[dangrossman]

Are you sure that's the right move to make? Do you no longer need the resources of even a single dedicated server? At even 2-4GB RAM requirement, you would not be saving money buying a VPS over renting a server.

A Linode 4096, where you're sharing CPU and disk IO with all the other users on the physical server, is $159.95/mo.

For $159/mo you could rent a Xeon 3230 quad core, 4GB RAM, 2x250GB HD server from Softlayer with more than 4x the bandwidth allotment and a better data center with a larger support staff.

[kd1221]

We deliver video content. We have a CDN that properly encodes and serves our content. All I need is to handle the HTTP requests for the "directory" of videos. A shared environment would probably be fine. All the 4GB servers seem to have most of their RAM dedicated to caching when I check what free -m gives me. Our physical disk space requirements are low. As I shift more of our content to the CDN, our bandwidth needs are decreasing as well (from 12TB/mo to 7TB/mo since I started optimizing).

I inherited this setup, so to me it looks like the servers are overpowered. Also, the customer service is terrible, which is the primary reason for wanting to leave them. I want a service where I can easily requisition and kit out new servers quickly in an "a la carte" fashion.

I have 3 servers running on EC2 already using micro instances. They're mostly to handle minor services (email list subscription/requeuing for all the web properties, payment processing postback handling, etc.) They've been up for nearly a year without any problem.

I've been leaning toward EC2, but I wanted to hear what else is out there.

[dotBen]

All I need is to handle the HTTP requests for the "directory" of videos.

Have you considered just using Amazon S3, especially now they offer full 'httpd'-like functionality (no more bucket XML listings if you try to visit the root of the domain).

http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2011/02/host-your-static-website-...

If you are running a CDN in front to stream the content, this sounds like the best solution to me. You could probably get away with Reduced Redundancy Storage too if you have backups.