Kaphost Blockland Servers

Poll

Online file storage like Google Drive? (monthly prices)

50GB ($3.00)
41 (11.2%)
100GB ($4.50)
17 (4.7%)
250GB ($7.50)
10 (2.7%)
500GB ($12.50)
7 (1.9%)
750GB ($16)
6 (1.6%)
1TB ($20)
30 (8.2%)
2-8TB (proportional to 1TB price)
0 (0%)
8-16TB (proportional to 1TB price)
43 (11.8%)
Prices too high (READ)
44 (12.1%)
No desire
167 (45.8%)

Total Members Voted: 365

Author Topic: Kaphost Blockland Servers  (Read 546937 times)

I never really looked into your hosting service, Kalphiter, but I will give it a try.



Really liking the new panel so far Kalph. Keep up the good work!
« Last Edit: May 22, 2013, 07:38:15 PM by Plexious »

Does it track your average amount of players per day?

Does it track your average amount of players per day?
I'm probably going to put that in a different graph.

The important part is that Kaphost is dedicated to providing accurate statistics.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2013, 07:57:53 PM by Kalphiter² »

I'm probably going to put that in a different graph.

The important part is that Kaphost is dedicated to providing accurate statistics.

Are you implying RTB doesn't?

Are you implying RTB doesn't?
No, RTB does not provide accurate CPU and memory statistics.

No, RTB does not provide accurate CPU and memory statistics.

Do you have a server on RTB to prove this?

Do you have a server on RTB to prove this?
RTB displays a 0 or a 1 for the CPU usage (and sometimes a 2) and Kaphost gives digits to the thousandth's place. RTB doesn't show memory statistics at all.

Do you have a server on RTB to prove this?
Based on this image, it doesn't even look like the graph is functioning properly because the server is starting without any CPU at all.

some advice: Just don't talk about RTB, you'll do a lot better.

Anyway it looks like competition has improved your service!

I got to see the new panel too, pretty neat.

Definitely a lot better than the RTB counterpart in terms of the accuracy of the data reported.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2013, 09:14:17 PM by Pecon »

I'm still not sold on the idea of having such detailed resource usage reporting, what are your reasons behind including it Kalph? The way I see it is, clients can see resource usage but they can't do anything with the data, so why do they need it? The $6 a month gets you a semi-managed service where you shouldn't have to worry about resource usage because that's what you're paying someone else for.

We have the data available, here it is:



We can use that as an overview, and drill down to specific slots if there's an issue so data accuracy definitely is never a problem. But yeah, what made you make the decision on these detailed stats?
« Last Edit: May 23, 2013, 01:21:12 AM by Rub »

But yeah, what made you make the decision on these detailed stats?
Probably the fact that everyone is asking for it so it's a good opportunity to provide something you don't.

Lub, why does your approach to every situation involving detailed statistics exert a philosophy of people not needing to know something? "No one needs to know that, so we shouldn't offer that"; this is an errorneous philosphy. Scripters may need to monitor CPU and sometimes memory usage. Not only may they need CPU and memory statistics, but they need accurate statistics, which RTB does not provide. I understand how this graph is irrelevant to many clients, but it can be a very important tool to some people. Statistics, data, and knowledge comprise the philosophy of Kaphost.

Not realizing the desire of some for detailed statistics results in a misperception of reality. This is the same as Apple's anti-developmental philosophy: you don't need to know how something works nor may you know too much about how it works.

Accuracy to the thousandths place is not necessary but it just makes a little more sense than claiming that the server is using 0% CPU.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2013, 09:03:10 AM by Kalphiter² »

"No one needs to know that, so we shouldn't offer that"; this is an errorneous philosphy. Scripters may need to monitor CPU and sometimes memory usage.
I agree.