4 ms·

For a static site that one can drag-and-drop to, I'd just use S3's new 'website' bucket configuration with CyberDuck as the S3 client (folder sync or drag-and-d

For a static site that one can drag-and-drop to, I'd just use S3's new 'website' bucket configuration with CyberDuck as the S3 client (folder sync or drag-and-drop files).

JonnieCache 16y ago
This would be ideal if only cyberduck didn't eat so much RAM. I prefer Interarchy. http://nolobe.com/interarchy/ http://nolobe.com/interarchy/
- calloc 16y ago
  Cyberduck is free, this piece of software isn't.
  - protomyth 16y ago
    Some people feel that paying money for something that works better for them or causes less problems is worth it.
    - bigfudge 16y ago
      Yes, but if you're going to pay for an sftp client then Transmit is far superior. Mounts ssh volumes etc.
      - protomyth 16y ago
        Oh, I wasn't going on about that specific client (I am also really happy with Transmit) just about the thought that people need to be warned about paid software.
hopeless 16y ago
I'm currently building a site generator for photoblogs hosting directly on S3. Seems like good performance, cheap hosting and no more worries about Wordpress
- VB6_Foreverr 16y ago
  Sorry for going off tangent but why would you worry about wordpress?
  - hopeless 16y ago
    It's always being hacked/targeted, requires constant updating, needs plugins for some functionality, and these may throw a hissy fit when you perform one of the many essential updates. Basically it's a general tool and a victim of its own success. I'm going to built something that fits my exact needs and produces a static site hosted on S3.