best free web host? geocities.com or 50megs.com?
david webster
Dave
Richard Ballard
"david webster" <noth...@spam.com> writes:
>Hi Im looking to create my first online gallery, does anyone
>have any idea which of the free webhosts out there are the best?
Do artists posting work on free webhosts lose the copyright
to the posted work?
What's in it for the webhost? Why would a webhost offer
this free service?
Thanks in advance.
Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ
--
Consultant specializing in computer networks, imaging & security
Listed as rjballard in "Friends & Favorites" at www.amazon.com
Last book review: "Guerrilla Television" by Michael Shamberg
Lee K
"david webster" <noth...@spam.com> wrote in message
news:10g7a3l...@corp.supernews.com...
> Hi Im looking to create my first online gallery, does anyone have any idea
which of the free webhosts out there are the best?
>
> Dave
>
>
Don't know if it's the best but Yahoo has a free photo album site with
unlimited storage.
http://photos.yahoo.com
Here's the Help site to read the 'rules of the road'
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/photos/
Sample:
Is there a storage limit?
No, there's not. Upload as many photos as you want! Your Yahoo! Photos
account includes free, unlimited storage. There is no limit to the number of
photos or albums you can store online.
To ensure that your photos are safely stored for as long as you need them,
be sure to sign in to your Yahoo! Photos account at least once every six
months. If you do not visit at least once every six months, your account may
become dormant and your photos could be deleted. We will notify you via
email if your account is at risk.
Sabineellen
>Do artists posting work on free webhosts lose the copyright
>to the posted work?
>
>What's in it for the webhost? Why would a webhost offer
>this free service?
So that they can offer advertising on the pages. In most you don't lose the
copyright but you ought to read terms and conditions quite clearly as it all
depends on it. In some you are granting a license to them to use your images.
The Black Sheep
any idea which of the free webhosts out there are the best?
Why go free when web hosting is dirt cheap? For example:
http://www.patcroteau.net/promo/
Richard Ballard
rball...@aol.com (Richard Ballard) writes:
>In article <10g7a3l...@corp.supernews.com>,
>"david webster" <noth...@spam.com> writes:
>
>>Hi Im looking to create my first online gallery, does anyone
>>have any idea which of the free webhosts out there are the best?
>
>Do artists posting work on free webhosts lose the copyright
>to the posted work?
>
>What's in it for the webhost? Why would a webhost offer
>this free service?
Related questions:
1) Are these free webhosts responsive to photographers
in case of service outages? With a for-fee webhosting
service there is incentive for quick service resumption
in case of outage. (The photographer always can take his/her
business and fees elsewhere.) Particularly if a photographer
wants to use a free website as a marketing tool ("Got a big
Customer presentation to make on Monday!"), what leverage
does the photographer have in case of service outage?
2) Are these free webhosts well written? I routinely
encounter commercial websites with poorly conceived HTML.
(Example: A screen-traversing monocolor horizontal pastel band
is constructed from a series of monocolor one pixel wide short
vertical pastel bands. On a 'slow' computer drawing that
screen-traversing horizontal band takes forever, and the
webpage HTML is constructed so that the horizontal band is
drawn, overwritten and then redrawn multiple times before
the webpage is totally constructed.) I detour around slow
websites with poorly written HTML. I purposefully have kept
my good computer off the Internet, and I don't want to wait
forever while my old Internet box draws website eye candy.
Darrell Larose
banner ads. They also have some clause in their TOS (Term of Service)
claiming they have rights to all content. My solution was just to register a
domain, and a commercial webhost.
"david webster" <noth...@spam.com> wrote in message
news:10g7a3l...@corp.supernews.com...
Mike Henley
> In article <20040725092938...@mb-m22.aol.com>,
> rball...@aol.com (Richard Ballard) writes:
>
> >In article <10g7a3l...@corp.supernews.com>,
> >"david webster" <noth...@spam.com> writes:
> >
> >>Hi Im looking to create my first online gallery, does anyone
> >>have any idea which of the free webhosts out there are the best?
> >
> >Do artists posting work on free webhosts lose the copyright
> >to the posted work?
> >
> >What's in it for the webhost? Why would a webhost offer
> >this free service?
>
> Related questions:
>
> 1) Are these free webhosts responsive to photographers
> in case of service outages? With a for-fee webhosting
> service there is incentive for quick service resumption
> in case of outage. (The photographer always can take his/her
> business and fees elsewhere.) Particularly if a photographer
> wants to use a free website as a marketing tool ("Got a big
> Customer presentation to make on Monday!"), what leverage
> does the photographer have in case of service outage?
>
Service outage is very uncommon on such big sites. Those sites may not
really be good as the only thing for a pro. They just don't look
professional.
> 2) Are these free webhosts well written? I routinely
> encounter commercial websites with poorly conceived HTML.
> (Example: A screen-traversing monocolor horizontal pastel band
> is constructed from a series of monocolor one pixel wide short
> vertical pastel bands. On a 'slow' computer drawing that
> screen-traversing horizontal band takes forever, and the
> webpage HTML is constructed so that the horizontal band is
> drawn, overwritten and then redrawn multiple times before
> the webpage is totally constructed.) I detour around slow
> websites with poorly written HTML. I purposefully have kept
> my good computer off the Internet, and I don't want to wait
> forever while my old Internet box draws website eye candy.
>
Some are. Some are not. The success of the site is often an
indication.
Webshots is good for digital images that end up being used as desktop
wallpaper. Usefilm is (supposedly) good for critiques, though I
haven't really found them of any help; the critique just isn't any
good.
Richard Ballard
mnhe...@msn.com (Mike Henley) wrote:
>rball...@aol.com (Richard Ballard) wrote in message
>news:<20040725134706...@mb-m01.aol.com>...
>
>>In article <20040725092938...@mb-m22.aol.com>,
>>rball...@aol.com (Richard Ballard) writes:
>>
>>>In article <10g7a3l...@corp.supernews.com>,
>>>"david webster" <noth...@spam.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>Hi Im looking to create my first online gallery, does anyone
>>>>have any idea which of the free webhosts out there are the best?
>>>
>>>Do artists posting work on free webhosts lose the copyright
>>>to the posted work?
>>>
>>>What's in it for the webhost? Why would a webhost offer
>>>this free service?
>>
>>Related questions:
>>
>>1) Are these free webhosts responsive to photographers
>>in case of service outages? With a for-fee webhosting
>>service there is incentive for quick service resumption
>>in case of outage. (The photographer always can take his/her
>>business and fees elsewhere.) Particularly if a photographer
>>wants to use a free website as a marketing tool ("Got a big
>>Customer presentation to make on Monday!"), what leverage
>>does the photographer have in case of service outage?
>
>Service outage is very uncommon on such big sites. Those sites may not
>really be good as the only thing for a pro. They just don't look
>professional.
I am observing 'too good to be true' (e.g., $5 monthly fee for
500MB storage) webhosting offers. As a computer professional, I
wonder how any organization can offer reliable responsive webhosting
service for a $5 monthly total fee.
I am a skeptical consumer. I wonder if businesses are using
their existing excess computer capacity to enter new markets
(e.g., webhosting) is a downsized business environment.
I also wonder if these low cost offers aren't designed as
'loss leaders' -- i.e., an introductory offer designed to lure
users to the service. At some future time (when moving large
website content volume would be troublesome, and when website
URL changes would confuse existing customers) these low cost
webhosting businesses might raise their monthly prices significantly.
>>2) Are these free webhosts well written? I routinely
>>encounter commercial websites with poorly conceived HTML.
>>(Example: A screen-traversing monocolor horizontal pastel band
>>is constructed from a series of monocolor one pixel wide short
>>vertical pastel bands. On a 'slow' computer drawing that
>>screen-traversing horizontal band takes forever, and the
>>webpage HTML is constructed so that the horizontal band is
>>drawn, overwritten and then redrawn multiple times before
>>the webpage is totally constructed.) I detour around slow
>>websites with poorly written HTML. I purposefully have kept
>>my good computer off the Internet, and I don't want to wait
>>forever while my old Internet box draws website eye candy.
>
>Some are. Some are not. The success of the site is often an
>indication.
Business startups are interesting. They often employ the
philosophy "How can we profitably employ our existing assets?"
Excess computer capacity and an idle group of programmers
might form the kernel of a webhosting business startup.
Startups in a new business areas don't always understand
where to expend their quality control resources.
A webhosting service utilizing slow, poorly written HTML
inadvertantly can discourage a freelance photographer's
potential customers. It is difficult to excite customers about
the photography when the website vehicle lumbers along
awkwardly like a broken-down horse and buggy.
"All Rights Reserved"?
If I 'right' must I reserve?
I got no problems.
Other people got problems.
00: 18+ _8 02 03/35 06 09
Don Wiss
>david webster <noth...@spam.com> wrote:
>> Hi Im looking to create my first online gallery, does anyone have
>any idea which of the free webhosts out there are the best?
>
>Why go free when web hosting is dirt cheap? For example:
>http://www.patcroteau.net/promo/
I agree that free web hosts are not the way to go. With domain
registrations at $8/year at godaddy.com, and hosts like the above, I see no
reason to put up with slow loading and ads that someone else is making
money from.
The host you list above is most reasonable for small sites. But as the size
of the storage and bandwidth grows, it becomes relatively expensive. Now
the $5/month sites do tend to come and go. So you need to be able to
reconstruct the site at a new host without much difficulty.
My most recent host is www.ixwebhosting.com. I am happy with them. I run
over 5 GBs a month in transfers, so I mainly look for high bandwidth. So at
ixwebhosting I have the $7/month plan to get 10 GBs of transfers. And that
gives me 1,500 MB of storage space. I am not using anywhere near that much
space! My pictures are modest in size.
You can check out the loading speed by visiting my pictures at:
http://donwiss.com/pictures/
Now I cannot advise on software to manage the pictures. My html code is
generated by a program I wrote. So I know nothing about what software is
available.
Don <donwiss at panix.com>.