31–40 of 92 posts
No upselling, no adverts at all.
Sweet REST API.
Account sharing so multiple users can manage domains.
There's a Ruby gem so you can register from the command line.
They also have an iPhone app.
https://dnsimple.com/r/4f322c139863f6
(disclosure: that's a referral URL that gives me and the person who uses it a free month of service, but I do love DNSimple)
Considering you can easily change the default nameserver settings, I don't see how this is an issue. Really, your just trying to imagine problems. Maybe you'd be so kind as to direct our attention to when this specific issue has caused problems for Name.com customers in the past?
At least with domain parking companies, you get the profit, name.com is plain old screwing you over.
My hands down favorite is Fabulous.com right now. Caveat is they cater to large portfolios and certain extensions (com/net/org/info). They don't screw you over on anything though. Even if your names expire and someone buys it through drop process, you get a cut of the sale. They don't keep any domains for themselves. Prices (for portfolio holders, retail side is as expensive as Netsol/register.com) are barely above cost.
Since Fabulous isn't available for most of you (unless you want to pay retail). I would recommend NameCheap.
I've used name.com for many years and have always been satisfied with their service. The advertising the author is complaining about only shows up if you do not configure the DNS records or name servers after buying the domain. Usually I spend 30 seconds setting this up as soon as I buy the domain, so the advertising doesn't even cross my mind. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this practice was pretty standard…
I configured the DNS immediately. However, one thing I'm not willing to do is set up a wildcard A record for my hosted zone when the request should be returning an nxdomain instead. There is no way in name.com's setting to enable that. On an ethical level this is closer to typo-squatting, something that there are rules against.
Why not? I'm being earnest here, I'm a name.com customer and I do have such a wildcard record. Are you building a network service that relies on nonexistent subdomains being resolved at the DNS level (rather than a 404 page or a redirect to a subdomain that does exist)? Or is it more of a philosophical thing?
I use name.com for quite a few domains. They have a very convenient way to do bulk changes, so you can, for example, select 50 domains at once, and tell name.com to change all of them to your name servers. They email you a few minutes later when they've done it. I always just change them to linode as soon as I buy a domain. I don't begrudge them this income stream from people who buy domains but don't do anything wit…
There are 2 main issues I have with this:
1. It's not "unused domains" that get this treatment. It's any domain that uses their DNS. I had several active sites and was shocked to find that blahblahblah.mydomain.com pointed to one of their spam pages.
2. If you went to spammysubdomain.realcompany.com and found a spam page, who would you think was responsible for it, realcompany.com or realcompany.com's registrar? I'm guessing almost everyone would think that the company themselves did it. By name.com doing this for active domains, they risk damaging the domain holder's reputation, for anyone who happens to stumble on to one of the spammy subdomains.
I'll stick with Name.com for all my non-COM/ORG/NET tld's.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I configured the DNS immediately. However, one thing I'm not willing to do is set up a wildcard A record for my hosted zone when the request should be returning an nxdomain instead. There is no way in name.com's setting to enable that. On an ethical level this is closer to typo-squatting, something that there are rules against.
> One thing I'm not willing to do is set up a wildcard A record Why not? I'm being earnest here, I'm a name.com customer and I do have such a wildcard record. Are you building a network service that relies on nonexistent subdomains being resolved at the DNS level (rather than a 404 page or a redirect to a subdomain that does exist)? Or is it more of a philosophical thing?
2. I'm in the process of setting up a self-assembling system that will need to be environment aware (public, staging, dev). If I redirect everything to a single A record I actually have to perform logic on my end. A failed request will instead mean to simply move to the next in the list. (Or that is how I am scheming for it to work anyway, not being built yet I don't know how it will turn out.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, this isn't just if you don't setup DNS records for your domain name. If you configure some subdomains with name.com, then all other subdomains for that domain go to a parked page. For example, my wife's website is jesleephotos.com. The subdomains store and www (along with some others that I don't wish to advertise :) go to the correct destination. The subdomain stuff, x, random, mail, etc all go to parked d…
So, don't use name.com's name servers if you don't like what they are offering?