Q: What’s the difference between storing files on Amazon S3 and serving it using the S3MediaVault.com plugin, as opposed to hosting the files right on your web site and having DAP serve them directly?

A: If you have a large amount of video, audio and other files, then a lot of people viewing and downloading them from your site (if they are stored on your site itself) will use up a lot of resources on your server – like site loading time, server memory, server bandwidth, etc – and your site could slow down considerably.

Plus of course, there are also bandwidth charges that your host will charge you with for all of those downloads, which are usually not very cheap.

Instead, if the files are stored on Amazon S3, then you don’t have to worry about your site slowing down, or you using up too much bandwidth and getting slapped with huge bandwidth fees, because the files are being served from Amazon’s huge S3 servers which have tons more resources and speed compared to your web host. Plus in the long run, the bandwidth is also going to be cheaper on S3 compared to your host.

And don’t put too much faith in your web host’s “Unlimited Bandwidth” clause, because if you read the fine-print carefully, you’ll see that as per their TOS, if you consume large amounts of bandwidth and use too much of the server resources, this could cause other web sites (belonging to others) on the same server to slow down and have a degrade in performance. And they could consider this abuse of their TOS, and could either slap you with huge bandwidth or server utilization fees, or even ask you to take your web site elsewhere because you’re causing issues for other site owners on the same server.