Comments on: ICDSoft Wrapup http://mikelococo.com/2006/04/icdsoft-wrapup/ Foo-Fu and other favorites... Thu, 29 Mar 2012 22:15:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5 By: ICDSoft Rocks (not)! | Bulbous, Not Tapered http://mikelococo.com/2006/04/icdsoft-wrapup/comment-page-1/#comment-31612 ICDSoft Rocks (not)! | Bulbous, Not Tapered Mon, 18 Oct 2010 04:13:03 +0000 http://mikelococo.com/2006/04/icdsoft-wrapup/#comment-31612 [...] Shortly after this post, I stopped using ICDSoft as a host due to this incident. Read ICDSoft wrapup for details. In short, they contacted me privately in an an email that conveyed considerable [...] [...] Shortly after this post, I stopped using ICDSoft as a host due to this incident. Read ICDSoft wrapup for details. In short, they contacted me privately in an an email that conveyed considerable [...]

]]> By: mike http://mikelococo.com/2006/04/icdsoft-wrapup/comment-page-1/#comment-16327 mike Tue, 26 Aug 2008 04:22:31 +0000 http://mikelococo.com/2006/04/icdsoft-wrapup/#comment-16327 I went with laughingsquid, mainly because their <a href="http://laughingsquid.net/aup/" rel="nofollow">acceptable use policy</a> is reasonable and understandable, and they boast a customer list of artists and bloggers that would be very unlikely to put up with the kind of content antics ICDSoft attempted. They're not the cheapest hosting provider by any stretch, and their feature-list is somewhat humdrum (I'm still waiting for a fully-managed WordPress service, where they handle updates and such). On the plus side: <ul><li>Reliability is good, I think there's been two-hours of downtime since I signed up with them in May of last year.</li> <li>Support is very good. I haven't needed it a lot, but when I do ask questions they're not trivial and I've gotten helpful responses from knowledgeable techs.</li> <li>Performance seems good. My site is not high-traffic, nor have I done and objective stress tests. I've never been disappointed by response-time, though.</li></ul> I went with laughingsquid, mainly because their acceptable use policy is reasonable and understandable, and they boast a customer list of artists and bloggers that would be very unlikely to put up with the kind of content antics ICDSoft attempted.

They’re not the cheapest hosting provider by any stretch, and their feature-list is somewhat humdrum (I’m still waiting for a fully-managed WordPress service, where they handle updates and such). On the plus side:

  • Reliability is good, I think there’s been two-hours of downtime since I signed up with them in May of last year.
  • Support is very good. I haven’t needed it a lot, but when I do ask questions they’re not trivial and I’ve gotten helpful responses from knowledgeable techs.
  • Performance seems good. My site is not high-traffic, nor have I done and objective stress tests. I’ve never been disappointed by response-time, though.
]]> By: Jane http://mikelococo.com/2006/04/icdsoft-wrapup/comment-page-1/#comment-16326 Jane Tue, 26 Aug 2008 03:38:55 +0000 http://mikelococo.com/2006/04/icdsoft-wrapup/#comment-16326 So ... who did you go with? I'm trying to make a decision for my companies' sites. Who did you choose and why? So … who did you go with? I’m trying to make a decision for my companies’ sites. Who did you choose and why?

]]> By: mike http://mikelococo.com/2006/04/icdsoft-wrapup/comment-page-1/#comment-49 mike Sat, 08 Apr 2006 15:50:12 +0000 http://mikelococo.com/2006/04/icdsoft-wrapup/#comment-49 Thanks for the comment, Sean. Clearly I was concerned about the situation. I did, after all, switch hosts and risk my search engine rankings by changing URI's. I do want to be careful here to present facts and let the reader make their own judgments, though, in contrast to my original post where I did a lot of editorializing and interpretation. But I agree with you that this sort of thing is probably more common than people think, and that's the big impetus behind the move. If it happens again, I'll be able make risk assessments for myself, rather than having to worry about other people who use and maintain the site getting sucked into the fray based purely on proximity. Thanks for the comment, Sean. Clearly I was concerned about the situation. I did, after all, switch hosts and risk my search engine rankings by changing URI’s. I do want to be careful here to present facts and let the reader make their own judgments, though, in contrast to my original post where I did a lot of editorializing and interpretation.

But I agree with you that this sort of thing is probably more common than people think, and that’s the big impetus behind the move. If it happens again, I’ll be able make risk assessments for myself, rather than having to worry about other people who use and maintain the site getting sucked into the fray based purely on proximity.

]]> By: Sean http://mikelococo.com/2006/04/icdsoft-wrapup/comment-page-1/#comment-48 Sean Sat, 08 Apr 2006 05:29:38 +0000 http://mikelococo.com/2006/04/icdsoft-wrapup/#comment-48 Censorship no...threatening you with policy violations? Oh yes! Personally, I can't see the difference. Unfortunately, the section found under ICDSoft's "abuse" heading on it's terms of use page seems to be fairly common among web hosting services. So their is plenty of censorship going on - they just prefer to call it something else. Censorship no…threatening you with policy violations? Oh yes! Personally, I can’t see the difference.

Unfortunately, the section found under ICDSoft’s “abuse” heading on it’s terms of use page seems to be fairly common among web hosting services. So their is plenty of censorship going on – they just prefer to call it something else.

]]>