MediaTemple vs. DreamHost
Posted on November 23, 2006 at 20:17Four days ago, my webhost (who will remain nameless for the time being) noticed that its aging servers (all hosted by third-party enterprise hosting services) were dying. So they decided to upgrade all of the servers, and switch to a different hosting location at the same time. The result: my sites hosted by them were down or unusable for (well, actually, I cannot give an accurate number because at the time of writing, the sites are still down, and the server on which they were hosted is only “27% migrated”). I had been thinking of switching webhosts for some time, but foolishly did not take any action on these impulses, since “everything seems to be working ok for now”. Luckily, with month old backups of my different wordpress databases, plus cached feedburner feeds, I have all of the content I will need to recreate my sites on a new host (and then add back some missing items when my old host finally gets their act together).
For me, it came down to MediaTemple and DreamHost. I have used DreamHost for a client site in the past, and found that they are a company that is very concientous of their customer’s well-being. They go out of their way to give easy access to different server features on their (somewhat bizzare looking but very useful) control panel, and overall are very open about different issues that are occuring with their servers (and are not afraid to take responsibility when things get messed up and it is their fault). Overall, I have been pretty impressed with their hosting, as well as customer service. (And am reassured that if problems occurred on a server, that they would take care of it ASAP, unlike my current webhosts).
Then there is MediaTemple. I first found out about them after seeing the little (mt) links on various popular blogs. Whenever people refer to a company that provides them paid services with little emblems, proudly giving free advertising, it says something. Since then, I have read more and more about this hosting service, their top-notch customer service and quality hosting.
The thing that clinched the decision in the end is MediaTemple’s new GridServer (gs) hosting package. This is a revolutionary hosting setup (which everyone will have to do in a few years in order to stay in business). Your sites are no longer tied down to specific hardware, that comes with its own limitations. Instead your sites are hosted by clusters of servers, that can scale instantly to handle large spikes in traffic (ie: if you are dugg, slashdotted and redd at the same time, your shared hosting plan might not be able to handle it, while (gs) will theoretically not even notice). As all of my previous hosting woes have been caused by faulty equipment (and bad service), and since (gs) seems to have solved the problems that come with having your site tied to one specific piece of equipment, in the end I went with MediaTemple (gs). (And although there have been some reported problems with the service, I have not experienced anything but very fast loadtime and well-designed control panels since I have started migrating my sites over).
11 Responses to “MediaTemple vs. DreamHost”
1) John Koetsier on Nov 24, 2006 | Reply
I’m one of the people that you’ve linked to above that has had some issues with MediaTemple’s new grid server, Yaakov. Overall it’s been fine, though. I think that as you move to a completely new architecture some birthing pains are inevitable.
2) Yaakov Ellis on Nov 24, 2006 | Reply
John - I would wager that the problems that you (and others have experienced) are (as you implied) more related to having been moved from the (ss) to (gs) plans, and that people like me who have only used GridServer will never see them. Also, I am not so concerned with occassional things bugs showing up, as long as the host has good customer service and is committed to fixing the problems ASAP (something that I have missed in the past with previous webhosts)
3) John Koetsier on Nov 24, 2006 | Reply
I’m not totally following you there, Yaakov. I had almost no trouble at all actually moving my sites … it’s in the operation of them that I’ve had issues.
I’m not sure there’s anything technically different between accounts that are created on GS as opposed to ones moved over from SS.
4) Iwo on Nov 24, 2006 | Reply
I am hoping that they will fix this issue. If not, I am moving to DreamHost. But, I will give them some time to work on it. Its only database problems, if you run a website without database, you will not experience the issue. Also, MT is aware of the problem.
5) Abhijit Shylanath on Nov 28, 2006 | Reply
@Yaakov:
I’m a new MT customer as well, but I face the same problem, database deaths…
@Iwo:
…and server deaths.
I’m waiting to see if it’ll get resolved in a couple of months. If it doesn’t, I’m switching to DreamHost, since a lot of people (including Yaakov) seem to have had positive experiences. Then again, that’s what I’d read about MediaTemple.
6) Yaakov Ellis on Nov 28, 2006 | Reply
@Abhijit:
I have had a good experience so far with Dreamhost. But still have the problems of having your site tied to a specific piece of hardware (and as you can see, they do have problems on a somewhat regular basis with specific pieces of software. Though there is nothing that can really be done about this (it is the nature of hardware to eventually break), assuming that (mt) can pull it off, it puts them at a definite advantage in terms of reliability and uptime.
(That said, it would be nice to see (mt) put up some kind of equivalent to the DreamHost Status site).
7) jabbett on Jan 22, 2007 | Reply
Any additional thoughts on MediaTemple performance and stability to share two months later?
Despite the fact I paid for “lifetime” hosting from TextDrive, I’ve grown tired of their spotty performance and unfulfilled promises … and now my support tickets are going unanswered for days. Time for someone new, it seems.
(What kind of stats package does (mt) provide?)
8) Yaakov Ellis on Jan 22, 2007 | Reply
jabbett - after two months, I am quite happy with the performance and stability. As I hoped, MediaTemple has gotten their act together with some of the stability of the overall “grid”, and they seem dedicated to improving it and killing the bugs going forward (and have been transparent about it as well, something that I always find to be a very good sign for a hosting company. Control panel is easy to use, their support has also been responsive to my requests, going “above and beyond” several times.
They use Urchin for stats.
9) nightmarehost on Apr 7, 2008 | Reply
For the love of GOD, do NOT go with nightmare host! You’re better off hosting a site on your own cable modem! (not kidding).
Media Temple by far has the better service. Sure they might have a few bugs here and there… but when it comes to scalability and performance, they give you what you paid for and then some.
On nightmare host if you have any type of high traffic spike or high bandwidth server, you get SHUT DOWN. Then the support will tell you how you’re disrupting everyone else they packed into a shared server… They offer you all that bandwidth but will never allow you to come close to using it.
And when they put you back online (days later), and you get a ton of legit traffic to your website… BAM shutdown forever. No refund. They steal your source code and wont give it back. You ask them to delete it, they wont.
Nightmarehost = thieves and cheats.