Free Hosts - Use them Or Not?

[Raven]

This is a big if...and, apologies if you've seen this post on other boards.

I'm conducting a little information gathering for a client.

IF there were a free host who was not a thief, who didn't steal your bandwidth or redirect your traffic, would you use one?

I used to use them; but haven't in recent years.....

What are some features that you would want?

[hova]

nope, the prices for good hosting are so low there is no need to use a free one.......unless it's Terra that's always good

[Raven]

So you think the only ones who would consider a free host would be newbies??

[hyper]

Originally Posted by Raven

So you think the only ones who would consider a free host would be newbies??

no free hosts can be used effectively for crosslinking

[Quotealex]

I would consider them only if:
1 - allowed hosting movies
2 - hosted my domain name(s)
3 - had a few scripts included (i.e. trade, TGP. toplist, gallery rotation scripts)
4 - guaranteed in writing that they will not redirect or pull any funny business

[hova]

Originally Posted by Raven

So you think the only ones who would consider a free host would be newbies??

No, if you use them in the right way they can be the right thing to use. But I don't have any need for them.

[rayzor]

yep.. free hosts are for newbies and cheaters

it's not a long term solution, but it's great for newbies with little cash to test the waters.

[David!]

Originally Posted by Alex from Montreal

I would consider them only if:
1 - allowed hosting movies
2 - hosted my domain name(s)
3 - had a few scripts included (i.e. trade, TGP. toplist, gallery rotation scripts)
4 - guaranteed in writing that they will not redirect or pull any funny business

I will be offering free hosting very shortly, and I will let "trusted" webmasters use regular scripts to run tgp's and trade traffic

[Raven]

Ok, thanks.

Here's another question.

If you had incredible amounts of bandwidth, what would you do with it? If not a free host?

[rayzor]

Originally Posted by Raven

Ok, thanks.

Here's another question.

If you had incredible amounts of bandwidth, what would you do with it? If not a free host?

ummm.. start a hosting company?

[tolik]

alot of partnership programms offer freehosts with cgi/php/mysql for affiliates with domain support etc. usual virtual hosts. you only need promoute programm sites from this host.

for example - see DamCash in my signature. i have 2 pics thumbs sites at their host and 1 movies - never have any problems. .htaccess - all work - just are usual virtual hosts - one server for script based sites - other one - for tgp/mgp galleries posting.

i using about 10 or more programms right now who giving hosts.

[Raven]

I have a client who is going to look at these answers and then decide. So, the more you input your ideas, needs, negatives and positives, the more likely it is he will be able to put together something that wins for everyone.

Thanks in advance.

[Lace]

nope, never use a freehost.

[Pipeline Q]

It is a must that freehosts support domains that you own. Any that don't, you know they are planning on pulling the plug in 2 or 3 months and taking your traffic.

[jt420]

i dont use free hosts unless its provided by the sponsor.

[Raven]

Originally Posted by jt420

i dont use free hosts unless its provided by the sponsor.

Do tgps accept galleries created on free hosts provided by sponsors?

[Strife]

Bandwidth prices are so low these days that free hosts are becoming obsolete even for newbies

[Quotealex]

Originally Posted by Raven

Do tgps accept galleries created on free hosts provided by sponsors?

Most likely yes if you use your own domain on it. They can't tell the difference between a paid host and a sponsor's free host IMO, there are no footers nor headers on these freehosts;).

[Yngwie]

there's also the fact that most free hosts are slower then molasses and get slower as more traffic comes in. Then the fact that not many tgps accept free hosts unless specified otherwise (a host that they trust which is not many in most cases). Then you have the no FTP bullshit.. Having no ftp is crap.. I remember back in 1997 when I had to upload through my browser and strangely enough many free hosts are still like this. I could be wrong since I haven't used a free host since 1998 but I've looked at some of them. So ftp uploads would be a plus. Maybe even a mail account to go with the free hosting account (even better if the host will host your domain. That way you can have [email protected] to go along with your domain)

Another plus would be to have multiple server where there are only a limited amount of accounts per server. This way the server doesn't get pushed beyond its limits and slow everyones shit down. Keep thing fast and honest and more people will trust you and use you.

Now we have the header and\or footer.. Webmasters don't want a FPA on top or at the bottom or both that's taking up too much damn room. Also, when a free host has too many outgoing link in the header\footer and a webmaster submits a gallery to a tgp that only allows 3 outgoing link your header\footer fucks them (in most cases anyway)

So lets see...

Fast
no insane header and/or footers
ftp access
owner of host not being a cheating, stealing prick
managing to get TGPs to allow your free host
not over loading the server(s)
allowing webmasters to run scritps (cgi, php or whatever) - like someone in this thread mentioned

That would make for a pretty good free host I would think.

[Raven]

I've posted this question on a few boards....and the answers all seem to be the same.

I used them back in '98. They were pretty productive then. But, that was then and this is now.

[Raven]

All good answers.

Any more?

[TheMob]

nope, don't use them. never.

[mardigras]

If I were going to use a free host to save money on bandwidth I would at least have a cheap paid account for index and search engine pages then link to higher bandwidth pages (galleries, movies if allowed) on the free host.

I've still got a page up from 97 or 98 on a free host. It is the most unreliable service I've ever seen and they arbitrarily change whether or not they have ads (and what kind) and movies have rarely worked or been redirected but the main HTML pages have stayed spidered in the search engines. I made a bit of money with it back then but none directly from it now, I pointed all of it's links to my domains several years ago and it still sends a bit of regular traffic to my current projects.

So I'd say yes, use free hosts if you'd like to to experiment for a variety of search engine traffic and feeds to your other pages, but don't build a main site on them.

[Raven]

Originally Posted by mardigras

If I were going to use a free host to save money on bandwidth I would at least have a cheap paid account for index and search engine pages then link to higher bandwidth pages (galleries, movies if allowed) on the free host.

I've still got a page up from 97 or 98 on a free host. It is the most unreliable service I've ever seen and they arbitrarily change whether or not they have ads (and what kind) and movies have rarely worked or been redirected but the main HTML pages have stayed spidered in the search engines. I made a bit of money with it back then but none directly from it now, I pointed all of it's links to my domains several years ago and it still sends a bit of regular traffic to my current projects.

So I'd say yes, use free hosts if you'd like to to experiment for a variety of search engine traffic and feeds to your other pages, but don't build a main site on them.

Interestingly, I'm getting some icq replies from friends of mine, American and European. They use free hosts in conjunction with real hosting, which is what we did when we first started out.

[rayzor]

the problem with most free hosts is that most experienced webmasters and TGP owners have been burned by free hosts in the past. most TGPs that send any form of traffic have blacklisted free hosts. getting them to change this rule is nearly impossible. considering the price of bandwith these days, any experienced webmaster that still uses a free host is either a) out of his mind (who wants to put all their stuff on a free host and have it close down in 6 months - you get what you pay for in terms of customer service, speed, quality, etc) or b) plans on cheating.

you want to know what webmasters want? all the advantages of paid hosting... for FREE. any free host that is willing to do this, you have to wonder.. where are they making the money? is header and footer and 404 traffic enough? most likely not and you guessed it, they end up redirecting traffic and other dirty tricks.

only exception to this is revsharehosting... but it is really a variation of a free host. even they had to close signups to experience webmasters. anything that is free will be used and abused.

[BastarD]

It's 100% better to use paid hosting with your own domain, gallery checkers for example are looking totally diferrent and you.. just like you come one day to suit shop wearing tshirt and jeans and the other day you come wearing well fashioned suit..

[flashfire]

why would anyone ever use a freehost when you can get shared hosting for like $5...is it really worth the stolen traffic and banner ads?

[Raven]

People would use them in conjunction with their paid hosting, not as a stand alone, I should think.

[rayzor]

Originally Posted by flashfire

why would anyone ever use a freehost when you can get shared hosting for like $5...is it really worth the stolen traffic and banner ads?

that will get you what 1GB of traffic? if you're doing TGP galleries, you will need a minimum of 100GB of traffic and expect that to go up to 1000GB as you grow. the risk of overage charges will be high!

experienced webmasters making money = paid hosting all the way
newbies = free host until you can make enough to cover hosting

[Magg]

Originally Posted by rayzor

ummm.. start a hosting company?

Thats exactly what is NOT needed... you dont start a hosting company because you have excess bw

[rayzor]

Originally Posted by Raven

Interestingly, I'm getting some icq replies from friends of mine, American and European. They use free hosts in conjunction with real hosting, which is what we did when we first started out.

the key is "when we first started out"... if you are a serious webmaster and can't afford the extra couple of bucks to ensure all your content/sites are 100% reliable, you shouldn't be in the biz.

[rayzor]

Originally Posted by Magg

Thats exactly what is NOT needed... you dont start a hosting company because you have excess bw

raven didn't say his client had excess bw... you wouldn't want to start a hosting company let alone a free host with excess bw. he said they had "incredible amounts of bandwidth."

raven.. maybe you can clarify what "incredible amounts of bandwidth" means?

[Raven]

Originally Posted by rayzor

raven didn't say his client had excess bw... you wouldn't want to start a hosting company let alone a free host with excess bw. he said they had "incredible amounts of bandwidth."

raven.. maybe you can clarify what "incredible amounts of bandwidth" means?

Well, first off, I'm a girl...

I don't mean to be so vague. I'm not sure what his bandwidth situation is, other than he's got lots and lots. That isn't so much different than incredible amounts, is it?

But, that's what I know.

And, I am thinking that anyone who wants to start something like a free host better have scads of bandwidth or go out of business real fast.

[rayzor]

Originally Posted by Raven

Well, first off, I'm a girl...

I don't mean to be so vague. I'm not sure what his bandwidth situation is, other than he's got lots and lots. That isn't so much different than incredible amounts, is it?

But, that's what I know.

And, I am thinking that anyone who wants to start something like a free host better have scads of bandwidth or go out of business real fast.

sorry miss raven... my bad!

it's best to make sure exactly what his bw situation is so you can answer him/her better. i know of newbies trying to be a TGP submitter on a 5 GB/month virtual account! it might also be useful to know where he is getting this bw from. if he is buying the bandwidth in bulk, you might want to do one thing whereas if it's bandwidth already bought for another project and left over you might want to do something else.