Choosing a new Hosting Company

airbornflghtairbornflght Houston, TX Icrontian
edited May 2006 in Internet & Media
Ok, at first i wasnt going to note names, and just use the brand a, brand b...but i thought that companies have reputations, and thats important too.

im looking at three different hosting companies to choose from, im getting tired of my current, i just feel that they dont have their act together.

Okay, Brand A (Sarcnet)

I can get 1 gb of space for $10 a month, I know nothing more about the service.


Brand B (Influx Host)

My friend has his site hosted here (j-revolution.com) I can get 7gb of space and 100gb of bandwidth per month for $8 a month. Pretty good plan, my friend hasnt had any issues with them that I'm aware of other than his site was hacked by some 13 year old:sawed:. Pretty good deal.

Brand C (GoDaddy)

Okay, im trying to figure these guys out, I can get 50gb of space, and 500gb of bandwidth per month for $7 a month?? WOW!, and their feature set seems to be the best except i dont see anyhting about cpanel, so im assuming i wont get it?:confused2 I'm impressed with these guys just because of the feature set, but one thing I dont like is that I dont see Cpanel, not to mention the sheer space and bandwidth.

who do you think I should go with? I'm looking to buy the new hosting about 2 weeks before my current hosting goes up, (i pay 3 months at a time)

oh, I guess I should have said what im curently getting. Right now, I have 3gb of space and 30gb of bandwidth for $7 a month.

Right now im leaningg towards influx host, because they seem to be the best compromise between all the features(cpanel/fantastico) and space. I just wonder, because as far as im aware, they are a pretty small company. They have unlimited pretty much anything, not that I need it but.. which one do you think?

Comments

  • primesuspectprimesuspect Beepin n' Boopin Detroit, MI Icrontian
    edited May 2006
    Just as another note, we offer Plesk.

    We don't (and won't) compete with those budget hosting companies. We are more geared towards specialty hosting. We don't meter bandwidth (i.e. we won't say "you get 100gb of transfer a month"). It is unmetered and capped at 3.5mb/sec of sustained transfer.
  • profdlpprofdlp The Holy City Of Westlake, Ohio
    edited May 2006
    Support is pretty darn important in a venture like this. Out of those three companies, which of them offer you the opportunity to communicate directly with the owner should you need help with something? ;)

    I'd gladly pay an extra couple of bucks a month just to avoid the Tech Support potluck arrangement you would get from most companies, not to mention the risk you run of watching your bill skyrocket should you exceeed your monthly transfer limit. :thumbsup:

    (No, I do not get a kickback for pointing this out. ;D )
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited May 2006
    The easiest limit to break in a hosting plan is the bandwidth; everyone always underestimates it, and thinks they need less than they do to save a few dollars. As someone has had websites hosted before, I would choose Brian's hosting package in an instant.. Not because I love him ( I HATE HIS GUTS ), or because I want SM kickbacks ( Thrax becomes the moderator of the bitter crumpet forum ), but because his unmetered bandwidth puts any amount of disk space another hosting company can throw at me to shame. Few people ever need more than 1gb of space for a private little operation, but unmetered bandwidth is legendary.
  • airbornflghtairbornflght Houston, TX Icrontian
    edited May 2006
    hmm. wasnt aware that it was unmetered. Going to have to think about it. That has me really thinking now. The main reason I was considering Sarcnet to begin with was because I can always get ahold of prime anytime just about.

    And I'm aware that I'll probably never use 1gb of space for a website. I just dont see it getting that big. Ok prime, your sales pitch almost has me hooked, but when you say 3.5mb of transfer is that divided among everyone accessing the site, or per user? and also, what is the ftp upload speed capped at, my current host is capped at 45kbs, and it is god awful slow uploading stuff. I thought there were supposed to be better alternatives to ftp by now?

    Prime: I went to sarcnets site, but I didn't see anywhere to sign up or anything???
  • primesuspectprimesuspect Beepin n' Boopin Detroit, MI Icrontian
    edited May 2006
    We don't accept signups from our website since we don't attract bulk business, so we do direct sales only. I'll PM you.

    3.5mb/s is shared amongst all users.

    Cap upload? never heard of it. Why would you do that?
  • airbornflghtairbornflght Houston, TX Icrontian
    edited May 2006
    I have no idea why it would be/if it is actually capped, but on there ftp, the fastest ive hit is about 40, and it looks like it is capped because smart ftp has a little line graph type thing, and it looks like it hits a ceiling at 40, my upload speed for my cox account is around like 15, but that is just because cox sux.
  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited May 2006
    Your wish is my command...

    "Thrax becomes the moderator of the bitter crumpet forum"

    :D

    Robert.. I give you.. the Bitter Crumpet...

    http://www.short-media.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=88

    :D

    Looks like a winwin hosting decision..

    Choose Sarcnet. They are the best, real choice ;)
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited May 2006
    What in the hell? THIS IS GLORIOUS.
    Shorty wrote:
    Your wish is my command...

    "Thrax becomes the moderator of the bitter crumpet forum"

    :D

    Robert.. I give you.. the Bitter Crumpet...

    http://www.short-media.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=88

    :D

    Looks like a winwin hosting decision..

    Choose Sarcnet. They are the best, real choice ;)
Sign In or Register to comment.