LET, is it worth going back?

[vanarp]

I never did understand why things had to be $7/mo or less.

Probably it is justified because of the name "Low End" and being Un-managed too. I thought each VPS provider has a public website where the prices are high enough that can compensate the loss from the special Low End offers.


I personally would like to see providers offering whatever is possible for them with stable infrastructure and good support response at ~$5/mo. It can be 128MB or 2048MB. The key is Stability and Good Support.

 

[MannDude]

Probably it is justified because of the name "Low End" and being Un-managed too. 

Low-End would be regarding the specs of the VPS

"Budget" would be regarding the price.

Instead of capping the price, they should have cappped the resource limit if they wanted it to be remained low-end. Eventually what happened was a market was created of sub-par services with cookie cutter companies offering more or less the exact same product on the same networks and hardware as many other companies. It was more or less a popularity contest and whoever handled themselves better publicly got the business when it came to identical products. Differences were typically +/- a few GB of storage or bandwidth here and there. That was it really.

A lot of great companies in the low-end market, don't get me wrong. Some very talented individuals out there who are truly doing things differently and doing their own thing, it's great. But there has been an uprising of these 'cookie cutter' type companies.

 

[Licensecart]

I wont because it's owned by a webhost who wanted it before and got refused.