subject: For Shared Web Hosting, What Host Is The Best One? [print this page] This has become the most common option available for Web Hosting. Basically a company starts by setting up one or more servers for Web Hosting, and then their various customers will pay for part of the server and as well as share with other customers. This means that one server can end up being responsible for hundreds of websites all at once.
There are numerous advantages to Shared Hosting. First of all, it is truly the most inexpensive route for commercial hosting as the numerous customers who are able to use it can easily offset the monthly cost of the server. You don't have to have any advanced techie know how to use it and you're only responsible for your own account - there's no time that you're involved with the server itself. Because it's a solution you're paying for, you will be able to access a contract, customer support, uptime guarantees, and what you need.
The only disadvantage is that as you are sharing server costs, you are also sharing the server's technical resources. Just like your personal computer, a server can only carry a certain amount of memory, processing power and space. If you are paired with someone who is putting a heavy strain on these resources, or too many people are using the same server, or you are put on a slower server - your website might ultimately suffer and more more slowly.
Furthermore, Shared Hosting will not permit much in the way of sophisticated, potent features which the more expensive choices offer to you, you will also discover. Keeping in mind that this server should be really safe in the first place, associated risk brought on by not knowing how safe your "neighbors" are is not so serious; a minor security risk is present, though.
For the majority of users and websites, Shared Hosting is the perfect answer to the needs. Just individuals who need to be able to have control over the server's contents will want any alternative, although there are always several exceptions.
