Ask HN: Where is a nice place to host which is not AWS / GCP types

Digital Ocean is always a good bet for an affordable yet reliable server.

Or Netlify or Cloudflare Pages for static content. Both offer server less functions for a fee as well.

Containers via Digital Ocean droplet(s).

Linode is great. Wonderful options, reliable, excellent tools. Been using them for almost a decade.

It's hard to beat Netlify and Vercel for static content. They make it easy and you'll be up and running in seconds.

I know you said Clojure, but it's worth mentioning: if you do choose to make a JavaScript/TypeScript backend, Vercel + Next.js's API routes is a great option. With that combination you'll have a GitHub integrated CI/CD build (if you need it) and serverless functions behind a custom domain with SSL in minutes.

VMs: hetzner, ovh, digital ocean, vultr, linode

PaaS: heroku, render

I’ve been using Vultr for a couple side projects and really like it.

Check out Low End Box for other recommendations.

You can also start with LightSail if you plan to extend it with other AWS features in the future (such as S3). It's a direct competition to Digital Ocean, Linode etc but on Amazon's infrastructure.

Digital Ocean, Linode, OVH

Used all of them and liked all of them

Digital Ocean is a bit better on UI but pricing wise Linode was the best (until they removed their lowest priced plans)

I use Vultr for all my projects. Currently running a VPS for my personal Wordpress blog, another VPS for wikijs, and a third VPS with Caprover that runs a handful of microservices. Vultr has a splendid UX that I really appreciate.

I know you said no large cloud provider, but seriously consider Oracle Cloud Infrastructure for your needs. You can host all your web services and APIs for free lifelong under the free tier limits (and yes its truly free no hidden cost like AWS or GCP) Check out the free tier offering and you won't be disappointed.

If you have an API to run, put it in a container. Bundle the HTML/CSS in the container. Pick a provider that will run a container for you without you needing to maintain a virtual machine or server. (I don't have any non-AWS suggestions, but AWS Fargate and Lambda both work well with containers)

I like Hetzner cloud. It consists of about 5 products. Very straightforward and cheaper than AWS.

After struggling to keep VPSs up to date with security patches for small sites, I've become a fan of shared hosting again. When I was a teen I hosted my sites with Pair.com, and they still have an excellent record and provide full shell access.

If your really want a VPS, they also provide an inexpensive fully managed VPS solution.

I got really tired of keeping the OS and patches up to date; I just want to get to coding. I also hate CPanel-based hosting.

I believe Pair.com is a good solution when you don't want an unmanaged VPS but you don't want to pay for Heroku et al either.

They're based in PA, though. So probably not the best if you're in the West coast.

Been using Hetzner for years.

render.com

you can host static pages and your typical MVC app as separate apps. even database.

all very turnkey

Just curious why not aws?

I don't see anyone saying Scaleway so far. It's a cool, simple cloud. New services are showing up all the time, but it's still VERY simple compared to AWS or Azure. Also I find their pricing invoicing very clear.

New services are often free for testing, sometimes even afterwards (their S3 is still first 75GB free).

I love documentation and web UI of Digital Ocean, but find their pricing a bit to high for tiny projects. Linode is also amazing.

Just a little note: if you are using clojure then you’ll need your machine set up with Java. That’s the important consideration here; it’s not relevant whether you’re using javascript or not because that’s all sent to the client’s web browser (doesn’t run on your server)

It sounds like you want something easy (PaaS). I’m using render.com. A similar one is heroku.

Github pages can host a static website for free https://pages.github.com/ Edit: probably not those clojure files if they run server side

Digital Ocean.

It is better to avoid the giants (Amazon, Microsoft, Google etc.) for small projects as they are too much of a hassle (trying to figure out what you will be billed for) and even expensive. Someone on HN had mentioned once that these large providers make sense, and are affordable, only if you are spending more than $5000 on your existing hosting already. I feel that is a very apt advice.

As for which host to choose, this was the advice I had got 10+ years back, and it still holds true:

1. Check how long they have been in business: You want to look for stability in a hosting company. Older hosts means they have a more stable business and more experience.

2. Check their reputation and support: Do they take their security seriously, have they ever been breached? How is their support - will they respond quickly to your needs?

3. Verify if they run their own data centres: Many small webhosting companies are resellers that just hire servers or instances from other larger providers and manage the software. Or some just resell a white label service while everything is managed by the larger host company.

4. Check if they "oversell": A server can serve only so many instances of a VPS or website. Many webhosting companies oversell the resources they have on the gamble that not all their clients will use the full resource they are buying. If you are running a business you don't want that kind of uncertainity when you expect to scale.

5. Check if they offer the tech you need: FreeBSD servers used to be really popular once, now Linux servers are the rage. Or you may prefer Windows for your .net app. Or even an Oracle DB (if you have money to burn unnecessarily). Or you may prefer a specific version of an OS / DB / software for a particular web app or SaaS you have developed. Different hosts offer different technology. Verify your requirement with the webhost before you commit to them.

Apart from these, other things one may want to consider - if you want "managed service" (where the hosting company manages your software - installation and updation of system software, monitoring your servers etc.) or "unmanaged services" (where you are the system and db admin and monitor and manage the server instance). Or if you want data centres in a particular geographical location. Or if they offer the kind of billing cycle you want and so on. You may also want to find out how generous they are when you hit the server limits of your paid plans - do they shut down your instance without warning, or do they allow an exception for the rare unexpected peak in traffic and resources when your website is slashdotted or appears on HN?

The usual US based hosts that were then highly recommended, based on these ideas, for small projects were:

- Pair (www.pair.com - one of the oldest competent small-to-medium webhosting companies)

- Rackspace (www.rackspace.com - medium-to-large).

- Linode (www.linode.com - came much later, but gained a lot of reputation with their affordable unmanaged VPS hosting services and the easy platform they offered to manage them.)

Having tried all 3, I still personally prefer and recommend Pair and Linode.

Later Digital Ocean (www.digitalocean.com) and Vultr (www.vultr.com) arrived on the scene with more competitive pricing and better hardware and tech than Linode (for a while). DigitalOcean is also good and seems to have gained a good reputation so far. Rackspace lost the interest of the hobbyist crowd when they started focusing more on corporate clients.

I like Digital Ocean the most these days, but other good options are Linode and Hetzner (which is especially good option for us Europeans). Digital Ocean has a great UI, managed databases, S3 alternative object storage, block storage, and more.

Shells[1] is a newer option which promotes a virtual desktop but VPS is also an option. They have recently announced partnerships with different Linux distros and offer reasonable prices.

[1]shells.com

Digital Ocean, Hetzner, Scaleway, Linode, Vultr, kimsufi.ie all seem to be dependable and solid options. Cost effective too.