New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Boring thread is boring.
What the hell is wrong with you. You really dont get what I mean. Clearly. Your response was completely non sense.
Well, you tag me, with nonsense, you get nonsense? big surprise?
The condescension on side of @clouvider, @mikept and @lee is palpable.
The typical price point the provider operates is the difference.
Youre going to have to explain that to me. Because I honestly am not 100% sure what you mean.
You mean providers in general? We already established in this thread that providers in different countries have different prices and in one place cheap is expensive and the other way around.
@AnthonySmith this move will only end up expanding the advertising space for the couple of dedi providers (one from UK and one from US that I can count) who seldom post offers here already. When people ask for high-spec dedis, well informed LETers do direct them to the best deals out there and such threads are already a good resource for such needs. There is absolutely no need to kill the "low-end" part of the board to facilitate the advertising needs of a handful of providers.
I don't get what's so fucking difficult to understand.
The previous $49/month limit excluded certain locations and/or specs based on that margin and it not being feasible for a host to offer the demand of the public (newer generation procs, more RAM, DDoS protection, newer technologies).
With the price increase; you should now be able to see more hosts offer more products because of the increased margin to work with; you've all seen that some geezer signs up and expects Dual Xeon E5 x, 64GB RAM, 2 x 256GB SSD, 2 x 1TB HDD and 9,001TB bandwidth for like $10/month, what happens? The community descents upon the thread and tells the OP to gtfo with their expectation(s) because it's an outright farce, the same will happen when a provider (new or old) tries to create a thread selling an Atom or an i3 for $84/month.
@Neoon - I think you're missing the point in its entirety; there will still be a mass amount of LowEnd products/offers, because 90% of the folk on this forum are cheapskates (it's true), the change will just allow more HIGH END servers for a more reasonable 'LOW END(ish)' price.
Well, Einstein once said, time is relative, that seems to apply to lowend also.
The Definition seems to be not relevant.
I wonder who you point your finger at.
For now, @Jack made his (first?) Dedicated Server offer out of Manchester. This increased the diversity of the offers already.
I literally cannot respond to this statement again, I have done it at least 10 times now, no offense intended but if you have any contesting points or questions that I have not already answered 10 times I am all ears.
@AnthonySmith why the $84/month limit? Why not remove it?
No need to wonder. Just pick one from the long list of dedicated server providers who advertise here :P
Anyways my point is that you don't need to destroy the core theme of LET in order to achieve a meagre goal of getting listings from a wider and dearer range of server providers. There are resources on web for that already. A experiment which will probably cater to the interest of just 1% of the crowd here while cluttering the board for the rest of the readers just isn't worth it. LET should maintain its niche.
lol
Not very helpful. Mind explaining that in more than 3 letters?
Not very helpful. Might explaining your request in more than 3 words?
Sure:
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2649997/#Comment_2649997
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2650090/#Comment_2650090
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2651617/#Comment_2651617
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2651629/#Comment_2651629
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2651644/#Comment_2651644
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2651701/#Comment_2651701
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2651884/#Comment_2651884
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2652073/#Comment_2652073
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2652967/#Comment_2652967
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2653060/#Comment_2653060
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2649991/#Comment_2649991
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2650096/#Comment_2650096
There you go, links to me covering the same questions over and over again on the same subject.
In case youre not just acting retarded, but genuinely want to have it explained in more words:
@AnthonySmith those questions were in regards to why you are increasing the limit. My question is why not remove it if your goal is increased diversity in hosts and offers.
Its just the difference between our perspectives then (user vs a provider).
Right, my sincere apologies, I thought you meant to remove it as in remove the 84 and revert to 49.
Fair question, the simple answer is I think that is a step too far for a community that has always had some sort of limit, additionally, I think having a fair limit increases competitiveness which in turn is good for users/customers.
@dynamo being both a squeezed provider and a user myself I hoped this was balanced, obviously I could not be sure, i accept that this may have been a terrible idea, I really do, that is why it is just a trial and that is why users will be allowed to vote in the long-term decision.
The limit is sort of arbitrary.
Because in my opinion, I am willing to pay max $20 for somebody's computer (or a piece of it). I only get vps however even though I know their are providers who offer dedicated for that price.
This is because I expect dedicated at that price point to be quite disfunctional or real low spec. At that point might as well get a chunk of the computer it'll be faster and have better network and an ssd.
Again perhaps when we unlock the power of quantum computing, we can have more reliable $20 dedicated servers.
Quantum computing is pretty shitty(unusable) for normal day to day use ;-;
@Aidan
Oh shit I read more about it and it does seem worthless in what I like to assume we do (sys admining).
I have several sub $20 dedis and they work fine. Low spec depends on what you're doing with them.
I don't know of any dedi providers with under-$49 servers that don't also have over-$49 servers. And if a dedi provider makes an attractive $49 offer that doesn't happen to suffice for my needs, I'll generally look at their site to check their other offers. It's just like how lots of us have some over-$7 vps's from LET providers even though those vps weren't posted on LET directly. The presence of an entry level plan is enough to get people interested in the host, and the magic of web browsers does the rest. Raising the ceiling at best brings in hosts who have no entry level plan that they can post in offers at the old ceiling, and it's not obvious to me that's a good thing.
Regarding voting after the trial, I think one thing bugging many of us is why we didn't get to vote before the trial. The idea of raising the VPS ceiling from $7 to $10 has been rejected many times and we're no worse off, based seeing LEB since they raised theirs.
@willie in hind sight you are right, a general vote could have been done in advance, my fear was that the loud minority overwhelmed it and it did not reflect the wider community without leaving it running for an age.
To be honest my opinion is that the dedi market on let is as dead as the dodo bird anyway so I did not think anyone would care, dedi sales here are rare, imo the price limit being just to low now is the reason, this was my way of finding out.
Perhaps I could have thought around that somehow, I will do an opinion poll of some sort for any price related changes in the future, not that I have any other price related changes in mind.
And much like Brexit, with no real information to go, people would have voted based on the opinions of others espoused as facts, and who knows where it would have ended up.
I myself was staunch supporter of the price limits, but I’ve also benefited from the occasional loosening of the limits under @Jarland, so I think a trial is absolutely the way to go.
If it sucks, everyone will vote it out in April, easy.
That's interesting. Your judgment on this is probably better than mine but I've found the dedi market here to be reasonably lively. So I've thought "we're not terribly short on dedi offers now, why do we have to stir up more?". Certainly, opening a request thread usually draws good responses if the request itself is sane. A dedi is for most of us less of an impulse buy than a VPS, so it seems ok that people spend a little longer shopping around or putting up a request. Anyway we'll see how it goes. Like Nekki, I may have overreacted a bit.
If you look at the sources though and just my view based on what I believe I see. The bulk of dedi offers appear to come from members creating a thread after seeing something. Which is fine and there are a lot of good deals about.
I think What Anthony is trying to do more of is bring new providers to us who will post their own offer, whether that is something fairly standard within the new price range or more of a one-off they may do for LET.
@jarland I'm on vacation, but when I get back, if this rule still exists, maybe I'll give the people what they want....