Shared Hosting vs. VPS Hosting?

[Mjlivera]

I'm using a shared hosting package for my blog but i heard about VPS hosting, it will improve speed and resource when i change to vps hosting?
What is the difference between shared hosting and vps hosting? any one gives me the answers?

 

[ElixantTechnology]

Both are considered to be shared hosting, as with a VPS there may be more websites on said server than there is on a typical shared server. VPS gives you more control over the software that you are utilizing to power any given website, as you have access to control it at the operating system level. Unless you have a great deal of experience with managing said platform, it would be recommended to just stick with Shared Hosting. From the rigth company, Shared Hosting can be extremely powerful and reliable. It's when you start going to companies like Hostgator and such that oversell the servers like no tomorrow that you start noticing issues.

 

[mido]

You can also go with managed VPS. Then they will take care of your hosting for you and installing everything you want to be installed. They will also monitor your services and optimize them when needed. It is a bit more expensive but IMO worth it.

 

[web-project]

VPS will give freedom of software you can use on the server, the resources are reserved for your VPS account, example: you can have nginx instead of Apache, php 5.6 instead of default 5.4.

 

[digitalConnect]

vps hosting is actually between share hosting & dedicated server, if your website load is high then it recommended to shift for vps hosting, may I know how many websites & what your current load is ? including monthly bandwidth, disk space, etc.

 

[HostNurse]

Shared web hosting is good for websites that do not consume a lot of resources (disk space, bandwidth, ram, etc). A virtual private server "VPS" in the other hand gives you more resources and control, but it is much more expensive.

If your website is newly developed and does not require a lot of resources, then it would be wise to start with shared hosting solution, as you can upgrade later to a virtual private server or dedicated server if needed.

 

[MrRapidHost]

IT depends on how much resources you are using, if the resources your using doesn't require VPS it's better to stick with shared hosting for the meantime.

 

[MightWeb]

It will highly depend - there are a lot of people who will push in the direction of VPS as soon as your site grows the slightest following, which is often not neccessary. A VPS is a good step up from regular shared web hosting in the following circumstances:

A) When you need plugins, services or applications that your hosting provider is unwilling to install for the entire environment.
B) If your website is getting very resource-heavy, to a point where it is affecting the rest of the shared environment.
C) When you wish to manage the environment yourself, instead of being on an already managed environment.

I cannot think of more scenarios, honestly. There are many shared web hosting plans that will offer pretty much anything else.

 

[vietnamtravel]

I love using Share Hosting, because VPS and Dedicated Server is very difficult to manage. maybe, I have a little knowledge in manage server and VPS.

 

[RDO Servers]

Moving to a VPS will not always speed up a site! If your site is small or has poorly written/optimized code, a VPS won't magically fix it.