Hosting company recommendations

[xinghu]

Hi

Does anyone know of any reliable, reasonably priced hosting companies based in the UK?

I am currently with Host Gator, paying about £17 a month. I am very happy with them, the only problem is that they are US based. I am really looking for a UK company since I have been told that my websites I am hosting would work faster if I had UK based servers.

I am currently on the Aluminum Reseller plan with Host Gator which has all the basic features as well as 50GB disk space and 500GB bandwidth. So I would be looking for something similiar if not better for the same or cheaper price, but not too cheap though. I was with UK2.net before Host Gator and whilst it was reasonably priced, the service was ridiculously awful.

I would be grateful if anybody has any suggestions or recommendations.

Thank you
Andrew

 

[ServWise]

You are unlikely to find host gator prices at host gator levels, they are probably the biggest hosting reseller in the US and that's because they are a heavy over seller. I would suggest you check what sorts of space and bandwidth levels you actually use and base your buying decision on that.

Welcome to check out our packages although you want find those types of numbers and for good reason.

good luck

 

[Dean 247]

Hi xinghu

We have a few different servers we use for clients websites. We design sites for the financial services industry and host them along with email account hosting etc. We have specific high grade servers upon which we could set up a hosting account for you for £10 per month. If you want to see our website type 'financial website design' into google and we are number 1, top of the list. (FTC Design)

We also have a basic hosting package at £45 per year which is fine for most of our clients.

Regards

Dean

 

[DesignerNick]

Take a look at 34SP Never failed me!

 

[benjamin_c]

CS new media are very good and affordable

csnewmedia.com

 

[xinghu]

Dean,

I'm confused. Are you a financial institute, web designers or hosting company?

 

[Dean 247]

Hi

We are a web design company who specialise in designing websites for the financial sector. We host our clients' websites which is why we have several servers. I have set up accounts on our servers for other business users who have experienced problems with other host providers and have been referred to us. We do not advertise the fact we can offer a standalone hosting service for other customers but it is something we will provide if we can help in any way.

Dean

 

[stugster]

Don't use us; we're crap.

 

[seiretto]

Hi Andrew,

They sure would be faster if you hosted here in the UK, or EU, for your UK/EU customers and for you to update/administer your website.

Do a simple speed test yourself using:
http://just-ping.com/

Enter your existing website and compare that will a properly hosted UK site (eg. try seiretto.co.uk, or an EU hosted site seiretto.eu).

But its not all just about speed there are other considerations too:
http://www.seiretto.com/news/EU-hos...-particular-location-to-host-your-website.php

Good luck with your move
(we assist to ensure all transferred sites, if you host with us, so the move completes with the minimum of downtime, usually zero downtime).

All the best

Dave

 

[H22SolutionsLtd]

Check out www.vidahost.com

Plenty of happy customers on here already, great service and always happy to help.

 

[zomex]

Hello Andrew,

While there is some truth in faster speeds using UK based servers (providing your visitor is from the UK) the difference is unlikely to be noticeable. As there are many more data centres in the US, US hosting is generally much cheaper as the cost for US servers is lower. It will depend on allot of factors but if you choose a UK host and they use an older server for example you may even see worse performance although it depends on the host you choose.

Jack

 

[seiretto]

While there is some truth in faster speeds using UK based servers (providing your visitor is from the UK) the difference is unlikely to be noticeable.

Jack you could not be more wrong. (this is exactly the same argument openmind Phil used to give when he started a few years ago and was pushing cheap USA hosting, now what does he sell? Proper UK hosting).

Check the time it takes to reach your own USA hosted website from London:
http://just-ping.com/index.php?vh=zomex.co.uk&c=&s=ping!

Now compare that to a properly UK hosted website:
http://just-ping.com/index.php?vh=seiretto.co.uk&c=&s=ping!

It is taking over 60 times longer to connect to your USA hosting account
(110 milliseconds London to USA, only 1.7milliseconds to our UK site).

Internet customers ARE fickle, if it takes too long to load the first page or other pages they are off elsewhere.

Add that to the fact that you as the host are exporting your UK clients' data outside of the EEC and you start to see there is more to it than just throwing a few sites on a cheap USA server to make money.

 

[zomex]

Jack you could not be more wrong. (this is exactly the same argument openmind Phil used to give when he started a few years ago and was pushing cheap USA hosting, now what does he sell? Proper UK hosting).

Check the time it takes to reach your own USA hosted website from London:
http://just-ping.com/index.php?vh=zomex.co.uk&c=&s=ping!

Now compare that to a properly UK hosted website:
http://just-ping.com/index.php?vh=seiretto.co.uk&c=&s=ping!

It is taking over 60 times longer to connect to your USA hosting account
(110 milliseconds London to USA, only 1.7milliseconds to our UK site).

Internet customers ARE fickle, if it takes too long to load the first page or other pages they are off elsewhere.

Add that to the fact that you as the host are exporting your UK clients' data outside of the EEC and you start to see there is more to it than just throwing a few sites on a cheap USA server to make money.

Why are you assuming that I'm using cheap hosting? If I'm completely honest I'm quite angry that you're assuming based on your very unreliable test. You couldn't be more wrong with that statement.

You believe that the results of your test are souly based on server location? How about the page weight of your site vs mine? Your home page loads 1 javascript file while mine loads 7. I'm also using a fair amount of PHP which means extra work on the server side. Then there's the Twitter script which connects to Twitter's API which adds some more time. Straight away the time you're seeing is mainly down to the weight of my page rather than the location of your server vs mine.

I find it amazing that you were quick to judge the quality of my services before even taking into consideration the sites themselves.

 

[ServWise]

seiretto and zomex,

Yes, UK hosting (Assuming it is on a good network and fast server) will be faster than US hosting simply because the distance the data has to travel is more, There is also another factor inherent in packet based transfers called latency and is more noticeable on large downloads than small, so for a normal web page you wont generally notice that it is slow if it is in the US (Especially in an east coast DC) but if you compare it to the same page on a UK server you would likely see that the UK page loaded a fraction faster and felt slightly more responsive.

However for large downloads (Large Images, zip files, Video etc) the latency is compounded as well as the general data transfer speed being slower and so the length of time to download is dramatically increased and much more noticeable.

However your decision on which hosting location should probably be based more on your target audience, if you are a global player then maybe US hosting would be better, if your targeting only the UK or Europe then choose a UK or EU server.

Luckily we sell both US and UK hosting and both are priced exactly the same so you get the best of both worlds at no extra cost.

 

[ServWise]

Why are you assuming that I'm using cheap hosting? If I'm completely honest I'm quite angry that you're assuming based on your very unreliable test. You couldn't be more wrong with that statement.

You believe that the results of your test are souly based on server location? How about the page weight of your site vs mine? Your home page loads 1 javascript file while mine loads 7. I'm also using a fair amount of PHP which means extra work on the server side. Then there's the Twitter script which connects to Twitter's API which adds some more time. Straight away the time you're seeing is mainly down to the weight of my page rather than the location of your server vs mine.

I find it amazing that you were quick to judge the quality of my services before even taking into consideration the sites themselves.

Ping has nothing to do with page load times, it isn't even touching your site it is just sending a predefined packet to your server and getting a response back. If you don't know that then what are you doing running a hosting company?

 

[stugster]

I find it amazing that you were quick to judge the quality of my services before even taking into consideration the sites themselves.

I find it amazing you don't understand ICMP.

 

[zomex]

Ping has nothing to do with page load times, it isn't even touching your site it is just sending a predefined packet to your server and getting a response back. If you don't know that then what are you doing running a hosting company?

I apologize. As you can tell I don't run the technical server side of the business but my partner does. I do everything else including supporting our clients, web design, marketing, invoicing etc

I will hold up my hand and say that my example was completely wrong but at the same time I don't believe the speed difference is likely to be noticeable in most cases. Unless the website is a UK based business it isn't something worth worrying about.

 

[stugster]

I will hold up my hand and say that my example was completely wrong but at the same time I don't believe the speed difference is likely to be noticeable

But lets be honest... You actually don't know. So why are you defending a statement of fact without any evidential support to back up your side?

There's a reason people in the UK buy UK-based hosting. And it's not for Queen and Country.

 

[zomex]

But lets be honest... You actually don't know. So why are you defending a statement of fact without any evidential support to back up your side?

There's a reason people in the UK buy UK-based hosting. And it's not for Queen and Country.

There's also a reason why many choose HostGator rather than a UK host. That being because they can get better value for money. Sure, they oversell their servers but in the end the service and support is very good for the price.

So you believe people from the UK buy UK hosting because they believe it's faster?

 

[Optegris]

(this is exactly the same argument openmind Phil used to give when he started a few years ago and was pushing cheap USA hosting, now what does he sell? Proper UK hosting).

Try seven years ago for a period of about six months when the majority of my clients were US based

 

[stugster]

There's also a reason why many choose HostGator rather than a UK host. That being because they can get better value for money. Sure, they oversell their servers but in the end the service and support is very good for the price.

So you believe people from the UK buy UK hosting because they believe it's faster?

Perceived Value is different from Value.

I don't believe people from the UK buy UK hosting because they believe it's faster... They buy the UK based hosting because it IS faster

 

[zomex]

I don't believe people from the UK buy UK hosting because they believe it's faster... They buy the UK based hosting because it IS faster

That's not true at all and you know it. People from the UK buy UK based hosting because it makes sense and search engines are likely to return UK based hosts.

So you're telling me a UK based host is always going to be faster than a US based host? How about the hardware itself, how well managed the server is etc The point I was trying to make is that generally US based hosting of the same quality of UK based is going to be cheaper in most cases due to the amount of data centres competing in the US compared with the UK.

Of course if you compare 2 identical servers then UK hosting will come out on top but it's not going to be noticeable.

 

[stugster]

That's not true at all and you know it. People from the UK buy UK based hosting because it makes sense and search engines are likely to return UK based hosts.

Before I completely destroy your theory with the market research we've got to hand, can you give me any reason as to why you believe people are so naieve that they wouldn't choose UK for speed?

 

[H22SolutionsLtd]

There are other considerations other than speed.

If your audience is UK based, you should use UK based servers. Google is more likely to display UK based websites to UK based web searches.

If your site is fast loading, Google may also rank you higher than some of your competitors.

If you are fast loading AND uk based - double bubble

 

[Dean 247]

We use both UK and USA based servers and yes the USA servers are slower due to the distance but we have many sites on the USA servers and have never had a client comment on the speed as it's hardly noticable! I wouldn't worry too much about it!

 

[zomex]

Before I completely destroy your theory with the market research we've got to hand, can you give me any reason as to why you believe people are so naieve that they wouldn't choose UK for speed?

Go ahead and destroy my 'theory'.

The majority of people looking for hosting aren't going to dig that deep to come to an assumption that UK hosting is going to be faster. You seem to think that every one looking for hosting is technicle worrying about where the server is located.

How about support, features, confidence in the company, information, choice, price?

 

[zomex]

If your audience is UK based, you should use UK based servers. Google is more likely to display UK based websites to UK based web searches.

I agree when it comes to page load but it wouldn't make sense for Google to rank websites hosted on a UK server higher just for that reason. Due to the spread of data centres in the world it simply wouldn't make sense in terms of relevancy because websites with better content could be and are likely (due to the amount of US data centres compared with the UK) to be hosted in the US.

 

[Cheapest Printing]

In our other business we use Just Host.

I am not sure if they are a new company, but they are offering some super deals and their support is second to none

Matt

 

[zomex]

We use both UK and USA based servers and yes the USA servers are slower due to the distance but we have many sites on the USA servers and have never had a client comment on the speed as it's hardly noticable! I wouldn't worry too much about it!

Exactly my point! Thank you

 

[zomex]

Before I completely destroy your theory with the market research we've got to hand, can you give me any reason as to why you believe people are so naieve that they wouldn't choose UK for speed?

I hope you didn't spend much on that market research because common sense will tell you that an average user is not going to list speed as a top priory. Even if they did the savings and extra features they'll gain by going with a US based host (in general) will outweigh the tiny faster response time (assuming the servers are of the same quality) they won't notice.

 

[xinghu]

I find the posts here interesting. It seems that it depends on who you speak with as everyone has a different opinion. I find it strange that the speed from US servers compared to UK servers are that different. Fair enough, thee is the longer distance, but how come US-based websites like IBM, Apple and Microsoft all seem to have quick loads on their sites? I think whilst they may be something like .02 of a second difference in the speed, that it is more to do with the quality of the servers being used. I can't imagine that the speed of a website on a US server is going to make a huge difference with speed having the site on a UK server.

As I may have mentioned before, I am happy with the hosting company I have. The downside is that they are in the US which isn't a huge disadvantage but I would have preferred to have a UK company. Unfortunately, I have been unable to find any UK hosting company offering a better deal to the one I have at the moment - 50GB Webspace and 500GB bandwidth for about £17

 

[ServWise]

I find the posts here interesting. It seems that it depends on who you speak with as everyone has a different opinion. I find it strange that the speed from US servers compared to UK servers are that different. Fair enough, thee is the longer distance, but how come US-based websites like IBM, Apple and Microsoft all seem to have quick loads on their sites? I think whilst they may be something like .02 of a second difference in the speed, that it is more to do with the quality of the servers being used. I can't imagine that the speed of a website on a US server is going to make a huge difference with speed having the site on a UK server.

As I may have mentioned before, I am happy with the hosting company I have. The downside is that they are in the US which isn't a huge disadvantage but I would have preferred to have a UK company. Unfortunately, I have been unable to find any UK hosting company offering a better deal to the one I have at the moment - 50GB Webspace and 500GB bandwidth for about £17

I would suggest that you attempt to use all of that quota and see how far you get before you are asked to leave.

Hosts like hostgator offer huge amounts of space and traffic for little money knowing that most people will only use a fraction if it and those that do use more than a fraction can be asked to leave with little loss to the bottom line.

So your reasoning behind why you picked hostgator over other hosts is not realistic, as I said at the beginning, find out how much resources you ACTUALY use and find a UK host offering a package that better suits your needs and still offers good value but without overselling.

You might be interested in reading my blog about the truth about hosts that oversell at http://www.servwise.com/blog-sam/index.php/2008/08/15/the-truth-about-unlimited-bandwidth-plans/

 

[dagaul101]

Great UK based hosts are pretty rare, and people normally prefer the US as it is much cheaper

 

[zomex]

I would suggest that you attempt to use all of that quota and see how far you get before you are asked to leave.

Hosts like hostgator offer huge amounts of space and traffic for little money knowing that most people will only use a fraction if it and those that do use more than a fraction can be asked to leave with little loss to the bottom line.

So your reasoning behind why you picked hostgator over other hosts is not realistic, as I said at the beginning, find out how much resources you ACTUALY use and find a UK host offering a package that better suits your needs and still offers good value but without overselling.

You might be interested in reading my blog about the truth about hosts that oversell at http://www.servwise.com/blog-sam/index.php/2008/08/15/the-truth-about-unlimited-bandwidth-plans/

I'm also against overselling but it's clear why it exists. As you pointed out most websites won't use much space which is why our Starter Plan comes with 200MB disk space and 2GB bandwidth and suits most of our customers needs.

I've also written a post on overselling here:

http://www.zomex.com/blog/website-hosting/the-truth-about-unlimited-bandwidth-and-diskspace.php

There are many high quality US based hosts that don't oversell but even with HostGator you're still going to be able to use a high amount of Disk Space & Bandwidth before it becomes a problem. Of course 500GB Bandwidth simply won't be possible but even at 20GB it would be worth be a great deal.

Jack

 

[gordi555]

I've got to recommend bpweb.net - been with them for ages! They are super friendly and always seem to accommodate your requirements. They are not complex but just keep running! Give them a try.

 

[That Guy]

Another vote for Vidahost

 

[ServWise]

Another vote for Vidahost

With you, the word "shill" very much comes to mind.

 

[Optegris]

With you, the word "shill" very much comes to mind.

I actually had to look that up!

 

[seiretto]

Same here!

But did you know "shilling" is illegal!
(a bit different in my days when a shilling would have bought me a mars bar and can of pop)

 

[stengardgreen]

Hi, I don't have that much experience but have used Totalweb and Easily. Totalweb are great on Technical Support and Customer service - quick and easy to speak to some one who knows what they are talking about - or will go and find out and available on a the all important Saturday morning when things tend to go array. I was recommended to them almost ten years ago and they host a number of sites for me and I have recommended to friends and partners. Very different to Easily! cheers Nigel