I once looked at taking out hosting with the bizarrely-named GoDaddy when setting up a site. I was put right off by their CEO's prominent appearances on the homepage and elsewhere. Perhaps if the giant, misogynistic tit spent less time feeding his predilection for "GoDaddy Girls" and making lengthy videos pontificating on "what it takes to be one", he might have more time to spend making sure his company isn't a complete shambles. And his ear-ring looks daft.
Now, now, he's not just a misogynist. When the Abu Ghraib scandal broke, he opined that the real problem was that we weren't torturing enough brown people, because that's the only language they understand. http://mediagirl.org/node/485
I don't know anything about their hosting. But I have registered domains with them. So far, they have been the best of any registrar I have used: domains are ready as soon as I've paid for them, nameserver requests are processed immediately, etc. Some of their competitors took 20+ hours just to process my domain order. Plus, they are consistently the cheapest.
Their name and their marketing is really something else. I'm not going to pass judgment on it. No doubt there are many people offended by it, but it has been extremely profitable for them.
I recently switched all of my domains from GoDaddy to NameSecure. I have read too many stories about GoDaddy selling off people's domains with insufficient efforts to contact the owner, or giving away private information without much of a fight. NameSecure, on the other hand, actually went to court in order to avoid giving away one of its customers' information.
I have been quite happy with NameSecure so far: reasonable prices and quick service, and the site is much simpler (less flashy) and less annoying in general.
Looks like the problem was something wrong with the Backup module, which was dumping the database to the /tmp directory over and over again, eating up storage.
http://drupal.org/node/313496
Charging customers for data overages is an inexcusable sham. Any respectable hosting company would just apply a space quota to each customer and if quota execeeded then no more data is stored.
Given that both the reporter and GoDaddy acted like fools, it's good that things worked out the way they did. A serious problem in Drupal will definitely get some attention now, consequences of ignoring monitoring and administration duties will be made clearer and more people will know to avoid GoDaddy altogether. Definitely a win for everyone not directly involved.
I love that the domain is "GodAddy" with Addy being a truncation of Address. Then when it came to commercializing they could just shift the capitalization and have a bizarrely named domain, but it was commercially usable.
I use Godaddy for domains, I used to use them for some hosting but the sites were slow and unacceptable in terms of support. I want to move my domains away but it would be a sizable investment to transfer away. So I wait.
Given that they try to market themselves as an easy gateway to get your web address, this is true. However, given how many supplementary products they try and market as you checkout, this isn't surprising. If someone isn't familiar with what you need for your own .com, it's too easy to get sucked in by their checkout process.
I initially used godaddy in 2003, and have watched the quality of their services spiral downward at an alarming rate. I no longer use them, as their services are so incredibly bad that they add negative value to any project that involves them. It is amazing, I never thought a company could be THAT BAD.
