Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links


Shells Virtual Desktop
BMail.ag - Secure Email Service
Server.net
CPLicense.net
VPS Server
Buy VPN
Vultr
VMs for AI
HostDare
HostDare
ReliableSite White-Label Dedicated Hosting for Resellers
25% Recurring Discount on NVMe VPS
InterServer VPS
BMail.ag - Secure Email Service
Best VPN
High-Performance Bare Metal Server Solutions
Karvl.com
Server Mania Cloud Hosting
DataWagon Hosting
AlphaVPS Hosting
Evoxt.com
Clouvider
VPS Hosting with NVMe
Residential IPs in the US & 4G Mobile Proxies in EU & US with Unlimited Bandwidth
ReliableSite White-Label Dedicated Hosting for Resellers
Rabisu - Hosting Solutions
CloudLinux
Shells Virtual Desktop

Categories

In this Discussion

Home › General
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.

Introducing ServerVerify: built with the LowEndTalk community in mind

1…222324252628»

Comments

  • AlteredParadoxAlteredParadox Member, Megathread Squad

    new month! i shall run all the yabs again.

    Thanked by 1buggedout
  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

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

    Amazing! Thanks for the submissions.

    Thanked by 1AlteredParadox
  • letsletletslet Member

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

  • HayzeeHayzee Member

    @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

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @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.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @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.

  • forestforest Member
    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.).

    Thanked by 1buggedout
  • rpqurpqu Member
    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 3forest whynotlearn buggedout
  • whynotlearnwhynotlearn Member

    @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
  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @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.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @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.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @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.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @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?

  • rpqurpqu Member
    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 3forest whynotlearn buggedout
  • HonestOpinionsHonestOpinions Member

    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

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @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.

  • CryptomusCryptomus Member, Patron Provider
    edited July 14

    .

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @jbiloh 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).

    That's fair feedback.

    I have to think through how to solve that.

    I am still working out a way to solve for cases like this. I haven't forgotten.

  • rpqurpqu Member

    @jbiloh said:

    @jbiloh 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).

    That's fair feedback.

    I have to think through how to solve that.

    I am still working out a way to solve for cases like this. I haven't forgotten.

    Nice. Any progress?

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    Here are the latest ServerVerify enhancements we recently released:

    1. Reduced duplicate leaderboard entries. Leaderboard results are now limited to one entry per user, per provider. This prevents a single user from submitting repeated benchmarks for the same server or container and crowding the leaderboard.
    2. The default tab on Advanced Search is now Benchmarks instead of Providers.
    3. You can now log in using either your User ID or email address.
    4. Fixed several visual display issues.
    5. Improved the email design and flow for certain events.
    6. Made several backend improvements.

    Over the next few weeks, we plan to release additional user-facing features, including:

    1. Provider recommendation scores. Provider profiles will show the percentage of users who would recommend that host. We have been collecting this information with every benchmark submission for the past several months.
    2. Improvements to the Value Index based on feedback shared here.
    3. Additional metrics and rankings on the Leaderboard.
    Thanked by 2rpqu buggedout
  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran
    edited July 22

    New on ServerVerify: Provider Recommendation Percentage

    ServerVerify now shows the percentage of benchmark users who would recommend their hosting provider. For the past few months we've been collecting answers to "would you recommend your host" when a benchmark is submitted.

    You’ll find the new rating on provider profile pages. The percentage is calculated using responses collected from users when they submit a benchmark, with results based on unique users.

    This adds another useful data point alongside benchmark results and customer reviews, giving users a quick view of how existing customers feel about each provider.

    I really like this feature because it's less likely to be biased by providers who hunt for positive reviews. It's a pretty real gauge of how users feel about their provider.

    Thanked by 1rpqu
  • rpqurpqu Member

    @jbiloh said:
    New on ServerVerify: Provider Recommendation Percentage

    ServerVerify now shows the percentage of benchmark users who would recommend their hosting provider. For the past few months we've been collecting answers to "would you recommend your host" when a benchmark is submitted.

    You’ll find the new rating on provider profile pages. The percentage is calculated using responses collected from users when they submit a benchmark, with results based on unique users.

    This adds another useful data point alongside benchmark results and customer reviews, giving users a quick view of how existing customers feel about each provider.

    I really like this feature because it's less likely to be biased by providers who hunt for positive reviews. It's a pretty real gauge of how users feel about their provider.

    https://serververify.com/benchmarks?provider=colocrossing -> https://serververify.com/advanced-search (/html/body/main/div/section[1]/div/div[1]/div[2]/div[4]/a)
    Should be https://serververify.com/advanced-search?provider=colocrossing
    Wait, provider doesn't work on advanced-search
    It should be https://serververify.com/advanced-search?providers_search=&providers=50f29195-efdb-4888-987e-294c73836cd8

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    https://serververify.com/benchmarks?provider=colocrossing -> https://serververify.com/advanced-search (/html/body/main/div/section[1]/div/div[1]/div[2]/div[4]/a)
    Should be https://serververify.com/advanced-search?provider=colocrossing
    Wait, provider doesn't work on advanced-search
    It should be https://serververify.com/advanced-search?providers_search=&providers=50f29195-efdb-4888-987e-294c73836cd8

    Working on this now.

    Thanked by 1rpqu
Sign In or Register to comment.