New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Pfft. Speakers are paid for. I rented everything in the room! I make sure to take the "free" porn they hide under the sink in the higher-class establishments like Motel 6 and Super 8. Those are complementary.
Dude, that's false advertising.
What I'm really getting at is that if you haven't turned off the lights, unlocked the door, bent over the bed, then posted on Backpage about it... You probably can't relate.
Nnng... finding it hard to concentrate on this auction right now- but I can't run to the bathroom for a quick fap. Don't do this to me!
Giant hairy man ass with slight remains of mud butt.
You're welcome. I've been told I'm really good at this cyber thing. 14/f/Cali if you're wondering.
FWIW just because it repeats doesn't mean I offer an unlimited load.
A guy has to usleep() sometimes.
As someone who works for an unlimited hosting company (only support staff, not management!) I thought I'd throw in my two pence (I'm British)
We don't sell unlimited RAM or CPU, we have LVE limits like everyone else. We don't promise it, either. I'm yet to see anyone that does
We do unlimited bandwidth and storage. Bandwidth is on a fair use policy (don't be saturating the port more often than not and you're probably going to be fine)
For storage it's simple and laid out in the terms and conditions. As long as the content is related to your website and isn't archival / backups / any other "mass storage" use (e.g. building the next Dropbox) you're probably fine. If not, we'll reach out and ask you to tidy things up a bit
Unlimited has a bad rep due to horribly oversold servers. We run on a vmware stack that we can easily scale as needed. If a server is tight on storage, we throw some more drives in the SANs and scale the server up a bit. It's not difficult
We balance between many cPanel / Plesk servers and migrate data as needed (we have two DNS servers that the hosting servers sync with that update to the new server automatically. Customers are informed if this needs to happen and we work with them to ensure as little disruption as possible)
Many customers choose us for peace of mind. For a small monthly fee you can upload as much content to your blog / shop etc as you like and not have to worry. Many of our customers are digital media agencies, photographers etc. as well as small businesses or just people wanting a cheap place to store their content online
A reputable provider would not offer unlimited space in the first place and then not honour that service respectively fulfil what was offered and paid for.
And please spare us the "for website hosting", as that is pretty irrelevant. As I already wrote it is none of the provider's business how a customer fills the allocated and paid storage. If I upload 50 1GB personal videos to my unlimited storage I'd be using 50 gigabytes and would still fall into the "hosting" category - even by your arbitrary standards.
What? I am afraid it is getting a bit surreal now.
I think we're done here.
Well, you're paying for the use of the provider's hard drives. They can have whatever terms they want, you aren't forced to agree and use that provider
I think I agree with @WSS at this point - we are done here ....
Doesn't matter what a provider that isn't reputable offers or doesn't offer though, they're frequently problematic for such a huge variety of reasons that how they market the product is of minimal concern. That's exactly why I'm talking only about reputable providers, because they're shattering the narrative you keep making.
No it isn't. You're buying web hosting service from a web hosting company with web hosting plastered all over their website. Your want it to be irrelevant because it builds your case out of thin air, but I refuse to believe that you're actually that removed from reality.
Yes it is. That's how they can make the offer, by selling WEB HOSTING and not CLOUD STORAGE. Again, you want this to be true, and I'll go as far as "you're welcome to your stupid opinion," but it is absolutely relevant to the unlimited WEB HOSTING provider that it not be abused by the person who knows very well that what they're buying it for is not it's function.
The only person who thinks to abuse it is the one who knows very well that it can only be offered by limiting it to website hosting, which is not being deceitful when you were sold "web hosting" on every page of the website. Just because you personally feel entitled to assume that you can use it for selling object storage to compete with Amazon doesn't mean you're being reasonable or logical, and you know deep down that it's a dick move that no one else is trying to pull.
Web hosting. If you put them on a web page then sure. Go sign up for Dreamhost and tell me when they don't do anything to you for it. They won't. You assume they would, but you're wrong. Try it though, prove me to be actually wrong with a real life reality that you can document and show me afterwards. If you compete the task in six months and prove me wrong while hosting actual website hosting related content, I'll pay for those 6 months of service at their monthly rate.
You're still talking theory and your theory still directly contradicts a reality I can prove: support.lowend.io, c.jarlanddonnell.com, year27.com. All hosted without issue on unlimited providers and you can't qualify your statement that I've made a technically, logically, or objectively worse choice by choosing those three providers over ones that limit storage.
A provider who advertises a services, takes money for it and then does not deliver is not reputable by definition. Serverhand did the same.
My case? Again, what are you talking about it? When I buy web hosting I buy primarily file storage, very often coupled with support for scripting languages and database storage. That file storage is also accessible via the web, that is the very definition of web hosting. And what bytes I store is none of the provider's concern. I pay for X bytes and can use these X bytes for files of whatever format I please.
Cloud storage? What? What's next? Synergies? Seriously.
Are you seriously suggesting only files linked from an .htm or .html file are "permitted" files? So files linked from .pl or .php would be "illegal"? Let alone favicon.ico and robots.txt?
Do you seriously not see these huge flaws in your arguments?
And what are you trying to prove here? How much storage are you using? I guess something that easily fits within a 100 megabyte package as well. What a surprise.
@bitswitch My apologies. I wished to assume that you weren't stupid, but I can see that I was wrong. I initially responded to your words stating basically that it is a bad choice to pick a provider that offers unlimited, stating that you cannot objectively qualify your statement. At the end of it, you've gone as far as to claim that website hosting is file storage (incorrect, file storage of the files for a website is part of website hosting, not generic file storage for any and all purposes). You even went as far as to imply that the difference between website hosting and cloud storage is a matter of buzzwords, just WOW. That's some next level stupid. You see GoDaddy hosting and Dropbox as the same product, I can't even put myself into your brain. By that logic instant messaging and cryptocoin mining are the same thing, both run on computers.
You still haven't provided one single piece of information to qualify your statement that it is better to choose a host that does not offer unlimited over one that does, you just continue arguing about stupid irrelevant bullshit. Meanwhile I'm showing you direct evidence of functioning websites on unlimited providers, so I guess that means I win the stupid internet argument about nothing.
And I quote:
You've just been proven wrong. It is not objectively better, and you can't prove that it is. This goes back to my original point: people just parrot opinions they latch onto instead of doing their own research.
@jarland UNMETERED STORAGE AND BANDWIDTH should mean that I can copy NetFlix to it provided they don't file a DMCA (which is also a fraud, lemme tell ya).
END OF STORY.
Just some clarification:
According to Wikipedia:
Web hosting service:
A web hosting service is a type of Internet hosting service that allows individuals and organizations to make their website accessible via the World Wide Web.
File hosting service:
A file hosting service, cloud storage service, online file storage provider, or cyberlocker is an Internet hosting service specifically designed to host user files.
Yeah but if you put your hand over all the other parts of the screen when buying web hosting you can simulate an event where you're purchasing unlimited storage as a service while purchasing web hosting. Since I just came up with that method, it's safe to assume that everyone is doing that and the provider obviously holds responsibility for it.
Yeah I think we are done here. Once a party goes down to personal insults it is pretty clear where everyone stands. Next stop a good old Godwin
Thanks for nothing.
Long story short: If you want to share 50GB files, rent the hardware directly, lest you cause issues for others. If you want more bandwidth than you are considered to be fairly sharing with others, pay for it directly. I hope this has cleared up the impropriety of "Cheapasspies making hosting difficult for normal people", Section 4, Series 1. I have been WSS. Good day.
Why is it always the same people that support socialism those that seem to cry "ME FIRST" at every turn which they seem to
claimbelieve they've earned some right to claim as their own? Wouldn't that be ownership?Can anyone give other examples other than dreamhost of reputable providers of shared web hosting?
I am just curious because it seems hard to me. I see a lot of companies but I also see alot of negative reviews.
But it also could be not enough people with good experiences commenting. Usually people like to complain and don't give complements when something is working fine.
I am unlikely to get shared ever because I like to think myself as young wet behind the ears nerd who loves to play with the insides of hosting and feel like shared would constrict me.
Don't let the door, which is the physical equivalent to a pack of bubble gum, hit you on the way out
Well, if you want, technically (only the content, the raw data, the entire infrastructure will hardly fit into a typical LAMP stack) yes. It might be a bit of a stretch but it would be what unlimited implies. Easiest fix, dont offer unlimited.
Ok. Good luck with that. I don't have unlimited bandwidth to argue with a wall, so I'm just going to let you claim that you win and move on to better shitposters.
As long as it's website hosting, you're forgetting that you're buying unlimited website hosting, not unlimited tanks of gas. I realize you black out at the word "web hosting" so everything sold as web hosting looks like a marketing lie to you, just wanted to make sure you're clear. By website hosting I obviously mean coffee machine, they're functionally equivalent as you well know.
You all are worse than Stalin, Hitler AND Mao.
Right now I use: Dreamhost, A2 Hosting, and Hostinger. The third has undergone a bit of a transition in recent years so you might not use 3+ year old reviews against them in full. No issues here.
The key to remember though is this: Dreamhost is enough by itself to show that unlimited can work. If it's impossible to offer it, they can't exist. The existence of only one undermines the entire narrative being sold by some members here.
Yes, I can. However, you also agree to an agreement, which does not usually evoke consternation when you overflow your "realistic" "unlimited" numerics. If you're pushing 100% CPU, 50,000,000 IOPS, and saturating a 10Gbit, guess how long you're going to lask on a "$3.99/yr" special?
The truth is, that most of these providers set their marketing specifically to attract cheap fuckers, but only a subset of these cheap fuckers actually try to abuse this ideology by throwing a dictionary word back to a ToS which they already agreed to.
I'll accept the first two, but not the last. I don't pretend to be a liberal.
Maybe you all want to look up the definition of "unlimited". Not that @404error hasnt mentioned it already often enough but you obviously missed every single instance.
This is all very easy to fix with clearly stated allocations and not some unlimited marketing stunts which are never supposed to be delivered. Serverhand all over again.