I asked this question for a solution on content storage similar to Amazon S3. I think it would be safe to say there is a difference in a hosting solution compared to content sharing? That being said I still don't understand why it was closed as a duplicate to this. I was needing a solution like Amazon S3, but I cant go with Amazon S3 because my client boycotts Amazon. I'm not asking for a debate on whose hosting is better. My issue involves a way to serve digital content for download or checkout securely, other than Amazon.
I was needing a solution like Amazon S3, but I cant go with Amazon S3 because my client boycotts Amazon.
You're looking for hosting meeting a certain set of requirements, and "not Amazon" is one of those requirements. You're not really explaining how your question isn't a dupe other than say so. This isn't "content sharing," it's still hosting, just not of web pages.
(Note I'm not saying your case has already been covered in the dupe question, just that it's where a response belongs.)