New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
For example you are a one man show, at least when your statement at the companies house is correct, your balance also doesn't looks this healthy. So why I should trust to build a business with a one man show company like yours? When I can have AWS?
Also I don't shifting any numbers - and why you take this all personal? I just ask how much 50TB storage with 50TB will coast on a dedicated server? I don't know where you see 150 in my posts?!
Check Companies House more carefully mate, you missed at least one person from the public record.
No one's forcing you to, heck I haven't made a single offer in this thread - what's wrong with you ? Why you take it so personal? Of course you can be with AWS at proven whopping 800% premium, it's up to you.
As I said, if you're interested, do reach out.
Oh ok than a two man show. Sorry for that. It makes it much better.
Yes and I am fine to pay more for a provider that will exist on long term than safe some bugs and be lost in the future. And now I am happy with AWS for my projects. But good luck for your business.
Wow that escalated quickly.
I agree largely with @Clouvider. If your service is reasonably popular Bandwidth should trump storage costs. Perhaps look into both cold and hot storage down the line too. This can be as simple as servers with different storage densities (e.g cold storage could be 36TB of storage with 1Gbps of transfer, whereas hot storage <2TB of storage with 1Gbps+ etc depending on scale).
One other piece of advice, scale out not up. It's far cheaper.
For starting it would be better if you go with a couple of dedicated servers, just use a mixed configuration.
For example, if you make "SoYouStart" your only provider:
Storage server:
BK-8T (Intel Celeron J1900, 4GB DDR3, SoftRaid 2x4TB SATA) £30.56
Transcoder server:
E3-SAT-1-16 (Intel Xeon E3-1225v2, 16GB DDR3, SoftRaid 2x2TB SATA) £25.50
Main server:
E3-SSD-1-16 (Intel Xeon E3-1225v2, 16GB DDR3, SoftRaid 3x120GB SSD) £25.50
You might maxout the network adapter of your storage server (I'm not sure if its 1gigabit or 100mb), but for the price you could have 2 storage servers and split the files on them.
Their game server line would work better for transcoding but they are limited on storage, if you pick up the biggest SSD that would cost you £59.99.
Search for multiple providers and try different configurations.
Also are you sure you need all those resources from the very begining?
You might be fine with just the main server and the transcoder server suggested at the beginning.
Another idea. Although you can use Amazon S3, there are several other S3 compatible storage providers - Delimiter is dirt cheap, throw BunnyCDN in front of it and you're off to the races.
@goldhat S3 is going to cost you a lung if you start using it for your bootstrap startup.
Roll up your sleeves and get your own S3-compatible storage.
I started playing with this and have a hetzner and an online summer special box running LeoFS
Your bandwidth and cost storage will be a fraction to what you will be paying S3. With a budget of $200 you can squeeze probably another 2 hetzner auction servers for your S3 storage.
$200 budget is not enough for S3 for a video sharing app. I think you need to add another zero to make it $2000 for a bootstrap video sharing app on S3.
who?
delimiter.com
back to my original message, who?
Are you playing retarded?
who?
who?
John Doe
You'll want wowza for streaming live, and if you want just saved streaming then skip S3. Use Backblaze, use a CDN like BunnyCDN, profit is better on that way. Further, skip MySQL, PHP - use node or python (@joepie91) as that'll speed up run time and ultimately it's just better. Use Node, Mongo and Angular or React for front end.
For CDN I can really recommend BunnyCDN
On the other hand, with the latency that CDN.net shows I'd be sad even delivering content from there.
PUSHRcdn runs on cogent ... or fdcservers :-D you know, prem quality, worldwide.
At OVH maybe?
We don't serve worldwide and we don't accelerate websites. We serve large bandwidth video and software services in EU and US and we do it well. We are no good for CSS, JS and other small objects. Anyway, I like Bunny CDN too and they offer a great solution. The rest is on the customers, that is what free trials are for.
Test IP? Also, since you claim that you have a great video delivery network... when did you open shop?
I've never heard of PUSHRcdn.
Edit: Testing will need to wait, as the sidebar on your site is broken on mobile.
Yeah video service will be costly in regards of infrastructure.
He really wants lots of cores for the webserver to handle as many clients as possible at the same time, while for the transcoding server you should think about an higher clocked CPU versus lots of cores. (he was actually right in the first approach)
????
ACD isn't S3.
@OP: Check out https://www.jwplayer.com/ for video hosting if this works with your app.
Mobile is broken at present.
We developed it in late 2014 to serve a file cloud for which the ad-revenue based business model did not allow a traditional CDN to be used due to price concerns. We went into beta in march this year with a few customers and opened for public last month.
http://demo.pushrcdn.com/sintel_trailer-1080p.mp4
http://demo.pushrcdn.com/1000Mb.dat
96.9.224.3
172.93.217.18
@PUSHRcdn What makes you different though? Apart from video delivery, there are other options available (MaxCDN, BunnyCDN, etc.).
We cater to individuals and businesses that can't afford/don't want to pay for traffic (we are unmetered) and don't have huge budgets or are just starting up. These are usually websites, services and mobile apps that are very content heavy. One of our startup customers sustains ~6Gbps during weekend peak hours and their only other option to do this without breaking the bank would be to build their own CDN (or get VC funding). Apart from the cost effectiveness factor, we are constantly developing features that you may not find with other networks - speed limits on per IP basis, simultaneous connections limits, a file migration assistant. We now work on a CDN stacking feature which would allow customers that need presence in regions where we can not provide service to mix us up with another CDN or their own servers and still use us in EU&US while we redirect the rest of the traffic to the other services. Inbuilt video transcoding engine will be in the works from tomorrow for a new customer that we are now boarding, and will be directly integrated with their CDN storage.
@PUSHRcdn Would try it you expanded to more locations
We have a roadmap for this, but it is not possible for me to provide an ETA on what will happen when, as these are very dynamic times for us and we focus on doing things right rather than fast. Thanks for considering us and for the questions!
@PUSHRcdn hello, any good promo for us?
You couldn't have chosen a poorer choice of words, considering your product.
Now, I happened to work for a huge video/software delivery CDN myself.
I can tell you a secret - being on solely cogent links isn't great if you're trying to deliver video content with a decent speed/throughput towards a bunch of ISPs.
I agree that the amount of pops doesn't have to be many, because having a few high capacity pops makes a lot more sense with working with a lot of data.
However doing it on cogent-only... Naaaah
Thanks for the feedback, @Zerpy !