VPS vs. Shared Hosting

[Arithan]

Why is it that VPS and dedicated servers offer so little space and bandwidth compared to shared hosting? Most of the shared hosts I see now offer unlimited space and bandwidth. I would think that shard hosting would offer less space due to more accounts on the same box.

The site that I am working on is fine here now, but if it starts getting a lot of users, it might be an issue. Since people can upload their own media files (without violating the ToS), on a VPS or dedicated server with about 100GB of space I would run out of space after 200 or so users.

Also, are there any good VPS people can recommend? The review sites that I've read all have different ones at the top.

[Early Out]

With shared hosting, they can get away with offering huge amounts of space simply because they know most people will never use it.

Let's say a shared host offers 100GB per user, and puts 500 users on each box. Do they actually put 50,000GB of disk drive on that box? Nope. They know that most people won't use more than 1GB or so, so they can get away with a much smaller disk drive, like maybe 1000GB.

But if a dedicated server host offers 100GB per user, they have to actually put 100GB of disk drive on that server they're renting you. If you looked at the free disk space on your server, and saw that it was only 2GB, you'd complain that you weren't getting what you paid for. If they sign up 500 users, they have to provide 50,000GB of storage.

[Arithan]

If I'm doing a Youtube like site, I keep seeing people saying that it would be better to use a VPS, but wouldn't I run out of space as people upload more and more videos?

Even though bluehost says unlimited hosting space, am I actually able to upload a lot of videos without having to worry about a limit? The box that I am on has been at 96% disk space for a while now and I'm worried that if my site starts taking up a lot of space, they will tell me to go somewhere else.

I've read that bluehost is planning on doing VPS in the future, but in the meantime if I start running into limit problems here, I've found two VPS hosts which seem good. They seem to be by the same owner because the physical address is the same.

http://www.vpsnext.com
http://www.hostican.com/index.php

Has anyone had experience with them?

[Early Out]

If the box you're on gets above 96% full, they'll just start moving some of the accounts to a new server - that happens on my server about once a month.

If you're letting other people upload videos to your site, you might run into some problems.

First and foremost, you can't store any copyrighted material on your account. If BH sees a bunch of videos stored on an account, they're going to be taking a very close look at it. Any hint of copyright infringement, and your account will be history.

Second, you can use all the storage you like, as long as the files stored are connected to the website. If you're trying to run a Youtube-like site, it might be tough to argue that all of those files are actually "connected" to the website. Creating a huge repository of files that others can search might be a stretch of the definition of a "website."

[felgall]

With files such as video it is best to contact BlueHost in advance of uploading files so that they can manually check that they don't breach copyright and then exclude them from their automatic checking process. If you don't then it is quite likely that their automated scan will flag a video file as a possible copyright breach and lock your account until you contact the abuse department to convince them to manually check and exclude the file.

[Arithan]

these files that people will be uploading are their own work. Like a demo reel they made for submission with a resume, or a video to demonstrate their directing skills or something.

Would those files be considered copyrighted material?

Also, as stated in the ToS:

"BlueHost.Com does NOT provide unlimited space for online storage, backups, or archiving of electronic files, documents, log files, etc., and any such prohibited use of the Services will result in the termination of Subscriber's account, with or without notice."

Where do I draw the line between whether my files are connected with my website or if it counts as archiving files? Each user has their own profile page and their uploaded material will show up there. So doesn't that count as part of the website?

[felgall]

The main issue with files you didn't create yourself and therefore do not own the copyright for is to ensure that you have written permission from the person who does own the copyright to have those files on your site. In the case of files you allow your site's users to upload you would need permission from them to display it on your site and a confirmation that they do actually own the copyright on what they upload. The first person to upload something that belongs to someone else will see your entire account shut down for breaching the TOS even though you weren't the one who uploaded the file.

[COOLORANGEFREEZE]

If the box you're on gets above 96% full, they'll just start moving some of the accounts to a new server - that happens on my server about once a month.

If you're letting other people upload videos to your site, you might run into some problems.

First and foremost, you can't store any copyrighted material on your account. If BH sees a bunch of videos stored on an account, they're going to be taking a very close look at it. Any hint of copyright infringement, and your account will be history.

Second, you can use all the storage you like, as long as the files stored are connected to the website. If you're trying to run a Youtube-like site, it might be tough to argue that all of those files are actually "connected" to the website. Creating a huge repository of files that others can search might be a stretch of the definition of a "website."

This was interesting because I am jumping into the classifieds website business. Now would all the posts/ads by various customers be considered connected to my website since they are all from different folks? Would my repository of ads that others can search be a stretch of the definition of a website?

I hope this won't be a problem. Opinions?