11–20 of 183 posts
I do skip the static generator part and go with artisinally hand crafted HTML/CSS/JS instead. It’s radically simpler and ultimately better imho.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
S3 is not competitive. Here: https://neocities.org/supporter
Competitive by what metric? My site lives more or less entirely within the AWS free tier. I think my total AWS bill is around $20/mo, and 80% of that is for the stupid number of domain names I’m hosting zones for.
i think of myself as a graybeard (in the article's parlance; i find the term exclusionary) and i use cloudflare in front of github pages. every year i've spent as this craft has seen me accumulate more than a year's worth of new things i'd like to program or learn, 30 years in the list is very long. spending my time and energy doing IT for a static web site is a major waste
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Competitive by what metric? My site lives more or less entirely within the AWS free tier. I think my total AWS bill is around $20/mo, and 80% of that is for the stupid number of domain names I’m hosting zones for.
Quick question: Why wouldn't I use my free tier registrar DNS? Are there really that man DNS queries serviced cause you pay based off the number of responses? Especially if they are stupid domains.
1. I’m lazy, and I already manage a bunch of other stuff in AWS, so it’s convenient for me to have the domains in the same place
2. For some of the domains, I’m serving records that point to other AWS resources (like Cloudfront and S3). AWS’s Route53 has clever helper features when you’re pointing records at other AWS services).
Otherwise, you’re right that there’s plenty of registrars that’ll do perfectly solid DNS
With all these I find it better to stick with old Apache or similar service for speed, rather than a simpler service that only takes care of GET.
don’t forget to add cloudflare workers + r2. the best parts of lambda and s3, without the egress billing.
I don't know how they made it so incredibly easy to learn and get going compared to AWS, but every time I try to figure out how to do AWS I get confused and get put off.
It felt odd to see a doc this comprehensive on static site hosting with no mention of AWS S3/Cloudfront, given how easy it is to push content to an S3 bucket (either manually or via the CI pipeline of your choosing) and then serve it up either direct-from-S3 or via Cloudfront. But then it turns out that this is actually pushing folks towards some new paradigm of static cached HTTP responses instead of files. It pitch…
>We’ve already standardized the hosting side of static sites by using the file system. Worth noting that the incoming younger generations can't and don't into file systems.[1] Yes, anyone who wants to be a webmaster should do their homework, but that is besides the point. We are probably the last generation who can be ubiquitously assumed to have an understanding of files and folders/directories in a computer. [1]: h…