GoDaddy Servers SUK

[WoodlandDomains]

GoDaddy Servers SUK

Yep its true, ive been using their hosting server and it suks... there is a lot of downtime.... im tired of this BULL$@1T...

do you feel the same?

 

[Name Trader]

I don't use GoDaddy for hosting because

1) It's a well known fact that their hosting service sucks.
2) They only offer Windows servers.
3) You should never host with your registrar, or vice versa.

 

[Spade]

I don't use GoDaddy for hosting because

1) It's a well known fact that their hosting service sucks.
2) They only offer Windows servers.
3) You should never host with your registrar, or vice versa.

LoL. I am a former employee and I can also assure you that their hosting is definetly subpar. Even when I worked there, I hosted elsewhere.

In regards to Windows servers, thats just untrue. Linux hosting is definetly more popular there then windows.

Just out of curiousity, why do you believe it is smart to host outside of your registrar? I host outside mine, but thats for a few of my own personal reasons.

Justin

 

[shockie]

Just out of curiousity, why do you believe it is smart to host outside of your registrar?

eggs in a basket... although with regular backups, it's not too bad.

 

[Corky]

I don't use GoDaddy because I need either cPanel or Plesk. Too me, they are just a domain registrar and i'm going to keep it that way.

 

[bluearrow]

Well one of my clients has a site hosted there now like 1 years i haven't noticed a downtime but I don't like their hosting coz they have their own messy control panel. No Cpanel. and they have Linux hosting too price is same as windows hosting.

 

[WoodlandDomains]

yeah they suk thats bottom LINE!!!!

 

[antic]

wwwLuckyDOTcom, what site do you host with them?

 

[IAmAllanShore]

Although you come across as a frustrated adolescent, I think most would agree that GoDaddy's hosting is not the best.
That being said, I have a few sites that I host with them because their bandwidth charges were the most reasonable (25gigs for $2.99/month - ok) and I had some sites that needed the space to run. My uptime tracker shows "100%", although I know it would have had to have missed things like server restarts, etc.
However, just posting "Oh doodez that totally sux!" doesn't add anything to a discussion, other than showing a lack of tact, perhaps.
I see that http://www.randommobi.com is having some hosting issues as well.
-Allan

 

[Spade]

Although you come across as a frustrated adolescent, I think most would agree that GoDaddy's hosting is not the best.
That being said, I have a few sites that I host with them because their bandwidth charges were the most reasonable (25gigs for $2.99/month - ok) and I had some sites that needed the space to run. My uptime tracker shows "100%", although I know it would have had to have missed things like server restarts, etc.
However, just posting "Oh doodez that totally sux!" doesn't add anything to a discussion, other than showing a lack of tact, perhaps.
I see that http://www.randommobi.com is having some hosting issues as well.
-Allan

Point and Match.

 

[CrazyTech]

Just out of curiousity, why do you believe it is smart to host outside of your registrar? I host outside mine, but thats for a few of my own personal reasons.

I know the reason for me was that generally people that specialize in one particular area follow the old adage: "jack of all trades, master of none." Domains and hosting are one of those situations that seems to prove the old saying. When a company has risen based on one service and later adds another things are not always the best in terms of service. Registerfly offered domains and hosting, for example. Sub par hosting seems to be the trend with most registrars. It's a two line highway, though. Hosts should not be registering domains either because that often leads to trouble as well.

 

[Spade]

I know the reason for me was that generally people that specialize in one particular area follow the old adage: "jack of all trades, master of none." Domains and hosting are one of those situations that seems to prove the old saying. When a company has risen based on one service and later adds another things are not always the best in terms of service. Registerfly offered domains and hosting, for example. Sub par hosting seems to be the trend with most registrars. It's a two line highway, though. Hosts should not be registering domains either because that often leads to trouble as well.

Thanks for the insight. When you point it out, it does ring true. I use GoDaddy as my registrar, but their hosting is just subpar. Ironically, I know everyone has a problem with 1and1 as a registrar, but I only host with them (I find their hosting to be adequate about 99% of the time).

 

[CrazyTech]

It's the same situation with 1&1, really as GD. It seems that people are either extremely satisfied or extremely unsatisfied with the services. I have a friend/client who I did some design work for and he hosts with GD. I don't ever remember his site being down and I always ask him how the service is. I have another friend who signed up there and hates them for all the downtime. I see the same story with 1&1. I tend to hang around on some of the web hosting forums out there and all you have to do is type in the company to see what I say and how it unfolds. 1&1 gets a far worse rap than Godaddy.

A lot of people wonder why I say this about other hosting companies, but I feel I'm fairly unbiased because I spent many years as someone who was a client and my service is directed at a different market. 1&1 hasn't made quite the dent here in America it made in Europe before they came over. I think that partially has to do with the much cheaper American market when it comes to hosting. Over in Europe 1&1 could easily compete on price and win every time. They had to break into the American market by giving away hosting for free. The jury is still out, IMHO, on that working.