Ask HN: Is any bootstrapped startup running their own servers?
I know it is not recommended to setup your own server at home etc. and go with the pros because that is not what a startup should focus on. But just wondering if anyone is successfully running their own server from home/office etc. while they bootstrap ?
Published in 2012, this chronicle by @yashchandra details the mechanics of building a profitable, self-funded business without venture backing.
Core Principles for Independent Builders:
Charging customers from day one acts as the ultimate filter for building software that solves genuine, high-urgency problems.
Keeping fixed overhead low and leveraging lean infrastructure allows founders to stay alive until market tailwinds kick in.
Small, repetitive improvements in customer retention and conversion rates yield massive returns over multi-year horizons.
Community Debate Themes:
The community focused on B2B customer acquisition channels, cold email vs SEO distribution, and balancing full-time employment with side-project development.
CATEGORY Bootstrapping & MRR →
HISTORICAL ERA Web 2.0 Genesis (2007–2013)
COMMUNITY SCORE 8 points
TOTAL DISCUSSIONS 15 comments
I have always run my own hardware in my apartment. Always.
Here is what I focus on:
1. I use good, stable UPS's, make sure the batteries are always running properly.
2. I use fast networking gear (switches, NICS in the servers, wiring, etc)
3. I buy low cost desktop boxes that support 32gb or 64gb of RAM and I am considering stepping that up to more as a max potential.
4. I max out the RAM in the boxes from the start. Saves needing to power down, install time, power up time, etc. May not sound like much but it is some savings.
5. I keep backups on a Drobo (16tb) for each server. In case of a failure I am able to restore fast after installing a new drive.
6. I run a pfSense box front-ending everything
7. I am on Comcast business a lot to provide the best service, stay competitive in price and make sure I am always running their latest modem offering.
8. I have daily logs e-mailed and I review quickly for anything major and then a weekly appointment with my servers to check them more in depth, run updates, etc. We only run CentOS.
I'd be happy to talk more about how I keep this in check or provide any more details.
We're currently running most of our stuff from a Mac Mini we own (about US$1500) that's co-located with macminicolo.com in Las Vegas (about US$30/mo). It's mostly a static sight right now, though we'll be setting up an online store to do direct e-book sales in a few weeks. We will also get a second Mac Mini sometime soon to use as a staging/emergency replacement server.
We're selling e-books to a niche market (check out www.photoshopdimensions.com) so we're not worried about runaway traffic growth, though of course we'd love to have that problem.
This has worked out well for us so far. Setting aside our questionable server OS choice, the downside of owning your server is the higher up-front cost and responsibility for the hardware. You can reduce this by leasing a physical server from a hosting company.
The upside is you have the full server CPUs/memory/disk at your disposal; a modern server can support a pretty sizable load if you don't have to share it. I believe StackOverflow got pretty far in their early days on a single app server and a single DB server.
We are running a Hybrid infrastructure. We use Rackspace and our own hosted servers at our office.
We are also bootstrapping this thing. At the beginning we thought creating and setting up our own servers (Google-style) was the way to go. We started at our office, but eventually just got to big for us to support.
We are only 4 people in the company, and we have other things to do than to manage all the servers. So we started using Rackspace.
Let me tell you cost-wise, it is not that different. We still had to pay for a good network pipe, and also cooling for the servers. So electricity was also expensive.
It is not a bad idea to host your own servers. It works fine at the beginning, with time it just gets too hard to scale without a team of people dedicated to that, and while bootstrapping that is though.
Using a provider has worked great for us, and I think it was a great choice to use a Cloud provider instead of fully hosting on-site.
Not us. Currently we are working unfunded, so the cost to purchase the hardware and upgrade our home internet service to be reliable enough to support a business server was too high. You would also have to worry about fault tolerance yourself, so then purchasing backup hardware (drives, machine) yourself (and preferably storing offsite) then factors in.
In the end, we went with Amazon Web Services while we build our prototype, etc. I spent an evening getting things set up initially on it (still more to learn), but they have a free usage tier now so there was/is no cost to keep our site there until our usage justifies it. Hopefully by then we'll be making money and can cover the cost.
I am. It's my first web service and couldn't justify the expenditure of a cloud based service. In fact, because it's my first experience, I'm a really better off with the entire control. I can see exactly what happens, when it happens. I can also switch database as I see fit, the only requirement being to be runnable on my machine.
It simply runs on my working computer, on the background. - 5.8 GB - 4 CPUs @ 2.33 ghz
If I ever need to get more power/memory/bandwidth, (which would be a nice problem) then I'll reconsider.
I suppose this is all a question of scale. Is your startup getting 10s, 100s, 1000s visitors a day?