[astrodust]

For all the money Linode has on hand, and the size of their technical team, it's absolutely insulting they haven't made any tangible improvement to their management front-end in at least five years, if not more.

The way it's behaving it's as if it was acquired and kept on life-support.

[Mahn]

For what is worth, I've been a Linode customer for a few years and never really felt their management front-end was in urgent need of an update. It's solid and does the job for us. My only complains to be honest are 1) the lack of storage dedicated nodes, as OP points out, and 2) the price, it gets very expensive very fast as you scale and spin more nodes.

We are currently considering moving to dedicated machines but only because of 2), otherwise we would happily be their customer for life.

[threeseed]

> never really felt their management front-end was in urgent need of an update

Even when it was hacked multiple times and customer VPSs compromised e.g.

http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/03/bitcoins-worth-22800...

Nothing is worse than spending weeks securing every aspect of your VPS only to have incidents like this appear. And worst of all ? To this day Linode never clearly said what happened or what they did to prevent it happening again.

[mumphster]

Not sure why this is being downvoted but the whole Linode hack incident was a huge factor for me to switch all my VPS's over to digital ocean.

[brobinson]

I went to Vultr. DO's interface is just as bad if not worse than Linode's. :(

[lugg]

Its not that bad, it has been updated frequently though. Seems to be getting better.

I do remember it being quite lacking back in the day.

[brobinson]

I haven't used DO since 2013 and I probably won't since I'm extremely happy with Vultr, but it's good to know that it's been improved!

[prirun]

I chose vultr over DO because DO used so many external web services to run their site. Every new page at their site required me to turn on 5 more domains in NoScript. Vultr only required me to enable their site. The performance at vultr was also very good for what I needed: test servers.

[mulchkin]

Why Vlutr and not something like Scaleway (https://www.scaleway.com/)?

I've recently switched from DO to Scaleway and would never go back.

[brobinson]

Actually, I did try Scaleway when I saw them on HN like 9 months ago! I recompiled a Go program I was working on [1] for ARM and benched it against Linode.

It was literally 10x slower than Linode even after playing around with Go's concurrency level to find the fastest runtime, and even with the dataset in memory. :( ARM just wasn't the right arch for what I was doing.

I ended up going with Vultr because it has the $5 pricepoint for hosting tiny websites and tons of datacenter locations. Their CPU performance and network speed were great in my tests.

[1] https://github.com/robinsonstrategy/go_backtesting_simulator...

[astrodust]

It "does the job" but it's not as pleasant to use as it could be. A lot of the navigation is pointless and confusing, information is often buried several levels deep, and there's missing information on some of the detail screens you need to go back to the main listing to find: Instance type is only shown on the main list, not the individual instance tab, for example.

If GitHub had never improved their site since they launched it would be awful. Every time they move things forward I'm happier to be a paying customer. With Linode I reluctantly use them, but for new projects I'm using other services that work better.

[cookiecaper]

Same here, moving to a dedicated server from a Linode this week. For slightly under 2x the monthly cost I'm paying at Linode, I can get a dedicated server with 8x the memory, infinity more transfer on the same size pipe (unmetered 100Mbps connection), 20x more disk space, and 2x the CPU, and all dedicated so no worries about phantom performance problems related to other tenants. Lish &c are a big plus for virtualized nodes, but I think I'll live without it.

[seunosewa]

Perhaps users don't have any complaints about their management interface? Do you?

Perhaps users mostly want performance and value which have been greatly improved by their substantial infrastructure upgrades?

[kawsper]

Yes.

Their IP Failover is really badly documented and hard to work with.

Their Nodebalancers are noticeably slow, the interface is alright, but you are better off setting up your own loadbalancer.

I feel that static networking could be made easier, and more automatic when I am adding a new node.

Their stackscripts should be able to receive parameters for when it is running, and the error-reporting should be better. I had issues where my scripts wouldn't run and I had no idea why.

Other than that, I am a happy customer.

[radlad]

I agree that networking is a pain point in terms of front-end interface. It's not horrid, but it could be improved.

I'd love to see them offer a storage solution as other commenters have mentioned.

[tomschlick]

Regarding static networking: https://www.linode.com/docs/platform/network-helper

[kawsper]

Oh that was hidden away, I have never seen that interface before, thanks!

[daflip]

When was the last time you added a node? New nodes default to 'automatic' networking now which configures /etc/network/interfaces automatically

[kawsper]

I scale up and down weekly. I didn't know about that, I will look into it, do I just need to add static networking to the node?

[smackfu]

Not doing regular improvements is how you end up being years behind your competitors, without even noticing it, and having to do a huge rewrite just to achieve parity.

[astrodust]

Perhaps those complaints just get ignored.

I know Digital Ocean's control panel has improved several times since their launch, and their ability to launch instances with a complete stack is extremely useful. Linode has done nothing here. They point to their badly documented StackScripts system and shrug.

There's a hundred things Linode could do to make user's lives easier and they've done maybe two or three of them.

[mpdehaan2]

Linode is good and simple if you have a not too large amount of nodes or complex need for extra bits, and I appreciate them for that.

I didn't really need anything shinier. Is it super-cloudy? Not so much, but also nice that you don't have to think about it.

[astrodust]

Why do people think "well designed" translates to superficial and pointless? Yes, sometimes this is the case, but when you have pride in your work you'll want to present it in the best possible light.

Would you rather eat in a restaurant where all the chairs are creaky, where the tables are wobbly, and where the wait staff is doing their best to get by with broken equipment, or would you instead visit down the street to a place where everything may not be new but it's well maintained? If the food quality was the same, why would you insist on going to the place with crappy, broken stuff?

Linode just doesn't seem to care about their site at all. If they did they'd listen to user feedback and improve things once in a while. You know, like at least once every six years.

[mpdehaan2]

I'm not sure if I am meant to be "people", but I certaintly don't think that design is superificial, but rather I think Linode is designed fine, and just works, and doesn't really need changes.

[riquito]

I never felt the need of more polished interface. It just works.

[EugeneOZ]

If we talk about DO in comparison, then DO's interface is just ugly and almost unusable. Every time I use it, I want to leave their site as soon as possible.

[astrodust]

If you think Digital Ocean is ugly and almost unusable I have to wonder what you think is better.

Their one page instance creator where you pick size, location, and distribution is extremely convenient. This is three separate steps with Linode that happens over the course of six screens, plus two more if you want to enable private networking.

Eight steps vs. one.

They also don't offer the ability to install a system with an SSH key pre-installed avoiding the need for password authentication when bootstrapping your system. Even on a technical level Linode is way behind here.

[corford]

I wouldn't call DO's interface ugly but I hugely prefer Linode's. Much better visual feedback and it feels like a solid management console rather than a pretty toy.

[astrodust]

Why does Linode look "serious" and Digital Ocean look "toy"? It's a phenomenon I see happening primarily in the tech industry where ugly trumps functional and clean. People like the complexity aesthetic, the rugged, rough edges.

[EugeneOZ]

Try to open this link https://cloud.digitalocean.com/droplets and find current balance of your account. I can't understand why it's under "Settings". When I'm in the dashboard, I want to see as many controls as possible, not as minimal interface as possible.

[corford]

I suppose a lot of engineers prefer function over form rather than the other way around. If anything I'm suspicious when a tech/engineer focussed product prioritises aesthetics over function. Might be irrational but it's my first reaction.