ldcdc — 2009-08-21T21:04:34-04:00 — #1
Based on my experience with their twin brand, Hostmonster, I would say that they should be just fine for a hobby site/playing around. I don't know about their support, as I didn't use it.
serverpoint — 2009-08-22T04:40:38-04:00 — #2
Mostly they have good gfeedbacks but some of negative ones can be found over there
I believe that happens because they can't be good for the all types of the web sites
akki_webmaster — 2009-08-22T07:05:34-04:00 — #3
Although i don't use Bluehost, i would say go for it. They are award winning company and surely deliver one of the best quality service. there are many top companies hosting their sites from them. Their scalibility is good, speed is awesome while customer service is very charming. How do i know all this? well some of my friends do use it and they are hell bent upon sticking to it due to these reasons.
I use host gator, which is also very good. In the end, its your choice.
ldcdc — 2009-08-22T12:49:22-04:00 — #4
They are award winning company and surely deliver one of the best quality service.
Probably 99% of hosting awards out there are just a way to say that a host pays a huge referral commission. So, unless we're talking about particularly relevant awards, I wouldn't use them to judge a host's worthiness.
there are many top companies hosting their sites from them.
Top companies using $6 shared hosting? That's doubtful.
rtccroy — 2009-08-25T04:15:38-04:00 — #5
Their hosting support team are working around the clock to provide live support to clients, which is very impressive.
But they only provide shared Linux hosting plan. If you are planning to extending your business, you might need reseller hosting account or dedicated hosting services.
felgall — 2009-08-25T05:42:32-04:00 — #6
The couple of times that I have needed BlueHost support during the several years I have had my site there I have had a near immediate response via their live chat option and the problem was resolved quickly.
They have implemented a CPU sharing model which basically means that unlike other shared hosting their CPU usage is basically unlimited with your scripts (if any) simply slowing down if you try to use more than your share of the CPU and there aren't enough resources to go around. Depending on the CPU usage of the other sites you are sharing the server with you might get the equivalent of dedicated hosting (if everyone else is running static sites). Anyway as you aren't planning to set up a business site the facilities BlueHost provide should way exceed your requirements.
matejsajher — 2009-08-25T08:04:56-04:00 — #7
i have a bluehost for 6 moths.
vilain — 2009-08-28T03:11:46-04:00 — #8
Strike 1-I tried to setup a development site without a domain so that I could leave the existing site alone. The current policy is that you can't do that. It won't let you create an account without an associated domain.
Strike 2-I find out that I have to be the owner of the transferring domain where my name in DNS, the name on the credit card, and the name on the account all have to match. Since I'm developing for a non-profit, they wanted notarized corporate documents to have any of these things different. Also, the person with all this is out of town, tasking me to just get the new site set up for inspection when they get back.
Strike 3-I setup an account for my own domain and they generate their own username based on the domain name. I want my own username which they refused to do. Apparently billing will take a couple days to get back to me. Since they have a 3-day full refund policy, they had better take care of this first thing tomorrow morning or my credit card company's gonna hear from me.
Any time I wanted to do something a certain way, I seem to be outside their way of doing things. I guess if I ran my own system, I could get away with that. But Bluehost seemed to go out of their way to not take my money.
In contrast, a2hosting bent over backwards to help me. Bluehost can learn a thing or two from that.
siberforum — 2009-08-28T06:37:40-04:00 — #9
They are very big web hosting company I suppose you will have no single problem with finding their reviews. Just do the search for their domain name
raiderremo — 2009-08-28T11:10:17-04:00 — #10
May be you can try Godaddy
felgall — 2009-08-28T16:44:58-04:00 — #11
Why put your hosting with a Domain Registrar when there are plenty of web hosting companies to choose from? Companies put the most effort into their main business not the let's make a little extra on the side afterthought.
ldcdc — 2009-08-28T18:17:03-04:00 — #12
Companies put the most effort into their main business not the let's make a little extra on the side afterthought.
True, though I have a hunch that the hosting side of things isn't such a small part of Godaddy's revenues at it may have been once, especially with the low markup per domain.
That being said, yes, I'm afraid Godaddy is not the best of choices for hosting (shared hosting at least).
felgall — 2009-08-28T18:57:10-04:00 — #13
It might be a bigger part of their business than it used to be but their cut down customised version of Plesk and the proxy server processing that they use between the sites they host and the rest of the web is nowhere near up to the standard of any host using a standard Plesk or cPanel setup.
If they were serious about the hosting side of their business they'd provide a standard hosting control panel (and possibly extend it rather than cutting it back).
maclover85 — 2009-09-30T12:29:52-04:00 — #14
I currently have changed to bluehost and so far so good its been over two months now, plus I read around and most of the options seem to be leaning towards the positive side.
juve20 — 2009-09-30T18:39:55-04:00 — #15
i'm thinking of signing up with bluehost
system — 2010-01-17T23:18:15-05:00 — #16
i have a bluehost for 6 moths.
ldcdc — 2010-01-18T15:22:22-05:00 — #17
Maybe you could share how it has been for you?