What do you think of this site?
- Thread starter Reverend
- Start date
Yep, your host is trying to install crapware when someone's viewing a page, which is strange because the host's name is Koolhost.
And everybody knows that malwares aren't cool.
Malwares infested freehosts asside, your site is indeed ol' school approved. I like it.
I agree with ninelven, BTW, get rid of the textured backgrounds, it doesn't look good, it's ol' school, for sure, but it really does not look good.
And everybody knows that malwares aren't cool.
Malwares infested freehosts asside, your site is indeed ol' school approved. I like it.
I agree with ninelven, BTW, get rid of the textured backgrounds, it doesn't look good, it's ol' school, for sure, but it really does not look good.
New Host (original post of mine edited... don't want folks clicking on it if it is so unsafe!)
I think it should be "safe" now . Let me know if otherwise.
Still have to clean up the HTML codes though. Still have to post what shadow technique -- and how -- John Carmack has decided to use for the engine he's currently working on (has that been confirmed anywhere btw?).
I think it should be "safe" now
. Let me know if otherwise.Still have to clean up the HTML codes though. Still have to post what shadow technique -- and how -- John Carmack has decided to use for the engine he's currently working on (has that been confirmed anywhere btw?).
It's ok now.Reverend said:New Host (original post of mine edited... don't want folks clicking on it if it is so unsafe!)
I think it should be "safe" now
If you break this news, and if it has indeed not been posted elsewhere, I predict that you'll have to look for another host very soon.Reverend said:
The bandwidth of those freesites can not support slashdoted material.
Well, the host says bandwidth is unlimited!.
It looks like a decent free package. I also received an approval from Hosting is Free but the current one (www.50webs.com) seems sufficient for my testing needs.
It looks like a decent free package. I also received an approval from Hosting is Free but the current one (www.50webs.com) seems sufficient for my testing needs.
Reverend said:
I feel strange posting this because I assume you know a lot more about this than I, having been in the industry for so long.
This reference to bandwidth is in regards to some monthly quota of aggregate data servered. Most free hosts will limit your 'bandwidth' to some maximum amount of data the server is capable of delivering before a software switch turns it off until the new 'billing period', possibly giving a "Bandwidth exceeded" page where your index would normally be.
This has nothing to do with the actual bandwidth (as in the networking term denoted in Mbps or Gbps) of the server. This bandwidth is never unlimited (for obvious reasons) and is often denoted in the network type bandwidth (T1, T3, OC3, etc), where it is assumed that the physical server is capable of saturating the network interface.
What I think Vysez means is that if you get slashdotted you will have lots of concurrent page requests, to the point where it will almost look like a DoS attack) and this is dependent on the network interface width and the server hardware, not a monthly quota of total data served.
50web.com FAQ said:
So in this case I would interpret this to mean you have no explicit monthly quota, although you are obviously still limited to the aggregate of the bandwidth (kbps, mbps, gbps) at any one time. Unlimited, therefore is very sketchy. I also interpret this to mean that this "unlimited" bandwidth only pertains to html web pages transmitted and not file transfers.
Yeah, well, right.
I don't really care -- I got what I wanted from the host, which was to see if the site looks and functions online as I intended.
Now, does Blogger really have "unlimited bandwidth"?
PS. I'm not worried about getting /.'ed over this JC tidbit I'd be posting -- all he did was confirm to me what shadowing technique he'd decided on for the engine he's currently working on plus some small expansion on that.
I don't really care -- I got what I wanted from the host, which was to see if the site looks and functions online as I intended.
Now, does Blogger really have "unlimited bandwidth"?
PS. I'm not worried about getting /.'ed over this JC tidbit I'd be posting -- all he did was confirm to me what shadowing technique he'd decided on for the engine he's currently working on plus some small expansion on that.
Looks very remniscent of your old site. Ahh, the memories. It almost doesn't feel right viewing that page without having clicked to it from Voodooextreme.com.
I should have looked at the other free host you mentioned, Hosting Is Free. If you look at the page you linked to them they state a 5,000MB bandwidth. This would be the total data served per month (presumably, it could be any period of time, but I think monthly is the norm). After 5 GB of data has been served within a 30 day period the server will cease to function until the next period (month) when the bandwidht quota is reset and the process begins over again.
I definitely think you would want an unlimited monthly quota, but if you are mainly looking to have simple pages consisting of text you can get more milage (more viewers served) because the per-page data amount is kept low. However, I think Vysez is right in that a host that cannot guarantee a certain level of service and is "free" will most likely crumble when everyone gets excited and hits your pages at the same time.
For example, I would suspect that Beyond3D has a relatively steady visitation throughput. This is not a drama website and instead I think people regularly visit to read or re-read some factual information, almost like a manual to a piece of hardware being consulted. If there were more sensational news, a la The Inquirer, you are going to get peaks (but they seem to always be peaking because they always have some sensationalist take on something). I think you get my point, Internet news travels quickly and expires very quickly. If you had an exclusive like that, I think you could expect everyone adding their own small visits to various websites of their choice coming to yours for the day. The load will be enormous comared to the normal trickle.
Imagine the headline "Reverend back at the Pulpit after leaving Beyond3D! Exclusive news on Carmack's next rendering engine!" on HardOCP, Shacknews, VE3D, Anandtech, Hexus, ohh...and those EliteBastards... Suddenly the total users of all those sites will pound on your door, at least for the day. This is the part where a server that is not equipped to deal with the situation explodes in a dramatic fashion and everyone wonders if The Return of the Pulpit was some sort of elaborate hoax.
BTW, I am glad to see that you are working on bringing back The Pulpit. I got a strange, fuzzy, nostalgic feeling when I saw the page.
I definitely think you would want an unlimited monthly quota, but if you are mainly looking to have simple pages consisting of text you can get more milage (more viewers served) because the per-page data amount is kept low. However, I think Vysez is right in that a host that cannot guarantee a certain level of service and is "free" will most likely crumble when everyone gets excited and hits your pages at the same time.
For example, I would suspect that Beyond3D has a relatively steady visitation throughput. This is not a drama website and instead I think people regularly visit to read or re-read some factual information, almost like a manual to a piece of hardware being consulted. If there were more sensational news, a la The Inquirer, you are going to get peaks (but they seem to always be peaking because they always have some sensationalist take on something
). I think you get my point, Internet news travels quickly and expires very quickly. If you had an exclusive like that, I think you could expect everyone adding their own small visits to various websites of their choice coming to yours for the day. The load will be enormous comared to the normal trickle.Imagine the headline "Reverend back at the Pulpit after leaving Beyond3D! Exclusive news on Carmack's next rendering engine!" on HardOCP, Shacknews, VE3D, Anandtech, Hexus, ohh...and those EliteBastards... Suddenly the total users of all those sites will pound on your door, at least for the day. This is the part where a server that is not equipped to deal with the situation explodes in a dramatic fashion and everyone wonders if The Return of the Pulpit was some sort of elaborate hoax.
BTW, I am glad to see that you are working on bringing back The Pulpit. I got a strange, fuzzy, nostalgic feeling when I saw the page.