I want to buy batches of 2 x Linode 512s for $20
Unfortunately it's not quite suited to my app and business model. My minimum offering needs two boxes, but two Linode 1024s would be surplus to requirements and too expensive for my clients.
Rather than one Linode 1024 for $20 I would happily pay $20 for a pair of Linode 512s with 4 cores each, half the disk space and one public IP. The extra support and maintenance overhead to you would be minimal. Please consider bringing back the 512mb offering, even if they have to be ordered in batches of two or four.
Would anyone else be interested in something like this?
40 Replies
@kyhwana:
Wait, $20 for.. two linode 512's with 4 cores each? So… a Linode 1024? (which gives you 8 vcpus)
Well, yes. That's what I said. I have a requirement to maintain a two-server (or more) architecture. I don't need and (my clients) can't afford two 1GB Linodes, even at this price. But two 512s would be perfect at $10 each.
I often hear that Linode won't go below $20 because they don't want the extra support overhead and "bad neighbours" associated with the Low End Box crowd. Fine, that makes sense. But why not let customers order multiple smaller boxes instead of just cutting out the perfectly adequate 512 plans?
If Linode is too expensive for your clients today, they were certainly too expensive before the upgrade.
Linode isn't going to go lower than $20 (well, $17 if you pay in a lump sum), but there are various things you can do in regards to chroot jails or OpenVZ in order to get some separation.
If your client expects a reliable multi-server architecture for $20/mth or less, though, their requirements are bad and they should re-examine them.
@Guspaz:
Errm, they didn't "cut out" the 512 plans, they gave them all a free upgrade. 512s were $20 before, now you get a 1024 for the same price.
If Linode is too expensive for your clients today, they were certainly too expensive before the upgrade.
Linode isn't going to go lower than $20 (well, $17 if you pay in a lump sum), but there are various things you can do in regards to chroot jails or OpenVZ in order to get some separation.
If your client expects a reliable multi-server architecture for $20/mth or less, though, their requirements are bad and they should re-examine them.
I'm not suggesting they "go below $20". Do you speak for them in an official capacity or are you just a sanctimonious busybody?
Do you see any 512 VPS plans available at Linode now?
@TeshooLama:
@Guspaz:Errm, they didn't "cut out" the 512 plans, they gave them all a free upgrade. 512s were $20 before, now you get a 1024 for the same price.
If Linode is too expensive for your clients today, they were certainly too expensive before the upgrade.
Linode isn't going to go lower than $20 (well, $17 if you pay in a lump sum), but there are various things you can do in regards to chroot jails or OpenVZ in order to get some separation.
If your client expects a reliable multi-server architecture for $20/mth or less, though, their requirements are bad and they should re-examine them.
I'm not suggesting they "go below $20". Do you speak for them in an official capacity or are you just a sanctimonious busybody? Where did I ask for your opinion?
Do you see any 512 VPS plans available at Linode now?
By posting here you are asking for the opinions of others. If you want an official response don't post here, but make a ticket or mail Linode instead.
@Guspaz:
Errm, they didn't "cut out" the 512 plans, they gave them all a free upgrade. 512s were $20 before, now you get a 1024 for the same price.
If Linode is too expensive for your clients today, they were certainly too expensive before the upgrade.
Linode isn't going to go lower than $20 (well, $17 if you pay in a lump sum), but there are various things you can do in regards to chroot jails or OpenVZ in order to get some separation.
If your client expects a reliable multi-server architecture for $20/mth or less, though, their requirements are bad and they should re-examine them.
The thing is for a lot of applications a Linode 1024 is overkill.
One of the companies I work for needs an external DNS server. Linode is a good choice because they are cheap and reliable. A Linode 256 would not be stressed by that workload. Don't tell me it's only $20/Month, when the accountants are having trouble making payroll every month that could be $20 less that someone gets in their pay packet.
If the wrong person notices digital ocean are cheaper I could end up with the worry of having an unreliable DNS server and I really don't need that.
How about bringing back Linode 512's and charging $12.50/month for them? Everyone wins.
@Nuvini:
@TeshooLama:
@Guspaz:Errm, they didn't "cut out" the 512 plans, they gave them all a free upgrade. 512s were $20 before, now you get a 1024 for the same price.
If Linode is too expensive for your clients today, they were certainly too expensive before the upgrade.
Linode isn't going to go lower than $20 (well, $17 if you pay in a lump sum), but there are various things you can do in regards to chroot jails or OpenVZ in order to get some separation.
If your client expects a reliable multi-server architecture for $20/mth or less, though, their requirements are bad and they should re-examine them.
I'm not suggesting they "go below $20". Do you speak for them in an official capacity or are you just a sanctimonious busybody? Where did I ask for your opinion?
Do you see any 512 VPS plans available at Linode now?
By posting here you are asking for the opinions of others. If you want an official response don't post here, but make a ticket or mail Linode instead.
Fair point. I do find Guspaz's unconstructive and arrogant responses off-putting though. He's probably costing Linode business.
I can't be the only one that thinks 1GB VPS are overkill for many applications? I understand this whole "$20 barrier" thing everyone speculates about. Why not let me purchase 10 x 512s for $100 per month? No "$20" problem there.
To add to this yes it would get to the point if this process was allowed to continue where the resources would be too small to be practical. But still, every time Linode graces us with their additional resources it would make halving the lowest plan again plausible/practical. Then in 10 years from now if Linode did this they would have around 50 different plans and a huge mess trying to keep them all on different hardware and managed.
@TeshooLama:
Fair point. I do find Guspaz's unconstructive and arrogant responses off-putting though. He's probably costing Linode business.
Don't take anything anyone says on this forum too seriously, it's not Linode's official anything. This forum is a mix of bright technical people, complaining, and trolling. Sometimes all three in one post.
@sednet:
@Guspaz:Errm, they didn't "cut out" the 512 plans, they gave them all a free upgrade. 512s were $20 before, now you get a 1024 for the same price.
If Linode is too expensive for your clients today, they were certainly too expensive before the upgrade.
Linode isn't going to go lower than $20 (well, $17 if you pay in a lump sum), but there are various things you can do in regards to chroot jails or OpenVZ in order to get some separation.
If your client expects a reliable multi-server architecture for $20/mth or less, though, their requirements are bad and they should re-examine them.
The thing is for a lot of applications a Linode 1024 is overkill.
One of the companies I work for needs an external DNS server. Linode is a good choice because they are cheap and reliable. A Linode 256 would not be stressed by that workload. Don't tell me it's only $20/Month, when the accountants are having trouble making payroll every month that could be $20 less that someone gets in their pay packet.
If the wrong person notices digital ocean are cheaper I could end up with the worry of having an unreliable DNS server and I really don't need that.
How about bringing back Linode 512's and charging $12.50/month for them? Everyone wins.
Couldn't agree more. It's completely inane to say "what difference does $X make". That small dollar amount can have a massive marginal impact when you're trying to hit competitive price points. On its own a small dollar amount can add up to a person's entire yearly salary when applied to many clients.
> I do not speak for Linode in any capacity but I can almost guarantee you there will not be a under $20 offering. This has been discussed many times in the past. You are not the first person to recommend halving the lowest plan to offer yet another cheap plan. You realize what would happen if they did create a $10 512 plan right? You got it, someone would demand a 256 plan for $5. You know what would happen then right? ….
I get it. I hear you. They don't want to have a $10 plan. But you missed my point. Why not give me a two 512s for $20. It's a $20 plan. I'd order bundles of these plans! I'd even pay $25 for the privilege.
Then every time linode gives us more resources this issue will come up again. Quickly it will turn into a mess that would degrade the quality of service for all linode users.
@DrJ:
No, I get what you are asking. It still requires hardware for 512 plans though. And someone after you will say hey that's nice. But I need 4 256 plans for $20/month. After that someone will need 8 128 plans for $20/month…..
Then every time linode gives us more resources this issue will come up again. Quickly it will turn into a mess that would degrade the quality of service for all linode users.
I think you're right in theory but not in practice. 512 is a reasonable cut-off point. You can get a lot of stuff done on a 512mb Linode. You couldn't say the same for a 256mb or 128mb box any more.
I suppose the same could've been said at every step of Linode's growth from Linode 80 through 360. But small websites and other light-use cases just don't need more than 512mb today.
What is reasonable to you may not be to another. So my theory stands. Really it is not a theory, it is fact.
Also, I strongly refute your claim that you could not get a lot done on the 256MB plan, or even lower. It depends on what you need the server for and there are things that 256 or even lower would be, yes, "overkill".
If Linode offered a 256 Plan still today for like $5 a month, I would probably have at least one. My mind is racing on the possibilities to offload certain services off my main server to that.
@DrJ:
You are wrong, sort of. $10 might be reasonable, but $20 is also very reasonable. By the way, $10 is not reasonable to many people. Why do you think the other cheap providers (I wont start naming names) are able to sell crap for $5 or less a month?
What is reasonable to you may not be to another. So my theory stands. Really it is not a theory, it is fact.
Well, you're making a hypothetical point that someone might want 8 x 128mb nodes, and thus my request - taken to its logical extreme - is invalid. On the other hand I'm saying that in practice you can't host much of anything on a 128mb box, but can on a 512.
The bottom line is Linode are currently valuing a given fraction (1/40th?) of their hardware at $20. Why wouldn't you sell 1/80ths (which still have excellent utility) at $10 to multiple-server customers on the basis that they won't generate any extra support overheads.
Someone is going to do this. Certain rivals are even cheaper than $10 as you point out, but just thinking about using them to run my business gives me cold sweats.
@TeshooLama:
Certain rivals are even cheaper than $10 as you point out, but just thinking about using them to run my business gives me cold sweats.
But that's why you're at Linode. And this is how things are here.
Linode has decided they don't want to go below $20 plans. I don't think it's a money issue that would get solved by saying "well, then group two of them together". I think it's the issue that Linode could experience exponential growth very, VERY quickly. If I were a company that provided amazing support like Linode, that would scare me. Again, I don't think it's a money issue. I think it's an issue with the number of hosts.
@TeshooLama:
@DrJ:You are wrong, sort of. $10 might be reasonable, but $20 is also very reasonable. By the way, $10 is not reasonable to many people. Why do you think the other cheap providers (I wont start naming names) are able to sell crap for $5 or less a month?
What is reasonable to you may not be to another. So my theory stands. Really it is not a theory, it is fact.
Well, you're making a hypothetical point that someone might want 8 x 128mb nodes, and thus my request - taken to its logical extreme - is invalid. On the other hand I'm saying that in practice you can't host much of anything on a 128mb box, but can on a 512.
The bottom line is Linode are currently valuing a given fraction (1/40th?) of their hardware at $20. Why wouldn't you sell 1/80ths (which still have excellent utility) at $10 to multiple-server customers on the basis that they won't generate any extra support overheads.
Someone is going to do this. Certain rivals are even cheaper than $10 as you point out, but just thinking about using them to run my business gives me cold sweats.
No, I am not. Someone would. The thing is Linode has to decide where to cut off the line. Many people will disagree with where that line is drawn. Linode has drawn it at $20. FYI, a 128MB server would be sufficient for an IRC server, a simple web server, mail server, DNS server, testing environment, small database server, hosting of certain games (yes nothing big), backup server configured and ready to go without data that would be re-sized if needed, and at least 1000 more uses.
@DrJ:
@TeshooLama:
@DrJ:You are wrong, sort of. $10 might be reasonable, but $20 is also very reasonable. By the way, $10 is not reasonable to many people. Why do you think the other cheap providers (I wont start naming names) are able to sell crap for $5 or less a month?
What is reasonable to you may not be to another. So my theory stands. Really it is not a theory, it is fact.
Well, you're making a hypothetical point that someone might want 8 x 128mb nodes, and thus my request - taken to its logical extreme - is invalid. On the other hand I'm saying that in practice you can't host much of anything on a 128mb box, but can on a 512.
The bottom line is Linode are currently valuing a given fraction (1/40th?) of their hardware at $20. Why wouldn't you sell 1/80ths (which still have excellent utility) at $10 to multiple-server customers on the basis that they won't generate any extra support overheads.
Someone is going to do this. Certain rivals are even cheaper than $10 as you point out, but just thinking about using them to run my business gives me cold sweats.
No, I am not. Someone would. The thing is Linode has to decide where to cut off the line. Many people will disagree with where that line is drawn. Linode has drawn it at $20. FYI, a 128MB server would be sufficient for an IRC server, a simple web server, mail server, DNS server, testing environment, small database server, hosting of certain games (yes nothing big), backup server configured and ready to go without data that would be re-sized if needed, and at least 1000 more uses.
Yes, yes, I know. But you couldn't do all of those at once on a 128 or 256. You can on a 512. 512 - on its own - is still a great product with excellent utility for practically all users.
A week ago practically everyone on this forum thought Linode 512 was the dogs gonads. I did too, apart from the price. Has Linode 512 become an antiquated server in just a week?
@tubaguy50035:
@TeshooLama:Certain rivals are even cheaper than $10 as you point out, but just thinking about using them to run my business gives me cold sweats.
But that's why you're at Linode. And this is how things are here.
Linode has decided they don't want to go below $20 plans. I don't think it's a money issue that would get solved by saying "well, then group two of them together". I think it's the issue that Linode could experience exponential growth very, VERY quickly. If I were a company that provided amazing support like Linode, that would scare me. Again, I don't think it's a money issue. I think it's an issue with the number of hosts.
Decade-old companies in highly competitive industries rarely have to worry about exponential growth!
@TeshooLama:
Yes, yes, I know. But you couldn't do all of those at once on a 128 or 256. You can on a 512. 512 - on its own - is still a great product with excellent utility for practically all users.
What if I want to create a new IRC network and want one 128 server in each facility. 256, or even 512 would be OVERKILL. 8 128 servers would work nicely for me. Point, set, match.
Edit: Just showing here there are reasons and people would start demanding/asking for it if linode started weird offerings like the one you want. Then linode would be like those other providers that make you sick thinking about them.
@DrJ:
@TeshooLama:Yes, yes, I know. But you couldn't do all of those at once on a 128 or 256. You can on a 512. 512 - on its own - is still a great product with excellent utility for practically all users.
What if I want to create a new IRC network and want one 128 server in each facility. 256, or even 512 would be OVERKILL. 8 128 servers would work nicely for me. Point, set, match.
You're describing a corner case. I'm describing a base case.
@TeshooLama:
@DrJ:
@TeshooLama:Yes, yes, I know. But you couldn't do all of those at once on a 128 or 256. You can on a 512. 512 - on its own - is still a great product with excellent utility for practically all users.
What if I want to create a new IRC network and want one 128 server in each facility. 256, or even 512 would be OVERKILL. 8 128 servers would work nicely for me. Point, set, match.
You're describing a corner case. I'm describing a base case.
Haha, believe it or not the case I just made would be in huge demand. An entire distributed IRC network for $20/month with 8 servers. That one example there would be great for many people. Its a strong "base" case. At least as "base" as what you are asking.
The thing you must realize is that everyone has different needs. Some people's needs are very very minimal. So low you could not ever imagine getting by with that.
On the other hand, how is the 128mb VPS business doing? Barely anyone offers them anymore. The market makes my point for me. 512 is still a product in demand. 128 is catered for only by niche providers. By contrast Linode 512 was still wildly popular just last week.
You seem to be suggesting that if Linode 128 made a comeback it would immediately become their most popular plan. Reality and the market would prove otherwise, in my estimation.
@TeshooLama:
It's been fun debating and I concede you're correct in theory. But no - in practice - people need LAMP stacks or derivatives thereof.
On the other hand, how is the 128mb VPS business doing? Barely anyone offers them anymore. The market makes my point for me. 512 is still a product in demand. 128 is catered for only by niche providers. By contrast Linode 512 was still wildly popular just last week.
You seem to be suggesting that if Linode 128 made a comeback it would immediately become their most popular plan. Reality and the market would prove otherwise, in my estimation.
First off, stop assuming what everyone needs. There are tons of linodes that have no LAMP stack or any part of it. That is one of your problems in debating this. Second off, I'm not trying to make a case for Linode to bring back a 128 offer, or a 256, or a 512. They wont, and I think they should not. By not doing so they are able to maintain the high quality of service they do today. Thirdly, most other providers that may have a 128MB of ram offer, or around there, probably do not have enough dispersed data centers to make my one example about IRC possible, or any other distributed network of the like. Fourthly, no a 128MB offering would not be their most popular plan. It would be the most abused for sure though (violations of TOS). Fifthly, you need to understand that what you are asking would be great for -you- and some others. It would not be enough for many people though and -would- be overkill for others. Sixthly (is that a word?), Linode can not satisfy every need. Attempts to do so would become costly and have a negative effect on us all. Seventhly (I'm on a roll! and almost positive that's not a word), you might as well drop it. As I've said this has been asked many times in the past, or very similar to it anyways. Linode has drawn the line, it was drawn in 2003 at $20. Hasn't budged in 10 years so don't expect it to.
@DrJ:
@TeshooLama:It's been fun debating and I concede you're correct in theory. But no - in practice - people need LAMP stacks or derivatives thereof.
On the other hand, how is the 128mb VPS business doing? Barely anyone offers them anymore. The market makes my point for me. 512 is still a product in demand. 128 is catered for only by niche providers. By contrast Linode 512 was still wildly popular just last week.
You seem to be suggesting that if Linode 128 made a comeback it would immediately become their most popular plan. Reality and the market would prove otherwise, in my estimation.
First off, stop assuming what everyone needs. There are tons of linodes that have no LAMP stack or any part of it. That is one of your problems in debating this. Second off, I'm not trying to make a case for Linode to bring back a 128 offer, or a 256, or a 512. They wont, and I think they should not. By not doing so they are able to maintain the high quality of service they do today. Thirdly, most other providers that may have a 128MB of ram offer, or around there, probably do not have enough dispersed data centers to make my one example about IRC possible, or any other distributed network of the like. Fourthly, no a 128MB offering would not be their most popular plan. It would be the most abused for sure though (violations of TOS). Fifthly, you need to understand that what you are asking would be great for -you- and some others. It would not be enough for many people though and -would- be overkill for others. Sixthly (is that a word?), Linode can not satisfy every need. Attempts to do so would become costly and have a negative effect on us all. Seventhly (I'm on a roll! and almost positive that's not a word), you might as well drop it. As I've said this has been asked many times in the past, or very similar to it anyways. Linode has drawn the line, it was drawn in 2003 at $20. Hasn't budged in 10 years so don't expect it to.
You are the one making unrealistic assumptions about what a base case for the VPS market is. I don't need to assume. I just look at what the marketplace proves to be the case. 128mb plans are NOT popular. In fact they are almost completely extinct. Why is that? They have limited utility. Indeed, they are for corner cases.
QED.
@TeshooLama:
@DrJ:
@TeshooLama:It's been fun debating and I concede you're correct in theory. But no - in practice - people need LAMP stacks or derivatives thereof.
On the other hand, how is the 128mb VPS business doing? Barely anyone offers them anymore. The market makes my point for me. 512 is still a product in demand. 128 is catered for only by niche providers. By contrast Linode 512 was still wildly popular just last week.
You seem to be suggesting that if Linode 128 made a comeback it would immediately become their most popular plan. Reality and the market would prove otherwise, in my estimation.
First off, stop assuming what everyone needs. There are tons of linodes that have no LAMP stack or any part of it. That is one of your problems in debating this. Second off, I'm not trying to make a case for Linode to bring back a 128 offer, or a 256, or a 512. They wont, and I think they should not. By not doing so they are able to maintain the high quality of service they do today. Thirdly, most other providers that may have a 128MB of ram offer, or around there, probably do not have enough dispersed data centers to make my one example about IRC possible, or any other distributed network of the like. Fourthly, no a 128MB offering would not be their most popular plan. It would be the most abused for sure though (violations of TOS). Fifthly, you need to understand that what you are asking would be great for -you- and some others. It would not be enough for many people though and -would- be overkill for others. Sixthly (is that a word?), Linode can not satisfy every need. Attempts to do so would become costly and have a negative effect on us all. Seventhly (I'm on a roll! and almost positive that's not a word), you might as well drop it. As I've said this has been asked many times in the past, or very similar to it anyways. Linode has drawn the line, it was drawn in 2003 at $20. Hasn't budged in 10 years so don't expect it to.
You are the one making unrealistic assumptions about what a base case for the VPS market is. I don't need to assume. I just look at what the marketplace proves to be the case. 128mb plans are NOT popular. In fact they are almost completely extinct. Why is that? They have limited utility. Indeed, they are for corner cases.
QED.
Final post, because you are starting to not even listen to me. I'm not making unrealistic assumptions. I'm telling you there are people who's needs would be less than 512MB. Even as low as 128 or lower. The point here is not for 128 plans. They should be extinct, and should never be back on linode. Not sure why you are arguing with me there, we agree on that point. My point this whole time is you want a special plan to meet your needs. The 512 plan is reasonable, even today, at $19.95. Be thankful that Linode now gives you twice the 512 resources for 5 cents more. If $20 is too much for you then it is, sadly for you, time to look else where because as I said, and I close with this: Linode will never be able to satisfy everyone's needs.
@DrJ:
There are tons of linodes that have no LAMP stack or any part of it.
grin I doubt there are many linodes without an 'L':-)
@sweh:
@DrJ:There are tons of linodes that have no LAMP stack or any part of it.
grin I doubt there are many linodes without an 'L':-)
Yea, true. Forgot "Linux" was part of it
@sweh:
@DrJ:There are tons of linodes that have no LAMP stack or any part of it.
grin I doubt there are many linodes without an 'L':-)
Linode does pvgrub doesn't it? You can run FreeBSD under pvgrub.
I've never tried personally but it sounds like a fun project.
Feel free TeshooLama to colocate a few dozen boxes, divvy them up into whatever size you think people just have to have, charge next to nothing, and see how long you stay in business.
Besides the simple accounting overhead of billing peanuts per month, there's the real overhead of maintaining the servers, the VM setup, and the networking infrastructure.
Good luck doing all that when you're billing out at $5-10 per month per whiny user, because it never fails that the cheapass customers always take way more support then the middle and upper customers.
@vonskippy:
Good luck doing all that when you're billing out at $5-10 per month per whiny user, because it never fails that the cheapass customers always take way more support then the middle and upper customers.
Could you elaborate a little bit on this? I am the "cheapass" customer of Linode (was having one 512 MB, now one 1024 MB Linode) and I rarely have to hit up the support. Hence I can't see a correlation between the Linode size and frequency of hitting up tech support.
TeshooLama: I wasn't trolling, or being rude (as you are), or being arrogant (as you are), or any of those things. I'm being upfront. Your client has unreasonable requirements, and my point is that your messages imply that Linode has somehow become a worse value by giving everybody free upgrades at the same price. But that's the price is the same. They didn't discontinue anything, they upgraded all their plans. It's still the same plan, it just comes with more RAM.
I don't really understand your hostility. You come here making unreasonable demands in a community support forum and then get all huffy when people tell you that your demands are unreasonable. What more do you want from us?
@petarpetrovic:
@vonskippy:Good luck doing all that when you're billing out at $5-10 per month per whiny user, because it never fails that the cheapass customers always take way more support then the middle and upper customers.
Could you elaborate a little bit on this? I am the "cheapass" customer of Linode (was having one 512 MB, now one 1024 MB Linode) and I rarely have to hit up the support. Hence I can't see a correlation between the Linode size and frequency of hitting up tech support.
Low-budget offerings tend to attract people who don't know what they're doing. Take, for instance, all the people here now complaining that their formerly-512MB-now-1GB nodes setup as web servers with stock configs of httpd, PHP, MySQL, and who-know-what-else can't handle more than 5-6 simultaneous connections without locking up and/or crashing due to an OOM condition. They ask for a ridiculous amount of support time and complain the whole time that their $4/month shared hosting worked just fine.
I'd love to see smaller, cheaper nodes at the $5-10/month point, maybe 512MB RAM, 10GB of space, two CPU cores, etc. sold as an ADD-ON for existing customers. Something you can use to spin off a memcached node, DNS server, load balancer, etc. Not something you try and run Plesk or,
So you get one 512 and you pay $20. You get another, your invoice does not change. You get another, it climbs up to $40….
Old hardware gets reused, $/mo/customer remains the same, more is sold because more customers would want X 512s instead of X/2 1024s.
@Azathoth:
You guys are all missing the OP's point. It's not about offering cheaper plans, ie. 512 nodes for ten bucks, but offering 2 x 512 combos for $20 minimum.
So you get one 512 and you pay $20. You get another, your invoice does not change. You get another, it climbs up to $40….
Old hardware gets reused, $/mo/customer remains the same, more is sold because more customers would want X 512s instead of X/2 1024s.
No, I was not missing anything. I understand what he wants. A special plan. My point to him is that if Linode honored requests like that then they would have others asking for more. And what happens with the current 1024 plan becomes a 2048 and there is nothing under that offered. Does his deal then become 4x 512MB plans for $20? If they just double it to 2x 1GB plans for $20 then you have the same situation. Well, can't I just get 4x 512 MB plans instead for $20? It will never end.
@DrJ:
My point to him is that if Linode honored requests like that then they would have others asking for more.
In one hand, you're right. And one more reason why such subdivision would not be welcome, is shortage of the IPv4 space, unless you wish to start offering IPv6 only and/or LAN-only plans.
On the other hand, Linode is being marketed as a $0.65/day cloud, and IMHO a cloud should be flexible in both ways, esp. since with the powerful Linode API you can make your own, highly-scalable and automated cloud. So the only bottom line here is the premise that Linode does not wish to offer customer support for less than $20/mo, and they can keep that bottom line with a special plan like 2x512 nodes for $20/mo.
512MB is a reasonable minimum, where 256 or less probably isn't. So yes, even if one day 1GB becomes 2GB, this system can still have its merits. Doable, possible, automated, the only question is whether Linode is willing to do it, and whether there is any interest at all.
@DrJ:
@Azathoth:You guys are all missing the OP's point. It's not about offering cheaper plans, ie. 512 nodes for ten bucks, but offering 2 x 512 combos for $20 minimum.
So you get one 512 and you pay $20. You get another, your invoice does not change. You get another, it climbs up to $40….
Old hardware gets reused, $/mo/customer remains the same, more is sold because more customers would want X 512s instead of X/2 1024s.
No, I was not missing anything. I understand what he wants. A special plan. My point to him is that if Linode honored requests like that then they would have others asking for more. And what happens with the current 1024 plan becomes a 2048 and there is nothing under that offered. Does his deal then become 4x 512MB plans for $20? If they just double it to 2x 1GB plans for $20 then you have the same situation. Well, can't I just get 4x 512 MB plans instead for $20? It will never end.
Yeah, computing technology has been like that, a never ending series of improvements. Its likely to continue for a while longer too. Companies that don't deal with it often end up finding themselves chewed up from below. Before there was VPS hosting, there was shared hosting, dedicated hosting, and colocation. Linode and other VPS and cloud providers have ended up eating into the market (or at least the growth) of dedicated hosting, shared hosting and colocation providers (while also being a customer of colo providers).
I understand the practicalities of maintaining a $20/month minimum, it seems the OP does as well. The fact that there is ongoing demand for cheaper plans is pretty good evidence that Linode is leaving room for upstarts to come along and disrupt their business. Offering a 2x512 for $20 plan wouldn't satisfy everyone, but it would allow Linode to hold the line on their price-points while also satisfying sophisticated customers who like the elegance of having a separation of concerns and abhore the inelegance of having severely over-speced servers.
I for one am delighted to have more RAM and cores at the same price-point, but honestly, I can't imagine what I'll do with it. I've bumped up the # of Apache processes. I might tweak mySQL. The disk cache will eat the rest, but very little data is "hot" or even warm. If I instead had the option of 2x512MB, I might start experimenting with load-balancing and failover and that could lead me to want and pay for more resources in the future. As it is, there is no temptation. The extra capacity is ultimately going to go pretty much unnoticed.
@eas:
I for one am delighted to have more RAM and cores at the same price-point, but honestly, I can't imagine what I'll do with it. I've bumped up the # of Apache processes. I might tweak mySQL. The disk cache will eat the rest, but very little data is "hot" or even warm. If I instead had the option of 2x512MB, I might start experimenting with load-balancing and failover and that could lead me to want and pay for more resources in the future. As it is, there is no temptation. The extra capacity is ultimately going to go pretty much unnoticed.
And therein lies the risk. I have two linodes that were just fine as 512's. If linode offered 2x512 for $20, I'd drop my two down to that and pay $20 instead of $40 a month