Introducing ServerVerify: built with the LowEndTalk community in mind

AlteredParadox · July 1

new month! i shall run all the yabs again.

jbiloh · July 2

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

Amazing! Thanks for the submissions.

letslet · 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 · 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 · 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 · 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 · 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 · 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

whynotlearn · 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.

jbiloh · 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 · 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 · 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 · 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 · 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.

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?
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.
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
Available sorting: value index, price, etc.
Make let providers attach order link lol.
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

HonestOpinions · 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 · 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.

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?

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.

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

Available sorting: value index, price, etc.

Make let providers attach order link lol.

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 · July 14

.

jbiloh · July 20

@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.

rpqu · July 20

@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?

jbiloh · July 20

Here are the latest ServerVerify enhancements we recently released:

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.
The default tab on Advanced Search is now Benchmarks instead of Providers.
You can now log in using either your User ID or email address.
Fixed several visual display issues.
Improved the email design and flow for certain events.
Made several backend improvements.

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

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.
Improvements to the Value Index based on feedback shared here.
Additional metrics and rankings on the Leaderboard.

jbiloh · 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.

rpqu · July 22

@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

jbiloh · July 22

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.

jbiloh · July 24

We just rolled out several new recommendation focused features on ServerVerify.

Provider pages now show the percentage of benchmark users who would recommend that host, along with the number of unique users included in the result.

We also added new data to the Insights page, including:

Overall host recommendation rate over time
Recommendation rates for VPS/Cloud vs. Dedicated Servers
A new Most Recommended Hosts leaderboard

The goal is to add more real user sentiment alongside the benchmark data and make it easier to see which providers customers are actually happy with.

Take a look at your provider profile and the updated Insights and Leaderboards pages:

https://serververify.com/insights
https://serververify.com/leaderboards

Feedback is welcome.

New Leaderboard tables (note this is based on the Wilson score ranking system)

This shows benchmark performance per provider over time (on the provider profile). In this case, we see @DediRock getting a big boost after rolling out their new i9 server lineup on their historical performance graph.

New data on the Insights page:

DediRock · July 24

@jbiloh said:
We just rolled out several new recommendation focused features on ServerVerify.

Provider pages now show the percentage of benchmark users who would recommend that host, along with the number of unique users included in the result.

We also added new data to the Insights page, including:

Overall host recommendation rate over time

Recommendation rates for VPS/Cloud vs. Dedicated Servers

A new Most Recommended Hosts leaderboard

The goal is to add more real user sentiment alongside the benchmark data and make it easier to see which providers customers are actually happy with.

Take a look at your provider profile and the updated Insights and Leaderboards pages:

https://serververify.com/insights
https://serververify.com/leaderboards

Feedback is welcome.

New Leaderboard tables (note this is based on the Wilson score ranking system)

This shows benchmark performance per provider over time (on the provider profile). In this case, we see @DediRock getting a big boost after rolling out their new i9 server lineup on their historical performance graph.

New data on the Insights page:

Hello @jbiloh

Awesome man Thanks for posting. Really cool feature.

The i9 Dream™

jbiloh · July 24

@jbiloh said:

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.

The ServerVerify Advanced Search provider filter bug has been fixed.

When viewing benchmarks for a specific provider, clicking Advanced Search will now carry that provider selection over and keep the results properly filtered. Thanks to @rpqu for reporting it.

rpqu · July 24

@jbiloh said:

@jbiloh said:

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.

The ServerVerify Advanced Search provider filter bug has been fixed.

When viewing benchmarks for a specific provider, clicking Advanced Search will now carry that provider selection over and keep the results properly filtered. Thanks to @rpqu for reporting it.

I've confirmed the feature. Thank you

jbiloh · July 24

@rpqu said:

@jbiloh said:

@jbiloh said:

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.

The ServerVerify Advanced Search provider filter bug has been fixed.

When viewing benchmarks for a specific provider, clicking Advanced Search will now carry that provider selection over and keep the results properly filtered. Thanks to @rpqu for reporting it.

I've confirmed the feature. Thank you

Awesome. Thanks for confirming.

If there are any other bugs or features you think of just let me know.

jbiloh · July 27

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

We did fix this by only allowing 1 entry per user per provider (the latest submission).

jbiloh · July 28

Any other features people would like to see added to ServerVerify?

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Introducing ServerVerify: built with the LowEndTalk community in mind

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Categories

In this Discussion

Introducing ServerVerify: built with the LowEndTalk community in mind

Comments