I am sure that the company

DavidVilia — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 07:41:35 +0000

I am sure that the company which is able to pass on the saving to you is webhostgiant.com. Besides, I have heard a lot of positive feedbacks about it. You will make productive decision if you choose this one. Windows hosting will be better, but it requires a bit more money. If your budget suits it, don't hesitate.

I think that dealing with

Dangerous.Script — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:59:13 +0000

I think that dealing with those companies will be profitable - they are stable and experienced. However, I alway do comparison and advise you to do the same. Comparable prices and deals for shared hosting are there at hqhost.net - the company is also quite stable and experienced. Take a look, that might be useful for you./

JeevesBond wrote: As

Vicerus — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:39:15 +0000

JeevesBond wrote:

As they're both cheap, I wouldn't expect anything wonderful from either of them. Also, since they are so cheap, you're not going to be losing much if one of them turns out to suck. Make sure you keep a backup of your data however!

It can never be stressed to highly enough that nowadays, cheap web hosting plans do not necessarily mean poor quality and service. Check on the disk space allocation, bandwidth, security features, traffic flow, e-mail storage capacity, and the kind of multiple domain accounts.
To my mind, ayksolutions.com would be nice choice as this company has nice reputation in the webhosting services market and offers good shared hosting plans.

I don't have enpough

Musson — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:23:11 +0000

I don't have enpough information about these companies, at least about their shatred deals, but I have someinfo of reliable companies I trust - look up Ahosting.biz - this company has great rates for shared hosting and also theu have pretty long experience in this business filed. I believe there is somethiong that might interest you.

I think that

Phillip — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:55:17 +0000

I think that webhostgiant.com will be nice choice. It has comparison table and you will see the main difference. I decided to start with Linux web hosting because it is a bit cheaper and easy to operate with, but I will not be able to host windows applications on its platform. What do you think, maybe Windows hosting is better to buy?

I have heard of

decibel.places — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:18:00 +0000

I have heard of webhostgiant

My theory about budget shared hosting companies:

They upgrade and begin to provide exceptional service
Many customers sign up for accounts, because of the good reputation
The servers get too crowded, service becomes spotty, some customers leave
At a certain customer attrition ratio, they reinvest in hardware
Rinse and repeat

So if you are "picky" about your hosting, be prepared to move regularly for cheap hosting, or pay more for sustainable hosting.

@ OP, does any of these

tummy — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 15:04:21 +0000

@ OP, does any of these provide discounts or a trial period?

If I were you, I would

Solommon — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 07:43:41 +0000

If I were you, I would choose webhostgiant.com because I have had a good run with this company. My sites have never had any downtime and I was not disappointed with this honest and stable company.

Well, they both look pretty

JeevesBond — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:04:26 +0000

Well, they both look pretty well established, and both have addresses, but only AYK has a phone number listed.