Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1

    DINIX.com BAD

    What's wrong with some host in the US, this is the second time that i,m ripped by a host.
    First i have ordered a server at HOSTIK (Hostik Dedicated Server 3.2GHz, 3000GB Transfer, 160GB Serial HDD, 1GB Dual RAM ) well this is a great server for me i Think,,,after i have ordered an pay,,and upload all my sites to the server 2 days later was the server down ,hostik SHUTTDOWN the server becourse i have 20GB data transfer daily? thats 600GB month, and a have buy 3000GB??? then they have olso abuse our credit card charce one mont extra,,,and if you are looking for dedicated server and 3000GB data transfer you will finde HOSTIK everywhere,,

    my second nightmare is DINIX.com Webhostplus.com mr Gudovich is respondig verry fast if an order is made,, if there are problems they are not at home,,, the server was hacked, so i have ordered and upgrade the server,, and with free plesk ,,so i have made an order and pay, 4 days later i have the server with no PLESK!!! so i have submit a troublle ticket...3 days later no plesk,, no one is respondig!!! it's not over ,,there is more, webhostplus.com charge our creditcard for this mont!ok no problem,,,thats ok,, and dinix.com sent an invoice???? that i must pay i have sent an e mail and tell mr Gudovich that webhostplus.com charge us for this mont and i have sent the notice that i have recived from WebHostPlus Inc. no one responding,,and now they shuttdown the rever,,,and no one respondig to support tickets telephone calls,,no nothing,,, To be shamed!!!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
    Posts
    4,974
    Do they still have customers (Dinix)? I think their supporters must have left them.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    North Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    4,163

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    61
    I had exactly the same experience with Hostik, exactly the same plan and the same situation, the wouldn't allow more than 2 Mbps, and when you tell them that there is no way to reach 3000 GB with that limit, they don't know what you are talking about, they are either dumb or pretend to be.

    They also took and extra month off my credit card (that I am fighting with the bank to get back).

    Add to that, they are incredibly rule, they don't reply to emails and one of the time I called they told me I have been calling all day.

    In addition, they either don't know what they are talking about or they are trained to cheat on the customers. They talk about "accumulated bandwidth" whatever that is.

    Interesting that the plan they don't allow you to have 20 GB/day is advertised for hosting up to 1000 website with high volume of traffic.

    Unfotunately you don't need a license to run a host company. this one seems to be a data center run off a garage by a group of teenagers that think they can take the world by assault.

    Unfortunately I am not in California, but it would be great if somebody could take them to court and take them out of business, really the internet hosting market would be better without them.

    BTW, Lanset is the same company, they offer some other services, stay away from them.

  5. #5
    I think you recive a mail like this!!!

    The problem is the accumulated traffic that the second site on your server is causing. The traffic is going up and up and up and up. One person starts to download a video, then another and another and son on, then some time later the first one finishes. This is accumulated traffic and your second site with its video/audio downloads is causing that. You will need to limit the number of connections to that site or it will trip the trigger in our network and it will automatically disable the port that your server is on.

    Thank you,
    Lanset Communications

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Northwest Colorado
    Posts
    4,630
    "Accumulated Bandwidth" is a new one on me, and frankly their explanation (posted by neelix) doesn't clear it up. Let's not go about blasting U.S. hosts because of the actions of these people, whom I suspect aren't U.S. citizens anyway. Some people are on the level, others aren't, nationality and industry of operation really don't factor in the equation.

    Originally posted by Ricardob
    Unfotunately you don't need a license to run a host company. this one seems to be a data center run off a garage by a group of teenagers that think they can take the world by assault.

    Unfortunately I am not in California, but it would be great if somebody could take them to court and take them out of business, really the internet hosting market would be better without them.
    Not really. WHP looks more like a professional spam-hosting operation to me. They certainly aren't teenagers, their criminal history is well-documented and extends beyond webhosting. There are some links to that information in this thread:

    http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showth...hreadid=365422

    What I don't understand is how SPEWS hasn't added the Dinix IP's to their blocklist yet. While claiming publicly to have cleaned up their act and are no longer spammer-friendly, two actions on their part say otherwise.

    First, they themselves continue to send out spam, it's reported almost weekly here at WHT. Second, as I documented in the other thread, the spammers whose accounts they claim to have terminated have in many cases moved to another host which is owned by the same principals as WHP.

    Oh, BTW, they aren't in California.
    Eric J. Bowman, principal
    Bison Systems Corporation coming soon: a new sig!
    I'm just a poor, unfrozen caveman Webmaster. Your new 'standards' frighten, and confuse me...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    61
    Originally posted by BigBison
    "Accumulated Bandwidth" is a new one on me, and frankly their explanation (posted by neelix) doesn't clear it up. Let's not go about blasting U.S. hosts because of the actions of these people, whom I suspect aren't U.S. citizens anyway. Some people are on the level, others aren't, nationality and industry of operation really don't factor in the equation.



    Not really. WHP looks more like a professional spam-hosting operation to me. They certainly aren't teenagers, their criminal history is well-documented and extends beyond webhosting. There are some links to that information in this thread:

    http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showth...hreadid=365422

    What I don't understand is how SPEWS hasn't added the Dinix IP's to their blocklist yet. While claiming publicly to have cleaned up their act and are no longer spammer-friendly, two actions on their part say otherwise.

    First, they themselves continue to send out spam, it's reported almost weekly here at WHT. Second, as I documented in the other thread, the spammers whose accounts they claim to have terminated have in many cases moved to another host which is owned by the same principals as WHP.

    Oh, BTW, they aren't in California.
    I was talking about Hostik. Their address is in Sacramento.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    61
    Originally posted by neelix
    I think you recive a mail like this!!!

    The problem is the accumulated traffic that the second site on your server is causing. The traffic is going up and up and up and up. One person starts to download a video, then another and another and son on, then some time later the first one finishes. This is accumulated traffic and your second site with its video/audio downloads is causing that. You will need to limit the number of connections to that site or it will trip the trigger in our network and it will automatically disable the port that your server is on.

    Thank you,
    Lanset Communications
    sorry, but it doesn't make any sense.

    In my case, I did not have any videos, I have users connecting to the site, requesting files, and the server serving them.

    Of course it would be "accumulated bandwith", what else?, you know, somebody makes and http request, the server serves it, then the bytes that go through the pipe are bandwith, another one, and another one do that and then of course the bandwith goes up.

    The problem is that you sell 3000 GB/month, and as much as you try to explain it's not the same, it is. Simply with your limits it's not possible to reach even nearly that amount. It's simply aritmetic, how much bandwith you are having per second, multiply it by the number of second in a month and you get the monthy transfers, there NOT other way to measure it. Simply, your offer of 3000 GB is an outright lie, if you don't allow traffic to flow through then you can't get that number.

    Secondly, even without this problem, it doesn't justify that you treat your customers rudely, and it also doesn't justify that you disconnect a server and refuse to refund the money.

    In my case, Hostik disconnected the server, they said it was because of high bandwith but in fact, when they did it, the server was having zero bandwith, the DNSs weren't pointing to it anymore, so, like everything else, it was an outright lie.

    Hopefully more and more people know about you and you will be getting less and less clients. You stoke 179 dollars from me but I hope at least 10 people will read this forum and decide to go somewhere else, then your little trick will not be worth too much will it?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    61
    Originally posted by BigBison
    "Accumulated Bandwidth" is a new one on me, and frankly their explanation (posted by neelix) doesn't clear it up. Let's not go about blasting U.S. hosts because of the actions of these people, whom I suspect aren't U.S. citizens anyway. Some people are on the level, others aren't, nationality and industry of operation really don't factor in the equation.



    Not really. WHP looks more like a professional spam-hosting operation to me. They certainly aren't teenagers, their criminal history is well-documented and extends beyond webhosting. There are some links to that information in this thread:

    http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showth...hreadid=365422

    What I don't understand is how SPEWS hasn't added the Dinix IP's to their blocklist yet. While claiming publicly to have cleaned up their act and are no longer spammer-friendly, two actions on their part say otherwise.

    First, they themselves continue to send out spam, it's reported almost weekly here at WHT. Second, as I documented in the other thread, the spammers whose accounts they claim to have terminated have in many cases moved to another host which is owned by the same principals as WHP.

    Oh, BTW, they aren't in California.
    btw, I agree with not blaming US host for this, if anything, you can only blame the US system that allows anybody to start a business, it has its problems but overall works very well, and without the entrepeneurs, most of us would problably be unable to lease a server since the only choices would be AT&T, UUNet or similar.

    I am currently with Sagonet, another US company and they have been great so far, so it's only a matter of choosing an honest, responsible, financially and technically sound company. It's not always easy so this forum gives a great service to people looking for hosting, warning them against the bad apples like Hostik.

  10. #10
    I'm going to say something I had never said before on WHT...

    That's simply the lamest answer I've read!

    You can limit the port speed to something like 10mbps, that way a server won't be able to transfer over 3164 Gb/mo (pretty close to 3000 GB/mo that they advertised), but as long as the server doesn't exceed the 3000Gb/mo limit there's no decent reason to unplug it.

    Maybe it's that the provider doesn't have enough bandwidth, so they advertise 3000 Gb/mo to get more customers but can't supply that amount of bandwidth, but in that case it would be false advertising.

    I've seen kiddies trying to run a webhosting company by having a couple T1's and offering 1000Gb/mo with each server, even when they aren't able to supply it.


    Originally posted by neelix
    I think you recive a mail like this!!!

    The problem is the accumulated traffic that the second site on your server is causing. The traffic is going up and up and up and up. One person starts to download a video, then another and another and son on, then some time later the first one finishes. This is accumulated traffic and your second site with its video/audio downloads is causing that. You will need to limit the number of connections to that site or it will trip the trigger in our network and it will automatically disable the port that your server is on.

    Thank you,
    Lanset Communications
    Fabio A. Calderon
    C.E.O.
    SEATi

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    61
    Sorry, I thought I was talking with one guy from Hostik and then I realize it was the author of the thread just posting the email.

    My rant was directed to Hostik, not the poster.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    61
    Originally posted by SEATi
    I'm going to say something I had never said before on WHT...

    That's simply the lamest answer I've read!

    You can limit the port speed to something like 10mbps, that way a server won't be able to transfer over 3164 Gb/mo (pretty close to 3000 GB/mo that they advertised), but as long as the server doesn't exceed the 3000Gb/mo limit there's no decent reason to unplug it.

    Maybe it's that the provider doesn't have enough bandwidth, so they advertise 3000 Gb/mo to get more customers but can't supply that amount of bandwidth, but in that case it would be false advertising.

    I've seen kiddies trying to run a webhosting company by having a couple T1's and offering 1000Gb/mo with each server, even when they aren't able to supply it.
    in fact, it does look as they are kiddies trying to do adult staff.

    When I received my email, and contacted them, I phoned up first and because the issue wasn't solved I said I would phone up later.

    When I did, their first answer was that I have been calling all day, that's not what you say to a customer, rather it looks like a kid upset because they can't play their games. That kind of arrogance and rudeness is found in teenagers, not business people.

    I have contacted my bank and hopefully they will reverse the charge, and hopefully they will cancel their merchant account.

    They think they are smart, but although I did authorize them to debit my credit card, it's clear that it is in exchange for services rendered, that they failed to produce (and refuse to).

    Really, they are not only incompetent and rude, they are also stupid.

Posting Permissions

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