Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) - Great option to host your static websites | TrustRadius

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is used by the department of engineering to host several static websites. The apps are written mainly in Angular and Jekyll.
We host the websites in S3 buckets, distribute them through Cloudfront which provide a CDN and an SSL connection, and then set up the domain that will be used through DNS configuration at Cloudflare.

Pros and Cons

Outstanding UI/UX (drag & drop features help a lot)
Per-file permission system (make a file public or not)

Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) does not provide SSL. Right now, you always need to use Cloudfront if you want to have SSL.

Return on Investment

The amount of time we've saved deploying our websites and files to Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) has been tremendous. The other option would have been to host them ourselves in a dedicated server.
We've saved a requisite amount of money by hosting our static websites in an Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) bucket instead of VPS.

Support Rating

10

It does its work. I have no complaints.

Key Insights

Do you think Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) delivers good value for the price?

Yes

Are you happy with Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)'s feature set?

Yes

Did Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) live up to sales and marketing promises?

Yes

Did implementation of Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) go as expected?

Yes

Would you buy Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) again?

Yes

Other Software Used

1Password, Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2), Amazon CloudFront

Likelihood to Recommend

Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is what you are looking for if you require to host static files. That includes serverless websites, images, videos, etc.
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is not suited for web sites that run on a backend (Django, ASP.NET web forms, etc.) because it does not run any server for them to execute.