Good CDN
-
Dose anyone know of a good CDN? Free if poss!!
It is for use on a joomla v2.5 site
Thanks
Richard
-
New WAF/CDN's
Only one offers a free plan also
I must be upfront and TAGFEE I am a partner of Imperva the company that owns Incapula.
Incapula now has a free offer on their content delivery network, of course, there are two catches.
- If your site Is encrypted a.k.a. Using SSL or https:// you must choose a paid plan.
- You do not get access to their phenomenal rewrite rules which can speed up your site quite a bit. Still, if you have no or no intention to use https this is better than CloudFlare when it comes to speed plus much better when it comes to security, but you must pay for the safety on both networks
The second content delivery network is not free. But worth mentioning.
StackPath is a new CDN/WAF built on MaxCDN's network. However, it offers you so much more for the base price of $20 month compared to what that would cost on MaxCDN hundreds of dollars a month.
This CDN is unique because you get so much for the money. I bring it up only because people browsing this will hopefully find this useful.
Hopefully, this is of use people checking out this question.
All the best,
Tom
-
I use MaxCDN at my place of work, it has proved itself to be very good, easy to set up and relatively inexpensive depending on the plan. As per Thomas and Thomas - CloudFlare is great as a free version.
-
- amazon Cloudfront is the best...
-
As mentioned by Thomas, I would really have a look at cloudflare, their free plan for me personally performs much better than other paid content delivery networks.
-
A free content delivery network the best one would be https://www.cloudflare.com/ is completely free and very high-quality & very simple to set up and will accelerate your site quite a bit. with a network that keeps growing, I would say if you're looking for completely free this is the only way to go. Here's a larger photo of the one below.
http://i.imgur.com/CikgNp4.png
**The same goes for Incapsula.com free plan, but if you do not log in often enough, they will turn it off on a free program. If you get their base paid offering, it is an incredible CDN as well. **
If you're looking to spend tiny bit more money but want a pure CDN to check out keyCDN CDNFi, CDN 77 Max CDN Rackspace CDN uses Akamai, and it's a bargain.
If Looking for great content delivery networks fastly, CacheFly.com, edge cast, Turbobytes
http://www.cdnplanet.com/cdns/
If you are looking for a higher quality CDN unique just content delivery CDN or information on CDN's, this is a list of reviews capabilities of each CDN and the cost and comparison
I hope this helps,
Tom
-
AWS, Google Cloud.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Just moved to CDN and site dropped in Google
Hi there, I have been modifying a clients site for months now trying to get higher up in Google for the term "wedding dresses essex" on the website https://www.preciousmomentsbridalwear.co.uk/ It's always ranked around 7th / 8th place and we want to try and get it into 4/5th position ideally. I have optimised pages and then due to the site speed not being that great we moved it to MaxCDN this week which has made the site much faster, but now we have dropped to number 10 in Google and in danger of dropping out of the first page. I was hoping that making the site much faster for desktop and mobile would help not hinder! Any help would be appreciated! Simon
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Doublestruck0 -
Why is hosting good for SEO?
I've heard a few people mention this now. I have seen hosting packages range from £5 to £1000 per month, and I understand that each comes with their own amounts of storage space, bandwidth and all. Now I understand that page speed is important to SEO and the type of hosting will dictate your page speed, but other than this why is hosting important to SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | moon-boots0 -
OSE - How to determine good links to build on...?
Hey Guys, Weather it be OSE, ahrefs, etc. How do you determine if the link is worth using to build a backlink on? I know to look for a higher DA/PA and overall established links. I want very quality sites for external links (as we all do) but I also want to know what to look for and what to bypass when determining if I should build a backlink on the domain. These are a Few examples / questions i have sorry if they are basic: (the below are all specific examples) 1. If a site has an article and that article page is a DA 65 / PA 1 with Zero (0) established links to that article my backlink is on; would it be link building worthy? Should I leave a backlink, why? ex. lots of different blogspot.com blogs pointing back at my site..^^ Same domian, different blog any benefit? 2. If a site is a PR2 DA 30/ PA 32 with 14 root domains, 250 total links.... Would a link like this give me any benefit or should I skip links like this? Why? 3. What main factors do you focus on/look for and know when & when not leave a backlink to your site when using a tool like OSE, Ahrefs? 4. Should I even worry about a sites PR when linkbuilding since PR doesnt play that big of a role anymore opposed to high quality backlinks? Ive seen PR 7 sites outranked by PR1 site with 200 high quality backlinks to it Thanks for any help and any help is GREATLY appreciated. 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Circa4440 -
Anyone know if seomaximus.com is good for linkbuilding
hi guys i find a service seomaximus.com want to know if anyone use it and if its good?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | adulter0 -
Is there a way to show random blocks of text to users without it affecting SEO? Cloaking for good?
My client has a pretty creative idea for his web copy. In the body of his page there will be a big block of text that contains random industry related terms but within that he will bold and colorize certain words that create a coherent sentence. Something to the effect of "cut through the noise with a marketing team that gets results". Get it? So if you were to read the paragraph word-for-word it would make no sense at all. It's basically a bunch of random words. He's worried this will affect his SEO and appear to be keyword stuffing to Google. My question is: Is there a way to block certain text on a webpage from search engines but show them to users? I guess it would be the opposite of cloaking? But it's still cloaking...isn't it? In the end we'll probably just make the block of text an image instead but I was just wondering if anyone has any creative solutions. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TheOceanAgency0 -
Nofollow in site archutecture. Good or bad in 2013?
We have been using nofollow links to create a silo architecture. is this a good idea or should we stay away from using this on our site. Its an eCommerce site with about 3000+ pages so not sure of the best architecture. ideas and suggestions on best practice welcome!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mark_baird0 -
Interesting 302 redirect situation - could they be a good idea??
Just started with a new SEO client. The site is built on Sharepoint Server 2007 running Windows Server 2003 R2 on IIS 6.5 (I know, fun times for me). Being a standard crappy Windows setup, URLs and canonicalization is a huge issue: first and foremost, we get a 302 redirect from the root www.example.com to www.example.com/Pages/default.aspx Now standard SEO best practices dictate that we rewrite and redirect these pages so they're clean URLs. However that may or may not be possible in the current environment - so is the next best thing to change those to 301s so at least link authority is passed better between pages? Here's the tricky thing - the 302s seem to be preventing Google from indexing the /Pages/default.aspx part of the URL, but the primary URL is being indexed, with the page content accurately cached, etc. So, www.example.com 302 redirects to www.example.com/Pages/default.aspx but the indexed page in Google is www.example.com www.example.com/sample-page/ 302 redirects www.example.com/sample-page/Pages/default.aspx but the indexed page in Google is www.example.com/sample-page/ I know Matt Cutts has said that in this case Google will most likely index the shorter version of the URL, so I could leave it, but I just want to make sure that link authority is being appropriately consolidated. Perhaps a rel=canonical on each page of the source URL? i.e. the www.example.com/sample-page/ - however is rel=canonical to a 302 really acceptable? Same goes for sitemaps? I know they always say end-state URLs only, but as the source URLs are being indexed, I don't really want Google getting all the /Pages/default.aspx crap. Looking for thoughts/ideas/experiences in similar situations?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | OddDog0 -
Does anybody know of a good Spanish-speaking SEO?
This would be really helpful. I need to do some SEO in Mexico and am looking to work with a good Spanish-speaking SEO but have found the pickings slim. Any recommendations and observations would go far. Thank you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | theghost100