QDE KVM VPS in Amsterdam | Ryzen 7950X or AMD EPYC | NVMe | From EUR 3.95/mo

Comments

• jsg Member, Resident Benchmarker

  August 1

  Important info missing (e.g. install from ISO) plus absolutely not tasty that offer.
  This is LET and to be successful you need much tastier offers, and even more so in Amsterdam.

  Thanks no.

  Thanked by 1itachikonoha
• Calypso Member

  August 1

  @jsg said:
  Important info missing (e.g. install from ISO) plus absolutely not tasty that offer.
  This is LET and to be successful you need much tastier offers, and even more so in Amsterdam.

  Thanks no.

  If you compare the reputation of QDE with quite a few other LET providers, it may turn in favour of QDE.

  When every complaint/issue raised here with a provider would add $0.10 to their cost, I bet quite a few of those "really cheap" providers would be more expensive as QDE.

  And yes, this is LET, but also quite a few visitors are not blinded by cheap alone.

  Thanked by 1QDE
• barbaros Member

  August 1

  @Calypso said:

  @jsg said:
  Important info missing (e.g. install from ISO) plus absolutely not tasty that offer.
  This is LET and to be successful you need much tastier offers, and even more so in Amsterdam.

  Thanks no.

  If you compare the reputation of QDE with quite a few other LET providers, it may turn in favour of QDE.

  When every complaint/issue raised here with a provider would add $0.10 to their cost, I bet quite a few of those "really cheap" providers would be more expensive as QDE.

  And yes, this is LET, but also quite a few visitors are not blinded by cheap alone.

  Let me rephrase what you saying, there are cheaper hosts than QDE offering same or better service than what QDE offers, for half price,

  Sure there are shit hosts, but there are quite successful LET providers that offers great service with much cheaper prices

  Thanked by 2jsg itachikonoha
• QDE Member, Patron Provider

  August 2

  @jsg said: Important info missing (e.g. install from ISO)

  You can install custom OS via netboot.xyz.iso from our control panel.
• Calypso Member

  August 2

  @barbaros said:

  @Calypso said:

  If you compare the reputation of QDE with quite a few other LET providers, it may turn in favour of QDE.

  When every complaint/issue raised here with a provider would add $0.10 to their cost, I bet quite a few of those "really cheap" providers would be more expensive as QDE.

  Let me rephrase what you saying, there are cheaper hosts than QDE offering same or better service than what QDE offers, for half price,

  Sure there are shit hosts, but there are quite successful LET providers that offers great service with much cheaper prices

  You rephrase with putting what I'm saying in the opposite direction. Yes, QDE is not the cheapest out there, but if stability, performance and ticket handling are important to someone, it may be a way better deal than $5/year VPSes that go down every 24 hours, and/or take 2 months to answer a ticket and/or you get 8086 performance.

  There's a price for everything and if you don't want to compromise on things mentioned above, the price of QDE is descent. If you're willing to compromise (or gamble) on 1 or more of them, there are cheaper options. There are people happy with a Trabant, and there are who think Rolls Royce is the benchmark.
• itachikonoha Member

  August 2

  @Calypso said:

  @barbaros said:

  @Calypso said:

  If you compare the reputation of QDE with quite a few other LET providers, it may turn in favour of QDE.

  When every complaint/issue raised here with a provider would add $0.10 to their cost, I bet quite a few of those "really cheap" providers would be more expensive as QDE.

  Let me rephrase what you saying, there are cheaper hosts than QDE offering same or better service than what QDE offers, for half price,

  Sure there are shit hosts, but there are quite successful LET providers that offers great service with much cheaper prices

  You rephrase with putting what I'm saying in the opposite direction. Yes, QDE is not the cheapest out there, but if stability, performance and ticket handling are important to someone, it may be a way better deal than $5/year VPSes that go down every 24 hours, and/or take 2 months to answer a ticket and/or you get 8086 performance.

  There's a price for everything and if you don't want to compromise on things mentioned above, the price of QDE is descent. If you're willing to compromise (or gamble) on 1 or more of them, there are cheaper options. There are people happy with a Trabant, and there are who think Rolls Royce is the benchmark.

  This manipulative argument of Comparing with worst hosts and then justify the cost telling it is at least stable/haven't raised prices etc.... does not do justice to the community.

  You are comparing a $4/month package against $4/year vps? Seriously?

  Atleast bring other $4/month package from other providers and then show how this provider is better than the rest of the pack. Or else, it descends in to fanboyism and NOT a genuine neutral post.

  Thanked by 1jsg
• Calypso Member

  August 2

  @itachikonoha said:

  This manipulative argument of Comparing with worst hosts and then justify the cost telling it is at least stable/haven't raised prices etc.... does not do justice to the community.

  You are comparing a $4/month package against $4/year vps? Seriously?

  Atleast bring other $4/month package from other providers and then show how this provider is better than the rest of the pack. Or else, it descends in to fanboyism and NOT a genuine neutral post.

  I'm not a fanboy, only someone with past experience with QDE. And I'm triggered by the "$4/month is not LET" argument. This forum is full (really full) of complaints about $15/year providers. I'm just saying, if you really don't want to take that gamble and need stability and performance and support, a $15/year VPS may not be for you. Then this offer of QDE isn't that bad at all - look around at other providers (not LET) what they charge for a 1C/1G VPS; I've seen $20+ a month - still in a shared environment.

  And why I reacted? Simply because I don't like the "it's not cheap enough" posts; if it's too expensive for your liking: move on. I expect that 95% of LET users is capable of doing their own thinking if an offer is interesting enough for them.
• itachikonoha Member

  August 2

  @Calypso said:

  @itachikonoha said:

  This manipulative argument of Comparing with worst hosts and then justify the cost telling it is at least stable/haven't raised prices etc.... does not do justice to the community.

  You are comparing a $4/month package against $4/year vps? Seriously?

  Atleast bring other $4/month package from other providers and then show how this provider is better than the rest of the pack. Or else, it descends in to fanboyism and NOT a genuine neutral post.

  I'm not a fanboy, only someone with past experience with QDE. And I'm triggered by the "$4/month is not LET" argument. This forum is full (really full) of complaints about $15/year providers. I'm just saying, if you really don't want to take that gamble and need stability and performance and support, a $15/year VPS may not be for you. Then this offer of QDE isn't that bad at all - look around at other providers (not LET) what they charge for a 1C/1G VPS; I've seen $20+ a month - still in a shared environment.

  And why I reacted? Simply because I don't like the "it's not cheap enough" posts; if it's too expensive for your liking: move on. I expect that 95% of LET users is capable of doing their own thinking if an offer is interesting enough for them.

  "it is not cheap enough" is just an opinion and opinions will always be subjective in nature. It depwnds upon your research, your wallet, your experience, your connection.

  A $10/month vps will be costly for some, and cheaper for others. Which one is right and which one is wrong? There is no defnite answers.

  A forum will always be a mixture of different opinions and that's the beauty of it. It gives others a different perspective to judge the offers accordingly.
• jsg Member, Resident Benchmarker

  August 2

  I don't think that @Calypso's argument is "evil" but rather that he confuses categories. The by far most relevant category her on LET is bang per buck. That may come with good and relatively quick support, usually actually is reliable and stable within the bounds to be reasonably expected, etc.

  But top "stability, performance and ticket handling" is another and different category and people looking for that tend to look elsewhere -or- are experienced long-term LET users who know the market quite well.

  Besides Calypso's argument has another - and major - weak point. AFAIK @QDE is not well known to offer top stability, performance and ticket handling, at least not yet.

  Anyway, we're talking about NL, Ams - and there are all sorts of providers, ranging from dirt-cheap but far away from 99.99%, up to 99.99% top performance and ticket handling, so it's certainly not that many were waiting for QDE.
  I myself happen to have multiple top class VPS there and all of them are cheaper than this offer here.

  @QDE I'm offering to benchmark and review one of your VPS offered above (your choice which one). Then, if it turns out to be top class, you'd have some grounds to stand one here. Just let me know here or via PM. All it'd "cost" you is a couple of days of free access.
• Calypso Member

  August 3 edited August 3

  @jsg said:
  I don't think that @Calypso's argument is "evil" but rather that he confuses categories. The by far most relevant category her on LET is bang per buck. That may come with good and relatively quick support, usually actually is reliable and stable within the bounds to be reasonably expected, etc.

  Bang per buck, that's right. And that may include a bit higher price, then the bang-per-buck can still be OK. In the end it's the decision of the customer, not of the "I'm not a user but I think it's to expensive for me and I'll let you know" category.

  But top "stability, performance and ticket handling" is another and different category and people looking for that tend to look elsewhere -or- are experienced long-term LET users who know the market quite well.

  To be honest, I've experienced quite a few LET providers, and they almost all have flaws. Even the ones with very good reputation here had their periods of issues; and it's the decision of me (customer) to cope with those times or pay a bit (or a lot) more.

  Besides Calypso's argument has another - and major - weak point. AFAIK @QDE is not well known to offer top stability, performance and ticket handling, at least not yet.

  I've been a customer of QDE for quite some time (not any more, but that didn't had anything to do with them) and my experiences were really good; I know, it's an N=1 experience, but on the other hand, I have enough material to compare them with.

  I myself happen to have multiple top class VPS there and all of them are cheaper than this offer here.

  The only thing that started this whole discussion (and I'm quitting it now, because it distracts from the purpose of this thread) is the "too expensive, not LET" remark. That's what I've responded to in the first place, because I think it's not necessary to make those kinds of remarks. Are you a potential customer? Then don't use the offer and move on. Are you offended by the price of an offer and think it shouldn't be here? Let the admins decide and ignore it yourself. It's just like going into a car dealer for Maserati, looking around and saying "your cars are too expensive" and leave, while the prices were visible when you were standing outside.
• jsg Member, Resident Benchmarker

  August 3

  Well, for a start I actually did purchase quite many VPSs for testing over the years, so I'm not just going into a car dealer for Maserati, looking around and saying "your cars are too expensive".
  Beside, IF QDE offers "Maseratis" (plus very good and quick support) I won't call their products too expensive - but we don't know yet. What we do know though is that their prices are quite high.
• Som Member

  1:04PM

  Do you provide a routed /64 IPv6 prefix?
• QDE Member, Patron Provider

  2:51PM

  @Som said:
  Do you provide a routed /64 IPv6 prefix?

  No, you will need to add additional IPv6 addresses one by one.

  Thanked by 1Som