News: TinyPortal Release Schedule. Please read this update for More Info.

Login  |  Register
HTML5 Icon HTML5 Icon
TP on Social Media
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

August 24, 2019, 07:14:10 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Recent

Members
  • Total Members: 3751
  • Latest: tom888
Stats
  • Total Posts: 188700
  • Total Topics: 20746
  • Online Today: 86
  • Online Ever: 629
  • (November 08, 2018, 01:36:54 PM)
Users Online
Users: 0
Guests: 21
Total: 21

Author Topic: [PAID] DreamHost  (Read 15257 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Xarcell

  • Guest
[PAID] DreamHost
« on: June 20, 2006, 06:36:18 AM »
I'd just like to let everyone know that I use DreamHost and been using them for 3 years now. They are an excellent host, have 99% uptime, 24/7 customer service and a 24Hour respond time.

Here is a minimal package:

1 free domain (domains & renewals at $10 a year)
www.yourname.com
UNLIMITED domains hosted
UNLIMITED subdomains
20 GB Disk, 1 TB Transfer
3000 Mailboxes, 75 Shell/FTP Users

7.95 a month(+ $50 stup) or $94.40 annually(no set-up fee).

I use one of the higher end packages.

They do offer miva merchant for free on higher-end packages, and have 1 click installs. You just click a button and it installs popular types of software for you such as phpbb, wordpress, oscommernce, etc. Thet do not have a one cliock install for SMF though, they feel SMF is a huge secruity risk.

* Please note: Dreamhost may be on of the best hosts out there, but because the way they set up there systems, they are not SMF friendly. There extra secruity messes up SMF sessionID's(because of the ; in url). ZYou have to disable it. They also doesn't work well with certain RSS scripts. As in the RSS Rejector mod at SMF and TP Rss blocks.

Other than that it's fine.

I just wanted tro give everyone the heads up with this host.

www.dreamhost.com

------------------------------
My TP/SMF Sites Running On This Host:

www.xarcell-studios.com
www.feyorin.com
www.xboxnarc.com
www.xarchology.com
www.veoclan.com (merged with xboxnarc)
www.xtmclan.com (merged with xboxnarc)



redone

  • Guest
Re: [PAID] DreamHost
« Reply #1 on: June 20, 2006, 07:46:24 AM »
I find it odd that they feel SMF is a security risk. Given that there is know known vulnerabilities and so many hosts support SMF via Fantastico one click install strikes me as odd.

I don't see much in your review that would make me use them to be honest. Its good that you have had three years good service from them but I would personally look for a more SMF friendly host and I also doubt the 1tb of bandwidth they offer as well.

Personal opinions aside a good review.

 ;)

Xarcell

  • Guest
Re: [PAID] DreamHost
« Reply #2 on: June 20, 2006, 03:51:15 PM »
Ya, it's more of a warning post. I don't recommend DreamHost for SMF users.

I got into the middle of a debate between unknown/grudge and dreamhost about the secruity issue. Grudge proved them wrong, but they haven't done anything about it.

redone

  • Guest
Re: [PAID] DreamHost
« Reply #3 on: June 21, 2006, 05:57:11 AM »
Sadly in most cases hosts don't know what they are talking about. Maybe someone could define security for me in a world where once you have ftp access for your domain you can pretty much upload whatever you like! Where is the security in that? lol

Besides which no one has ever provided any valid reason why SMF should not be installed on a server.

Xarcell

  • Guest
Re: [PAID] DreamHost
« Reply #4 on: June 21, 2006, 06:30:22 AM »
They don't have a problem with it being installed. It's there "extra secruity" that interferes with the ";" in the URL on sessionID's. You have to disable the "extra secruity" mod.

Skal Tura

  • Guest
Re: [PAID] DreamHost
« Reply #5 on: June 22, 2006, 11:55:12 PM »
As part of market research study i tried dreamhost. That account is still in use for low importance websites.

But i wouldn't recommend DH for anything else than at tops a personal website or low importance website.

Here are couple reasons:
A) Their servers are slow, they have oversold by too large factor
B) Network is slow, they have again oversold by too large factor
C) Lagging -> sometimes it takes 10-20s just to connect & data to start transferring
D) broken network, see this:
Code: [Select]
ping homer.artichost.net
PING homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11): icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=47.3 ms
Warning: time of day goes back (-1127542us), taking countermeasures.
64 bytes from homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11): icmp_seq=2 ttl=53 time=50.4 ms
64 bytes from homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11): icmp_seq=3 ttl=53 time=61.3 ms
Warning: time of day goes back (-1138575us), taking countermeasures.
64 bytes from homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11): icmp_seq=4 ttl=53 time=0.000 ms
64 bytes from homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11): icmp_seq=5 ttl=53 time=66.8 ms
64 bytes from homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11): icmp_seq=6 ttl=53 time=34.5 ms
64 bytes from homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11): icmp_seq=7 ttl=53 time=34.1 ms
64 bytes from homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11): icmp_seq=8 ttl=53 time=52.9 ms
64 bytes from homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11): icmp_seq=9 ttl=53 time=33.7 ms
64 bytes from homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11): icmp_seq=10 ttl=53 time=33.6 ms
64 bytes from homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11): icmp_seq=11 ttl=53 time=34.0 ms
Warning: time of day goes back (-1135308us), taking countermeasures.
64 bytes from homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11): icmp_seq=12 ttl=53 time=0.000 ms
Warning: time of day goes back (-1107532us), taking countermeasures.
64 bytes from homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11): icmp_seq=13 ttl=53 time=0.000 ms
64 bytes from homer.artichost.net (72.232.48.11): icmp_seq=14 ttl=53 time=36.4 ms

--- homer.artichost.net ping statistics ---
14 packets transmitted, 14 received, 0% packet loss, time 17193ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.000/34.697/66.898/20.889 ms
or longer time statistics:
Code: [Select]
--- homer.artichost.net ping statistics ---
69 packets transmitted, 69 received, 0% packet loss, time 77794ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.000/119.039/1247.855/273.644 ms


I find these lines very intresting:
 Warning: time of day goes back (-1138575us), taking countermeasures.
WHAT? Excuse me? Lol, i've never ever anywhere seen something like that.
That causes rtt min to be 0.000

I find it also very curious that the latencies change this widely for a server this close,  it's just a few hops from  gblx network (what dreamhost uses) to savvis network (where homer.artichost.net resides)
E) Periodic technical problems. Some i have encountered are: periods for random internal error (500) on websites, sometimes when you try to take a new connection via SSH it won't let you login. GD, ImageMagick etc. periodically broken etc. misc problems like that.
F) VERY poor support. For a time sensitive server error (basicly: websites wasn't working like they should, but internal server errors etc.), i had to wait for an answer from support for over 2 days! And then they denied that any problem would have existed!

Their pros:
 - you can kind of resell their space.
 - No hard limits
 - You get lots of resources assigned per buck (if i just could utilize these, lol!)

I'm sure even 1&1 is better. Goto webhostingtalk.com for more info on hosts :)


redone

  • Guest
Re: [PAID] DreamHost
« Reply #6 on: June 24, 2006, 07:42:06 AM »
Certainly interesting feedback. I have to be honest and say I am yet to come across a host that oversells and does a good job of it.

Overselling from what I have seen simply does not work in the long term. As the hosting industry continues to mature from the 99c and 8gb of bandwidth to more reasonable prices and specs I would say look for a host that is upfront about not overselling and is happy to tell you they are not the cheapest.


Omniverse

  • Guest
Re: [PAID] DreamHost
« Reply #7 on: July 25, 2006, 11:56:04 AM »
I currently use DH myself. I was wondering what you mean by disabling the extra security mod?

akulion

  • Guest
Re: [PAID] DreamHost
« Reply #8 on: July 25, 2006, 12:26:47 PM »
well im a happy customer

as for the internal mumbo jumbo and milli seconds and number of queries, i couldnt be bothered, im satisfied with DH

Skal Tura

  • Guest
Re: [PAID] DreamHost
« Reply #9 on: July 26, 2006, 08:31:22 AM »
well im a happy customer

as for the internal mumbo jumbo and milli seconds and number of queries, i couldnt be bothered, im satisfied with DH

The times are just exact numbers, don't you ever feel your site is slow on DH? ;) I sure do so.

Besides, not the latency times aren't much to worry about, but the skewed portions, these:
Warning: time of day goes back (-1127542us), taking countermeasures.
Are the ones which make you wonder how broke is their network actually? OR what the HECK is going on here?