Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 46
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    196

    Namecheap vs Stablehost?

    Looking for a new host and I'm debating between Namecheap and Stablehost...they both seem to have good reviews, but of course they both seem to have a few negative points as well.

    My primary concerns are site uptime and speed/performance. Any preference of Namecheap or Stablehost? Does one outshine the other?

    Namecheap seems to give you more bang for your buck, but there site seems to run slower at times and the other day while scrolling through their knowledge base I kept a 'server offline' error for almost 5 minutes, which kind of worried me. Stablehost seems to be more stringent with what they give you, but there site seems quick and efficient.

    Any preference for Namecheap or Stablehost?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Online
    Posts
    4,881
    I've used Namecheap, and I'm using Stablehost; personally, I see it as a toss up, as they're both excellent providers.
    If I'd have to throw a dice, I'd say Stablehost - but only because I'm still with them (I left Namecheap only because I had a special offer for another provider from a friend).
    My "ranking" is kidding.
    I'm just a humble client, here to seek help and guidance from the true experts.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by member65 View Post
    Namecheap seems to give you more bang for your buck, but there site seems to run slower at times and the other day while scrolling through their knowledge base I kept a 'server offline' error for almost 5 minutes, which kind of worried me. Stablehost seems to be more stringent with what they give you, but there site seems quick and efficient.

    Any preference for Namecheap or Stablehost?
    I'd like to point out that the speed in which a hosting provider's company website loads does not necessarily equate to how your website will load on their servers. Although, I agree that if their company website's performance is lacking it does not reflect well on them and can hinder your access to the client area, support, etc. Both companies you have narrowed down your choice to have a good reputation so you're almost there.
    Review Hell - Brutally Honest Web Hosting Reviews
    Helpful Web Hosting Advice
    Web Hosting Guide - Easy to Understand For Newbies

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    PA, US
    Posts
    410
    I only ever used NameCheap they are pretty good but now they removed the ability to pay 3 years ahead which is a negative thing. Now they expect it per year. Other then that I am extremely happy with them.
    Fast Reliable Web Hosting Dedicated to beginner users. DirectAdmin Shared Hosting. https://bhdmmwh2.us/
    Many plans and custom plans offered at fair prices.
    Proudly hosting customers since 2012.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    70
    I would go with NameCheap, awesome services and I've never had an issue with them.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Modesto California
    Posts
    6,858
    Quote Originally Posted by member65 View Post

    Namecheap seems to give you more bang for your buck, but there site seems to run slower at times and the other day while scrolling through their knowledge base I kept a 'server offline' error for almost 5 minutes, which kind of worried me. Stablehost seems to be more stringent with what they give you, but there site seems quick and efficient.
    Sounds to me like you are merely comparing the amount of Diskspace + Bandwidth being advertised as included in the monthly service (which would be an inaccurate method). In all likelihood, you are getting the same "amount" of resources or pretty close to it with either web host.

    Where you will find a difference (if any) will be regarding server performance + customer service. Everything else is going to be somewhat irrelevant.
    Looking for an awesome VPS Offer? CLICK HERE

    "Knowing is not enough, we must apply. Willing is not enough, we must do." – Bruce Lee

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    7,325
    Stablehost has always been rock-solid for me, and also keeps quite on the cutting-edge, which is nice to see. May seem like an contradiction, but not really.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Kepler 62f
    Posts
    16,699
    As mentioned elsewhere, each has slight differences, but both are excellent.
    || Need a good host?
    || See my Suggested Hosts List || Editorial: EIG/Site5/Arvixe/Hostgator Alternatives
    ||

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    3,784
    Thanks for considering us. We do offer unlimited bandwidth but limit on disk space, because frankly it's expensive and when you offer huge amounts like 50GB or Unlimited disk, it becomes a very hard task to keep backups of that every day as well as keep 14 days of changes.

    Please let us know if you have any specific questions I can answer for you.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    London
    Posts
    4,931
    Quote Originally Posted by FernGullyGraphics View Post
    Sounds to me like you are merely comparing the amount of Diskspace + Bandwidth being advertised as included in the monthly service (which would be an inaccurate method). In all likelihood, you are getting the same "amount" of resources or pretty close to it with either web host.

    Where you will find a difference (if any) will be regarding server performance + customer service. Everything else is going to be somewhat irrelevant.
    http://www.stablehost.com/terms.php#resource

    and

    https://www.namecheap.com/legal/hosting/aup.aspx

    Is worth checking
    Matthew Russell | Namecheap
    Twitter: @mattdrussell

    www.easywp.com - True Managed WordPress, made easy

  11. #11

    Name Cheap downtime is high

    I m using Name Cheap hosting for my website but not satisfy because there downtime ratio is very high.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    London
    Posts
    4,931
    Quote Originally Posted by Laurie86 View Post
    I m using Name Cheap hosting for my website but not satisfy because there downtime ratio is very high.
    We have a really good track record for uptime. What is the domain you're hosting with us so I can investigate?
    Matthew Russell | Namecheap
    Twitter: @mattdrussell

    www.easywp.com - True Managed WordPress, made easy

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    450
    Quote Originally Posted by stablehost View Post
    Thanks for considering us. We do offer unlimited bandwidth but limit on disk space, because frankly it's expensive and when you offer huge amounts like 50GB or Unlimited disk, it becomes a very hard task to keep backups of that every day as well as keep 14 days of changes.

    Please let us know if you have any specific questions I can answer for you.
    +1 here. I have accounts with them and I know their support is doing their job as they've contacted me about some "suspicious files" on my accounts. I'm assuming as one of my class names was Proxy.php, it was automatically flagged or found through a grep. (no, it was fine and within tos and is now resolved). Really shows that they're dedicated to keeping their servers stable and keeping abusers off their servers. (I've never had a single other provider even question some of my scripts)

    Now before people go on about how it may have been a privacy violation, I'm confident that they only searched for certain flagged words like "proxy", and that's why my files showed up as a hit. I have NO problems with stuff like this if it means I can be more sure that my shared server doesn't have a bunch of random abusers.

  14. #14

    * Name cheap is best

    Previously I have used Namecheap, best customer support on webhosting. They help me to solve my issues on my website.

  15. #15
    I used namecheap, and untill now there is not issue with namecheap.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Modesto California
    Posts
    6,858
    End of the day though it comes down to this statement: Your use of the server resources shall not endanger the capacity and operation of the shared server.

    Every shared web host pretty much has the same line (within good reason), which is why it makes some of the metrics you mention in your TOS as irrelevant. As mentioned earlier, what will seperate web hosts is Customer Service and Actual reliability of the network (which you wont really know until you sign-up for a web host).
    Looking for an awesome VPS Offer? CLICK HERE

    "Knowing is not enough, we must apply. Willing is not enough, we must do." – Bruce Lee

  17. #17
    i have used namecheap so i can suggest that , 2 points i can mention specifically is


    1) their free domain privacy for first year
    2) no issues in DNS etc , i have seen some issue with other provider in DNS resolution taking more time etc

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Atlántida, Uruguay
    Posts
    93
    Namecheap seems good and I do have one small account with them on their Value plan. But I canceled my reseller with them over a couple of deal breaker issues. Might not be deal breakers for you.

    1. No "remote domains" and they are absolutely adamant about not doing that. Which means that you cannot have your web hosting all set up ready to go, in advance of changing authoritative DNS to point at their nameservers. My hosting model is that I insist on having that ability, on having alternate sub domain (like us01 instead of hosted elsewhere www) and "warm site" manual failover sites always ready to go. Namecheap insists that only their support will add your remote domains.

    2. I had 2 weeks worth of back and forth with only-in-Ukraine Namecheap support on this. They did it but screwed it up on the main and add-on domains in my reseller account, and refused to understand/admit it. Domains were indeed in cPanels and in hosting DNS (and in my own hosts file for testing from my Linux laptop and in my he.net, Gandi.net, or even Namecheap's own FreeDNS) but clearly were not being served up by their Apache. Getting only their redirect to a cgi-bin domain misconfig page. Unlike the exact same thing they had done, correctly, in my Value Plan account and for that matter, for the add on domains in the reseller account's primary cPanel.

    3. Got classic "upsell in lieu of support" on at least two of the support ticket exchanges, with, "you need a VPS." Sorry, no, and my great performing shared plan at Fresh Roasted Hosting lets me do this with no support intervention needed. So does, of course, the additional DigitaOcean VPS I spun up and put Virtualmin on, beyond the 4 droplets I already had there. Which is where the sites are that I was trying to use Namecheap for. So did DreamHost, whom I was finally dumping after 12 years.

    4. I don't like the idea of outsourced support. Matt has elsewhere claimed it's really Namecheap but technically it's a different company.

    5. I really don't like the idea of only offshored support. Especially in what's now a politically unstable hotspot country with multiple war zones.Also with Ukraine in general for years being the worst source of hack attempts on my sites, at least per my Wordfence logs. I don't like implying guilt by association but "Ukraine" and "Internet trust" are polar opposites to me.

    6. Namecheap strikes me as kind of a "virtual company" rather than a real one. Despite being themselves an ICANN-approved registrar, they still use Enom for registrations. I really don't like the ethics of Enom parent Demand Media, even if now renamed as Rightside. Hosting isn't Demand Media but it's unclear if it's really Namecheap, or is Matt's own company Web Hosting Buzz. I prefer to deal with companies that are less obscured.

    That said, i just moved some domains into them in part to support the EFF, where Namecheap is on the side of the angels ethically. I continue to host some low to traffic sites and think they're fine for uncomplicated hosting with no special needs. I applaud that their head of hosting participates in online discussions.

    I haven't used StableHost but hear lots of good stuff about them, and hosting is their main businesses. For me, that would make me lean towards them if you have this as only two choices. But I'd also seriously suggest you consider Fresh Roasted Hosting.
    Last edited by MarkXS; 02-11-2015 at 03:30 PM. Reason: Correct autocorrect!

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    8,148
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkXS View Post
    Namecheap seems good and I do have one small account with them on their Value plan. But I canceled my reseller with them over a couple of deal breaker issues. Might not be deal breakers for you.

    1. No "remote domains" and they are absolutely adamant about not doing that. Which means that you cannot have your web hosting all set up ready to go, in advance of changing authoritative DNS to point at their nameservers. My hosting model is that I insist on having that ability, on having alternate sub domain (like us01 instead of hosted elsewhere www) and "warm site" manual failover sites always ready to go. Namecheap insists that only their support will add your remote domains.

    2. I had 2 weeks worth of back and forth with only-in-Ukraine Namecheap support on this. They did it but screwed it up on the main and add-on domains in my reseller account, and refused to understand/admit it. Domains were indeed in cPanels and in hosting DNS (and in my own hosts file for testing from my Linux laptop and in my he.net, Gandi.net, or even Namecheap's own FreeDNS) but clearly were not being served up by their Apache. Getting only their redirect to a cgi-bin domain misconfig page. Unlike the exact same thing they had done, correctly, in my Value Plan account and for that matter, for the add on domains in the reseller account's primary cPanel.

    3. Got classic "upsell in lieu of support" on at least two of the support ticket exchanges, with, "you need a VPS." Sorry, no, and my great performing shared plan at Fresh Roasted Hosting lets me do this with no support intervention needed. So does, of course, the additional DigitaOcean VPS I spun up and put Virtualmin on, beyond the 4 droplets I already had there. Which is where the sites are that I was trying to use Namecheap for. So did DreamHost, whom I was finally dumping after 12 years.

    4. I don't like the idea of outsourced support. Matt has elsewhere claimed it's really Namecheap but technically it's a different company.

    5. I really don't like the idea of only offshored support. Especially in what's now a politically unstable hotspot country with multiple war zones.Also with Ukraine in general for years being the worst source of hack attempts on my sites, at least per my Wordfence logs. I don't like implying guilt by association but "Ukraine" and "Internet trust" are polar opposites to me.

    6. Namecheap strikes me as kind of a "virtual company" rather than a real one. Despite being themselves an ICANN-approved registrar, they still use Enom for registrations. I really don't like the ethics of Enom parent Demand Media, even if now renamed as Rightside. Hosting isn't Demand Media but it's unclear if it's really Namecheap, or is Matt's own company Web Hosting Buzz. I prefer to deal with companies that are less obscured.

    That said, i just moved some domains into them in part to support the EFF, where Namecheap is on the side of the angels ethically. I continue to host some low to traffic sites and think they're fine for uncomplicated hosting with no special needs. I applaud that their head of hosting participates in online discussions.

    I haven't used StableHost but hear lots of good stuff about them, and hosting is their main businesses. For me, that would make me lean towards them if you have this as only two choices. But I'd also seriously suggest you consider Fresh Roasted Hosting.
    Nice detailed review! Where did you learn their support is outsourced to Ukraine?

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Atlántida, Uruguay
    Posts
    93
    Common knowledge, search. Including here at WHT. Plus all their names are a clue along with how some have linked to their LinkedIn profiles and Twitter accounts.

    Support outsourcing company Zone3000 in Ukraine.

    https://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1423791

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    9,064
    +1 for StableHost. I use them for a personal web site that I host, and I have never had any major issue with them. I recommend them.

    Separately, I have used NameCheap's domain registrar services, and I'm neutral on NameCheap personally.

    Note that these are just my own opinions, not those of my employer. I'm referring to hosting (and domains) that I bought for my own personal projects.

    -mike
    Mike G. - Limestone Networks - Account Specialist
    Cloud - Dedicated - Colocation - Premium Network - Passionate Support
    DDoS Protection Available - Reseller Program @LimestoneInc - 877.586.0555

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Kepler 62f
    Posts
    16,699
    Quote Originally Posted by Ali1 View Post
    Nice detailed review! Where did you learn their support is outsourced to Ukraine?
    It's not outsourced.

    Namecheap maintains a strong EU presence for hosting, and that is where most of their support is located. Just because something is not in the U.S., does not mean it's inferior. (Try telling that to somebody in the EU!)

    Zone3000 exists for Namecheap. Without Namecheap, it doesn't exist.

    This has been addressed before: http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showpo...8&postcount=35

    ... and you know I'm VERY anti-outsource. But this isn't one of them.
    || Need a good host?
    || See my Suggested Hosts List || Editorial: EIG/Site5/Arvixe/Hostgator Alternatives
    ||

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Atlántida, Uruguay
    Posts
    93
    Yes, @kpmedia you addressed it with your definition of what you consider "outsourced" and "offshored", and by your definitions it is neither.

    By the plain use of the words, it definitely is "offshored", whether or not Zone3000 is owned by Namecheap. Just like when my old Boston, MA, USA employer opened up a big development/support center in Gurgaon, India, they "offshored".

    Given that in that same thread, other members indicated that Zone3000 does do support for other than Namecheap, and other than Namecheap Hosting VP and Webhostingbuzz owner Matt Russell's Webhostingbuzz, then arguably it's not an integral part of Namecheap. In which case, by most people's standards, their support is indeed "outsourced".

    In any event, they're not in the same offices, in the same general timezone, and with the same native-English capabilities, as in-USA support for in-USA target audiences. That does matter to a lot of people. And regardless of ownership, their being in a country at war does matter too.

    You have great info on your site, and in your posts here, in the short time I've been at WHT and seen them. But you are exceedingly quick to jump in to defend Namecheap and take this particular point about offshoring/outsourcing very sensitively, from what I see. "Things that make you go hmmmm..."

    People who consider Namecheap for hosting or for anything else, do have a right to understand the intricacies and geographic issues involving their support model - something which Namecheap is very non-transparent about on their actual public website, the same way they are very non-transparent about Enom. What their representatives and satisfied customers say on web hosting boards is very much "inside baseball" that the vast majority of their customer and prospect base will never see.

    More to the point, the disjointed nature of Namecheap/Enom, Namecheap/Webhostingbuzz/Webhosting.com, Namecheap/Zone3000, is a risk factor in some customers' opinions. It's not really "one company". I had an example of that on the domain side a few years ago, where a security issue with an unauthorized unlock of a domain, became a big back-and-forth with Ukraine and from them to Enom, with somebody from Namecheap telling me "we have to check with the registrar" - which was a "But aren't YOU the registrar?" moment.

    Support at Gandi, I'm dealing with Gandi, whether in Luxembourg, Paris, or now San Francisco. Support at Fresh Roasted Hosting, I'm dealing with FRH including often with FRH-Dave. Support at DreamHost, I'm dealing with actual DreamHost employees at DH in Los Angeles. (Tickets/emails: Not counting livechats which are typically outsourced and often offshored with many companies). Support at Namecheap, I'm not really sure even what company I'm dealing with at the root of the issue.

  24. #24
    1 vote for namecheap. they do OK but have some silly issues. one time a client mailed them a check for hosting and they returned it saying refusing payment siting they don't have the ability to cash checks. The web support chat is hit or miss depending on who you get.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Online
    Posts
    4,881
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkXS View Post
    ....Support at Namecheap, I'm not really sure even what company I'm dealing with at the root of the issue.
    You're dealing with an excellent company, period.
    My "ranking" is kidding.
    I'm just a humble client, here to seek help and guidance from the true experts.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-06-2014, 04:00 PM
  2. Replies: 35
    Last Post: 04-05-2014, 05:04 AM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-03-2013, 11:44 AM
  4. StableHost (StableHost.com) Initial Review
    By Mike - Limestone in forum Web Hosting
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-16-2010, 06:55 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •