SSL is still more expensive, though. For most small content websites (< 500-1000 visitors a day), a shared hosting is sufficient with costs of maybe around 100 USD/year. For SSL, you usually need a more expensive hosting, you have to buy a certificate (OK, available for less than 10 USD if you don't care about it's quality but need mainly browser support without an ugly warning window) and most hosters allow SSL only for one domain in a hosting.
Example:
Shared hosting with 4 WordPress blogs, SSL is active but only to access the control panel since the hoster allows SSL only for one domain. Costs incl. a cheap SSL certificate: 110 USD/year.
All 4 WordPress blogs with SSL, i.e., 4 shared hostings plus 4 cheap SSL certificates: 440 USD/year.
(And caching with a Wordpress plugin is probably no longer possible …)
https://www.startssl.com/?app=1
You also don't need "expensive" hosting, it just needs to support SSL which is free from a technical perspective. You no longer need a dedicated IP either.
A cert with a larger key is better than one with a smaller key, but other than that, what's the "quality" of a SSL certificate?
Galopping gargoyles, where do you host that shared costs you $100? A small VPS costs half.
$29.88/year.
"Base certificate costs $165.00 for three domains"
"After the third domain, each additional domain costs just $45.00"
The multidomain cert supports up to 100 domains, but the cost is $29.88/year for the first 3 included, plus an additional $12.88/year for each additional domain.
Under this price structure, you could have 100 domains covered with one certificate, but it would cost you $1,279.24 per year for that single certificate.
Nobody said otherwise.
3 domains at $30/year is $10/year/domain which is no different than buying individual certs.
The problem was that shared hosting plans didn't support multiple certs, forcing people with a few sites to purchase a plan for each. The multidomain cert solves this problem.
SNI works fine, but when it doesn't it fails horribly. Apache defaults to the first vhost on an IP which can result in non-SNI clients being redirected to the wrong site.
As for XP/IE7 usage, I have a client in an aerospace related industry with most of their customers still on XP/IE7.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication#Browsers...
It is documented, and all you have to do is install additional packages to enable it, but still, that's not automatic.
Not anymore, unless you need to support antiquities like IE7 on Windows XP or some ancient Java-based software. SNI works just fine in other cases.