Archive for the ‘ Webmaster ’ Category

Is HostGator Any Good?

Tuesday, December 27th, 2011

For years I rented a dedicated server until I revised what it was costing me versus what advantages it brought me. It was not that expensive, under a hundred dollars a month, but it was hard to justify spending over 1100 USD a year when I could actually spend less than 16 percent of that for shared hosting and lose very little in terms of flexibility.

I considered three of the biggest discount hosting services: GoDaddy, 1and1, and Hostgator. I ignored Yahoo hosting because what they offer is great for Joe Schmoe, but just  not what a serious programmer needs. I chose HostGator because it was the only one that accepted PayPal as payment. I elected to go with their business hosting package, which allows me to host an unlimited number of sites and Mysql databases for about fifteen dollars a month. The web-based control panel has pretty much everything you need, including an easy way to add new domains and email addresses. I also have Linux shell access via ssh/sftp, which they grant you if you ask for it, and although I cannot do anything that requires root access, I have my familiar command line interface whenever I need it!

It has been almost a year and there have not been any outages. Their customer service was fairly quick to respond via email, but not always with the right answers, although eventually I hit someone who was knowledgeable. I signed-up for their affiliate program, but so far it has not yielded a single cent in commissions. Generally, it is better to join affiliate programs where you get paid per click rather than per sale, but they do not offer that option. Another criticism I might make is that they use a third party service for domain purchases instead of their own as GoDaddy and 1and1 do. 1and1 wins on that count, with discounted first year charges and low annual fees after that. Note that you can still use that part of their service even if you are hosted at the competition.

Overall, I’m very satisfied with HostGator and not planning to move anytime soon! Click here to visit their website.

Related Articles:

  • No related article

Are Paid Links and Paid Posts Evil?

Sunday, September 4th, 2011

If you manage your own blog or small web site, you know that growing your viewership is painstaking and results are likely to be minimal for all the effort. You’ve probably heard the  adage that if you produce interesting content, others will find you and will organically link to your site from theirs and eventually your its popularity shoots up. Maybe that was enough 10 years ago, but not now, unless a major web site touts yours. There’s about 44 billion web pages in Google’s index alone, so getting found is no small feat, never mind what bs seo “experts” claim. So how can your labor of love make any money?

It’s not evil to want to make a bit of money, even if it only covers the hosting costs. There’s referral programs you can join, but if they only pay for conversions, where your referral actually buys something, your chances are nearly nil. There’s some programs that pay you a few pennies per unique click, but again, if you don’t have the traffic, it will take some time before you get something out of it (most set a minimum accumulated commission before they pay out). Referral programs are better than nothing, so by all means use those that are most likely to yield results.

Selling banner ad space is virtually impossible unless your monthly visits are in the tens of thousands. What is left is actually the kind of stuff that makes Google cringe: paid text links and paid posts.Whether you join some kind of program or someone comes to you (it happened to me repeatedly), you’ll stand the chance to collect a small fee for minimum effort. The problem is that these advertisers, although offering something that’s relevant to your web site’s topic, aren’t looking for return traffic but rather contextual back links, their goal being to improve their position in major search engine results.

In the case of a paid post, they’ll either ask you to place their own article with a contextual link embedded, or let you write your own with the aforementioned link in it. Using theirs is a sure fire way to get flack because it’ll obviously be somebody else’s writing, while writing your own, if the topic is germane to your web site, is not that dark a proposition, though what you write might be slanted in favor of the advertiser rather than an objective critique — they usually reserve the right to request changes. They’ll probably offer a one time fee, which, if you think about it, is a rip-off considering it constitutes a permanent advertisement. Simple paid contextual links, typically earn you a monthly fee, and you can remove the link if you or the advertiser cancel the arrangement.

Google, the God whose decisions can make or break web sites, frowns upon both paid links and paid posts. They hate paid posts with a passion, but as sophisticated as their detection methods may be, I don’t think they’re penalizing web sites who have them because of the difficulty in determining if the link is organic or not. As for paid links, which tend to be found in blog rolls, they’re easier to identify, and in this case I have an inkling that they do beget a Pagerank penalty.

Truthfully, a paid post is a bit more insiduous because you’re writing a biased article, but in the case of a paid link, why is that any worse than a paid banner if what is being offered is related to the web site it’s on and isn’t a scam? If they want to penalize the advertisers who engage in anything that tries to influence their positioning in search results, fine, but is it fair to also discredit small web sites who only have this as a source of income? Sorry, I can’t see this as worse than some major web sites, such as weather.com, that are chock full of spammy banner ads!

 

Related Articles:

All Blogs Flooded by Comment Spam

Sunday, April 24th, 2011

“Great post, thanks!”. “Very useful post, thanks!”. If you have your own blog, you have probably seen comments such as these. Thought there were just readers expressing their appreciation? Think again! While that is possible, it is much more likely that this is an insidious form of comment spam, submitted by a robot to thousands of blogs of all types.

Your first hint that this is spam is the lack of any reference to the actual topic of your post. It could be applicable to any post on any subject. Your second hint that this is spam is that the submitter never fails to include a link. In most blogs, particularly those running under WordPress, comments can include an url in the identification part of the form. Some will also include links directly in the body of the comment, making it all the more obvious that it is spam. Black hat programming sites sell or give away robot scripts that can plant such comments across hundreds of thousands of sites while you sleep!

The objective of spammers in submitting bogus comments  is the creation of thousands of links back to their own web pages, which may even hide viruses. The odds are good that many unsuspecting blog minders will approve the comment, and few will report it as spam even if they don’t approve it, as they may have lingering doubts on whether or not it came from a real person. Even if the links are of the nofollow type, it’s still a winning proposition for the culprits as lesser search engines might index the link anyway and with thousands of links out there, some people will inadvertently click the comment spam’s link, thus adding to their site’s traffic as well as  providing more victims.

How do you defend against such spam? First and foremost, your blog should have the Akismet plug-in, which may filter out of most of them. Also, don’t allow comments to be automatically approved — you should always review them first, even if you’ve approved comments with the same email or url before, as subsequent messages may well be forged. Better still,  install a comment captcha plug-in. This should stop the flow of spam completely, although real people might find it annoying.

Related Articles:

What Should a Good Dedicated Server Have?

Friday, March 25th, 2011

Hosting is cheap these days: a shared hosting plan can be under ten dollars while there’s plenty of inexpensive dedicated server plans on offer. If your web sites have become popular, it might be time to consider migrating to a dedicated server. Not preparing for such an eventuality might cost you dearly as even so-called unlimited hosting plans will shut your account down if your sites swallow up too much of a shared server’s resources and bandwidth.

Increasing traffic isn’t the only reason for choosing dedicated over shared. Other motives might be to avoid the disruptions that others sharing the same server may cause through such things as their own sites’ popularity or inefficient scripts. If your web site  isn’t up 24-7, you’re losing customers! Also, if you need to install your own applications, not just scripts, shared hosting does not offer that luxury. Of course, dedicated isn’t the only alternative either. Some choose to move to a VPS, or Virtual Private Server, which provides most of the advantages of a dedicated except that you’re still technically sharing a server. VPS is a good option, and puts a “wall” around your sites, but if a simulated dedicated server is not your bag and you want an entire machine under your control, just go dedicated!

That said, not all dedicated servers are created equal! Be weary of the exceedingly cheap deals, as most likely the machine you get will  have a weak or old CPU (I’ve even seen some with an Intel Atom!), a single ip address, low ram, a smaller than normal hard disk, and a 10 Mbps Ethernet card instead of 100 Mpbs, thereby limiting your bandwidth at any given moment in time. The trick hosting companies use is to charge extra for features that usually come included with more expensive plans, even for such basic things such as CPANEL or other graphical server management software, so when you add-up all the extras, you might not have such a great deal after all! Most dedicated servers come with a free version of Linux as the operating system, usually Ubuntu or Cent OS, and that’s absolutely fine unless you really need a Windows server, in which case your plan will cost more by virtue of Windows not being free.

If you can afford it, the better dedicated servers usually are the $200 + a month range. You could also do what’s known as a co-lo (co-location) where you provide the server and the hosting service charges you for the rack space and the bandwidth, but a properly equipped server might set you back several thousand dollars, and you’ll have to configure it yourself, which is fine if you’re an ubergeek, not so much if you’re just a regular Joe! Another thing to be mindful of is how reliable is the staff minding the data center at the hosting company. Most companies provide you with a means to remotely cold reboot your server, but if that fails, for example because of a hardware failure (even just a disconnected cable), you don’t want to be waiting hours for their geeks to go and have a look at it. You can usually find out a lot about a hosting service’s reputation by googling their name. Their customers will usually sound off in the many tech forums if they had any difficulties.

Finally, before you migrate your sites to any new location, whether dedicated, VPS or just shared, avoid disruptions by having a moving plan. The usual method is to first duplicate your content and configuration on the new server first, testing with sub-domains of the originals (Ex: new.mysite.com) and when everything appears to be in order, only then switch the dns information to the new ips. Don’t cancel your original hosting plan yet, as the dns changes will take time to propagate and thus a lot of visitors will still land at the old location. I would still keep the original alive for a week or so in case you forgot something, though keeping copies of everything on your local PC or in the Cloud somewhere should be part of any serious moving plan. Note that logs and any dynamic data will likely be out of synch, and while there are ways to avoid minimizing data loss, such precautions are likely to be beyond the skills of most users.

Happy dedicating!

Related Articles:

Virtual Server vs. Dedicated Server vs. Shared Hosting

Monday, July 26th, 2010

A Virtual Private Server, or vps, is a hosting alternative to dedicated servers and shared hosting. Vps, as its name implies, is a virtual server, whereby you have all the conveniences and power of a dedicated server, but without the higher cost and the hassles that come with the latter.  Vps is also a big step above shared hosting, the cheapest hosting choice that comes with all the problems inherent in sharing a computer with a large number of users.

Latter day virtual servers enable hosting companies to give you an exclusive block of disk space and limits each customer’s RAM usage, unlike in a shared hosting situation. The server’s cpus are used in the same way as for shared hosting, however.  The way top vps hosting companies insure that your web sites’ traffic spikes and those of other customers do not result in performance problems is by using burstable memory. That is, when memory usage reaches a threshold, reserve memory will be used.

When you are logged into your virtual server, it is hard to differentiate the experience from that of having a dedicated server, since the file system and the applications look identical. Everything you can run on your own dedicated machine you can also run on a vps, with very few exceptions. Since a vps runs within its own “jail”, anything that transpires within your vps has no effect on the host machine, so if your virtual kernel crashes, you will just remote reboot it just as you would if it was a dedicated server.

So, which should you choose? If you want to host a slew of different sites, or run your own server applications and scripts without any restrictions, or have a site with a serious amount of traffic, that pretty much eliminates shared hosting. The big advantage of vps when compared to a dedicated server is that if you need more ram or disk space, you don’t have to copy,  reinstall and re-configure everything on a new server, or pay big bucks to the hosting company to install more memory chips or an extra disk. Instead, you just bump-up your hosting plan. In addition, maintaining your own server means acting as your own sys admin, which is time consuming and more involved than what you are looking for.

Next time you are looking for hosting, consider the vps option

Related Articles: