Tell me more ×
Webmasters Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for pro webmasters. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 0 down vote favorite

I want to start a filehosting and filesharing website like rapidshare.com / mediafire.com. I'm thinking of using hostmonster as my webhost, as they are offering unlimited hosting space and bandwidth. What things I'll have to be concerned with? Any further suggestsions

EDIT:

Just found that, hostmonster doesn't allow such services. What are the alternatives then?

share|improve this question
3  
Read the terms (hostmonster.com/cgi/info/terms.html) carefully: "Please note, however, that the Hostmonster service is designed to host websites. Hostmonster does NOT provide unlimited space for online storage, backups, or archiving of electronic files..." – paulmorriss May 21 '12 at 11:16

2 Answers

up vote 4 down vote

I don't think anything below a dedicated server (or a powerful virtual one) will do. And they do not come cheap. You could also host your own server, but there, again, you will need a fast internet connection (like fibre optic) and backups and redundancy and the like.

Note that you will not only require a server, but also support or a tech team to solve performance issues.

These are all things that you do not get with cheap shared hosting. I suggest you do more research on this matter. But my bet is that unless you invest some serious money, you do not get to host your own file sharing service.

Edit: If you are serious about Filehosting, you might want to look for filehosters that offer some kind of reselling program with branding (i.e. you can use your own label). A list of Filehosts can be found here: http://premium-account.org/en/1-home.

I was not able to find such an offer quickly, though.

share|improve this answer
1  
Agree, the fact that OP needs to ask this question gives away that they are not up to creating a full blown file-sharing service like RapidShare/Mediafire (who manage petabtyes of data) – Dunhamzzz May 21 '12 at 12:35
1  
@Dunhamzzz "...gives away that they are not up to creating a full blown file-sharing..." I'd be careful with this kind of normative statement. This site is to help people, not to judge them. – user 99572 is fine May 21 '12 at 13:23
Well it was helpful in telling OP you should be way past this level (especially with hosting) before trying to create the next RapidShare. – Dunhamzzz May 21 '12 at 13:38
up vote 1 down vote

You could use an API to store the actual data on AmazonS3, for example. All you need to host web-wise is the interface, which could be very light. Keep the two parts as separate entities. I don't know of a better service than Amazon S3 for that kind of massive storage ability.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.