Could everybody please post their site inhere?


#1

I’m interested in joining Dreamhost but want to test the speed etc.
Also please let me know what your thoughts are of dreamhost overall (price/quality ratio)

Thanks


#2

The main menu leading to my various sites is at:
http://www.dan.info/
They’re all hosted at Dreamhost.

– Dan


#3

If you are exploring hosting companies, you need to learn about netcraft.com

Every webhosting company has their strengths and weaknesses. That means they are going to be good for some purposes, not good for others.

And of course, there are the vast majority of hosting companies that seem to be good for nothing.

I’ve been using Dreamhost since oh, about 1998. My needs have changed over that period of time. Dreamhost was super, then mediocre, then pretty darned good, and of recent, not particularly suitable for me.

I won’t switch to another hosting company, but I’ll probably be on a dedicated server. It’s more than twice as expensive, but it doesn’t matter how cheap something is if it doesn’t get the job done, does it?

Dreamhost has always had fast, responsive servers, excellent (although not cut-throat) pricing, and their control panel is exceptionally capable, although it’s slow enough to that you can drink three Jolts waiting for the next page to arrive. You could do worse than Dreamhost. A lot worse.

If you have particular concerns, please feel free to write me privately.


#4

[quote]If you are exploring hosting companies, you need to
learn about netcraft.com

[/quote]

I second this. Picking a few examples at random can give you unreliable results. I try to mention this when someone writes into Sales asking for a few examples (I consider us pretty ethical, but some hosting companies will offer kick-backs to certain customers to spread good words about them, and are likely to only ‘recommend’ sites on known-speedy servers/connections).

Asking a host if they’re any good will likely result in a pretty predictable ‘yes’. :>

For those shopping for a host, always get your information from multiple sources. Prowl through the usual web hosting review sites, epinions.com, and as many unbiased hosting-related message boards as you can.

There’s an unofficial directory of DreamHost-hosted sites at:

http://directory.dreamhost.com/

…we don’t edit the list, and can’t guarantee that all sites are still up or even still hosted by us. But there are quite a few links there.

Every host has strengths and weaknesses, including us. Finding one that suits your particular needs takes work! Nobody can be everything to everybody.

In any case, you’re only going to get an accurate picture if you weigh the totality of everyone’s opinions and experiences. Every host is going to have its share of very vocal fans (we’ve got quite a few), as well as a few people with unattainable expectations. The general feeling of the people in the middle are probably of the most use, if you’re doing research.

[quote]I’ve been using Dreamhost since oh, about 1998. My needs
have changed over that period of time. Dreamhost was
super, then mediocre, then pretty darned good, and of
recent, not particularly suitable for me.

[/quote]

I’m sorry to hear that, deke. If you have any specific concerns, would you mind sending them my way?

  • Jeff @ DreamHost
  • DH Discussion Forum Admin

#5

Also note, though, that you should always take results from services like Netcraft with a grain of salt. Especially be wary of sites that measure latency or network responsiveness, unless they are monitoring from a number of different networks and geographical locations.


#6

[quote]Especially be wary of sites that measure latency or
network responsiveness, unless they are monitoring from a
number of different networks and geographical locations.

[/quote]

Good point. If the monitoring is being done from the middle of nowhere on a static-laden dial-up connection, odds are pretty good that any site is going to be slow and sporadic. :>

  • Jeff @ DreamHost
  • DH Discussion Forum Admin

#7

[quote]Especially be wary of sites that measure latency or
network responsiveness, unless they are monitoring from > a number of different networks and geographical
locations.

[/quote]

Sounds like you are unfamiliar with Netcraft, Wil.

Netcraft tells you who is being hosted at any given hosting company. Do a “What’s that site running”, and you find the server ident string as well as the owner of their IP block. Click on the IP block owner’s name, and it tells you other sites in the same block. If they have the same server ident string, chances are fairly good that they use the same hosting company.

They tell you how long each site has been up, continuously, but that information isn’t necessarily helpful. If the numbers are too high, it means they haven’t been applying patches, and they are ripe for an assault by script kiddies.

You can also see how long the site has been at the same IP number. If a site has been in the same place for three years, either he owns his own server, is satisfied with the hosting company he uses, or he’s a dunderhead. Looking at the site will tell you whether he is a dunderhead or not.

There’s usually enough information on any site to help you contact the owner, fairly expeditiously, although a WHOIS will give you a little more. Owners will tend to tell you whether they like their hosting company or not, and will tell you why they like the hosting company.

[quote]Good point. If the monitoring is being done from
the middle of nowhere on a static-laden dial-up
connection, odds are pretty good that any site
is going to be slow and sporadic. :>

[/quote]

I’m not sure that static-laden dial-up has much to do with it. A friend is standing over my shoulder. A couple of minutes ago, we established SSH connections to our respective websites. We copied a file from one server to the other, then did wgets from each server to the other, all within 10 seconds.

It was 184.35 KB/s one direction, and 262.09 KB/s the other. Should we conclude that one site is uphill of the other, so that it takes 50% longer to make the trip one direction than another?

From “van” here at dreamhost:
yahoo.com - 193.41 KB/s
microsoft.com - 113.42 KB/s
msn.com - 123.01 KB/s
msnbc.com - 110.81 KB/s

Google, though, was 2.41 MB/s, over ten times as fast as everyone else.

I think that we can draw the conclusion from these numbers that Dreamhost’s speed is quite satisfactory. It’s in the same class as Yahoo, and the hosting company my friend does business with.

I’ve had comments from users that they appreciate my site’s speedy response, although a lot of that has to do with the fact that I am a brilliant (although excessively modest) webmaster.

You can also conclude that Microsoft must be running their sites on Microsoft software, and that Google is running their computers on Jolt cola instead of electricity.

Like I said in the beginning, fast and responsive hardware here. I have never complained about that. (Unless, of course, the site was completely hosed. It gets really slow when THAT happens. But the internet does suffer from backhoe operators getting careless and train tunnels catching fire.)


#8

Anybody using MySQL ?
Would be interesting to visit a site to check the speed that’s using MySQL databases.

Btw: could you guys rate this host /10 ?
Uptime & speed are very important to me.

Thanks in advance


#9

I think you’re talking to me and not to Wil. :>

I’m definitely familiar with Netcraft - I was speaking in general terms.

The uptime measurement they (ie Netcraft) use doesn’t show network availability at all AFAIK. I believe they determine uptime the same way that nmap does (using the TCP timestamp option). This means the measurements could be falsified and / or may give incorrect results with some operating systems / kernels.

I was going to point out the bit about long uptime not necessarily being a good thing for basically the same reasons you stated (although please do note that the machines with the longest uptime are mostly BSDI and FreeBSD machines :>).

I think Jeff’s example was intended as an extreme one, and primarily as a joke…