My sites were not in the same 1and1 account, but they were in 4 different shared packages. but still I kept wpthemes.info and wpthemepark.com[both high traffic sites] in one package before, that was the issue.

I tried the dedicated server for a couple of days, but it is not easy to manage, I had to learn a lot about PLESK and other softwares and they don’t have FrontPage Server Extensions on their dedicated server plan, which makes it hard for me to keep FTP-ing. so I just bought additional shared packages and moved my sites to different packages.
Everything looks good so far, but I am still looking for a better hosting plan, where I get the ease of the shared hosting and the power of dedicated server.

Let me know if you have any suggestions.

Shared hosting accounts often have significantly larger theoretical capacity than their virtual or dedicated cousins. But the difference between the two has nothing to do with simple data transfer or disk space numbers. The difference is in the amount of traffic they can cope with, or more to the point, the amount of the CPU you are using. If you are using 50% of the CPU’s processor time you WILL have your site shut down, regardless of how little data transfer or disk space you use. Virtual server plans generally have massively higher CPU usage tolerances and with dedicated servers you can run them at full pelt ALL the time and you will never be shut down (unless you hit your data transfer cap that is). Most shared plans have a proviso somewhere in the contract to cover this issue.

Sadish’s sites are very impressive. If they’re all hosted off the same 1and1 account then I’m not surprised he’s had to move to a bigger plan as they’re likely receiving a significant amount of traffic. Personally I’ve never had any trouble on a shared hosting plan, but I doubt my sites get anywhere near the traffic that Sadish’s do.

They almost had me convinced that my site, which is in fact relatively small, was too large, with too many links — which meant it loaded too slow, and brought too much traffic for the shared server. Bull. The fact is they were cramming 478 sites on a server that couldn’t handle it.

I went back to my siteground sales pitch — the one that said I had unlimited space and capacity — and questioned them again. They then tried to tell me it was the TYPE of blog I had, e.g. WP. I pointed out that they are listed in WP’s top ten hosts. I then found several other WP sites, much larger and more popular than mine, hosted by them. NONE of them were on a dedicated server. I wrote Siteground with this info, and told them I didn’t appreciate that in order to sell their dedicated servers, they had disabled my site.

It’s a sales pitch. That’s what it boils down to. A way to extract more $ from sites with traffic. And I don’t know about 1&1, but if you look at the contract for a virtual server, it actually comes with LESS space than the shared server.

Just thought I’d share my experience. I didn’t buy it. My site runs fine now.

I think they should have at least sent you a warning or tried to get in touch with you about it before bringing your sites down. I understand that from their perspective, if your websites are putting too much strain on the server, they need take measures so that other paying customers don’t get affected by the traffic your websites get. However, a good host will try to deal with the situation in a way that neither you or other customers (or them, for that matter) end up with the weaker side of the rope or get harmed in any way. So sending you an email would have been a much better approach. I would say change to a more reliable host.

I also find it ridiculous that your host would make such a move without first informing you. My only recommendation would be that you consider hosting those sites else where. I’ve had very good experiences with both http://www.lunarpages.com and http://www.insiderhosting.com (and while I’m currently a client of both, I’m not looking for “referral bonuses”, they’re just good hosts).

Thanks.