3 ms·

> Of course you can choose to put your website on AWS and svck on the bolls of Jeff a little. But you don't have to! And that's what all kinds of young devs jus

> Of course you can choose to put your website on AWS and svck on the bolls of Jeff a little. But you don't have to! And that's what all kinds of young devs just miss. Where are you hosting your websites?

mysterydip 5y ago
Can't speak for OP, but mine are on vultr. There's a whole industry of web hosting, virtual private servers, or colocation facilities to choose from.
vgel 5y ago
Not OP, but Linode. Used to be on their $10 a month VPS, downgraded when they added the $5 a month one. I think they have some fancy Kube stuff now but I just have a makefile that rsyncs a directory to my VPS and nginx picks it up. Honestly even the $5 VPS is more power than I need for static files, but it's nice to have the option to throw up a flask app or run some web-scraping scripts overnight or something. Admittedly it's behind Cloudflare because DDOS skiddies, but I think the CF lock-in isn't much if you're not using workers or anything proprietary to them. Admittedly it does suck for people with really privacy-customized browsers or using Tor, but idk a better solution unfortunately.
- FractalHQ 5y ago
  But personal-website-tier static file hosting is free these days!
  - hellbannedguy 5y ago
rambambram 5y ago
It's called webhosting at a hosting provider. ;) It works for me like this since the 90's. Here in Europe there are literally hundreds or thousands of webhosts. Some pricier, some faster, some cheaper. I host some websites at Antagonist in The Netherlands. But I'm strongly considering moving, although they are by far the fastest and most reliable party I've seen. Why? Because they - just like a lot of other European webhosts the last years - are now part of some vague sh1tshow called Group.one or something. I don't know what this organisation is up to, but I don't trust it for a second. I guess they are trying to become some European version of AWS or something. Data grabbers, probably. Every sincere webhost that became part of their 'network' (they sell it like this, but it's just a merger/acquisition) uses stupid wording in their press releases, customers are not kept up to date about these important changes (only after the fact, of course) and they all of a sudden are now offering 'cloud storage' like it's Dropbox. This was a bigger reply then I intended. But thanks for yours!
- post-it 5y ago
  Smaller web hosts tend to use AWS on the backend. Sometimes they use Azure or OVH, but they rarely have their own datacentre.
hungryforcodes 5y ago
Contobo, Digital Ocean just to name two.
Bellamy 5y ago
Scaleway

mysterydip 5y ago

Can't speak for OP, but mine are on vultr. There's a whole industry of web hosting, virtual private servers, or colocation facilities to choose from.

vgel 5y ago

Not OP, but Linode. Used to be on their $10 a month VPS, downgraded when they added the $5 a month one. I think they have some fancy Kube stuff now but I just have a makefile that rsyncs a directory to my VPS and nginx picks it up. Honestly even the $5 VPS is more power than I need for static files, but it's nice to have the option to throw up a flask app or run some web-scraping scripts overnight or something. Admittedly it's behind Cloudflare because DDOS skiddies, but I think the CF lock-in isn't much if you're not using workers or anything proprietary to them. Admittedly it does suck for people with really privacy-customized browsers or using Tor, but idk a better solution unfortunately.

FractalHQ 5y ago
But personal-website-tier static file hosting is free these days!
- hellbannedguy 5y ago

rambambram 5y ago

It's called webhosting at a hosting provider. ;) It works for me like this since the 90's. Here in Europe there are literally hundreds or thousands of webhosts. Some pricier, some faster, some cheaper. I host some websites at Antagonist in The Netherlands. But I'm strongly considering moving, although they are by far the fastest and most reliable party I've seen. Why? Because they - just like a lot of other European webhosts the last years - are now part of some vague sh1tshow called Group.one or something. I don't know what this organisation is up to, but I don't trust it for a second. I guess they are trying to become some European version of AWS or something. Data grabbers, probably. Every sincere webhost that became part of their 'network' (they sell it like this, but it's just a merger/acquisition) uses stupid wording in their press releases, customers are not kept up to date about these important changes (only after the fact, of course) and they all of a sudden are now offering 'cloud storage' like it's Dropbox. This was a bigger reply then I intended. But thanks for yours!

post-it 5y ago
Smaller web hosts tend to use AWS on the backend. Sometimes they use Azure or OVH, but they rarely have their own datacentre.

hungryforcodes 5y ago

Contobo, Digital Ocean just to name two.

Bellamy 5y ago

Scaleway