Thoughts on my new website

Looks nice. Has a great design and is multi-funtional. Presents good priced plans for shared hosting and all. I think what you're offering is good, idk, I haven't used shared hosting for many, many years lol. Looks like the complete package. I think you did good with it.
 
First thought, without even opening the page is "Why another webhost?!". Then I think about it and erase that from my mind.

Then, I see this:

At StriveHost, we provide affordable, quality website hosting. That means that if you have a website designed in HTML, or use Wordpress, Joomla, Drupal, phpBB, MyBB, or any other system we support, then you will be able to host it on our server space, making it publicly avalible to anyone who wishes to visit your website.

There's nothing that ticks me off more than hosts with a "limited scope". People do program in a number of languages, from scratch. It's good to know that I won't be able to host with you. You don't need to support it at an application level, since generally the people looking at hosting with you will know what they want in this case, but you should be looking at supporting it at a server level.

That said... The plans you're offering look as though you're running off a VPS. People can get more, for less, over on Host4Post.

By the way, available is spelt as such 🙂
 
Thanks Eren. 🙂

@R44 thanks for the feedback.

I don't think anyone can compete with a post to host service in terms of affordability, but a lot of people don't want to bother with that type of host, so I see them as a competitor, but not a competitor that destroys the business model.

I don't think I wrote the paragraph you quoted very well. The host supports any PHP, Python, perl, or rails application.

Thanks for the feedback. 🙂
 
Cosmic said:
I don't think anyone can compete with a post to host service in terms of affordability

I'm not talking about affordability, I'm saying I can get more space for less - or nothing.

750MB isn't all that much space, either.

Cosmic said:
I don't think I wrote the paragraph you quoted very well.

I'd have to agree, which is why I quoted it.
 
Your pricing is pretty much something that would put me off. For example the cheapest shared hosting plan on NameCheap is like $40/yr (currently on sale for $10/yr), so it comes down to $3.3/mo, includes 20GB storage, unmetered bandwidth (I know there's always a limit, but seeing how they sell extra VPS bandwidth for $10/100GB it's safe to assume that running out of AUP on shared won't be happening very soon for many). They do limit the domains to three though.

So it's kinda hard to see why would I get a hosting from you when an actual big name company can offer more for less.
 
Thanks for the suggestions! Pricing is definitely something I will change.

What do you think about this?

Standard -- $1.50 /month, $15 /year -- 50 GB Bandwidth -- 2 GB Disk
Plus -- $2.50 /month, $25 /year -- 100 GB Bandwidth -- 4 GB Disk
Ultimate -- $5.00 /month, $50 /year -- 150 GB Bandwidth -- 8 GB Disk

I am open to any suggestions you have for pricing. 🙂

Here is how I've reworded the error R44 pointed out. Not yet live on the server, but it's in my development copy of the code.

At StriveHost, we provide affordable, quality website hosting. Our servers support the most up to date technologies, including PHP, Python, Ruby on Rails, and HTML. In addition, we offer a one-click installation tool for Wordpress, phpBB, MyBB, SMF, Joomla, Drupal, PrestoShop, and many more popular web scripts.
 
I wouldn't think HTML would matter as it's not parsed at the server anyway. I'd also clarify the specs as per month regardless of payment method.
 
Firstly, I like the theme and the price seems fair but with the amount of competition in the web hosting sector, you really need a unique selling point and I can't see it from your website. You need to offer something that other web hosts don't offer in order to succeed.
 
I really love the design. Its simple, neat and very much pleasing to the eyes. The color combinations are perfect and there isnt even a slight font incompatability anywhere in the page.


Amazing.
 
Back
Top Bottom