40 days ago I read impressive thing about Reliablesite Cheap Windows Hosting Services and I bought 3 mounts shared windows service with (Site ID: 114816332) only $6 . After 3 mounts period it will $10 for a mount.

Their MSSQL 2008 DB service is very good. But you need install web application to manage your DB and well known port (1433) has been changed. So you should make internal FW rule definitions to connect it.

Another critical issue is their support service. You should not any respond especially for 12 hours after you opened ticket.

And their statistic server is terrible. It works good only for 15 days. For 2nd 15 days period I took many errors for statistic application (SmarterStats). In last 7 (seven) days it did not work completely and I opened 2 tickets. In their forums they informed customers about ongoing statistic application maintenance period (started 06.30.2009 ).

Now I'm looking for reliable and not one-man windows hosting company.

Can you use this link (http://www.webhostingtalk.com/report.php?p=6272002) to tell us what domain you have hosted at Reliablesite please?

Edit: you're too quick for me.

Domain verified.

Smarterstats is notoriously unreliable which is why we dropped it.

Perhaps look to spend more to get the reliability you require.

40 days ago I read impressive thing about Reliablesite Cheap Windows Hosting Services and I bought 3 mounts shared windows service with (Site ID: 114816332) only $6 . After 3 mounts period it will $10 for a mount.


Ok great.


Their MSSQL 2008 DB service is very good. But you need install web application to manage your DB and well known port (1433) has been changed. So you should make internal FW rule definitions to connect it.


We change the default port to allow remote connections. There's nothing wrong with this. There is a constant flow of attacks on the default port and it's assigned in the same string as the IP so I don't see what the problem is assigning it with the IP address (there's absolutely no additional work involved).


Another critical issue is their support service. You should not any respond especially for 12 hours after you opened ticket.

And their statistic server is terrible. It works good only for 15 days. For 2nd 15 days period I took many errors for statistic application (SmarterStats). In last 7 (seven) days it did not work completely and I opened 2 tickets. In their forums they informed customers about ongoing statistic application maintenance period (started 06.30.2009 ).


It's been clearly mentioned that this is under maintenance, we're moving away from SmarterStats and constantly opening tickets about this won't get you anywhere. Our SLA mentions that you'll get a response to tickets within 24 hours and we meet that deadline. Most of the time in under 1 hour.

You're paying an unmatched price for a service that has been provided to you as promised, and you mentioned yourself that the db performance is exceptional. I don't see how this is in anyway a negative review, especially when you have access to raw log files to analyze.

Smarterstats is notoriously unreliable which is why we dropped it.

Perhaps look to spend more to get the reliability you require.

There were no issues with reliability mentioned in the review.

The negative point of the review is: “not supplying offered feature for 7 seven days”. It could be minor or could be ignores for a support person.
But it is a feature of your promised service. I could not take important statistics, demographic and tendencies of startup website first visitors.

I know differences between just giving response and fixing an error. You are right your written SLA did not cover to fixing an error just responding to it. You response it by writing an about error and I waited for a week to take promised feature. Also you should think that you take more for that kind of heroic support service. But you know hosting market is very competitiveness and hypersensitive to defects.

Another point is MS SQL port configuration. Many corporate firewalls (like mine) define 1433 as default port for MS SQL. Your customers should try to changed corporate security policy to connect SQL server as me. This means paying for a security expert to outsource this issue. May be you should change port 80 to another one so exploits could not detect web applications vulnerabilities.

I'll not changed my review and point. Any hosting company (should be royalty free or retailer) should support service features and not only PING times (statistics server PI level availability is more than 3-nines).

The negative point of the review is: “not supplying offered feature for 7 seven days”. It could be minor or could be ignores for a support person.
But it is a feature of your promised service. I could not take important statistics, demographic and tendencies of startup website first visitors.

As mentioned in our TOS/AUP any reported maintenance periods are not considered downtime as customers were in fact notified as you mentioned.



I know differences between just giving response and fixing an error. You are right your written SLA did not cover to fixing an error just responding to it. You response it by writing an about error and I waited for a week to take promised feature. Also you should think that you take more for that kind of heroic support service. But you know hosting market is very competitiveness and hypersensitive to defects.


Ordering a new server, setting it up, and testing it requires time. I still don't see why you wrote a whole negative review over unavailability of statistics. To say that we're "bad" for trying to improve the service we offer is a bit out there.


Another point is MS SQL port configuration. Many corporate firewalls (like mine) define 1433 as default port for MS SQL. Your customers should try to changed corporate security policy to connect SQL server as me. This means paying for a security expert to outsource this issue. May be you should change port 80 to another one so exploits could not detect web applications vulnerabilities.


Remote connections are a convenience and we in no way expect a customer to rely on them, changing the port to being something alternate doesn't effect how your web site works. We also offer a web based administration tool in case you can't access it remotely anyways.

I'm not asking you to change your review, but I do think it was unnecessary.

Smarterstats is notoriously unreliable which is why we dropped it.

Perhaps look to spend more to get the reliability you require.

What a disappointing comment. Not only is is factually inaccurate, but "notoriously" would suggest that others share concensus on this opinion. The reputation of SmarterStats is sound when it is set up correctly.

SmarterStats is reliable, stable, and generates detailed analytics reports. SmarterStats use Web logs to create the analytics--which has some significant advantages over script-based solutions (e.g. spider and bot detection) which can suggest more accurate results. Further, SmarterStats is under active development now to add som new, major functionality that will increase the value of the product even further

It is hard to write this without sounding self-serving, but the negative post quoted above looks more like an outsider to the topic who is desperate searching for an opportunity to post into a thread for which they have no real contribution to make.

Be well,
Jeffrey J. Hardy
www. smartertools.com

It is hard to write this without sounding self-serving, but the negative post quoted above looks more like an outsider to the topic who is desperate searching for an opportunity to post into a thread for which they have no real contribution to make.

Be well,
Jeffrey J. Hardy
www. smartertools.com

Wrong. We have an enterprise SmarterStats license and have used SS for the last 3 years in 3 different continents over 100s of servers. I can produce my license key right here to prove that I am not an 'outsider'. Actually we are a SmartTools Partner. After dropping SS our support requests went down by 50%. Issues ranged from log corruption to smarterstats sites just failing to work and needing to be recreated. That said we did run it on over 1000 sites so on a % level the issues would have been small.

I have 7 servers with SmarterStat and wonderful works

Smarterstats is notoriously unreliable which is why we dropped it.

Perhaps look to spend more to get the reliability you require.

It is? An old company I worked for ran SmarterStats supporting 10,000+ domains for three years with no major issues!

I'm happy for you both. I'm also happy we dropped support for SmarterStats.

The interface is awesome though. Have you messed with the latest version?

I should update status of Reliablesite Smarterstat service:
Reliablesite fixed problem finally (06.30.2009-07.10.2009).
Now I can reach my Smarterstat also it is covering problem days data. Performance is not bright but may acceptable (7 days with not more than 100 visits are reported in not more 4 second).