Which is most attractive to YOU when setting up or buying a hosting package,

1) Disk Space
Or
2) Bandwidth

Why

:)

*Usually* bandwidth because it is worth a lot more than disk space.

bandwidth.....I dont really care about disk space, I never use much

What is the minimum amount of bandwidth you would go for?

KEY WORD = Minimum

Personally I think they are both important, and at the end of the day either bandwidth or disk space could be more important depending on your web site.

For instance, if you have a small community site with movie clip downloads, you might need lots of disk space, but little bandwidth as you probably won't receive many visitors at all. On the other hand if you have a popular message board, you might need relatively little disk space (your site will contain mostly text), whereas bandwidth would probably be more important as your site might be receiving hundreds of thousands of hits per month (even with small files, it all ads up).

Bandwidth for sure

(where is brit. spears on the list, that would be #1)

Neither - Sever Resources interest me more.

That depends heavily on the kind of site I'm serving. If I had lots of file that only visited a few times a day then disk space would be more important. If I had a popular download site that only serve a few shareware then bandwidth is more important.

For me, it's disk space, and my main site fits the "small community, lots of multimedia visited a few times a day" description. Only once in 18 months has my site used *most* of its 10 GB bandwidth; usually it's under 5 GB.

And I'm having a bugger of a time finding a reputable host that lets me acquire more space without breaking the bank, so to speak, or one that doesn't give me too much stuff I don't need.

I think both are important, and as mentioned above, Resources are important as well...

I run a site with 20gigs of bandwidth (going up), and about 300mb of disk space. Disk space is quite cheap nowadays with everyone offering hundreds at a time...but bandwidth still comes at a premium...

but i'd say, most important above all of this, is simply a reliable host. trust me, i've been through hell and back in the past months =)

I would have to say bandwidth because I have noticed mopst my customers buy 100 megs and use 5 megs but will use all of their bandwidth

Bandwidth. BUT there must be at least 50mb space bare minimum. I've never had troulbe with server resources (except one beta script I tryed running) so thats not a huge concern either.

I would never sign up for uner 25gb transfer/month :)

"Which is most attractive to YOU?"

Elle McPhereson.... *pause*.. I mean, my wife!... Yes dear, right away dear...

Bandwidth is a continual cost, and for the majority of people, unless you have a site that doesn't get much traffic but you want a lot of storage, or you have small data transfers and a lot of databases or something, than bandwidth is usually more important, for almost anyone, I think. As someone else said, resources are important to them, probably being memory and CPU usage. I think disk space and disk access/performance would be next. I usually have average sized sites that get a lot of traffic though.

I don't know. I've reached the point where it's nice to have a little more bandwidth and space than you need - and would now rather seek out hosts that have well balanced plans.

(Note to Tim: One mysql database not enough :) )

Add to that, someone at the helm that actually knows what they are doing and have preferably being doing it well for a while and have a decently configured server setup.

Price is an issue but it's slowly becoming less of one. None of my sites have any commercial value whatsoever and I avoid ads like the plague (affiliates might be ok) Consequently, I'm not really willing to shell out a fortune just to be hosted.

I would second that. There's simply too many variables, for any type of site, to really wonder about something so trivial as comparing parts of the plan and service, when so many are so vital together to really be a decent hosting experience. One might be great, but if another vital aspect is lacking, that one or a few great things might just not be at all valuable.

Correct. I think the concept of having Plan A to Plan Z is a bit dated.

Rather, the host should decide how much each bit costs, allow me to configure my own plan and let me upgrade or downgrade as I please.

Have your Plan A to Z if you must, but have a flexible plan as well - something I can play with (add a gig of transfer, add diskspace etc etc) and it should just spit out a cost. Let me balance my needs with my budget.