On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com> wrote:

Quoting Todd Hawley (celticdm@gmail.com):

> Good point and most times that would be true. However, I've run into a
> couple folk who have more than one site hosted there and move other
> sites there "because they provide good service." In other words, they
> provide better service to users who have multiple accounts there than
> to those who only have one.

Very plausible. And/or those other users may have bought a higher grade
of service costing more money.

Not sure if DH offers that but who knows.

Also, to be fair, a number of major hosting service such as Bluehost
(don't know wbout Dreamhost) based their reputations on specifically
hosting of Wordpress Web sites on shared hosts -- with other services
like SMTP / mailing lists being (in the opinion of outside commenters)
afterthoughts that are poorly run.

I used to maintain a site that ran WordPress, we migrated it to DH and they insisted

they could only run WP if our URL included the Dreamhost name in the URL. It made

for a very clunky and LONG URL to say the least. So yeah DH will run a WP site but

only (at least at the time) if you gave "free advertising" to DH in the form of an extra

long URL.

This would be consistent with what most modern Internet-hosting
customers mean when they say 'site'.

Worpress is a vast and security-problematic blogging (etc.) engine
written in the security-problematic PHP language, so there's quite a
market niche describable as 'company that takes care of innumerable
security meltdowns and other nuisances so you can use a cruddy Web app
without devoting your life to it'. If a customer sees that as the most
important thing a hosting company can do, then from that perspective a
company whose SMTP / mailing list operations suck rocks might be utterly
excellent.

Aha! I wondered why WP had so many security issues. Although from what

I'd heard PHP was a nice scripting language and easy to learn. I had no idea

it was prone to security issues.

-th