Slashdot Mirror


Webhosting For A Large Art Project?

First time accepted submitter heleneleh writes "I'm in a class at school on Electronic Writing and for my final project I'm trying to upload the entire contents of my computer to a webserver that will preserve the directory structure (I plan on using rsync so that it is continually updated as my files change). I need about 500 GB of space, and I'm willing to spend some money, so I was hoping Slashdot could suggest a reliable hosting service for that type of project. Traffic shouldn't be too high, but the storage space and ssh access are key. If there's another way to do this, I'd love to know about it." I've noticed a lot of VPS providers charge almost nothing for processor time and RAM, but disk is still pretty expensive.

137 comments

  1. Dreamhost by epdp14 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I use dream host... "unlimited space and traffic" they really mean don't go crazy and try to host a google.com mirror off of it. Its pretty cheap, I pay $8 a month. You can run cron jobs, mysql databases, etc. I've been happy with it. I know it is karma/referral whoring but you can use my referral code and get a free domain registration: FOLLOWTHEHORIZON (if you already have a domain just use DREAMBUCKS for $50 off your first year). http://www.dreamhost.com/r.cgi?303747

    1. Re:Dreamhost by InsightIn140Bytes · · Score: 1

      I wanted to come pitch in with my datacenter providers, but seems like he didn't need such. However, I still suggest you try FDCServers, if you have any kind of need for traffic for your art projects. If not, there are multiple cloud backup providers which should suit your need.

    2. Re:Dreamhost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my experience, cloud backup providers don't tend to provide block level storage compatible with rsync and similar tools. Which were you going to suggest?

    3. Re:Dreamhost by morari · · Score: 3, Informative

      Dreamhost is great! I've been using them for years to host about a dozen different sites. Nothing [i]quite[/i] as big as what the posters is looking for, but they do claim "unlimited space and traffic". If nothing else, their tech support is ridiculously amazing. When you contact them, you actually get someone that you can understand and that knows exactly what they're doing... even in some of the obtuse situations I've put them in. :)

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    4. Re:Dreamhost by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm probably pushing 1TB of photos on DreamHost. They're maybe 98% uptime but for something like I use it for it really doesn't matter. For what I pay it's great.

      Plus one of their employees wrote Ceph. (A FOSS distributed file system).

    5. Re:Dreamhost by epdp14 · · Score: 2

      I have around 1.5TB of photos and home movies on DH as a web-backup and to share with family without having to sign the rights over to facebook.

    6. Re:Dreamhost by Stuarticus · · Score: 2

      I used Dreamhost for something similar to the requesters needs, but was informed that the 500GB did not include the storage of any "media"files and had to move to another provider at pretty short notice. Would not recommend!

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    7. Re:Dreamhost by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Why not just install Apache, and expose the contents of your computer to the world directly, instead of pushing it to external servers?

      If your ISP gives you grief about a server on your account (I hear that some do)....switch to a business account....it isn't that much more and you can run all the servers you want, no caps, no extra charges. Mines only about $69/mo with Cox Business cable.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    8. Re:Dreamhost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dreamhost is not a backup or file archival service.

      if you've got your whole library of photos on public-facing, public-accessible web pages, great..

      but if not.... you could lose the whole thing as your use of their service would be a violation of their aup.

    9. Re:Dreamhost by dreemernj · · Score: 3, Informative

      without having to sign the rights over to facebook.

      And this way you can do crazy things like require a person authenticate themselves before they can see the picture vs someplace like Facebook where every picture is publicly accessible.

      --
      1 (short ton / firkin) = 89.1432354 slugs / keg
    10. Re:Dreamhost by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      Which reminds me. On top of your 'unlimited' web serving data, they also toss in 50GB that you CAN use to back up anything.

      Yes I know their TOC.

    11. Re:Dreamhost by Luckyo · · Score: 2

      Dreamhost is cheap, but reliability and speed are not that good. We have a club that hosts its site, smallish but actively used database that fetches content from another database hourly and member email on it. During last year we had several unannounced short site outages, one mail outage that ended up losing day worth of mail randomly (small amount of mail went through, rest got lost) and one maintenance that they announced only a couple of hours before actual maintenance.

      There is also an issue of speed, they do not seem to mirror outside US and their speeds to Europe are... well, bad. Takes up to ten seconds to load a text page with php script fetching content from DB (into a table). Guy who has full write access to DB for pushing some changes to it has to often wait really REALLY long for database to update his changes. I've seen up to 30 seconds for change to a single value this autumn, pretty much not usable, although that was partially script's fault for writing more then that value every time afaik,but still inexcusably slow.

      It's cheap, but you get what you pay for. Considering that we don't really need reliability that bad, and beside the email loss that one time and slowness being occasionally annoying, it's a functioning system for most of us.

    12. Re:Dreamhost by Shifty0x88 · · Score: 2

      I'm with you cayenne8! Why pay for something that you may not need to pay for.

      Also install DynDns on the server so you can always go to you server without remembering your ip address( God when I found this service I was ecstatic, no more remember IP Addresses!!!).

      If you are unfamiliar with DynDns it just makes a Dns record for you on their server so when you point your ssh client or browser to yourWebServer.dyndns.org it resolves to your public ip address ex: 170.99.99.123 or whatever you are so you can access your files.

      Plus is you use apache you can create a sweet web interface to your server and amaze all of your friends!

    13. Re:Dreamhost by quintin3265 · · Score: 1

      Upload bandwidth is limited. I have a business account at $60/month that provides 2 megabits per second. That's $17 more than the residential service, but you could pay $9.95 and get a webserver that has a connection with 100Mbps of upload bandwidth. If you have 500GB of files to transfer, and you host them on a 2Mbps connection, it would take a month to upload all of the files to even one visitor - and your entire connection will be saturated all the time while you provide poor download speeds to whoever is accessing the server.

    14. Re:Dreamhost by SausageOfDoom · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The obvious corollary is that it will take a month to upload all of the files to the server anyway.

      Am I missing something here - how does uploading the 500GB contents of your hard drive to a web server qualify as an art project for an electronic writing class?

      Frankly this sounds like an insane and poorly-conceived idea, but unless the OP is uploading 500GB of ripped films or porn, nobody is going to bother trying to download all of it, so if it's just to tick a box as part of a school project, I would have thought hosting it on the end of a 2Mbps connection will be a feature.

    15. Re:Dreamhost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably a cool idea 10 years ago, but today it is pretty fucking retarded.

    16. Re:Dreamhost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or Google, who charges next to nothing for storage. Better yet, he can use a traditional hosting service and offload the media to Amazons s3, though he'll have to work out the rsync part.

    17. Re:Dreamhost by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      You can use a public-facing web app which requires authentication; then it's no longer a violation of the ToS.

    18. Re:Dreamhost by neyla · · Score: 2

      You use a public-facing app that requires authenthication, Dreamhost even has a one-click-installer for Gallery, which supports extensive access-controls.

      It doesn't matter what something "is", only what it does. If you upload all your pictures to a gallery-installation on Dreamhost, they're available for download, should your local computer crash-and-burn.

  2. WHT Forum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.webhostingtalk.com/ - This would be a good site to review.

    1. Re:WHT Forum by billcopc · · Score: 4, Informative

      This.

      If you have the patience to read reviews for a half hour or so, you will hear all the pros and cons of any given hosting company. On top of that, they often post exclusive deals in that forum which can be quite a bargain. It is *THE* go-to for hosting discussion. Very highly recommended!

      Or you could go the no-brainer route and get a cheap dedicated server from a place like Leaseweb. I've been with them for years, and I think they have US-based "bargain servers" starting around $80 or so, but that's entirely self-managed, so you need to know enough to set up your own Apache/SQL stack on CentOS or Ubuntu or whatever the kids are using these days. Like I said, I've been there for 5+ years, their service used to be ass back then but now it's top-notch, and the price is hard to beat for what you're getting. Traffic is cheap there too, heck you can get 100mb unmetered for under 2 bills if you don't mind slightly boring hardware.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    2. Re:WHT Forum by nine-times · · Score: 1

      But does he need a dedicated server? Even $80/month seems a little steep if all he needs is 500GB of web space to rsync some files to.

    3. Re:WHT Forum by billcopc · · Score: 2

      In that case, he could just rent space from an actual rsync backup provider.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    4. Re:WHT Forum by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Maybe. The requirements are unclear, so it's hard to come up with a solution. He mentioned that he wanted it to be a web server, but who knows if that's because it actually needs to be publicly available via http?

    5. Re:WHT Forum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      heck you can get 100mb unmetered for under 2 bills if you don't mind slightly boring hardware

      That's excellent for $2 .. have to wonder exactly how much shaving of their profit margin goes on for that kind of money... loss leader perhaps?

    6. Re:WHT Forum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want cheap, here in europe they offer a 1to dedicated server for 18€ at kimsufi, the budget line from ovh http://www.kimsufi.com
      though i don't like to make publicity, they're the cheapest for the value : 100mbps, no data-limit. etc.

  3. VPS for server, storage for storage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Get a bog standard VPS to do the hosting, storage on S3/other cloud storage provider - probably the cheapest way of doing it.

    1. Re:VPS for server, storage for storage by InsightIn140Bytes · · Score: 3, Informative

      Uh, transfer in and out of S3 is really costly. It's one of the reasons I didn't change my servers there. I would have for processing power and everything else, but the bandwidth is extremely costly.

    2. Re:VPS for server, storage for storage by Trepidity · · Score: 1

      Transfer in is currently free as a promotion, but yeah transfer out is pricey. Just storing the data is also fairly pricey compared to low-end shared-hosting options. For example, you could throw up that 500 gigs on a $9/mo Dreamhost account, but it'd cost you $50/mo of S3 storage space even under the reduced-reliability storage option (or $70/mo under the regular one). S3 has much better performance, but it doesn't sound like that's a major consideration here.

    3. Re:VPS for server, storage for storage by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 2

      Transfer in is currently free as a promotion, but yeah transfer out is pricey.

      For what it's worth, I don't think free inbound transfer is a promotion. If it is, it sure isn't presented that way on their pricing page.

      Obviously that doesn't change the fact that outbound transfer is on the expensive side.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    4. Re:VPS for server, storage for storage by Trepidity · · Score: 1

      You're right, it looks like I'm misremembering from a while ago, and they made it permanent. Googling around, it looks like, back when they first introduced the free inbound transfer in 2009, it was billed as a promotion good through June 2010, but then they just kept it.

  4. Bluehost or Hostmonster by pereyra · · Score: 1

    http://www.bluehost.com/
    http://www.hostmonster.com/

    Unlimited space and SSH Access enabled. Low price. I'm use to backup with rsync my files.

    Cons:
    The server can to be with high load.

    Greetings from Paraguay

    --
    NICOLAS PEREYRA MOLINAS http://npereyra.ywork.net
    1. Re:Bluehost or Hostmonster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahem you are against their TOS. Unless of course your files are in the public folder, and make them part of some website. I host lots of files with them, they warn me about high file count (wonder if they count the hard links correctly since that's what my webapp does) but otherwise they seem good service if you want to easily install php stuff, do email, mysql and postgres...

    2. Re:Bluehost or Hostmonster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      avoid bluehost like the plague - complete cowboys with shocking customer service

    3. Re:Bluehost or Hostmonster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, their customer service ranks pretty much higher than anybody else's. (I'll back up may uncertified statement if you do)

    4. Re:Bluehost or Hostmonster by RemyBR · · Score: 1

      Seconded. Support is terrible, my mysql databases got corrupted several times a month because server crashes or shutdown, and they warned me that my account could be syspended because I was hosting a collection of about 30k images (all photographs made by me and others for our website, mind you). There you go with their "unlimited" plan.
      I still have an account with them, but just because I couldn't find the time to fully migrate over to a new host. Now I use Slicehost and couldn't be happier. At least they state their limits and honor them.

    5. Re:Bluehost or Hostmonster by lucm · · Score: 2

      I agree, I've been with them for years and they have a very good service. Twice I tried different hosts (more expensive), I even tried Google App commercial offering (which I hated) but I always went back to Bluehost.

      Pros:
      -uptime
      -service
      -performance
      -the whole package (features, SimpleScript library, etc.)
      -clear billing, no scam
      -no annoying upsell campaigns (excep the Postini ad when you first access the CPanel)
      -their IPs are not on spam blacklists

      Cons:
      -restrictions for photo/video content
      -shared databases are not secured properly (you can see the other user names when you login)

      A few times I sold part of my business and had to transfer the domains to a third party, and even if it was taking business away they were very helpful with this.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
  5. 600 gigs storage, $5.83/month by tomhudson · · Score: 1
    cheap enough - owned by iweb.

    Before they made the split, you could have signed up for the 10-year deal for as low as $1.67/month.

    1. Re:600 gigs storage, $5.83/month by InsightIn140Bytes · · Score: 1

      I must warn you. These $1-2 a month providers are huge crap. They have large downtime, huge abuse amounts, and sometimes they just disappear. But yeah, what can you expect for a few dollars a month. Less than what you would eat at McDonalds. If you want any kind of guarantee for your data, avoid them.

    2. Re:600 gigs storage, $5.83/month by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      I've been using them for a few years now ... and iweb isn't about to disappear any time soon.

      This is just their way of getting attention for their bread and butter - some very nice servers+bandwidth at a very nice price.

    3. Re:600 gigs storage, $5.83/month by sandytaru · · Score: 3, Informative

      I switched from a $15/month host to a $3/month host (Maiahost.) The previous host was unreliable, had frequent downtime, and was running on some fairly archaic web technology. (At one point, they lost ALL my data with no local backups. That was the last straw; I ran my own backups once a week but that was still a few days of SQL data totally gone.) When I switched, I've had access to instant tech support, 0 unplanned downtime so far, and a library of amazing CMS systems that they're happy to help me implement at no additional cost. Love them to bits. The marketplace for hosting is very competative now, and the overpriced unreliable ones are going to fail eventually.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
  6. This was not a great question by digitalsushi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You might have asked us what the best sports team is, frankly.

    I want to see some Ask Slashdot questions with some depth. The focus on breadth is eating Pez candies day after day, and my teeth are rotten and I want a meal.

    --
    slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
    1. Re:This was not a great question by masternerdguy · · Score: 1

      He might as well have asked us what the best thing is.

      --
      To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
    2. Re:This was not a great question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't had Pez in forever.
      I have to order a box for myself this Xmas.

      One consistently good candy, excellent service, fantastic add-ons you can wrap your Pez in to expose them in whatever way you wish.
      10/10 in all categories. How they can offer such a cheap service is amazing. /tech review of non-tech stuff.

    3. Re:This was not a great question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A hot woman is the best thing.

    4. Re:This was not a great question by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      But some slashdotter might sidestep the whole issue and reply:
      BIIIG storage, Small traffic? why not getting a business dsl and host everything on a laptop under linux or a linux vm if you really really can't?

      Pro: no upload times.
      Contra: no remote backups, needs a bit of admin / network skills, possibly less uptime.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    5. Re:This was not a great question by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      You've never owned a Ferrari.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    6. Re:This was not a great question by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      I Pwned a Ferrari, does that count?
      (Saw it passing me with a not very young couple. I saw the look of the wife and thought "dear husband, that woman there is not gonna let you speed up one bit". Turns out I was right)

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    7. Re:This was not a great question by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that happens a lot.

      When I drove Stan's 365, since he'd lost his license, I got some encouragement to open it up on the Internstate. No time at all we had a '76 Trans Am trying to engage us. It's not that we were doing 90 in second gear, but the mullet in the screamin eagle was dodging traffic to stay in front of us, and doing very well for about 20 miles, until we happened on the downhill straight coming into Newport. traffic opened up, and he didn't block us quick enough to make me stop. 130 in third gear was the last we saw of him at all. We turned around in Waterville and drove back on the 202 for the turns. The seller said it would do 170, but I dared only 150 on the straights. Stan made me wear gloves. Your hands sweat when you drive that fast, truth.

      Lots of kids with the Trans Ams will jam them into tight spaces, since they cost what, $10,000 back then? The 365 was a bit more, and really hard to get fixed if you wrinkled it. Easy to take chances with your own iron, too. Stan just fell into a pile of cash with his business, so he looked for the most esclusive thing he could buy. He sold it 2 years later, they are not much fun to drive around town. And his divorce kinda took the starch out of his wallet.

      If only I could afford a really quick car. I'm stuck with the crap NG900 turbo convertible. What a load, but it is quickish from 50-90. Not like the real thing tho.

      The sailing equivalent is having a big old yacht, like a Hinckley, and having to hire a captain to dock it. The bank will make you restore it when you scratch the paint, and you can't afford real damage... So you pay for someone else to park it. Pathetique.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  7. Couple of questions by Nutria · · Score: 2

    a) What the heck is Electronic Writing that it needs a course separate from "regular" writing?

    b) 500GB of words is 55 metric arse-loads. What are you not telling us?

    Anyway, why aren't you backing the data up to a local USB drive?

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    1. Re:Couple of questions by ByOhTek · · Score: 2

      I don't know about the submitters case, but one case I'm familiar with, is one of my friends teaches Electronic Writing. The idea is that people tend to expect/use different standards in online publications (compare similar topics in a blog to other sources. They tend to expect more pictures, in particular, but paragraph separation and other factors come in. Apparently a less formal standard of writing is also allowed.

      Sorry I can't give you more details, that's about all I got from her.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    2. Re:Couple of questions by schroedingers_hat · · Score: 1

      That's a couple of two page docx files. Haven't you used the latest version of word?

    3. Re:Couple of questions by Nutria · · Score: 1

      1) More pictures?
      2) paragraph separation????
      3) a less formal standard of writing?

      Are you sure this isn't a workshop on writing children's stories?

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    4. Re:Couple of questions by ifrag · · Score: 1

      b) 500GB of words is 55 metric arse-loads. What are you not telling us?

      Maybe using PDFs and wants to backup Adobe Reader with it.

      --
      Fear is the mind killer.
    5. Re:Couple of questions by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I don't know... It seems to me that if you had a college with lots of writing courses, and you could take a semester that focused on the nuances of writing for online media, that wouldn't be too unreasonable. It might be interesting to pick apart and think about how blogs posts, as a medium, are different from other kinds of short articles. As someone who has done some different kinds of writing, sometimes professionally, it *is* interesting how different media demand subtly different rules of writing.

      However, I have a hard time imaging that studying the writing of blog posts would warrant more than a semester, unless you were at the level of getting a PhD doing research into how the Internet is changing the conventions of writing.

    6. Re:Couple of questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >> b) 500GB of words is 55 metric arse-loads. What are you not telling us?

      It's ASCII porn?

    7. Re:Couple of questions by rwv · · Score: 1

      However, I have a hard time imaging that studying the writing of blog posts would warrant more than a semester, unless you were at the level of getting a PhD doing research into how the Internet is changing the conventions of writing.

      For instance, relying on your audience to copyedit your misspellings in their heads and the shocking number of cases where such things don't even get noticed by your readers (i.e. imaging versus imagining).

    8. Re:Couple of questions by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      From the summary ("I'm trying to upload the entire contents of my computer to a webserver that will preserve the directory structure") it's some stupid "performance art".

      500 gigabytes (5 terabits). Assuming a consumer 10mb down/1mb uplink, it would take (not counting protocol overhead) 1,389 hours (58 days) for the initial upload, by which time we can assume at least some of the data has changed.

      Not to mention that if the author has a non-free OS or applications on that computer, they'll be violating plenty of copyrights.

      Bottom line: AGH (Ain't Gonna Happen).

    9. Re:Couple of questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wanted to say it's porn, but 500GB is waaay too little. And too large for books, calibre for example, I can tell you, it can hold ~20k ebooks in various formats occupying a mere 20GB. Therefor there's only one sensible conclusion, it's very old porn, maybe even ascii and bmp's.

    10. Re:Couple of questions by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      What the heck is Electronic Writing that it needs a course separate from "regular" writing?

      "Regular" writing is the day to day stuff that people need to write - you know, memos, letters, that sort of thing.

      "Electronic" writing is probably more known as Technical writing, which is a subfield to writing compliant papers (e.g., to submit to IEEE and other journals), as well as online documentation and printed technical documentation (user manuals, service manuals, etc).

      Instructions are particularly important as well, and it can be tricky to get right (as anyone who has ever encountered poorly written instructions may attest to).

    11. Re:Couple of questions by Nutria · · Score: 1

      Ah, Tech Writing. Thanks.

      Old-line tech companies (well, that-which-was-DEC did, at least) have been creating tech documentation using computers for 30 years, though.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    12. Re:Couple of questions by pianosaurus · · Score: 1

      Bottom line: AGH (Ain't Gonna Happen).

      Dear Tom/Barbara: Ain't gonna happen, assuming your assumptions. I have a 100 Mb uplink, and still remember being happy when hard drives became fast enough for me to utilise that. I realise this is unusual for a home connection in most places of the world, but the poster may very well be trying to upload from his campus. I don't know how universities are connected to the net in the US or wherever else the poster may be from, but I'm guessing he (like me) could upload 500 GB in a workday or so.

      Also, what is this "millibit" you speak of?

    13. Re:Couple of questions by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      This is an art student looking for a cheap solution - this is not someone who has the $$$ to spend on an 100mb uplink. Otherwise, they'd just host it directly off their own machine, as others have proposed.

      Your proposed loophole - that maybe they have access to a uni account with gobs of bandwidth, but unis now have safeguards in place for bandwidth hogs, same as everyone else. Saturating a 100mb/s uplink for any period of time will get your account first throttled, then blocked - and that's assuming that nobody else you've p***ed off on your local lan segment don't first hunt you down and physically disconnect you with extreme prejudice to your equipment.

      So no, it Ain't Gonna Happen.

    14. Re:Couple of questions by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      As a further follow-up - you completely ignored the copyrights question. They want to mirror their whole computer drive, which would of necessity include the OS.

      On top of that, most "all you can eat" web hosting agreements don't allow you to use the account for "online backup" purposes - the files have to be part of a functioning website, and certain filetypes are banned (such as executables).

      Now, if the poster DID have a 100mpbs connection, as you "pulled out of the air" to make your case, they still couldn't use a cheapie service - individual users are limited to a small % of total system resources (usually ~2% from the ones I've seen) over a set interval - so while they *might* be able to upload @ 100mbps for a minute or two, it's not going to be sustained for hours, never mind days.

      So, they're now looking at their own dedicated server ... a LOT more expensive, and often requiring a 1-year contract. Even then, the TOS won't allow for copyright violations, so unless they're using BSD or Linux, they're out of luck with "mirroring their whole hard drive" (and if they were using a F/LOSS OS, they would have most likely specified things like available bandwidth).

      So no, it Aint Gonna Happen.

    15. Re:Couple of questions by pianosaurus · · Score: 1

      Ok, thanks for the info. I'm assuming you are talking about the US, which is obviously very different in terms of both pricing and policy. I still don't know where the poster is from, though (statistically, the US).

    16. Re:Couple of questions by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Also, what is this "millibit" you speak of?

      Not me ... but nice try :-)

    17. Re:Couple of questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here in Sweden it's typical with at least 10 Mbit/s uplink. My grandpa has 100 Mbps in both directions for like 40$/month. I got 100/50 for slightly more...

      Some friends who has a student apartment has a 1 Gbit connection both ways which is included in the rent (source: http://www.chalmersstudentbostader.se/visa.lasso?ukat_id=8000000000056578&kat_id=84500000000019930&mall=2-spalt.lasso - page is in Swedish, but is translatable!).
      Sure, it doesn't fill the 1000/1000, but when we tested it the connection achieved something like 850/400 Mbps.

      So, to conclude: It's cheap and usual in Sweden to have a quite fast connection. It depends on where you are.
      So, it COULD happen!

    18. Re:Couple of questions by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1

      Everything is written, freehand, by in Microsoft Paint, with a large purple crayon font. The files are then saved in uncompressed .BMP files. That is why this Electronic Writing takes so much room.

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    19. Re:Couple of questions by pianosaurus · · Score: 1

      Please take a deep breath. I was simply pointing out that 100 Mb connection is not entirely uncommon, depending on where you live and what institution you are connected to. I happen to have 100 Mb at home and 100 Mb at work (a university). I was not intending to attack your reasoning in any way, and I apologise if that's the way I came across. You sound very cross with me now. Am I reading you wrong?

      The "millibit" thing was just a jab at your lowercase "M" for mega. Again, no offence intended, though I can see that that could at least be interpreted as an insult.

    20. Re:Couple of questions by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Nah, I'm not mad or anything - in fact, I find the project itself to be silly, I guess it's the "new ask slashdot - same as the old ask slashdot" - aka "do my homework for me" meets "I'm too lazy to google".

    21. Re:Couple of questions by pianosaurus · · Score: 1

      Aye. I keep telling myself to move on from slashdot, but it seems I have too much time to waste.

    22. Re:Couple of questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see you are unable to use the metric system with SI units properly. Maybe that is part of the reason why you can't get good internet connections.

    23. Re:Couple of questions by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Well, it's *still* better than failbook ... though the changes to "Ask Slashdot" might be a shot across the bow ...

  8. Duh everyone know this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... Go Daddy!

    No, duh, colocate a dedicated server or even rent a dedicated server for next to nothing.

  9. I used to host large art projects... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ...then I took an arrow to the knee.

  10. Consider using a CDN by firegate · · Score: 3, Informative

    You should consider using a Cloud CDN like Rackspace CloudFiles or Amazon S3. They're designed purely for cheap, efficient and fast storage and delivery. While you can't SSH into one, you can certainly set up rsync without incident and the data can be called from a site hosted anywhere.

    --
    "Make it idiot proof, and someone will make a better idiot."
    1. Re:Consider using a CDN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cheap is relative. Cloudfiles for 500gb is $75/mo. Pretty sure that's not the submitters definition of cheap.. or he would just purchase a dedicated server instead of posting a question here.

    2. Re:Consider using a CDN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You should consider using a Cloud CDN like Rackspace CloudFiles or Amazon S3. They're designed purely for cheap, efficient and fast storage and delivery. While you can't SSH into one, you can certainly set up rsync without incident and the data can be called from a site hosted anywhere.

      You can run an EC2 instance and mount S3 storage as NFS thus you can ssh into it and run anything on top of it using your favorite AMI (amazon machine image) available for nearly every mjaor OS :)

      EC2 is the way forward!

    3. Re:Consider using a CDN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I highly recommend Rackspace. You could either do like firegate suggest or you setup a cloud site. Service Rocks.

  11. Techark by lunatic1969 · · Score: 1

    I've used Techark for years ( http://www.techark.com/ ). They've been reliable. Nice folks too.

    1. Re:Techark by unrtst · · Score: 1

      No comment on their quality, but their advertised packages don't come close to meeting the very basic requirements of the post.

      10 Gig disk space + 150 Gig bandwidth @ $8.95/mo
      40 Gig disk space + 300 Gid bandwidth @ $25.95/mo
      Dedicated server with 500 Gig disk and 10 Mbps unmetered bandwidth @ $115.95/mo

      Sorry, but how's he supposed to get 500 Gig of data up on any of those? Even the dedicated server lacks enough space (OS will chew some up).

    2. Re:Techark by lunatic1969 · · Score: 1

      I'd recommend contacting them about the specific requirements. I've been using them for years, found them to be reliable with actual people running the show instead of automated drones. And believe me, I've been through quite a few hosts before these folks.

  12. "Entire contents" might get you unwanted attention by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What will "entire contents" include? Will this art project be publicly accessible? If you are planning to upload files from your hard drive including program files you did not create (e.g. windows or program files folders), you may be inviting some unexpected attention due to copyright issues.

  13. HostMonster - unlimited space and bandwidth by TheGreatOrangePeel · · Score: 1

    Everyone has their own hosting provider that they prefer. Mine is HostMonster. Hard to argue with unlimited space and bandwidth. Haven't had any issues with uptime in the year I've been hosting with them. They allow SSH access to their hosts (but you have to provide an image of a your drivers license/state ID). Haven't tried to rsync to my server, but then again, I've never had issues using rsync provided I was doing it over ssh (e.g. `rsyc -a -v -e 'ssh -l username' /local/dir hostname:/remote/dir` #going by memory here)

    1. Re:HostMonster - unlimited space and bandwidth by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      If your rsync source/destination is of the format username@hostname:/path/to/files it uses SSH by default.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  14. Dedicated server... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    At current VPS prices you'd bleed yourself through the nose for enough disk space. The first VPS plan from Linode with that much disk space is $480 a month, whereas you can get a Softlayer dedicated server with a 500GB drive for ~$200 a month.

    If it supports directory hierarchy preservation (haven't tried), the cheapest alternative is Amazon S3, which is something like $70 a month for 500GB ($0.14/GB) of space, and another $20 or so per month for an EC2 instance to serve it from. There's at least one FUSE implementation that *should* let you rsync to it as well.

  15. Unlimited spaces != unlimited files by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Many hosting services who offer "unlimited space" have other limitations you need to know about so you don't find out in the middle of transferring files that you can't do what you want to do. There are limitations on the number of inodes you can store, which for your purposes would mean the number of files you can store. So if the limit is, for instance, 50,000, then after you have uploaded that many files, you won't be able to upload any more no matter how much space you have left. The other limit I have run into is a daily limit on number of ftp file transfer which I ran into once. The limit on my hosting account was 2000 and once I reached that limit, I got locked out until I contacted tech support. Additionally, read the TOS because they might prohibit using the space to store files for archiving purposes.

  16. modwest by jd142 · · Score: 2

    I've been very happy with http://www.modwest.com over the last 10+ years. Their basic plan is $7/month, but have more expensive plans if you need it. They have unlimited(within reason of course) because they know that only a small percentage of users come close to any limits they would set.

  17. If it's only for your class by denshao2 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I would host it at home. If it's only for a professor to see, you should not be getting a lot of traffic. Just keep it on a machine that is separate from anything important.

    1. Re:If it's only for your class by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Sounds good, DynDNS + port forwarding on your home router to a machine/VM running the hosting service = problem solved.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  18. a class to rip people off and take more classes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a class to rip people off and take more classes just to drive costs up and make the 4 year degree take 5 years to complete.

  19. Something is wrong here by nine-times · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't mean to be rude, but it seems like you may be approaching this the wrong way. What are you actually doing and why? Why are you looking a VPS providers? You say, "I was hoping Slashdot could suggest a reliable hosting service for that type of project." What type of project? Define "reliable".

    To be more specific, why are you trying to upload the entire contents of your hard drive to a web server? Like, if this is a writing project, do you care about copying your program/system files, and if so, why? Why a web server? Is it going to be accessed by someone else? If so, who needs to access it, and where are those people located relative to you (e.g. are they on the same network?)?

    If you just need 500 GB of web space, there are lots of shared hosting companies that will provide that much space for less than $10 per month. It will be reliable enough for a lot of purposes. However, not knowing what you're trying to do, I don't know if you're doing something completely silly.

    1. Re:Something is wrong here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds more like he wants a seedbox ;-)

    2. Re:Something is wrong here by Chelloveck · · Score: 1

      I read the question as, "Hi. Real online backup sites are expensive. I want to backup my drive on one of the cheap 'unlimited storage' web hosts, but none of them allow wholesale backup. So, I'm going to call this an 'art project' and claim that it's not a backup, but a legitimate functioning web site. What hosting companies are dumb enough to fall for it?"

      Maybe I'm just a philistine, but I really can't imagine how a live copy of someone's hard drive can be considered "art".

      --
      Chelloveck
      I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
    3. Re:Something is wrong here by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'm just a philistine, but I really can't imagine how a live copy of someone's hard drive can be considered "art".

      Well I can't imagine how a lot of modern art is considered art, but it is. If he really just wants a backup, why not ask? It's not as though we're going to turn him in. And yes, basically hosting companies are dumb enough to fall for it, but it probably won't be a great backup solution.

  20. What about your house? by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

    If it's not high traffic, your ISP will not call TOS violation, and with speeds nowadays, high traffic means pretty high so it depends, you'd have to get the details that are local to your area.

    But I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this, or maybe i just didn't read it... but what you do is register a domain and point it at your home IP, set up a web server at home, open port 80 on your router. There are a million factors to consider here, but one less obvious one is you are probably not a high profile target, so default security will probably suffice, just don't use weak or non-existent passwords.

  21. Just cuz they have the coolest looking equipment.. by pr0nd3xtr · · Score: 1

    http://www.backblaze.com/ - I always wanted to build one of those 200TB units for $8k too

  22. knows rsync, ssh, and VPS, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    can't answer his/her own question? That doesn't compute.

  23. initial upload by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You realize of course that even with reasonably good upload speeds (> 5Mb) its going to take over a solid week to upload 500GB and your ISP will probably cut you off for abusing the system. For that much data you need a service with provisions to handle you sending a disk, so all you do over the internet is deltas.

  24. Dedicated Server Recommended by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You should get a dedicated server or a VPS for that kinf of space.

    Do you have an idea of your bandwidth requirement

    www.Gogax.com

  25. You often get what you pay for... by asdf7890 · · Score: 1

    I've noticed a lot of VPS providers charge almost nothing for processor time and RAM, but disk is still pretty expensive.

    A cheap VPS provider will have "fair use" policies, officially or otherwise (in fact any VPS provider, though good ones are more likely to have well documented policies so you know what standard you are to be judged against). If your VM uses too much CPU time you will find it disabled without warning until you beg to have it turned back on again. The same goes for if you create a lot of I/O activity (i.e. any heavy database work).

    You don't have to break your quotas either: I've have a cheap VPS provider cut me off for "to much bandwidth use in a day" when the amount of bandwidth used in the the day in questino was noticably less than "the amount I was supposed to be allowed in a month" divided by 31.

    Also, the cheaper the offer the more chance there is that the host machiens will be massively oversold, so you have so many other VMs on the host your's is on that there is so much competition for I/O bandwidth that any disk operation will take much longer than you'd expect to complete. A cheap provider might have tens of VMs all using the one single spinning-metal based SATA drive.

    I still have a couple of cheap VPSs that I use for various bits and bobs so if you find reasonable ones all can be fine - they certainly have thier place but be aware of the possible problems. I never have anything hosted on just one of them, so if one goes down or slows to a crawl all I have to do is switch some DNS entries and another takes over. Also, if looking ay OpenVZ never judge a VPS by its "burstable" memory allocation. If you need the memory you need the memory. A fair proportion of the not-the-cheapest-of-the-cheap hosts have stopped offering burstable memory. (swap on Xen is different as you can always allocate the full amount if you need to, but with OpenVZ with burst enabled you don't know until you try which makes some things fall over regularly - apparently Java based apps of any significant size are generaly not happy in such situations for instance, and I've seen rtorrent fall over when there is a suddern glut of incoming data and it hsan't been told to artificially reign in its memory use)

    http://www.webhosttingtalk.com/ is a good place to look for hosting information generally, and http://www.lowendbox.com/ is a useful resource if you are looking at the lowest end of the market without wanting to consider shared hosting. If you don't mind signing up for 6 or more months rather than a rolling monthly contract you might find so very reasonable dedicated server offers like those at http://www.kimsufi.co.uk/ (as with a cheap VPS, consider what options you lose by giong cheap such as support and SLAs), again http://www.webhosttingtalk.com/ is a good place to look for offers and discussion. Amazon's free tier (http://aws.amazon.com/free/) may also be worth looking at - you may find that much more stable and less over-sold than a cheap VPS.

    1. Re:You often get what you pay for... by asdf7890 · · Score: 1

      Actually, cancel the Amazon mention: yout 500Gb isn't going to fit on the free tier by a long shot...

  26. Startlogic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unlimited GB of Storage
    Unlimited GB of Transfer
    http://www.startlogic.com/

    1. Re:Startlogic by GPLHost-Thomas · · Score: 1

      Yeah, right... How about you give a link so someone can download the full of the internet on it's local hard drive? THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS UNLIMITED. We live in a finite world. Linking to any random hosting company pushing for this universal lie isn't going to help the OP.

  27. Do you know ... ? by heatseeker_around · · Score: 5, Funny
    I assume that you know you posted your question on slashdot . So I can assume you know it is a cave full of nerds and geeks all over the place. Some are staring at you from the the ceiling, others are cowardly anonymous and invisible, some also pretend not to be nerds by referring to nerds as "they", "them", "the nerds"... hum...
    But all of them have something in common: they need SPECIFICS, they need to know EVERYTHING, they are paranoiac, they are whiners and they hate non-sense !

    Examples :
    • - You say, "I was hoping Slashdot could suggest a reliable hosting service for that type of project." What type of project? Define "reliable". (nerd 778537)
    • - To be more specific, why are you trying to upload the entire contents of your hard drive to a web server? (nerd 778537)
    • - What the heck is Electronic Writing that it needs a course separate from "regular" writing? (nerd 679911)
    • - 500GB of words is 55 metric arse-loads. What are you not telling us? (nerd 679911)
    • - You might have asked us what the best sports team is, frankly. (nerd 137809)

    Do you really expected to get any valuable answers with your non-specific question ? yeah... be sorry.

    To answer to your question anyway, I need to know what kind of movies are you trying to upload illegally ?

    1. Re:Do you know ... ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's amazing to see the edges of the common Slashdotter's knowledge set, and appurtenantly his or her worldview. By 'Electric Writing', I am guessing the poster is referring to the discourse surrounding textuality and inscription in the age of mechanical and digital reproduction (Benjamin, anybody?), and more specifically highly influential thinkers like Friedrich Kittler ('the is no more writing') Greg Ullmer (electracy, or Arthurt Kroker)? This stuff isn't necessarily related to art in the traditional sense, but most Slashdotters are way to closed-minded, cynical, and let down by culture, to bear witness to the close relationships between contemporary visual culture and theories of language, truth, and code. But, my goodness, do I have a chuckle when art-oriented questions or articles come the way of Slashdot. Indeed, a cave full of impressively high intelligence, critical thinking, logical prowess, and deep technical know-how with combined decades of expereience - yet, when someone asks a question that has to do with the inherent non-perfunctory, less than efficient intentions of an art project, whereby the outward facing concept, the form, and the intent or ideological examinations, are what is at stake, five thousand heads explode. Suddenly, one guy
      suspects this poor MFA-seeking poster of conspiracy to surveil his school network (which, by the way, would be considered a
      very legitimate internet-art, or computer art project, or one of the numerous other related subcategories of late modern and
      contemporary art that engages the computer). I'm not going to go into an art harangue here more I have, because at this stage the Slashdot culture will overpower it, but if you guys consider yourself helpful people, maybe try opening your mind to the possibility that in projects where some kind of examination of the way relate to our data is the aim, the premise - granted coming from an obvious layperson who could have been more articulate and put some more time into his post - is not always going to either conform or else be diametrically opposed to your idea of rationality.

      -Paris Ionescu

    2. Re:Do you know ... ? by neonKow · · Score: 1

      Oh get off your high horse. All but one of those questions above are technical questions to get more details on the OP's needs.

  28. No vps by mariushm · · Score: 1

    VPS won't be good enough for your needs - most VPSes share the disk space (a raid 5 is shared between 8-16 vps machines so they can't give you lots of space).

    Talk to various companies advertising budget servers on Web Hosting Talk forums.

    You should be able to rent an Atom based server or an older generation server they wouldn't otherwise be able to rent for about 40-50$ a month and some of the companies will even accept to physically mail them a hard drive and install it in your server for a few extra dollars a month.

  29. Re:Just cuz they have the coolest looking equipmen by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    These guys are supposed to be the cheapest in dollars-for-gigs, don't know if anyone's overtaken them. They also claim to offer true encryption, in which only the user has the key.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  30. AWS S3 by funkman · · Score: 1

    http://aws.amazon.com/s3/pricing/

    For 500GB you are looking at 46.50 or $70 a month for storage alone. I'd think the transfer costs (HTTP traffic) would be pennies based on the traffic patterns described.

    You won't be able to use rsync ... but I'd guess there are solutions our there that allow mirror like functionality you describe.

    1. Re:AWS S3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, for example http://s3tools.org/s3cmd

      And if it's all static content then S3 can serve all the HTML/CSS/Javascript too.

  31. Enterhost by Drummergeek0 · · Score: 1

    Enterhost, been using them for over 8 years. Great service and a lot of bandwidth

    --
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
  32. Host yourself by keith_nt4 · · Score: 2

    Based on the description I don't see why hosting it yourself isn't an option. If you literally have 500 gigs of data get two 1TB drives and build a NAS with the two drives mirrored. For OS you could use either a Linux server with LVM/RAID or a FreeNAS set up with ZFS. You could even virtualize it if you wanted to get fancy (easy to switch physical hardware used if nothing else). Open a port on your router and hand out the IP or setup a DynDNS sort of deal for others to access. You also want a separate USB hard drive to back the data up.

    For the amount of money it would take to host all this data the Linux/FreeNAS solution would be much, much cheaper (less than $400US). Also, ridiculously easy to setup an SSH daemon on linux/FrreeBSD.

    You sound like you're at some kind of college or university so I assume it wouldn't be too difficult to bribe a local computer scientist with mountain due and pizza to help you out as needed.

    --
    "UNIX is very simple, it just needs a genius to understand its simplicity." -Dennis Ritchie
  33. Fishy by plsenjy · · Score: 1

    I know I sound paranoid, but to me it sounds like the submitter is trying to monitor the comings-and-goings of someone else's computer.

    --
    Glad I could help.
  34. Pair Networks = reliable, but you're on your own by Kalvos · · Score: 1

    I've been using Pair Networks for about 15 years. They have the tools and space you need, and you can exactly mirror your present directory structure. It's either shared hosting (some 'dangerous' tools are limited) or your can lease a server. They have high reliability, near zero downtime, a software/hardware maintenance schedule (no surprises). It's FreeBSD Unix and they won't hold your hand with automated tools, so you're on your own.

  35. Kimsufi by skyride · · Score: 1

    I think this should be EXACTLY what you're looking for: http://www.kimsufi.co.uk/ I've personally had a server with them for about 2 years with no major issues. For the money, it's phenomenal value.

  36. Re:Pair Networks = reliable, but you're on your ow by Kalvos · · Score: 1

    Also, Pair is amenable to special circumstances, such as high storage / low volume, nonprofits, etc. Use their homepage as a guide, and then email to ask. They answer.

  37. InMotion by yakatz · · Score: 1

    InMotionHosting offers tons of disk space for a very low price.
    I and other people who used to use them highly do not recommend them
    Start with these : http://blog.sucuri.net/2011/09/mass-compromise-at-inmotionhosting-com.html
    http://thehackernews.com/2011/09/inmotion-hosting-server-and-trinity-fm.html

    They messed up the cleanup, damaging sites that had already cleaned up by themselves.

    Last but not least: http://www.windows8update.com/2011/11/17/top-10-reasons-that-i-dont-use-inmotion-hosting-for-my-website-and-business/

  38. bring the server to you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If bandwidth isn't important, why not just put the server on your local machine?

  39. And submitter "heleneleh" has disappeared. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just brilliant, ask a vague question and then walk away. Don't answer anyone's questions. What a way to waste everyone's time. Thanks a lot, "heleneleh".

  40. Universtiy may host it. by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 1

    Talk with your professor first about having the University host it. Your school will have the infrastrure to host this themselves. They may have dedicated space for students. You may need to get an exception to host that much data. This is what your tuition should be paying for.

  41. elitter.net by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    www.elitter.net obvisouly rools all. Command line access is teh rock!

  42. Host it from home. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Based on what you have indicated:
    - priority is on space/storage
    - priority on reliability of storage
    - will not be alot of cpu or bandwidth usage
    - you already have the information on your computer's hard drive

    Suggested solution:
    - get a dyndns account and use that to point to your home, so people can find it. Or just have a script that auto-updates a web page link.
    - have the storage on a local Frys special computer or a NAS unit with mirroring of 2 drives.
    - give it an assigned ip address either via dhcp or hard coded and port forward from the outside

    1. Re:Host it from home. by neminem · · Score: 1

      Mod this guy up. I recently got my random hosted files off my alma mater's web server I'd been mooching off for the past couple years, and set up my own apache server running locally on an old laptop in my closet (I got the laptop for free, but you could probably find one for basically free off Craigslist or your local used computer shop). Wasn't terribly difficult, and now I can do whatever I want to it. I wouldn't consider it if there were any chance of, say, getting slashdotted, but for files that will mostly only be seen by myself and people I specifically point to a particular file, it's pretty nice to have.

  43. laptop + xampp + external hard drive by sdnoob · · Score: 1

    take your project to school to demonstrate it, don't put (and keep) a copy of your entire hdd online. that's just pointless.

    hosting that much data for a one-off project not intended to remain online is a lot of wasted bits transferred and a lot of wasted time/effort.

    also consider upload times for 500gb data....
    384k upstream = 126 days, 10m upstream = 5 days
    might be able to half those using a transfer scheme with compression, but still, that's a hell of a long time.

    (and don't forget about any usage caps enforced by your isp)

  44. EC2 + S3 by dracocat · · Score: 1

    You can just use Amazon S3 Storage. .10 per GB would mean $50 per month for 500 GB.

    If you use EC2 for a simple virtual server you can mount the S3 volume onto your virtual server.

    If you are like me and prefer rackspace virtual servers, then you can still mount the S3 volume with something like jungle disk.

    You can then use something like Jungledisk to mount it as a volume on both machines, server and source machine.

    Rackspace has basic virtual servers for like $10 a month.

    So $10 for basic virtual server. $50 for 50 GB of disk storage on S3, plus $5 a month for jungle disk.
    $65. Is that within your budget for a short term project?

    Jungle disk is not required to make it work, but its only $5, and can make it simpler to mount the volume. If you use a virtual server on amazon EC2 you can actually just mount the 500GB volume.

  45. hosting site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use this place and they are unlimited everything with free ssh and unlimited space and bandwidth. www.tmdhosting.com it cost $3.85 a month and it comes with a free domain name also. Hope this helps. I never had my site go down in 2 years.

  46. Why not MiracleData(tm)? by MiracleData*Sponsor* · · Score: 2

    Hi folks, Dan from MiracleData(tm) here! I thought I'd take advantage of Slashdot's new AskSlashdot sponsorship feature to throw in my two cents worth, and recommend to you our own line of MiracleServers(tm)! While I am the chairman and CEO of MiracleData(tm), I don't want you to think I'm biased in any way when I say - without fear of contradiction, since I now control the moderation on this thread - that MiracleData(tm) is the greatest service to mankind since the invention of modern medicine! No, that's only because it's absolutely, 100% true!

    Now, just to give you an example, how much would you pay for our entry-level MiracleLite(tm) server? It features 64 cores, 512 GB of RAM and over 100 terabytes of disk space! Sounds perfect for your little art project, right? Well, don't answer that price question yet, because a box like that needs a fat pipe to keep it happy, and that's why we're pairing our MiracleLite(tm) server with your own dedicated, unmetered OC-96 line! NOW how much would you pay? Got a number? Good! Now, what if I told you you could have that server and connection for....$1.79 PER YEAR! You'd say that's insane, right? And you'd be RIGHT - it IS insane, because we're INSANE for low prices here at MiracleData!!!1!!11!!!

    So in conclusion, I think you can see that MiracleData(tm) is the only sensible choice here. Give us a call to get started today, and remember our motto - "If It's A Good Server, It's A Miracle"!

  47. Amazon. by drolli · · Score: 1

    The Amazon EC/AWS has a lot of options. You can start hosting at little cost and nearly unlimited scaling at no infrastructure cost.

    AWS Cloudfront should handle any peak you can produce (as long as you dont do your thing right before christmas....) and the pricing seems ok.

  48. Go Dedicated by utkonos · · Score: 1

    Don't bother with a VPS for this sort of thing. Just buy a dedicated server. You can get one for fairly cheap compared to the specs on a VPS when you want to go that high with HDD space. A good service for this is serverpronto.com.

  49. Re:Pair Networks = reliable, but you're on your ow by GPLHost-Thomas · · Score: 1

    It's been a long long time that I haven't seen any host asking for a SETUP FEE for a VPS. That's a sign that they must be doing the setup manually, which means you should avoid them (you want to be able to reinstall your OS yourself, that's one of the very basic features any decent host will have).

  50. Overwhelmed choosing CMS/Wiki/Paywall Options by Jonah+Hex · · Score: 0

    Note: I posted this on WHT but wanted to fish for replies here.

    Hi folks, I'm new to hosting with HostGator VPS but not so new to linux or hosting my own site, but I'm wanting to do something I've never done before, offer premium content! I would like to do this using as much of the infrastructure HostGator provides (application installs, subscription/CC integration, etc) as possible instead of trying to piece together a bunch of different products.

    The main client site needs to be able to present articles, individual and galleries of videos (and pics), and some wiki articles embedded in the front end. The front end has to support different subscriptions or one time payments for membership levels. The back end needs to support wiki style collaboration on articles, fiction stories, storyboard drawings, and even videos if possible for an internet connected team of movie makers. The ability to stream live video is also on my wish list.

    So far I am torn between WordPress and Joomla for the front end, as both seem like they can handle subscription/paid content, but I'm not sold on either. It also looks like if I want Single Sign On I'll have to use MediaWiki, even though I am not convinced it would be the best collaboration platform for movie making. Not sure what AcceptSafe integrates with but I'd sign up if its easiest to get working.

    What are people using for distributing videos or large files? Since HostGator doesn't allow .torrent files, and due to the adult nature of the work I can't just tie into YouTube; I'll need an alternative.

    Thanks in advance for any suggestions!

    1. Re:Overwhelmed choosing CMS/Wiki/Paywall Options by Jonah+Hex · · Score: 1

      I wasn't going to post the update here as well as on WHT, but since I got an off topic mod I thought I'd make the point that my question is a better Ask Slashdot than the original question. I mean come on, share your hard drive as an art project? Sounds like someone has been toking all semester and needs a quick completed "work". I should know, sounds like something I would of tried back in the day.

      Just an update on what some of my research has led me to, hopefully to help someone else or further discussion.

      First off I have expanded my requirements, the main one is integration with Amazon S3 for http and torrent downloads. This side steps the issue of HostGator not allowing .torrent files and allows me to save bandwidth by using torrents as well as paying less for the http video transfers.

      I've used Drupal before for hobby sites but wanted something more professional as my platform for both the client front end and the artist/contributor backend. I've also been experimenting with TikiWiki for sorting out my own writings and more, unfortunately it can't be used for the entirety of the new site but if I find a bridge I may use it instead of MediaWiki.

      Joomla reminds me a lot of Drupal, and it appears it meets all my requirements, but like WordPress it appears to also need to be hooked in to MediaWiki to have a full wiki with version/history and discussion pages. At least since MediaWiki is used by both projects as their own site's wiki integration is very tight and does support single sign on. Still not convinced a wiki is the best collaborative environment but it'll have to work until something better comes along.

      Joomla also appears to be a fairly heavy framework like Drupal, but still needs additional plugins to support my full requirements. I'm also concerned with too many boxes, plugins, gadgets, etc, cluttering up the site design. I'm putting further Joomla research and testing on the back burner for now.

      Let me quickly mention Dolphin 7, which may be ahead of the curve when it comes to features based on what I've read. What scared me off from even trying it however is their apps/plugin marketplace. Plus most of the features are available in other CMS platforms I am more familiar with.

      Wordpress has the advantage of being fairly lightweight as a base install, and I plan to get the front end up with only a few installs that are tightly integrated. BuddyPress looks like it will handle all the social interaction, and either s2member or MarketPress for subscriptions/sales. I've seen a few themes that integrate the WP-ecommerce plugin but have also read that its not the easiest thing to work with. Also I'm concerned that the payment processors they integrate with allow payments to a site that offers some adult content.

      That's all for now, as always comments, etc are welcome!

  51. Opera Unite by ElliotWilcox · · Score: 1

    Leave all of the files on your computer - download the Opera browser and use the Opera Unite feature to share all of the artwork right from your computer. If the audience is small and the load is not an issue and you have a good DSL connection - this might be the easiest way to do it. Opera Unite will give you a URL to share and you can password protect the content also. Greg

  52. Another "How did this make the front page" stories by Vrtigo1 · · Score: 1

    Google is your friend

    And it would seem that any standard FTP client from the last 15-20 years will do exactly what you want as far as uploading your files while preserving the directory structure.

  53. Host yourself by bestoffrm · · Score: 1

    Hi, I'm an admin for a group called yazili sorulari and we'd love to have this added to the group!