Responses to windows hosting…

I am glad to see many users responding to our proposed plan of possibly implementing windows hosting. Thanks for your comments.

Let me make one thing VERY clear. If we do windows hosting it will probably be more expensive than linux, but the windows hosting platform will survive on its own. Meaning the linux hosting will in no way subsidize the windows hosting. Windows hosting MUST be profitable on it own. So for those worrying about price increases or service levels dropping, please don’t. Everything will remain just as it is including pricing.

Thanks again for your comments,

Matt Heaton /

25 Responses to “Responses to windows hosting…”

  1. Kevin says:

    Good to hear Matt.

    Of course at the same time once you have MS up and running and it is not a profitable venture I hope monies would not be diverted from other portions of the company to fill the gap.

    You are right it should stand on its own but depending on how sweet the deal MS is giving you it would be expected to lose money in the beginning.

  2. Sounds good to me you have the green light sir :)

  3. Shane says:

    DON’T DO IT! MS Windows is much more costly, cumbersome, bloated, problematic and time consuming to maintain and manage. While I have several business sites running on BlueHost (Which rocks) as I transition from my day job as Director of IT for software development, I run two datacenters for a corporation running 120+ WinOS servers w/AD and lots of networking complexity, SAN, NAS and iSCSI sub-systems. My other 2 DC’s are Linux based are nearly 50% of the cost in both licensing, maintenance and support. I have 1 tech to every 40-50 DELL/Linux servers and 1 to 15-25 to keep the DELL/Win solutions going.

    DON’T DO IT! It will divert your resources, time and money. Stay with what you know and continue to be successful. There’s no inherit benefit in doing WinOS except maybe ASP support. MSSQL licensing is high where as MYSQL is much lower. Personally, ASP support is not compelling enough…

    But, then that’s just my opinion. 😎

  4. Jeremy says:

    If it’s a good move for your business… do it!

  5. Ayman says:

    Well, if you do go with windows hosting, I only ask that you keep it in a completely different segment than the linux one, with a strong firewall in between. I would want tons of unnecessary broadcast, and security holes interrupting the linux traffic. Thanks!

  6. Danny says:

    Avid mac user and curious on what hosting on a mac platform would contribute to bluehost? With unix at the core it has close to the same amount of stability as linux. Just a few thoughts.

  7. Tom says:

    OT: I am very interested to know which Distro Linux you use at BlueHosting.
    Is it possible to know?
    Thanks in advance

  8. Erich says:

    I ordered a 24 month package yesterday from Bluehost. $166 damage effective immediately. OK, never mind. Spent a couple hours setting up my blog, and I wake up this morning to take a proud look and is unavailable. I can’t access it. I can’t access the cPanel. It’s 12 o’clock on a Monday morning in Western Europe, and tech support (which is probably going to cost me another arm and a leg) is closed. My point is: does it matter whether Bluehost uses Windoze or Linux if it’s going to dowtime like this? Sheesh, I don’t know what to do right now I’m so lost in words.

  9. Greg says:

    They use Red Hat Enterprise

  10. Nathan says:


    Great post on Windows Hosting. I am glad to see you are considering windows hosting. I am a ASP.NET developer in my fulltime job and a best hosting plan code developer in my freelance time. I am the guy that chooses a programming language based on the hosting plan that is available. If BlueHost offers windows hosting with multiple domain support I would be one of the first people on board. offers a windows package, but their overall control panel is a POS. Hopefully BlueHost can make a great windows hosting package with an equally great control panel. Also, on the windows front, are you thinking about virtual decatied servers as well?

  11. richard says:

    After working years with one of the largest computer companies globally and with Microsoft products I would say don’t do it. I will not host my web sites on IIS. The last hosting company I used started supporting MS had a huge increase in support calls. I believe it drove them to sell out to another company. After that the service and especially support went down hill (to reduce cost India was used) which is why I am now at Blue Host. Do what you know best, focus on an area and be the best at that. When you dilute yourself mediocrity sets in. Jack-of-all-trades, master of none.

    Erich, ALL web hosts go down, once your expectation is adjusted in this area you will be much happier. You will have to wait at least 6 months before you can even have an educated or experienced opinion as to the quality of service bluehost offers. 6.95 per month… hmm.. If you remember back to when you were in school, there is a triad. Good, Fast (performance), and Cheap. You cannot have all three and you must meet a minimum requirement in the one that you cannot have. If you understand this and see the value and the balance bluehost has struck, you will adjust your expectations and have a much better experience. If you can find a better host for the price, get a refund, go, and be happy. I have not found a better value.

  12. Please don’t go with Windows. I’ve tried several hosts over several years, but BlueHost just bowls me over with the amount you offer for the money.

    Naturally Microsoft are trying to tempt you in, but when you’re in the trap – snap! I don’t see how you can avoid your costs going up. Let alone the workload.

    Oh well. I’m a biased Mac user. At least if you do go with Windows, please keep it as a separate, and if necessary more expensive option than Linux.

  13. Toni says:


    Any news about the windows option. While I personally don’t like windows (I use mac all the time) some of my clients are asking for it.



  14. Paul says:

    I will look forward to you supporting windows, as we ae having to leave your excellent company to goto an asp host, as we ae rolling out web 2.0, we will keep an eye out for when you release your windows servers so we can return!



  15. as well as linux? although windows can do as much, it still needs configuring beyond belief and trips over its self.

  16. rap dinle says:

    They use Red Hat Enterprise,

    Yees =)

  17. Büyü says:

    While I personally don’t like windows (I use mac all the time) some of my clients are asking for it.

  18. Jhoy Doe says:

    great post! i still prefer linux though.

  19. Büyü Bozma says:

    great post! i still prefer linux though.

  20. kale kasa says:

    thanks admin thanks admin thanks admin

  21. Windows servers have their own applications and is good if you clients plan on using ASP programming.

  22. paul says:

    very good but linux is good too

  23. Mata Telinga says:

    it’s great for me when i find this post. But, until today still confuse about choosing hosting, wich one better ? windows or linux ?

  24. russell says:

    Well I think Linux is probably more widespread and there are more resources and info for Linux web hosting. I do use some Windows hosting, but Linux is the way to go

  25. Very nice site. And very nice post. Would recommend it to others

Leave a Reply