Web Hosting Options: Categories

• Shared Web Hosting - Apartments of the Web Hosting world: cheap, high-density living (up to 500 customers on a single server), where "landlords" impose considerable restrictions over our living space. Biggest advantage » inexpensive. You get a lot for what little you pay. (Long as you don't try to use it all, you should be fine.)

• Virtual Private Server - Condos of the Web Hosting world: low-density living, at a price considerably less than Dedicated (see below). We have 99% control over our "living space."

Normally VPS clients can install any software they like, with the exception of changing the version/distro of Linux, which is used by all clients on a particular server.

Note: several flavors of VPS hosting are available, dictated by the specific virtualization software employed (by the company who owns our physical server)...

.. such as Virtuozzo (what WiredTree uses), OpenVZ (open source version of Virtuozzo), and the hypervisors: Xen (cool name, open source) and VMWare (pricey). Each have their own pro's & con's. Many continue to debate the relative merits in discussion forums online.

• Dedicated servers -The single-family homes of the Web Hosting world. No sharing at all. We have 100% control over the entire server (Woohoo!), tho these luxuries cost considerably more than what you typically pay for a VPS. Dedicated servers represent the ultimate web hosting solution for web site authors like me. Maybe someday .. when I'm rich-n-famous.

Shared Web Hosting Realities

First — and most common — we have the standard "Shared" hosting plan. These plans typically cost ~$100/year. (Usually discounted if you pre-pay annually.) Most come with a 30-day money-back guarantee.

DreamHost is the king of Shared hosting. I hosted with Lunarpages for 2 years. They were good (.. until they got nasty). Countless more options exist. This is where most of us start our web hosting journey, and all that most of us will ever need.

Shared hosting packages offer maximum bang for your web hosting buck. Don't be misled however, by outrageous offerings of huge storage and bandwidth allowances.

Lunarpages, for example, touts a storage allocation of 1,500 GB (1.5 Terabytes), and 15,000 GB monthly bandwidth (15 Terabytes). And these jaw-dropping numbers are likely to grow by the time you read this.

Dreamhost even has a policy where they automatically increase your allowances every week (by 2-GB storage and 40-GB bandwidth). Now, if you're using more than 5-terabytes of bandwidth monthly, you've long outgrown Shared web hosting. So it's silly to offer such outlandish numbers.

Compare those specs with the (more realistic) numbers offered by my (far more expen$ive) VPS plan » 30 GB (storage) and 300 GB (monthly bandwidth) .. which are some 50 times less than the plan offered by Lunarpages.

As a further point of comparison, Radified (which hosts thousands of web pages) uses ~2GB of disk storage and ~50 GB monthly bandwidth. So we're using ~ 1/10th of our allowable storage/bandwidth limits .. which would equal roughly 1/500th the so-called "limits" stated by Shared web hosting providers mentioned above.

And note that Radified already exceeds the RAM limits associated with WiredTree's cheapest VPS plan (which is based on 256-MB memory). This should give you a rough idea how storage, bandwidth, CPU usage and memory compare in the real world .. of both Shared and VPS web hosting.

Also note that Radified is (for the most part) a static site. We use no PHP. (Not yet, anyway. Learning PHP however, is on my list.) The only major dynamic software we use is the forum (which employs a Perl-based script).

As a side note, you may be interested to learn that WiredTree lets you upgrade your memory allowance at a rate of $7.50/month per (extra) 64-MB. If the hardware node (physical server) upon which your site currently resides has no memory available (and you need more) Zac says they will move you to one which does.

I should also mention that most Linux gurus agree » the CPU/memory module used to monitor resource usage (for your account) in WHM .. is a piece of krap. So when your Shared web host starts throwing "statistics" at you (retrieved from WHM/cPanel), realize it's merely a sign to start looking for greener web hosting pastures. But the numbers themselves do not necessarily reflect actual usage.

Why do some Shared web hosting providers claim to offer such extravagant disk storage & monthly bandwidth? In a word » Marketing. They realize prospective clients (like you & me) are likely to compare the features offered by Provider 'A' with those offered by Provider 'B.' When we see 'B' offers more, we'll likely decide to host with them. (Like I did.) But Hosting providers also understand that most of us will never come close to reaching those limits.

Notice, on the page touting Lunarpages' long list of features, you see nothing there mentioning either CPU or memory restrictions. Does this mean they think a site can actually use 15,000 gigs (15 Terabytes) of bandwidth monthly and not exceed 1% CPU usage?

If you actually tried to *use* all 1,500 GB (disk space) and/or 15,000 GB (bandwidth), they'd send a nastigram, notifying you that your account had been suspended (for some other reason, or course). Simple economics dictate that no Web Host can actually provide its customers with such fabulous amounts of storage & bandwidth and stay in business.

Does this make them dishonest? Perhaps. Understand they're merely seeking an edge in a highly competitive industry. The reason they feel compelled to tout such large (tho wildly unrealistic) numbers is twofold »

The competition does it.
It works. (It's the reason I decided to host with Lunarpages.)

Shared Web Hosting vs VPS Servers

I liken Shared web hosting to living in a big apartment building. Similarly you share the physical structure (building/server) with many other tenants. You don't own the unit, so you can't modify it to suit your needs .. beyond minor cosmetic changes, or arranging the personal items (files/furniture) you bring into your unit.

The biggest benefit of Shared hosting » it's inexpensive. Everyone agrees » you get plenty for what little you pay .. which brings us back full-circle to our original catch-22. If we actually start using most of what they claim is available, our host will deem we've outgrown our lease, and pressure us to upgrade, (to either VPS or a Dedicated server) .. cuz they really don't want us to move (like I did), which would mean losing our business.

Long as your site doesn't place many demands on the server, and doesn't use many resources, you should be happy with Shared web hosting (and Shared hosting will be happy with you).

But. What if your site starts growing? What if you start using more than your fair share of server resources? You'll receive a nastigram .. claiming you're hogging server resources .. and that you need to either:

reduce your usage (which you most likely CAN'T),
or upgrade to a more expen$ive plan (VPS or Dedicated server).

They may even CANCEL your account outright (tho probably not), or move your site to a so called "Stabilization server."

I must say, I did not appreciate the way Lunarpages moved my site without even informing me first. I would've liked at least received a notice saying, "Heads up. We'll be moving your site..." Nor did I appreciate the tone of their warning notification, which insinuated I was somehow being a bad boy .. naughty .. because the site was seeing healthy traffic .. something obviously beyond my control.

[NOTE: this guide focuses on upgrading to a VPS server (from Shared web hosting) .. because that is our experience. But most of the principles presented here will apply equally well to Dedicated servers.]

On the next page, we'll compare Dedicated servers with Virtual Private Servers, and analyze how Web Hosts can afford to purchase the very best equipment for our new VPS.