abinidi

A couple of thoughts. First, I actually employ both options, albeit on different domains. For my main domain, I am using cPanel forwarders to forward aliases to my mail gmail.com domain. For a family domain, I am hosting my email with google apps, and have my MX records set to google. I don\'t use Horde or Squirrel Mail at all. I actually like both options for different reasons. Let me break them down. Option 1: Create cPanel forwarders and use a gmail.com e-mail address. I\'m the only person who would use an address on my main domain, as it is named after me. So forwarding to a standard Gmail account is an easy option. When I want throwaway accounts, I either create them as forwarders (aliases) in cPanel, or I use an on-the-fly forwarder from a free service like spamgourmet.com. I have set up my Gmail account to allow me to \"send from\" other addresses. The mail headers make it obvious that the message was sent from my Gmail account. In fact, I\'ve had some people report that they actually see my Gmail address and not my personal domain address when they receive my messages. Apparently this is a \'security feature\' put into place to prevent people from faking the sender information. This works great, and I get all the latest Gmail features (including storage space) as it becomes available to the regular Google customer base. Option 2: Host mail with Google Apps, and modify MX records with TCH. This is a great option for my family domain where I have given accounts to members of my family. Google has some great features, including adding all my site members to each others address books automatically. When I want forwards or group recepients, I use the Manage Domain control to add email lists. Lists can contain one or more people. So I can have the faux-account \'webmaster\' and \'admin\' point to my main account. Then I can create an \'all\' faux-account to e-mail all people with accounts on my domain. This option works really well. Because Google hosts and my MX records just point, all my recipients always see my domain e-mail address; there is no Gmail address associated with the account. Also, Google never deletes these accounts due to inactivity. The drawbacks of this option include: (a): Gmail does not necessarily equal Google Hosted E-mail. For example, Gmail is constantly increasing storage space for users. Right now that is approaching 3 GB of storage. Google hosted e-mail is stuck at 2. Gmail includes a picture feature for displaying a user-selected picture for contacts. Google for your domain doesn\'t include this feature. You can\'t guarantee that all Gmail features will be released simultaneously to Google Apps. They might, but there isn\'t a guarantee. ( Occasionally TCH (3 times in the last 12 months, I think) resets the MX records, and suddenly my mail doesn\'t show up in Google Apps. In order to compensate for this, I\'ve set up some redundancy. I added forwarders in my cPanel so that if the MX records get switched back to TCH, the cPanel forwarders take over and my messages don\'t get lost; they get forwarded to my external gmail.com account. I really like both solutions. Each has its drawback, so figure out what is most important to you, and then pick the solution that works best for you. Hope this review helps. -Paul

I'll probably wait a bit. The WP folks have promised to maintain the 2.0 codebase, so upgrading to 2.1 isn't the only option in order to keep your script current. I'll wait a bit to see how things work. I'll set up a test blog and install my plugins and see if everything works. Then I'll watch the WP forums to see what problems people encounter. When the 2.1 line stabilizes, THEN I'll upgrade.

I doubt anybody in Portland OWNS chains for their car. I live in Utah where the winter weather is generally MUCH more severe than Portland, and there are very vew people I know who own chains for their cars. (I actually do have chains, but that's a different story.)

Bill! Thanks for that post! I literally laughted out loud!

I've never used Dreamweaver to connect to a database. But I know that when I connect using PHP, I have to use username that I gave to the database. When you creatd the database in cPanel, you have to create a user/password and add that user to the database. I'm not sure from your code whether or not you are using yoru cPanel username or your database username. Also, double check to ensure the user has been added to the database. You also have to remember that yoru database username AND your database name are prefixed with your cPanel username, but not your password. So let's say your cPanel username is johndoe, and you created a database named customer. You created a database user called jonny with a password connect. When you connect to the database, your DB name is johndoe_customer. The database user is johndoe_jonny. The database password is connect. I hope this helps.

I download video from the iTunes store frequently. I haven't actually purchased a television progam yet, because there aren't any that I'm interested in (not really a TV guy...), but I love iTunes. It is 100% legal and works great. And its easy.

If Just-Rob's suggestion doesn't help for you, then when you post back, give us some more information about what you are trying to accomplish, and what the code is you are using to do it. (Just be careful not to include your cPanel username, which is part of the path for connecting to your database.)

Yes, well, sorry I didn't know you were a long-time user. You can see how I made an assumption based on your not being logged in... Yes, I have indeed "checked out" multiple other hosting solutions. In fact, not long after I joined the TCH customer family, I had a group of acquaintences who wanted to start their own webhosting business. I worked with them for about six months doing research, checking out the space, and setting up a few clients. After six months I left the company, because I realized that I didn't believe enough in them to switch my hosting from TCH. Even before that, I hosted my website with a number of different webhosts -- some better than others. While I haven't checked out every web host out there (obviously), I'd say I've checked out enough that I can make my prior claim without it being pure speculation, though I admit that I'm sure there are some great webhosts out there that I just haven't found yet. After I found TCH I quit looking. I understand your agrument that bandwith and add-on domains are not necessarily corrolated. I might have five domains that have very low traffic, so they might be able to share a bunch of space and bandwidth and not cause anybody else problems. However, I'd say that in many cases, allowing tons of add-on domains does indeed affect the server's processor, and affect the server's ability to serve other clients on that server. Let's take a hypothetical server. I'm making these numbers up. Let's say that a hosting company has a server with 100 accounts. We'll use round numbers to keep things simple. If the hosting company does not allow add-on domains, then there are only 100 URLs pointing to the server. The processor only has to handle requests for 100 websites. What if the hosting company allows 10 add-on domains? Then the potential jumps to 1000 websites on the same server with the same hardware. Now the server has to handle requests for a thousand sites. Some of these sites may not be processor heavy or intensive, but some of them may be. Overall quality for all users on that server declines because the server gets overloaded. Your comaprison comapny allowed 100 add-on domains. That means that potentially this hypothetical server could be hosting 10,000 separate sites.... using the same hardware. With 10,000 sites sucking processor time and bandwith, you can see how the server isn't meeting the needs of the individual account holders as it would if add-on domains were not allowed. Which server do you want to be on? The server that is trying to meet the needs of 10,000 websites for 100 account users? Or the server that is trying to meet the needs of 100 websites for 100 account users? Is my example extreme? Yes. I recognize that not all users will max out the number of add-on domains that are allowed. But when you open the door, the potential exists. TCH recognizes this and keeps the rest of us with good service by not compromising the servers with tons of add-on domains. And those sites that claim you can use unlimited bandwidth? See what happens when your site gets /.ed or digged. They aren't really offering unlimited bandwidth. Bandwidth isn't free. In the end, you may not believe us. Ok. Good luck finding out on your own. But I stand by my assertion that TCH does the rest of their clients a favor by not allowing add-on domains as a rule. Customer service is better and the servers run better. Simiple math shows the potential disaster of opening this particular can of worms. As for the SPAM issue, I totall disagree with your premise. The potential for abuse is absolutley a reason for disallowing something. The potential for abuse is the reason you need a prescription to purchase many drugs. Other drugs are outright banned in many countries. It's the reason you need a license to drive an automobile, and the reason you need a permit to conceal/cary a handgun. TCH recognizes that there are ways that spammers function. They try to protect legitimate clients by disallowing behaviors common to spammers. If another hosting company wants to provide a spammer-friendly environment, horay for them. Just keep the spammers off MY server, which is what TCH is trying to do. Thank you TCH for your continued efforts to keep spammers off my servers. There are a number of scripts that aren't allowed on TCH servers. Why? Becasue they compromise the server in a way that negatively affects other TCH customers. As a service provider, TCH has the right (and the responsibility to their other clients) to enforce controls on their property (in this case, the servers). I, for one, am greatful that they are doing it. It is what keeps my service runnign so well, and a reason why I'm such a staunch defender of the folks who run this business. Disclaimer: I'm not affiliated in TCH with any way. I'm just a happy customer. I speak my opinions only and I don't speak for any other entity.

Disclaimer: I'm a WordPress user. I maintain 4 WP-powered sites. I'd be curious to know in what regards you find MT superior to WP as a blogging platform. I've never used MT, and am genuinely curious.

A somewhat biased site to post a credible comparison, don't you think? Still interesting, however.

Hi Itai, Welcome to the forums. Indeed, TCH does not offer multiple domains on a single account, and while it would be cheaper for me if they did, I understand why they don't. TCH is committed to providing you (and other customers that share your server) with high quality, fast hosting. Webhosts that offer hundreds of add-on domains, or that offer unlimited bandwidth don't have (1) the quality servers that TCH provides, (2) the speed that TCH servers provide, (3) the uptime that TCH provides. Those servers are most often oversold and under supported. It is simply a matter of economics. There is more load on those servers, and they don't have the revenue to support them. Additionally, allowing add-on domains can encourage SPAM senders or scammers to set up shop on servers. Since TCH doesn't allow it, spammers stay away, and TCH servers stay off the blacklists. TCH is really protecting you and other clients on the servers by not allowing any one user to overload the servers, taking away bandwith and processing time that you are paying your share for. So, yeah, my pocketbook says add-on domains would be nifty. My brain, however, understands (and agrees with) TCH's policy. Have a great day. Hope to see you around the forums.

Good news, TCH! Thanks! Sounds like a home run!!

Thanks. I appreciate your help. Maybe the if function exists option won't work because maybe it isn't a standard function. I'm kind of glad to know it isn't just me. Because I've been banging my head on the wall over this one all day. At least I didn't miss something obvious. I wonder how the Plugins page knows that the plugin is active? I wonder if I could copy that little bit of code....

Ok. He hasn't been active on the forums (meaning clicked a link on the forums) for over a half-hour. So maybe he has left the building. Darn!

It doesn't kill the page, but it replaces the post title with the word "-image-" followed by the post's title. And it doesn't appear in the H2 style, as it should. It just appears as plain text. That is why I hoped to include an if condition for if the plugin is active and an else condition for if the plugin is not active. -Paul

LOL. I might believe you, but his icon still shows him as being active in the forums. Is he browsing from his blackberry?

Thanks for the help, Bruce. Unfortunately, however, that is a generic WP function, and it is used regardless of whether or not the Image Headlines plugin is enabled. Here is my code block: ><?php if (function_exists('FUNCTION_NAME')) { ?> <h2 id="post-<?php the_ID(); ?>"><?php the_title('-image-'); ?><span style="display:none"><?php the_title(); ?></span></h2> <?php } else {?> <h2 id="post-<?php the_ID(); ?>"><?php the_title(); ?></h2> <?php } ?> So the function the_title() is active in both cases. I'm looking for the function that WordPress uses to know that the Image Headlines plugin is actually active. There must be some way, because when you go to the plugin's page, the ImageHeadlines line is green, along with the other active plugins. I just wonder what the function name is that shows it is active. Does that make sense?

I subscribed to that other thread with immediate e-mail notifications, in hopes that if I'm not browsing the forum at the time it is posted I'll at least get an e-mail letting me know. Just a thought....

I have a feeling it is going to be a major server announcement. And I wonder if it will be posted in the locked thread over in that area?!?!

I have the image-headlines plugin on my TCH-hosted WP site (www.paulpehrson.com), and I'm trying to package my theme for use by other people. I want to leave in the code that runs the image-headlines plugin, so I"m trying to insert some if/then logic in the pages. WP includes the if function exists option shown below (replace the FUNCTION_NAME variable with the function's name): ><?php if (function_exists('FUNCTION_NAME')) { ?> Ok. So if the plugin author doesn't tell you, and their support forums are closed, how do you determine what the function name is that you need to check for in order to see if the plugin is enabled? FYI, I'm using WP 2.0.6, and the plugin is Headline Images v. 2.7. Their blog is http://www.coldforged.org/image-headlines-plugin-for-wordpress-15/

Only 12 more hours (if you are on North America's west coast!! [which, come to think of it, I'm not])

Yes, welcome to the forums and to the TCH family! I'm glad you've had a good experience here. Glad to see you are using the forums. They are very helpful, for hosting-related questions and all sorts of other questions you might have. Hope to see you around the forums.

Every time I see a new post in this thread, I get all excited. Then I realized that Bill will probably start a new thread with the biggest announcement ever to hit the TCH forums. So now I have to watch Bill's user profile to see what he's working on (in what forum, or writing a message, or whatever....)

Thanks Thomas. I updated 4 blogs in about 15 minutes. I wish all web programs were as easy to upgrade as WordPress is!! Wordpress 2.1 will be out soon! That should be fun.

In my case, I decided I wasn't interested in Google Images indexing my site for images, so I added a robots.txt file that bans the Google Image search engine. The Google Image bot is a separate bot from the regular Google bot, so you can prevent Google Images from indexing your content, while still allowing Google (normal text) to index your content. This won't solve your current problem, but might help you keep your images private in the future. Of course, this supposes that the bots will obey the robots.txt file (which Google does), so you will keep regular searchers away. It doesn't help with rogue bots, however.