4 ms·
The order seems arbitrary, why not put the best options first? If I were building a static website in 2020, I would expect my provider to not only host the sta
by styfle 6y ago
The order seems arbitrary, why not put the best options first?
If I were building a static website in 2020, I would expect my provider to not only host the static files, but build from source when I `git push`. That narrows down the list to 5 so I would put those at the top.
Second, I would expect the products that don't come with static hosting out of the box to be at the bottom of the list.
For example, number 4 says "Heroku is free for non-commercial apps. It doesn’t offer hosting for static websites out-of-the-box but need some hacky tricks".
Disclaimer: I work for Vercel, one of the static hosts in this list :)
- robjan 6y agoIt seems like primarily an affiliate site so not sure how well the article has been researched.
- kevincox 6y agoFWIW I don't want them to build my source. If your job is to serve my files just serve them. All of these CI+CDN startups have some build environment that is hopefully good enough but is eventually going to be lacking an important program or library. I much prefer using a dedicated CI solution for CI and a dedicated CDN solution for the CDN. It's not like the integration is hard. Just tar up some files or rsync and send them to the CDN.