If you are starting a website and are trying to decide between a hosting and a housing service, you are not alone. Many startups, small businesses, freelancers and web developers are faced with this choice and often get confused between the two terms.
Hosting and housing may seem similar at first glance, because in both cases the final goal is to put a website or an Internet service online. In reality, they are very different solutions, with specific characteristics, costs and management methods.
The main difference between hosting and housing lies in the level of control and the way in which the servers are managed: in the first case, resources are rented from an external supplier, while in the second, your own server is placed in a specialized structure.
In this article we will examine in detail what hosting means and what a hosting service is, analyzing its characteristics and the main types of hosting available (from shared hosting to dedicated servers and the cloud).
We will then see what housing is (also known as colocation) and what variants it offers, highlighting the pros and cons of this solution. Finally, we will compare hosting and housing under several key aspects – such as costs, flexibility, security, maintenance and scalability – to help you understand which solution to choose based on the needs of your web project.
Web hosting is a service that allows you to host a website or online application without having to physically own the server on which it resides. In practice, the user rents space (or hardware resources) within a server owned by a specialized provider.
The provider provides the necessary infrastructure: servers located in reliable data centers, high-speed Internet connection, protected power supply and all air conditioning and security systems to guarantee service continuity.
A fundamental characteristic of hosting is that the hardware management and the basic infrastructure is entirely the responsibility of the provider. This means that the provider will take care of the maintenance of the physical servers, operating system updates (in managed solutions) and intervene in the event of failures or technical problems.
The end user is only responsible for managing their own web space and the site content (files, databases, emails), typically through intuitive control panels or web interfaces provided by the service. In this way, even those who do not have advanced system skills can put a site online, relying on the technical support and infrastructure of the provider.
There are different types of hosting suitable for different needs. The solutions are mainly distinguished by the number of dedicated resources, the level of performance offered and the degree of control that the user has over the server environment.
Shared Hosting is the simplest and most widespread form of hosting. In this scenario, a single server hosts hundreds of websites from different customers: hardware resources (such as CPU, memory and bandwidth) are shared among all the accounts on the machine.
Each user has a separate personal space for their files and data, but the server and operating system are common. The main advantage of shared hosting is the extremely low cost: it is in fact the most economical solution, ideal for small websites or projects just started.
Furthermore, it is a turnkey solution: the provider takes care of all the technical management of the server and the user does not need to have specific skills to use it.
On the other hand, shared hosting also has some limitations. Performance depends on the activities of all the sites present on the same server: if one of the sites generates a lot of traffic or uses a lot of resources, it could influence (even if in a controlled way) the speed of the others.
The possible configurations are limited, because you do not have administrative privileges on the server (no root access). Scalability is also limited: if your project grows and requires much more resources, you will probably have to upgrade to a higher plan (such as a VPS or a dedicated) since shared hosting offers a fixed and relatively low amount of resources.
A Virtual Private Server (VPS) is an intermediate solution between shared hosting and a dedicated server. In this case, multiple virtual servers isolated from each other through virtualization technologies run on the same physical server.
Each VPS has its own dedicated operating system, guaranteed resources (CPU, RAM, disk space) and can be managed independently from the others, as if it were a private server.
Compared to a shared plan, a VPS offers superior performance and above all greater control: the user often has administrator access (root) to his virtual environment and can install software, configure system settings and manage the server according to his needs.
The advantages of VPS hosting include the great balance between cost and performance. The price of a VPS is higher than a shared one, but it remains affordable for SMBs and growing projects, especially considering the sharp increase in dedicated resources.
It is also a scalable solution: many providers allow you to add resources (RAM, CPU, storage) to the VPS or upgrade to a higher plan quite easily, meeting the needs of an expanding site. On the other hand, managing a VPS requires more technical skills than shared hosting, especially if the provider does not provide a management service.
The user must be able to administer his own system (install updates, configure security, troubleshoot), or he must rely on a technician. Finally, while guaranteeing dedicated resources, a VPS still shares the physical hardware with other VPS: in rare cases, an intensive use of resources by another customer on the same node could slightly affect performance, even if modern virtualization systems tend to minimize this risk.
A dedicated server (or dedicated hosting) is a solution in which an entire physical server is made available to a single customer. Unlike VPS or shared, the user does not share any hardware resources with others: CPU, RAM, storage space and bandwidth of the machine are totally reserved for his use. In practice, you rent an entire server, located in the data center of the provider, who remains the owner of the hardware but grants it for exclusive use to the customer.
This solution guarantees the highest possible performance for a single server and complete control of the environment: you can freely configure software, security settings and services, as you would on your own machine.
The advantages of a dedicated server are mainly related to performance and flexibility. Having 100% dedicated resources, a dedicated server can handle very high workloads, traffic spikes and CPU or memory-demanding applications, while offering stability and fast response times.
Security can also be higher than shared solutions, since there are no other customers on the same machine. On the other hand, costs are significantly higher than the solutions seen previously: the fee for a dedicated server is high, justified by the exclusive use of the hardware.
Furthermore, managing a dedicated server requires solid system administration skills. Often, those who opt for a dedicated server have their own systems engineer or IT team, or choose managed hosting services offered by the provider, paying extra for assistance with configuration and maintenance. In general, a dedicated server is suitable for large-scale business projects, web portals with many visitors, mission-critical applications or particular needs that require a dedicated and highly customizable environment.
Cloud hosting is a modern form of hosting that uses a cloud platform instead of a single physical server. In a cloud environment, computing resources are distributed across a cluster of servers and flexibly allocated as needed.
This means that your site does not reside on a single machine, but on a cloud infrastructure composed of multiple interconnected servers: if a cluster node becomes too loaded or fails, the system automatically moves workloads to other nodes, ensuring high availability. From the user’s point of view, cloud hosting allows you to have scalable resources in real time: you can add CPU, RAM or storage with ease, often paying only for the resources actually used (pay-per-use model).
The strengths of cloud hosting are its great elasticity and reliability. This solution is ideal for applications that have variable or unpredictable workloads, as it can quickly adapt to demand without interruptions.
Fault tolerance is also superior: thanks to the cluster’s redundancy, a server failure does not cause service downtime. An additional advantage can be geodistribution: some cloud services allow content to be distributed across multiple data centers in different geographic areas, improving response times for users in different regions.
On the other hand, cloud hosting can be more expensive than traditional solutions if your resources grow significantly, and the pay-per-use pricing structure can be difficult to predict. Additionally, managing a cloud environment still requires technical expertise; while many providers offer simplified control panels, taking full advantage of the cloud’s potential may require specific knowledge of cloud computing and advanced configuration.
The term housing (also called server housing or colocation) refers to a service through which a company or professional places their own server within the infrastructure of a provider’s data center.
In other words, instead of keeping the server “in-house” (at your own premises), you host it at an external server farm equipped with all the professional power supply, Internet connectivity and environmental control systems. The housing provider provides a physical space (for example, a slot in a standard rack), the necessary electricity, network connection, air conditioning and physical security (fire protection systems, access control, surveillance) so that the customer’s server can operate 24/7 in an optimal environment.
The distinctive feature of housing is that the server is owned by the customer. The customer purchases or already owns the machine and delivers it to the provider for installation in the data center.
From that moment on, the responsibility for server management at the software level remains with the customer: he (or his IT department) will take care of installing and configuring the operating system, application security, updates and so on. The provider normally limits itself to guaranteeing the physical infrastructure and, in certain cases, can offer additional hardware assistance services (for example, intervening to restart the machine, replacing faulty components supplied by the customer, monitoring basic operating parameters).
However, unlike traditional hosting, with housing the bulk of the maintenance and administration of the server is the responsibility of the customer, who must therefore have adequate technical skills or qualified personnel.
Housing is a solution typically aimed at medium-large companies or entities with specific needs. It is often chosen by those who already have their own servers used perhaps on-premise (on-premise solutions) and want to move them to a more secure and reliable environment without giving up control of the hardware.
Even companies that require special hardware configurations (for example, servers with custom components, machines for specialized processing, etc.) can opt for housing, so that they can use their own customized infrastructure while benefiting from the connectivity and security offered by a professional data center.
Single Server Housing
Many providers also offer single-server housing services. In this case, the customer rents space to place a single machine inside a shared rack in the data center.
Typically, modular spaces are offered: for example, housing for 1U or 2U (rack units, i.e. the height occupied in the rack), or half cabinet (half a rack column) or other customized solutions. With the basic option, you pay a monthly fee to host a server with certain limits on electricity consumption and Internet bandwidth, and services such as static IP addresses and a certain amount of monthly data traffic are often included.
This formula also allows small businesses to benefit from the environment of a professional data center for their server, paying only for the space and services actually needed for a single machine.
Single server housing is ideal when you have only one machine to manage but you don’t want (or can’t) keep it in your offices. This may be the case of a company that owns a single server for a management system or a company website and prefers to entrust its physical hosting to a provider, in a secure and connected 24/7 environment.
Among the advantages of this formula there is certainly the cost reduction compared to larger solutions: you pay a rent proportionate to the space occupied and the resources actually consumed, without investing in infrastructures larger than necessary. On the other hand, it should be considered that if in the future the servers become more than one, having machines scattered in single housings could be less convenient to manage and less convenient than moving to a higher level housing (such as a dedicated rack).
When needs exceed a single server, companies can opt for larger housing solutions, such as renting an entire dedicated rack (typically 42U of space) within the data center, or a significant portion of it (a quarter or half a rack).
In this case, the customer can install multiple servers and possibly other network equipment (switches, hardware firewalls, dedicated storage) in their private rack cabinet. The provider reserves that space exclusively for the customer, providing adequate power (often with a higher absorption limit than the single server), enhanced connectivity and additional services such as redundant connectivity, a greater number of IPs, etc.
From a logistics point of view, having a dedicated rack allows you to manage a complete infrastructure while maintaining centralized control: all your servers are physically close and interconnected within the same cabinet, which simplifies cabling and internal configurations.
Dedicated rack housing is suitable for small-scale private data centers: companies that have several servers and need to house them in a secure environment without having to build an internal server room. In terms of cost, renting an entire rack is more convenient (cost/machine ratio) than paying for many separate individual spaces: you benefit from economies of scale, obtaining a better price per unit of space and often more advantageous conditions on traffic and included services.
Of course, investing in a dedicated rack only makes sense if you plan to fill a good part of it with your own equipment; otherwise you would end up paying for unused capacity. This solution remains expensive in absolute terms and is intended for those who have a large server park or need high horizontal scalability (i.e. the ability to easily add new machines).
Furthermore, managing multiple servers in housing requires proportionate organizational structures and skills: you need to be able to maintain different systems and monitor a more complex infrastructure, with all that this entails in terms of backups, security and updates.
The main strength of housing is full freedom and total control over the server infrastructure. Since the machine is owned by the customer, he can configure it as he wishes, choosing the hardware (CPU, RAM, disks, peripherals) and software (operating system, applications, configurations) that best suit his needs, without the constraints imposed by a provider on shared environments.
This flexibility allows you to get optimized performance for specific workloads and implement customized security policies. Another advantage is that you benefit from the advanced facilities of the data center (protected power supply, air conditioning, high-speed connectivity, fire protection systems, etc.) while maintaining ownership of the hardware.
For companies with a large server fleet, housing can also be advantageous in terms of unit costs: purchasing your own servers directly and placing them in a dedicated rack can, in the long run, be cheaper than renting many dedicated machines from the provider, because you avoid the markup on rentals and you amortize the hardware investment over several years. Furthermore, from the point of view of privacy and data control, some prefer to have their own physical servers to ensure that critical data resides on exclusively dedicated machines and under their direct control.
Despite the notable advantages, housing also presents several disadvantages and critical issues to evaluate. First of all, the initial costs: the customer must take charge of purchasing the servers and any accessory equipment (requiring an often significant capital investment), to which is added the monthly housing fee which, for high-end machines or for dedicated spaces, can be high.
Second, operational management requires specialist skills: you need technical staff who can administer servers, monitor their status, apply security patches, take care of backups, and intervene promptly in the event of malfunctions.
For smaller businesses, having a dedicated system administrator can be costly. Hardware maintenance also falls to the customer: if a server component breaks, it is up to the owner to provide a replacement and coordinate with the provider for the intervention (unless they have signed expensive advanced support contracts).
Another limitation is the less immediate scalability: to increase the resources available, it is necessary to add new components or new physical servers, operations that require time and planning, unlike a cloud or hosting environment where an instant upgrade of the plan is often sufficient. Finally, it is necessary to consider the life cycle of the hardware: the servers age and after a few years they could become obsolete or less reliable, forcing the company to invest again in new machines.
In summary, housing is a powerful but demanding solution, advisable only when you have the economic and technical resources to manage it adequately and when the benefits clearly outweigh the costs and risks.
After having analyzed the hosting and housing features separately, it is useful to compare the two solutions on some key aspects.
Both options allow you to publish websites and applications online, but they do so with very different approaches that bring specific advantages and disadvantages. In short, hosting offers simplicity and management delegated to the provider, while housing offers maximum autonomy but requires more resources and skills from the user. The choice will depend on what you favor and the specific needs of the project.
From an economic point of view, the differences between hosting and housing are significant. With a hosting service, especially in shared formulas, the initial investment is practically zero: you pay a periodic fee (monthly or annual) to the provider for the chosen package and you get the necessary resources without having to purchase hardware.
Even more advanced solutions such as VPS, dedicated servers or cloud still involve recurring costs but do not require physical ownership of the servers. Housing, on the other hand, involves a high initial cost, since you have to purchase the servers (and other equipment if necessary) yourself.
Added to this is the colocation fee at the data center, usually calculated based on the space occupied (U of racks or entire racks) and energy and bandwidth consumption. For small projects or startups, hosting is almost always the most economical choice.
Housing can become advantageous only in large-scale scenarios or very specific needs, where the investment in own hardware is amortized over time and justified by performances or configurations that would be impossible (or very expensive) with a traditional hosting service.
In terms of flexibility, understood as freedom of configuration and control over the environment, housing is clearly superior to hosting. With a hosting service (especially if shared or managed) the user has limited room for maneuver: he cannot intervene on the system configurations beyond what is permitted by the control panel, he cannot freely install unsupported system software and must adapt to the settings decided by the provider to guarantee shared stability.
Even if you choose a VPS or dedicated server hosting, you certainly have more control (root access, choice of operating system among those available, etc.), but you are still tied to the provider’s infrastructure and the types of hardware it offers.
With housing, on the other hand, freedom is maximum: being the owner of the server, the customer can choose any compatible hardware component and install any software or operating system that meets his requirements, without restrictions imposed by third parties.
You have full control of every aspect, from the firewall to backup policies, being able to build a customized infrastructure. This flexibility, however, has the downside of greater management complexity: all the responsibility for correctly configuring the system falls on the user. In short, if the goal is total customization and you have the technical capabilities to manage it, housing offers what hosting cannot; if instead you prefer a ready-made solution and you want to deal only with applications and content, hosting is more suitable.
Security must be considered on two fronts: physical (infrastructural) and application. As for physical security, both hosting and housing benefit from the protected environment of a professional data center: monitored premises, controlled access, redundant power supply, fire protection systems, etc.
From this point of view there are no substantial differences, since the provider guarantees high standards for both solutions. The differences emerge instead in terms of IT security and systems management.
In hosting services, especially shared and managed, most of the security aspects (system updates, patching, network firewall, monitoring) are taken care of by the provider.
The user finds himself in a pre-configured environment where measures such as antivirus, antimalware and automated backups are often included or at least provided by the supplier, reducing the risk of incorrect configurations.
With housing, the responsibility for software security falls almost entirely on the customer. It is up to the server administrator to ensure that the operating system and installed programs are up to date and properly configured, that protections such as application firewalls, intrusion detection systems, encryption of sensitive data, regular backup policies, and so on are implemented.
While the user has full freedom to adopt the security solutions he prefers, on the other hand this freedom requires competence and commitment: a non-optimal configuration can leave the server vulnerable to cyber attacks.
In short, hosting offers a “basic” level of security managed by the provider, suitable for those who do not have specialized personnel, while housing allows a customizable and potentially higher level of security, but only if the customer is able to implement it correctly.
Another important comparison element is the maintenance and technical support needed to keep the servers running. In the case of hosting, much of the infrastructure maintenance is covered by the provider: hardware updates, replacement of failed components, infrastructure monitoring, basic security and sometimes operating system updates (for managed solutions) are the responsibility of the provider.
The user does not have to worry about these “low-level” aspects and can focus on managing their site or application. In addition, hosting services usually include dedicated technical support: in case of problems with the server or disservices, the customer can open a ticket or contact the provider’s support, which will intervene to resolve the anomaly. This means less operational burden and more peace of mind for those who do not have an internal IT department.
In housing, the situation is the opposite: server maintenance and troubleshooting are primarily the responsibility of the customer. If the server stops working, it is the owner who must diagnose whether it is a hardware failure or a software problem, and take corrective measures.
The provider hosting the server generally offers only limited hardware support (for example, it can perform a restart on request or report obvious anomalies), but does not intervene in the system configuration. Some companies offer smart hands services or advanced assistance in housing, but these are paid extras.
In practice, choosing housing means directly taking on the burden of ordinary and extraordinary maintenance of your servers. Those who opt for this solution must therefore have internal technical support or a trusted system administrator to rely on, otherwise the risk is of not being able to effectively manage any failures or emergencies.
Scalability indicates the ability to increase (or decrease) the resources available based on needs. Also on this front, hosting and housing present marked differences. With hosting services, especially in cloud or VPS solutions, scaling is relatively simple: often it is enough to move to a higher plan (upgrade) to obtain more CPU, RAM, web space and bandwidth, and in cloud environments some platforms even allow dynamic auto-scaling in real time.
This allows a web project to start small and grow gradually without having to worry about the underlying physical infrastructure: the provider will allocate more powerful servers or additional instances when needed, sometimes without significant disruption to service.
In housing, scalability is mainly vertical (enhancing a server by adding components or replacing it with a more powerful one) or horizontal (adding new servers to the infrastructure). In both cases, it requires planning and investment: if the workload increases, additional hardware must be procured (purchasing new servers or upgrades for existing ones) and physically installed in the data center, with implementation times that can be days or weeks.
You can’t get extra resources with a few clicks like you can with the cloud, so housing is less resilient to sudden changes in traffic. It should be noted that, at the design level, a company can prepare the infrastructure in housing with future growth in mind (for example, by purchasing a modular chassis with free slots, providing additional rack space, etc.), but this involves upfront costs.
In short, hosting offers more immediate and practical scalability, while housing requires greater forecasting ability and investment to scale effectively.
In light of the above, how do you decide between hosting and housing for your project? There is no one-size-fits-all answer: the choice depends on your specific needs, budget, and resources (including human resources) available.
In general, for those who are taking their first steps online – like many startups, small businesses, freelance professionals or freelance web developers – hosting represents in most cases the most practical and economical solution.
Housing, on the other hand, is aimed at more specific situations, often at an enterprise level or in any case at projects that require total control over the infrastructure and can sustain greater costs and complexity.
Generally speaking, if you do not have extraordinary needs or in-house system skills, it is best to focus on hosting; housing should only be considered when the project requirements make it truly indispensable.
When Hosting is Convenient
Choose traditional web hosting if you need to put one or more sites online quickly and without complications. Hosting is recommended when:
In all these cases, hosting offers an optimal balance between cost, ease of use and adequate performance. It is the preferred choice for the vast majority of small and medium web projects, where the priority is reliability and simplicity rather than extreme customization of the server environment.
Server housing becomes a sensible choice in more specific scenarios, where the benefits clearly outweigh the disadvantages in terms of cost and complexity. Consider the housing option if:
In short, housing should be chosen when you have a real need for control and performance that hosting solutions cannot satisfy, and at the same time you have the capabilities (economic and technical) to manage this autonomy. For most other use cases, hosting remains the simplest, quickest to activate and sustainable solution from a cost point of view.
From professional activity to business, we are able to satisfy your needs.
Sito web creato da My Web Lab – Web Agency Milano & Powered by Simone Elle
