI. Unfortunately, well over a third of Internet users are still running XP.

MyITGuy
08-12-2013, 02:58 PM
Users on Windows XP will be told there is a certificate error when accessing sites taking advantage of SNI. Unfortunately, well over a third of Internet users are still running XP.

But only if they are using Internet Explorer. Other browsers (Chrome, Firefox and etc) can make use of this feature/functionality.

Either way, they will get a certificate error...but they can still continue to the site if memory serves me right....but yes this is something a site owner/operator will need to account for until Windows XP is phased out (Likely to happen sooner now that XP is End of Life).

Sjfine
08-12-2013, 03:20 PM
Lot of tech talk here - much appreciated - but what does anyone think of 1&1?

MyITGuy
08-12-2013, 04:24 PM
Lot of tech talk here - much appreciated - but what does anyone think of 1&1?

Hate them! Their interface is slow and proprietary...so a simple DNS change that should take seconds (before propagation) will take several hours with 1&1 (before propagation).

Harold Mansfield
08-12-2013, 05:26 PM
Lot of tech talk here - much appreciated - but what does anyone think of 1&1?

No. 1&1 is the "Go Daddy" of Germany.

billbenson
08-12-2013, 07:59 PM
No. 1&1 is the "Go Daddy" of Germany.

Godaddy is far better than 1 &1

DetailsCleaningService
08-14-2013, 01:33 AM
Try Brain host. The level of customer service and instant help is amazing.

PayForWords
08-14-2013, 03:20 AM
Godaddy is far better than 1 &1


Go Daddy is far better than EVERYONE :p

MyITGuy
08-14-2013, 10:44 AM
Go Daddy is far better than EVERYONE :p

Meh, GoDaddy is just a ring above 1&1 in my opinion. I personally moved all my domains away from them 2 years or so ago after their position on SOPA

billbenson
08-15-2013, 07:19 PM
Who do you use now Jeff (for domain registration)

MyITGuy
08-15-2013, 11:33 PM
Who do you use now Jeff (for domain registration)

I'm using Enom at the moment since they allow me to purchase/resell domains, SSL Certs and etc at some good price points.
OpenSRS (Or one of their resellers) is a pretty decent choice as well, their pricing includes a private whois listing at no additional charge if you choose to use it.

nexxterra
08-17-2013, 01:09 PM
Godaddy has made their name through name registrations and the hosting is just an add on for them.
Their servers are overloaded, however as the Hosting grows, they are getting better.
I would suggest moving to myitguy for future peace of mind.
As for a VPS, MOST of the time this popular choice is a very stupid one. If a shared server is NOT oversold, it will process your website with 8 cores and 16 gigs of RAM, (provided the server has these specs) when you choose a VPS, you are limited to way fewer resources than what a shared server would provide... and you will have to maintain all aspects of the VPS, operating system, control panels, security etc.

A VPS is good if you need to be completely separate from other server clients, like PCI compliance. Even a "reseller" account will provide a better environment for designers or startup hosts that want to separate their clients.

Harold Mansfield
08-17-2013, 08:15 PM
Sorry guys. Had to delete. Just PM or contact each other to complete your business transaction. No harm no foul, but we can't let others think it's OK to conduct business in open threads.

If you want to do business with someone, just PM them privately.