Amazon CloudFront vs Staticaly: What are the differences?
Developers describe Amazon CloudFront as "Content delivery with low latency and high data transfer speeds". Amazon CloudFront can be used to deliver your entire website, including dynamic, static, streaming, and interactive content using a global network of edge locations. Requests for your content are automatically routed to the nearest edge location, so content is delivered with the best possible performance. On the other hand, Staticaly is detailed as "A free CDN for Git repositories, WordPress, images and more". An open source project and free CDN hosting for static files. Pulls from GitHub, Gitlab, Bitbucket, and more.
Amazon CloudFront and Staticaly can be primarily classified as "Content Delivery Network" tools.
Some of the features offered by Amazon CloudFront are:
- Fast- Using a network of edge locations around the world, Amazon CloudFront caches copies of your static content close to viewers, lowering latency when they download your objects and giving you the high, sustained data transfer rates needed to deliver large popular objects to end users at scale.
- Simple- A single API call lets you get started distributing content from your Amazon S3 bucket or Amazon EC2 instance or other origin server through the Amazon CloudFront network.
- Designed for use with other Amazon Web Services Amazon CloudFront is designed for use with other Amazon Web Services, including Amazon S3, where you can durably store the definitive versions of your static files, and Amazon EC2, where you can run your application server for dynamically generated content.
On the other hand, Staticaly provides the following key features:
- Static files CDN
- Imgpx: Image Acceleration
- WordPress static files CDN
Staticaly is an open source tool with 62 GitHub stars and 38 GitHub forks. Here's a link to Staticaly's open source repository on GitHub.
What is Amazon CloudFront?
What is Statically?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Why do developers choose Statically?
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using Statically?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
I love CloudFront. All my assets are hosted by them, and they cut page load time in half, and my average bill is around $0.15/month. They're good, fast, and cheap — pick three!
We chose CloudFront mostly because it’s incredibly popular. But also because it’s the recommended CDN for Heroku, which means there shouldn’t be any problems using them together. Rails makes it really easy to drop in a CDN reference for your app so that when your assets get compiled, they’re shipped off to the CDN and then deployed with your app.
So anytime we push to Heroku, we’re pushing up to CloudFront (if the assets don’t already exist). One major issue we still haven’t been able to solve involves Fonts. Has anyone actually been able to get fonts served up through CloudFront using Rails 4 and Heroku? Literally spent hours researching this and can’t find any solutions. We ended up just referencing a CDN for all the font libraries.
We have a separate distribution for each environment, since I don’t think it’s possible to use the same distribution for the multiple domains.
I use CloudFront to front the static website at zerotoherojs.com that I host in an s3 bucket.
This way, I don’t have to worry about scalability or performance, as I’ll know that the content will be delivered to the users as fast as possible from the closest edge location.
Parked in front of an nginx instance that serves all of our static assets. Performance and reliability have been excellent, and the header pass-through rules are wonderful. Price is affordable, as well.
In my opinion, the best Content Delivery Network for the money. This, along with other services from AWS's ecosystem make this the easy choice for CDN. Fast, simple and cheap.