What do people want?

[velton]

well, i think 100mb is more than enough to running a heavy graphic site ..
usually, we dont do heavy graphic to load on site .. that's aint a good idea .
unless u are running some large forum or something else ..
php is important to me .

 

[Meksilon]

I chose the first one:

• No requirements but VERY low resources

But let me explain. When I *first* wanted to host my website (and remember I've been a member here since Jan 2002), I looked for paid hosting - then I decided to go with a relatively new host that looked, and seemed reliable; it turns out my instincts were correct. I went with icontact-hosting, mainly because 1. they didn't draw attention to their free service on their website and so 2. their hosting service was paid for by the paying clients.

As you can see I'm looking for more hosting now - that's not because I don't have enough space and bandwidth, in fact I have much more then I need. When I signed up it was for 1GB of bandwidth - I'm now allocated 10GB for some reason (I don't complain), even though I still use less then 1GB! My available webspace seems to have increased as well (from 100MB to 200). Now it is true that sometime after I signed up, they started giving away 200MB/5GB free accounts... but I never requested this.

Now I have something new - something that I can't host in the USA because I'll receive DMCA take-down orders; so I can't use my current host - and further more I plan on making this site a massive traffic generation machine, that will hopefully assist visitors everywhere. Because it will be rich in valuable original information, collated resources, etc I'm anticipating requiring paid hosting for it, but I would like to start with a free package I can upgrade when I need to.

A lot of people have unrealistic expectations, and don't understand if they're not going to give a host anything back then they can't expect to abuse the resources given to them.

 

[TSO]

I would probably go with post2host, depending on the frequency required. Then again, I may go with the host that has a small feature-set. It just would depend upon my needs.

 

[Stanley08]

hmm none , paid hosting

 

[ranit]

Post 2 Host

 

[TaoPhoenix]

Mix the Clients

i say post 2 host with reliable service! ad's make the sites slow... and low resources with nothing... doesn't really say that the host has a long life!

Hmm. I would think that "low resources" make it easier to stay around.

I saw a couple of hybrid approaches once. You could start off / go back to a low-use package ( for the folks who only need a tiny site out of harm's way). Then if you later needed to handle solid volumes, require a sliding scale of posts and ads at the user's choice.

Reliability is key. Even if you don't have a lightning server, at least hold it together. I'm shopping for a new host because my last couple choices have been pretty dismal.

 

[h0ster]

For me, no contextual ads. Low resources are fine as a new project rarely needs more. You can also run multiple apps from one mysql, a lot of people don't seem to realize this.

For the masses you wouldn't want to be asking for posts either really.

It's a good question but I think finding a target/niche market and focusing on what they need (if you can give it) would give you a better result