-NicolasTHOU SHALL NOT POST-PADhttp://www.webmasterpeers.com//image...teammember.gif
Member of the Month - April
since im still starting, i don't need much to spend...
Paid for me. Home is not worth the effort.
Out of the 2 options I would pay for hosting, but otherwise I just take the free option
To tell you the truth, Paid is the way to go. There are several problems with hosting at home
-No 24/7 monitoring
-Most ISPs Block or Restrict this
When I started off, I did host at home, but after several weeks I found out that it would not work. I eventually went with Shared Hosting, then Reseller Hosting, then a VPS and now Dedicated.
█ Keith I. Myers█ K-Disk Networks - Reseller Hosting Specialists
█ Affordable Semi-Dedicated Reseller, Master Reseller and Alpha Reseller Hosting Done Right
█ End User Ticket Support Available | FFMPEG Active on All Plans
I would host it at home if i my ISP provided static ip's. No point buying when you can host at home for free since CentOS is free and it would require any free control panel to handle your site
I think it would be a lot safer to hire a hosting service instead of setting up your own. If something crashes and your not around to fix it your website could be down for a while.
Submit Your Proxy to A fast Growing Proxy list and receive free traffic. Speedy Proxy
Having a host is in my future plans, never even thought about hosting it my self and i am still with "paying for host" variant.
I think that hosting at home is a bad idea,why ?
Its simple,for starters,your connection,no way you can match a datacentre connection,then security,also a major problem.What about power ? Daily Backups...there are so many reasons not to do it,and almost none to do it,its always better to get a VPS/dedi at a datacenter then to experiment around,sure having a home server is a great think,but not for hosting your public sites,its for home media,backups etc...
|Nico Lawsons - Quality Web Hosting at WiredStorm
|cPanel with Softaculous and 24/7 Email (Ticket) Support & Live Chat