DirectAdmin rocks! :)
bikegremlin
ModeratorOG
There, I've said it. Sane and sober. 
As a shared/reseller hosting user/customer, I've been reserved towards DirectAdmin.
With a lot of, hopefully constructive, criticism towards it.
Started playing with it, just to learn the ropes in case it becomes prevalent, but it had more than a few downsides compared to cPanel.
Now, I'd say it has matured. Almost a year since I had completely stopped using any cPanel hosting.
These days, upon hearing the news of my current provider being sold/merged/partnered/something, I started migrating websites to a tried&tested "backup" provider, just in case, before I see how the new system runs after the merge and the server/staff changes are done.
DirectAdmin to DirectAdmin migrations are a breeze!
Even as an ordinary shared/reseller hosting user (i.e. low user privileges).
It's just brilliant. Export backup, import it to the new account and it all works out of the box, right away.
Every file, database, .htaccess setting etc.
Without having to bother provider's technical support, wait or similar.
Now, I'm a bit weary of using cPanel hosting in the future, since it takes more time to do manual migrations, even when it's cPanel-to-cPanel.
I consider having backups and being able to move in case of any problems to be of crucial importance.
Hence, in my opinion, this is a huge plus for DirectAdmin.
Hoping to see cPanel pull something similar, or to see some of the highly renowned (and reliable) hosting providers start offering DirectAdmin reseller hosting, in addition, if not instead of cPanel.
P.S.
I understand that a provider can easily do this in cPanel from the WHM, but I can't do it as a customer.
It's a lot better to be able to do this on one's own, when it's most convenient (for live websites with lots of activity).
P.P.S.
For full disclosure, I've started using a cPanel provider, for reliability and reputation reasons, hoping to concentrate on making content, instead of doing migrations.
But it's been a tough call, for the reason discussed in this post.
P.P.P.S.
Even longer drivel in my DirectAdmin control panel review
Detailed info about providers whose services I've used:
BikeGremlin web-hosting reviews
Comments
i really like the API. they did a good job.
lol, that's all.
I like it! We only offer DA now, cpanel was kept for legacy users as long as they need it. We won't be using cp in the future for new clients.
Its become stale and loss any sense of innovation. The only big changes are now the price! I'll eat losses to honor existing agreements but I'll be damned if I continue supporting them further. Oddly enough, we get less support requests from DA which I did not expect at all
Chris on https://hostingforums.net/
By modern standards, their API is awful. I'm currently writing a Go wrapper for it for internal use (it'll be open-source in case anyone else is interested in it), and it's been painful to say the least :P My general complaint is the lack of consistency throughout, particularly where a returned field may have either an empty string, or an object. I understand though, given that DA's API was created prior to the REST standards we're used to today. It's still miles better than other panel APIs. Plus, I believe they're currently in the process of creating a full modern REST API to replace the existing one, which is awesome!
Links | Plexus | Satisfactory Server
I always see glowing praise for DA, and whilst I appreciate it is perhaps the only reasonably costed option around now and it has developed and improved significantly since the enhanced theme days.
I still can't see how anybody could prefer it. From my point of view (albeit poisoned with 15+ years of being a WHM user) I still find everything about DA a little bit 'cheap' and unitiutive. Almost anything I do in DA requires more clicks than it does in cPanel/WHM and
the UI is too dependent on fancy JavaScript tricks that it just slows things down more.
Perhaps a UI style that has all the fancy tricks removed would be the thing that would sway me in to moving over.
Reliability of the provider is what I meant, not the panel.
I've been very sceptical (and critical). Now, it has both cons and pros - I wouldn't say that it's inferior in every possible aspect.
The way backups and restorations are done tips the scale for me.
Haven't ever tried the API so can't comment on that.
Detailed info about providers whose services I've used:
BikeGremlin web-hosting reviews
i am interested in what you think is a good API? any i can check? would very much appreciate your experience on this.
Sure
CloudFlare, DigitalOcean, GitHub all have great APIs and documentation. You'll find most well-known/established companies have great APIs nowadays. The web hosting space is far behind unfortunately; WHMCS' API is awful too.
The issue with DA's is that it doesn't follow modern practices, and is horribly inconsistent. One thing they don't do it make use of HTTP status codes. Typically if your request fails for whatever reason, the code should be 4xx. With DA, it's almost always 200, so you instead have to check for specific "Success" messages which could change at any point.
They also don't make use of HTTP methods most of the time and instead rely on a
actionparameter to determine what you're trying to do with a multi-purpose endpoint. And lastly, their naming and overlapping of endpoints is very confusing to navigate. Ideally, their frontend should be using the same API endpoints throughout as this typically leads to better thought out API design. Unfortunately, they don't, and their endpoints return a lot of unnecessary data a lot of the time; particularly if you're making requests within the admin context.If DA's documentation was better, it wouldn't be quite as bad as there would be less "gotcha"s. I've relied quite heavily on their list of API endpoints from the "Create Login Key" page as this seems to be the only complete list available. Their root API docs have very little information on them, and their versioning page is missing a bunch of endpoints too.
As I mentioned in my previous comment, I'm not bashing DA. It makes sense given when they began working on their current implementation, as most of the modern practices weren't really in-use. And they're working on a complete rework with a full OpenAPI/Swagger spec which is absolutely fantastic.
Links | Plexus | Satisfactory Server
A minor UI-related complaint - hadn't noticed it until I had to (over)work while underslept:
Detailed info about providers whose services I've used:
BikeGremlin web-hosting reviews
I think that's actually better - Delete would indicate removal of files, Remove places into trash folder by default so it's probably a little more fitting just to add my thoughts but it's probably a personal preference thing that will never please everyone!
Chris on https://hostingforums.net/
I fail to see your logic and point.
Though, the same probably goes vice-versa - and the designer(s) apparently share that point of view.
Detailed info about providers whose services I've used:
BikeGremlin web-hosting reviews
Haha yeah, it wouldn't particularly bother me either way in all fairness as I know the intent behind the function regardless of the label- merely adding to the topic!
How was the switch back to cpanel if you don't mind me asking? I feel its stagnated a little IMO but I have been using both for so long I tend to find my way around without thinking too hard
Chris on https://hostingforums.net/
The intent is not a problem, the problem is they look needlessly similarly - visually.
)
Sure, there is a confirmation dialogue, but I think a change to "Delete" would still be a very good idea.
(it seems like opinions on this are divided: I think it should be changed; and everyone else thinks it's fine
Well, the new cPanel "Jupiter" theme is more like "Uranus" if you catch my drift.
)
(this being a written conversation, in a foreign language, I must note that any offence is intended strictly towards the panel's design, not towards any forum members, even the OG ones
WHM version is actually good, better than before.
But the user-level cPanel is awful with "Jupiter."
Fortunately, MDDHosting still offers and allows the use of the "obsolete paper lantern."
With the "obsolete" theme, cPanel is better than DirectAdmin.
The only downside is the backup export and import function.
DirectAdmin is head and shoulders above cPanel on that account, and that's one of the most important things.
So, a major advantage in my book.
Migrations from DA to CP (and vice-versa) are a hassle.
But DA to DA goes much faster and smoother than CP to CP.
At least when we talk about access rights & tools available to reseller hosting customers (i.e. more-less limited).
Detailed info about providers whose services I've used:
BikeGremlin web-hosting reviews
Ahhh that's where I'm misunderstanding you 😁 I didn't spot that!
Chris on https://hostingforums.net/
I haven't taken offense to your back end analysis (lol) so don't worry there! Migrations I can related somewhat - when we stopped offering cpanel due to the regularly changing prices and lack of improvements - we promised to keep existing users on cpanel and just grandfather those plans - something we've maintained btw!
We did offer a free migration and account credit to those wanting to move from cpanel-da which was popular. Essentially explaining the changes to products and the difference in cost for us and people responded quite well to the transparency I feel! Most were happy with DA but there was some issues during migrations that were annoying but overcome quite easily!
I must admit I have yet to migrate anything from DA to cpanel for clients but have done so in testing! And as you say DA to DA seems to be quite easily achieved, I once suggested there may be a group of companies that change things to be a PITA towards migration away from them but the pitchforks came out in defense so I won't repeat that mistake!
Its interesting to get other peoples opinion on these things as we can all become quite bias due to our experience using software making it somewhat easier!
Chris on https://hostingforums.net/
Yes.
From my perspective, cPanel vs DirectAdmin is sort of a strategic decision - because of the migrations hassle.
My philosophy is to always have backups and be ready to move - especially for the "important stuff."
Sometimes things can't be fixed quickly, that's the way it is, and the best solution is to move, even if it's only temporarily.
Of course, I never enjoy moving sites, and prefer stable providers.
So far, my shortlist of 24/7-support providers that have been reliable boils down to HostMantis (now sold) and Veerotech.
Veerotech is cPanel only.
MDDHosting (cPanel only too) looks very promising, but in case of any problems, it's easier to move cPanel to cPanel (Veerotech).
Regarding the 24/7 support:
It's usually nonsense, and you have to wait for Monday, for someone who knows what they're doing to come to work, at least for any "major" problems.
But it puts the ball in the providers' court in case of any client complaints - "I did what's up to me."
I.e. it's better to post a ticket, than rush to a computer (I prefer hiking and cycling on weekends) to migrate websites. Even if the end result in terms of actual website uptime is worse.
Not sure how well I've explained this.
Detailed info about providers whose services I've used:
BikeGremlin web-hosting reviews
No I get the sentiment - Brixly is quite a good choice for uk/us/asia if you haven't yet explored them!
I think we'll be offering a white labelled reseller only service towards the middle of next year, with a few cool perks - I shall post here when it launches. The aim will be to focus on good pricing for web designers/hosts rather than the actual end user as support requirements are typically lower volume but higher urgency - something I think we'd accommodate quite nicely....of course until it does launch I'm merely a man with a dream so I won't discuss the finer details until we're closer to launching it 😛
Chris on https://hostingforums.net/
Brixly have been very good (my Brixly "review").
). Didn't like the idea of doing that manually for dozen(s) websites. Apart from that, Brixly was (is) quite good.
The dealbreaker for me was they couldn't get SSL/TLS automated certificate renewals to work for sites that use Cloudflare's SSL setting put to "Full (strict)" (as it should be
Detailed info about providers whose services I've used:
BikeGremlin web-hosting reviews
Lol, already been there and done it - nice!
That's interesting, I shall experiment with that - I'm not a huge cloudflare fan, I do use the business plan for one site just because I'm too lazy to swap! Maybe one day! Lol
Chris on https://hostingforums.net/
Just wondering was it a DA server, I got 2 vps running DA one production and other dev on one of them DA auto-renewal the cert if the site is using CF the other doesn't, I've not put much effort to debugging or try to fix it the error was No domains pointing to this server to generate the certificate for.
The site was a friends site i host he managed to fix so he could use strict mode without manual renewal, he generated a origin certificate on Cloudflare ui and used for that for ssl on DA it works fine on strict mode since its cloudflare issued ,the disadvantage if you disabled CF proxy its a useless cert since only CF trust it.
Yes - it was DA reseller hosting.
Detailed info about providers whose services I've used:
BikeGremlin web-hosting reviews