9 ms·

I don't see that distinction at all. Both Linode and DO provide persistent local storage. Both let you resize your server. And now, they're competitive on price

I don't see that distinction at all. Both Linode and DO provide persistent local storage. Both let you resize your server. And now, they're competitive on price; Linode even has hourly billing. Granted, DO has lower-end plans than Linode. But I don't see any indication that DO treats servers as disposable or fungible whereas Linode doesn't.

chc 13y ago
I don't think anyone's ever gotten good hard numbers, but just from having seen a lot of people's anecdata over the years, my general impression is that Digital Ocean seems to have more short-term outages and to oversubscribe their boxes a bit more.
- vbtechguy 13y ago
  that's probably due to the massive surge in growth and growing pains for DO
gtaylor 13y ago
> But I don't see any indication that DO treats servers as disposable or fungible whereas Linode doesn't. I'm not sure "disposable" is a good word to describe DO's approach. We do know that they cram a lot more people per host machine, though. That may be where the "treat VMs like cattle" statement was getting at. You need only fire up a few instances of comparable type, get some CPU load, and watch some basic metrics to determine this for yourself.
- nine_k 13y ago
  I suppose they do it because load on a typical instance is low. Probably $5 instances are mostly hosting services like low-volume blogs, personal home pages, ssh/vpn tunnels, etc. OTOH the lowest ($20) tier on Linode is probably used by more serious projects that, on average, exert considerable load.
  - gtaylor 13y ago
    > OTOH the lowest ($20) tier on Linode is probably used by more serious projects that, on average, exert considerable load. I'm not sure about that. For me, I pay the extra few bucks on Linode for the customer service, stability, and the consistent performance. I'm not running my VMs ragged, I'm just willing to pay a little more for a higher quality service. Anecdotally, it's a quality thing for me. Digital Ocean = Economy car, Linode = A nice Hyundai sedan or a higher end Accord.
    - threeseed 13y ago
      Your anecdotes (just like everyones) are meaningless. If you some evidence that DO is inferior at the same price level as Linode then you should post it. I was with Linode and had to deal with constant outages (at Fremont DC) and went through two major hacking incidents where I found out through Reddit instead of from them. I've never been with a worse provider than Linode.
      - waps 13y ago
        All these anecdotes make one wonder why these people aren't simply going to hetzner and ovh and simply get a dedicated server for just slightly more (meaning $25/month).
        neverminder 13y ago
        Or you can go with http://kimsufi.com http://kimsufi.com and get a 2GB RAM dedicated server for $13 a month.
        latch 13y ago
        kimsufi is just OVH's budget brand (not that there's anything wrong with that, but your parent already mentioned OVH, so I thought some people might not know that they aren't really distinct)
        superuser2 13y ago

chc 13y ago

I don't think anyone's ever gotten good hard numbers, but just from having seen a lot of people's anecdata over the years, my general impression is that Digital Ocean seems to have more short-term outages and to oversubscribe their boxes a bit more.

vbtechguy 13y ago
that's probably due to the massive surge in growth and growing pains for DO

gtaylor 13y ago

> But I don't see any indication that DO treats servers as disposable or fungible whereas Linode doesn't. I'm not sure "disposable" is a good word to describe DO's approach. We do know that they cram a lot more people per host machine, though. That may be where the "treat VMs like cattle" statement was getting at. You need only fire up a few instances of comparable type, get some CPU load, and watch some basic metrics to determine this for yourself.

nine_k 13y ago
I suppose they do it because load on a typical instance is low. Probably $5 instances are mostly hosting services like low-volume blogs, personal home pages, ssh/vpn tunnels, etc. OTOH the lowest ($20) tier on Linode is probably used by more serious projects that, on average, exert considerable load.
- gtaylor 13y ago
  > OTOH the lowest ($20) tier on Linode is probably used by more serious projects that, on average, exert considerable load. I'm not sure about that. For me, I pay the extra few bucks on Linode for the customer service, stability, and the consistent performance. I'm not running my VMs ragged, I'm just willing to pay a little more for a higher quality service. Anecdotally, it's a quality thing for me. Digital Ocean = Economy car, Linode = A nice Hyundai sedan or a higher end Accord.
  - threeseed 13y ago
    Your anecdotes (just like everyones) are meaningless. If you some evidence that DO is inferior at the same price level as Linode then you should post it. I was with Linode and had to deal with constant outages (at Fremont DC) and went through two major hacking incidents where I found out through Reddit instead of from them. I've never been with a worse provider than Linode.
    - waps 13y ago
      All these anecdotes make one wonder why these people aren't simply going to hetzner and ovh and simply get a dedicated server for just slightly more (meaning $25/month).
      - neverminder 13y ago
        Or you can go with http://kimsufi.com http://kimsufi.com and get a 2GB RAM dedicated server for $13 a month.
        latch 13y ago
        kimsufi is just OVH's budget brand (not that there's anything wrong with that, but your parent already mentioned OVH, so I thought some people might not know that they aren't really distinct)
        superuser2 13y ago