GreenGeeks vs. SiteGround

If you are looking for a shared hosting service, Green Geeks pricing is comparable to most vendors. T2 tech support is generally knowledgeable, T1 is responsive via chat, but often is not able to resolve issues (other than KB questions). Load balancing on a shared server is difficult for all vendors, since individual website usage is hard to predict. Vendors have different ways of dealing with this - some simply do not guarantee resource limits (e.g. available memory, PHP threads, etc). Green Geeks does provide resource limits as part of their contracts, but they frequently downgrade those limits, presumably to address overloaded servers. BUT BE AWARE - I believe GreenGeeks uses unethical practices when a customer wants to cancel. It is my personal experience that they make it extremely difficult / impossible to cancel a contract. I feel the process is not transparent and they will ignore emails directing them to cancel. In my experience, they will then proceed to charge customers for a renewed contract. I believe multiple customers have reported this problem.

I used other hosting providers in the past and actually I'm very happy with SiteGround mainly because of this: * very quick to setup and install my Wordpress website * sends me weekly emails about traffic, website healthscore etc * great wordpress plugins to help with SEO and optimizing

• T1 support generally responds w/i 15-30 minutes

• You get a number of page views as a guide to your bandwidth, and a fixed amount of disk space on the server. So you know what you have to work with. No hazy promises of “unlimited” resources.
• If you pay more, you’re allocated a server with fewer accounts, so there’s less chance you’ll be slowed down by your neighbors.
• Its self-help material is pretty good — close to InMotion Hosting for knowledgebase quality.
• SiteGround tackles slow speeds from all angles, using SSD storage, Nginx, SuperCacher, CloudFlare CDN, and HHVM.

Incentivized

• In my personal experience, the billing department uses unethical practices when customers cancel subs.

• Business model and clarity about prices after the second year
• Server Performance when it's stressed or under a big volume of traffic
• Upgrading model. Sometimes I felt like it was mandatory to update and pay more for basic needs, even with low traffic volumes

Incentivized

The UX is fluid and easy to understand.

Incentivized

Three ways to get customer support, phone, email, and chat. Chat is available 24/7 and the agents are always friendly and very helpful. In all the instances where I needed assistance chat support agents were always available to help. Wait time is minimal and on rare occasions I had to call, the agents were very helpful as well. I can not remember a time I walked away from support without my question or concern being resolved.

Incentivized

From a technical perspective, all shared server vendors are comparable. Bluehost has terrible customer support. A2 is more expensive, but has more personalized support.

GoDaddy and Bluehost offer grossly sub-par performance in 2017 for a price point that doesn't make sense. At least GoDaddy has great tech support - but I shouldn't have to rely on it as often as I do if all was working as it should. inMotion was overly complex on the backend, and lacked some common hosting features (easy WordPress installs for one) that are common across all other hosts. WPEngine, had great performance, and decent support, but their own proprietary backend interface was always a shift when switching between them and cpanel. Also - VERY expensive compared to SiteGround for comparable (if not lesser) service & performance.

Incentivized

• Throttling servers impacted website availability.

• Consistent uptime is a positive return on time investment.
• Support response times are a positive return on time investment.
• If large cost increases are not, we should change to another provider at renewal time, but we have not, due to other priorities.

Incentivized