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.
Why DO,AWS Doesn't Provide Web Hosting?
Hi ,a question is coming in my mind from last few weeks. That why AWS, Digital Ocean doesn't provide web hosting,domains? Like web hosting products are profitable as per i know. Domain is not that much
So why they don't sell it? AWS provides domain reg not others.
But maximum companies like DO,AWS,Vultr,Linode or Akamai..all doens't focus on this.. so can you tell for what they don't? Any explanation
Comments
The profit for domains and hosting is very slim.
These companies provide website hosting but target a more knowledgeable audience.
DigitalOcean has App Platform.
AWS has Elastic Beanstalk.
There is very little margin in web hosting, and it also requires a huge support team.
Full-stack developers or teams generally don't need support, provided they have all the tools at their fingertips.
The process of logging in to FTP and uploading new files is quite an old one. We develop everything on GIT; we have Actions to deploy our code. We know what has changed, who changed it and when.
Not like that...As per i know margins on web hosting is not preety dat
There is probrably many factors, amongst others:
They rely on their own developed infrastructure and have decided not to work on creating a shared hosting panel.
The majority of their revenue comes from large enterprise companies who run their own hosting environment.
They would have to dedicate a lot of resources to provide a service where they likely cannot add any new value nor would it target the audience that generate their largest profits.
And they'd be competing with their own customers, who offer shared web hosting off their infrastructure.
Thanks guys
you can host static sites on aws s3. (.html) and even photo galleries. -- that the only basic hosting they provide. But not shared hosting, as they mostly target developers.
I had eariler hosting with such WebFaction - for developers, it was shared hosting with no control panel like cpanel, but it was really made for developers in mind, costed $10/mo 100GB SSD, unlimited CPU, RAM. Later they got bought by HEG, then Godaddy and then got closed. But their original creators started Opalhosting on similar platform.
Simple response is... It's not worth their time. They let people manage their own stuff.. For shared webhosting people will have dependency on Host to a great extent.
To echo what others have said, they've decided to focus on providing the hardware and the software to automate provisioning of virtual machines, something that often costs a ton of money for any business—there's substantial value in providing that to a would-be customer, often at a significant savings over installing and maintaining on-premises hardware.
Their target market never has, and never will be, people just wanting to get a website online because it would cost them even more money to offer that. It's a big oversimplifcation of their stance but it basically comes down to: "we handle the hardware, and all the costs that come with it, you handle what you run on it"
@4te56 not really, the clouds mentioned are actively trying to get away from offering raw hardware, AWS is the most successful at it. That’s not to say that they want to offer shared hosting with cPanel and a bunch of tickets asking how to install WordPress, but most of AWS products isn’t hardware, it’s managed hosting. DigitalOcean and the rest you mentioned are trying to get there too (although not at all to the same extent)
@emgh Fair point. I was responding more to OP's question about why companies in the IaaS space don't offer domains/managed hosting. There's definitely a trend for companies that aren't Amazon/Microsoft to add more managed capabilities to their platforms, but they, like you pointed out are much more specific than catch-all shared hosting services.
You can get pretty far with static files plus an API, which AWS already offers (S3 + Lambda). This is the direction web hosting is moving in - static sites that can be effectively cached on CDN nodes, plus an API on a separate subdomain for any dynamic stuff.
AWS only provides the building blocks for it, for developers. They're not interested in consumer-facing services - there's be far more overhead in terms of support, for limited benefit.
shared-reseller is heavier on support, i would say that's pretty much it.
Digitalocean has acquired Cloudways to provide managed hosting services.
AWS has web hosting service attached with their Lightsail, comes with cPanel and Plesk.
You may also register domain on AWS using their Route53 service.