Introducing ServerVerify: built with the LowEndTalk community in mind

Comments

• AlteredParadox Member, Megathread Squad

  July 1

  new month! i shall run all the yabs again.

  Thanked by 1buggedout
• jbiloh Administrator, Veteran

  July 2

  @AlteredParadox said:
  new month! i shall run all the yabs again.

  Amazing! Thanks for the submissions.

  Thanked by 1AlteredParadox
• letslet Member

  July 5

  The "Best Value" feels a bit played by GreenCloud dominating the section with 3GB RAM VPS for $0.25 monthly ($3/yearly).
• Hayzee Member

  July 5

  @letslet said:
  The "Best Value" feels a bit played by GreenCloud dominating the section with 3GB RAM VPS for $0.25 monthly ($3/yearly).

  I mean, that's some pretty damn good value, and it's a bit odd for you to say that, considering on the first page there are only 5 GreenClouds, then 3 other providers, and the rest being CometVPS
• jbiloh Administrator, Veteran

  July 9

  @letslet said:
  The "Best Value" feels a bit played by GreenCloud dominating the section with 3GB RAM VPS for $0.25 monthly ($3/yearly).

  That's fair feedback.

  I have to think through how to solve that.
• jbiloh Administrator, Veteran

  July 9

  @Hayzee said:

  @letslet said:
  The "Best Value" feels a bit played by GreenCloud dominating the section with 3GB RAM VPS for $0.25 monthly ($3/yearly).

  I mean, that's some pretty damn good value, and it's a bit odd for you to say that, considering on the first page there are only 5 GreenClouds, then 3 other providers, and the rest being CometVPS

  I'm open to all suggestions on how to make the data more useful.
• forest Member

  July 9 edited July 9

  @jbiloh said: I'm open to all suggestions on how to make the data more useful.

  By not rating things as "good" or "bad" on their own. It should just give information about each service so that people can find what they're looking for. It shouldn't assume that people have certain priorities. For example, the emphasis on CPU performance is way too high. If there have to be rankings, they have to be in categories that can be independently sorted (memory, CPU speed, network speed, price, etc.).
• rpqu Member

  July 9 edited July 9

  @jbiloh said:

  @Hayzee said:

  @letslet said:
  The "Best Value" feels a bit played by GreenCloud dominating the section with 3GB RAM VPS for $0.25 monthly ($3/yearly).

  I mean, that's some pretty damn good value, and it's a bit odd for you to say that, considering on the first page there are only 5 GreenClouds, then 3 other providers, and the rest being CometVPS

  I'm open to all suggestions on how to make the data more useful.

  The value ratio is good. But, it could be better if value ratio for each region, country, metro. Furthermore, filtering by minimum fio speed (4k,64k,512k,1m), port speed, disk size, geekbench score, price. Also, a collaboration with @whynotlearn will be optimal.
  I think the optimal presentation layer is 2D graph canvas with ability to mark selected plans. The Y axis should be core/ram/disk/port speed/bandwidth available, and X axis is price. Tabbed toggle to switch the Y axis.
  Next problem is aggregating YABS plan, but that should be doable with core/ram/disk ratio

  Thanked by 2forest whynotlearn
• whynotlearn Member

  July 9

  @rpqu said:

  @jbiloh said:

  @Hayzee said:

  @letslet said:
  The "Best Value" feels a bit played by GreenCloud dominating the section with 3GB RAM VPS for $0.25 monthly ($3/yearly).

  I mean, that's some pretty damn good value, and it's a bit odd for you to say that, considering on the first page there are only 5 GreenClouds, then 3 other providers, and the rest being CometVPS

  I'm open to all suggestions on how to make the data more useful.

  The value ratio is good. But, it could be better if value ratio for each region, country, metro. Furthermore, filtering by minimum fio speed (4k,64k,512k,1m), port speed, disk size, geekbench score, price. Also, a collaboration with @whynotlearn will be optimal.
  I think the optimal presentation layer is 2D graph canvas with ability to mark selected plans. The Y axis should be core/ram/disk/port speed/bandwidth available, and X axis is price. Tabbed toggle to switch the Y axis.
  Next problem is aggregating YABS plan, but that should be doable with core/ram/disk ratio

  More than happy to collab. Let me know if anyone wants more details if anyone in general is interested to collaborate.

  Thanked by 1rpqu
• jbiloh Administrator, Veteran

  July 9

  @forest said:

  @jbiloh said: I'm open to all suggestions on how to make the data more useful.

  By not rating things as "good" or "bad" on their own. It should just give information about each service so that people can find what they're looking for. It shouldn't assume that people have certain priorities. For example, the emphasis on CPU performance is way too high. If there have to be rankings, they have to be in categories that can be independently sorted (memory, CPU speed, network speed, price, etc.).

  I do think it's a fair point that the scoring system weighs CPU performance too much right now. We are thinking through the best and most fair approach to improve that.
• jbiloh Administrator, Veteran

  July 9

  @rpqu said:

  @jbiloh said:

  @Hayzee said:

  @letslet said:
  The "Best Value" feels a bit played by GreenCloud dominating the section with 3GB RAM VPS for $0.25 monthly ($3/yearly).

  I mean, that's some pretty damn good value, and it's a bit odd for you to say that, considering on the first page there are only 5 GreenClouds, then 3 other providers, and the rest being CometVPS

  I'm open to all suggestions on how to make the data more useful.

  The value ratio is good. But, it could be better if value ratio for each region, country, metro. Furthermore, filtering by minimum fio speed (4k,64k,512k,1m), port speed, disk size, geekbench score, price. Also, a collaboration with @whynotlearn will be optimal.
  I think the optimal presentation layer is 2D graph canvas with ability to mark selected plans. The Y axis should be core/ram/disk/port speed/bandwidth available, and X axis is price. Tabbed toggle to switch the Y axis.
  Next problem is aggregating YABS plan, but that should be doable with core/ram/disk ratio

  Excellent suggestions. Working on it.
• jbiloh Administrator, Veteran

  July 9

  @whynotlearn said:

  @rpqu said:

  @jbiloh said:

  @Hayzee said:

  @letslet said:
  The "Best Value" feels a bit played by GreenCloud dominating the section with 3GB RAM VPS for $0.25 monthly ($3/yearly).

  I mean, that's some pretty damn good value, and it's a bit odd for you to say that, considering on the first page there are only 5 GreenClouds, then 3 other providers, and the rest being CometVPS

  I'm open to all suggestions on how to make the data more useful.

  The value ratio is good. But, it could be better if value ratio for each region, country, metro. Furthermore, filtering by minimum fio speed (4k,64k,512k,1m), port speed, disk size, geekbench score, price. Also, a collaboration with @whynotlearn will be optimal.
  I think the optimal presentation layer is 2D graph canvas with ability to mark selected plans. The Y axis should be core/ram/disk/port speed/bandwidth available, and X axis is price. Tabbed toggle to switch the Y axis.
  Next problem is aggregating YABS plan, but that should be doable with core/ram/disk ratio

  More than happy to collab. Let me know if anyone wants more details if anyone in general is interested to collaborate.

  I'll send you a message.
• jbiloh Administrator, Veteran

  July 9

  @rpqu said:

  @jbiloh said:

  @Hayzee said:

  @letslet said:
  The "Best Value" feels a bit played by GreenCloud dominating the section with 3GB RAM VPS for $0.25 monthly ($3/yearly).

  I mean, that's some pretty damn good value, and it's a bit odd for you to say that, considering on the first page there are only 5 GreenClouds, then 3 other providers, and the rest being CometVPS

  I'm open to all suggestions on how to make the data more useful.

  The value ratio is good. But, it could be better if value ratio for each region, country, metro. Furthermore, filtering by minimum fio speed (4k,64k,512k,1m), port speed, disk size, geekbench score, price. Also, a collaboration with @whynotlearn will be optimal.
  I think the optimal presentation layer is 2D graph canvas with ability to mark selected plans. The Y axis should be core/ram/disk/port speed/bandwidth available, and X axis is price. Tabbed toggle to switch the Y axis.
  Next problem is aggregating YABS plan, but that should be doable with core/ram/disk ratio

  Just to be clear, are you talking about the Advanced Search (https://serververify.com/advanced-search) or Value Index (https://serververify.com/benchmarks/value-index) for adding the additional filtering options?
• rpqu Member

  July 9 edited July 9

  @jbiloh said:

  @rpqu said:

  @jbiloh said:

  @Hayzee said:

  @letslet said:
  The "Best Value" feels a bit played by GreenCloud dominating the section with 3GB RAM VPS for $0.25 monthly ($3/yearly).

  I mean, that's some pretty damn good value, and it's a bit odd for you to say that, considering on the first page there are only 5 GreenClouds, then 3 other providers, and the rest being CometVPS

  I'm open to all suggestions on how to make the data more useful.

  The value ratio is good. But, it could be better if value ratio for each region, country, metro. Furthermore, filtering by minimum fio speed (4k,64k,512k,1m), port speed, disk size, geekbench score, price. Also, a collaboration with @whynotlearn will be optimal.
  I think the optimal presentation layer is 2D graph canvas with ability to mark selected plans. The Y axis should be core/ram/disk/port speed/bandwidth available, and X axis is price. Tabbed toggle to switch the Y axis.
  Next problem is aggregating YABS plan, but that should be doable with core/ram/disk ratio

  Just to be clear, are you talking about the Advanced Search (https://serververify.com/advanced-search) or Value Index (https://serververify.com/benchmarks/value-index) for adding the additional filtering options?

  Let me break down.

  1. When using value index, there's lack of information within the card about price, percentile of fio+ network+ gb6, location (or locations after yabs aggregation), cpu count, ram, storage size, approximate port speed. Clicks is high, but it's time consuming. But, do people make decision from serververify given the frictions?
  2. When using the advanced filtering, it showed the provider instead of the results -> has to click the provider -> click again more benchmark -> click again each of result -> waste of time.
  3. I think it's the best to aggregate the results based on core count/ram/storage/location then find the median as a single SKU. When clicked, we would be able to see the results
  4. Available sorting: value index, price, etc.
  5. Make let providers attach order link lol.
  6. The 2D graph presentation layer are supposed to to speed up the decision making, by letting the user see the candidate position within the cpu/ram/storage/gb6/network index and price.

  @whynotlearn has different approach. He makes it Geospatial based -> geo/routing/facility. Then, make Airbnb like display

  Thanked by 2forest whynotlearn
• HonestOpinions Member

  July 9

  We can include a table showing a score that factors in both the number of reviews and the average rating. This allows sorting by providers with the most reviews and highest scores. The derived score can be calculated by multiplying the average rating by the number of reviews.

  https://serververify.com/hosting-providers
• jbiloh Administrator, Veteran

  July 10

  @rpqu said:

  @jbiloh said:

  @rpqu said:

  @jbiloh said:

  @Hayzee said:

  @letslet said:
  The "Best Value" feels a bit played by GreenCloud dominating the section with 3GB RAM VPS for $0.25 monthly ($3/yearly).

  I mean, that's some pretty damn good value, and it's a bit odd for you to say that, considering on the first page there are only 5 GreenClouds, then 3 other providers, and the rest being CometVPS

  I'm open to all suggestions on how to make the data more useful.

  The value ratio is good. But, it could be better if value ratio for each region, country, metro. Furthermore, filtering by minimum fio speed (4k,64k,512k,1m), port speed, disk size, geekbench score, price. Also, a collaboration with @whynotlearn will be optimal.
  I think the optimal presentation layer is 2D graph canvas with ability to mark selected plans. The Y axis should be core/ram/disk/port speed/bandwidth available, and X axis is price. Tabbed toggle to switch the Y axis.
  Next problem is aggregating YABS plan, but that should be doable with core/ram/disk ratio

  Just to be clear, are you talking about the Advanced Search (https://serververify.com/advanced-search) or Value Index (https://serververify.com/benchmarks/value-index) for adding the additional filtering options?

  Let me break down.

  1. When using value index, there's lack of information within the card about price, percentile of fio+ network+ gb6, location (or locations after yabs aggregation), cpu count, ram, storage size, approximate port speed. Clicks is high, but it's time consuming. But, do people make decision from serververify given the frictions?
  2. When using the advanced filtering, it showed the provider instead of the results -> has to click the provider -> click again more benchmark -> click again each of result -> waste of time.
  3. I think it's the best to aggregate the results based on core count/ram/storage/location then find the median as a single SKU. When clicked, we would be able to see the results
  4. Available sorting: value index, price, etc.
  5. Make let providers attach order link lol.
  6. The 2D graph presentation layer are supposed to to speed up the decision making, by letting the user see the candidate position within the cpu/ram/storage/gb6/network index and price.

  @whynotlearn has different approach. He makes it Geospatial based -> geo/routing/facility. Then, make Airbnb like display

  I am working on this list now.
• Cryptomus Member, Patron Provider

  July 14 edited July 14

  .