Virtual Servers Are Better Than Shared or Dedicated Servers

A terrible article and assumption. Each resource has its pros and cons. Alot of startups will begin with virtualization because its cheaper and an easy way for them to manage resources in the sense that they can split a server for app and db specifics. As they grow and try to scale virtualization can become a pain, cpu and IO is just not the same vs a dedicated server. Its all being contended for by these virtual servers. So quite a few will move to a dedicated server model and instantly see latencies drop and performance sky rocket. I cant recall but I believe github did this and it was a major change for them.

This is not a substantive, HN-worthy article. It defines virtual, shared and dedicated servers, then makes an assertion based on a sales pitch from Linode.

The level of virtualisation, or the way resources are shared is also rather critical.

Fully virtualised servers are not necessarily all that efficient either, especially if they're configured to do simple resource dedication among the hosted systems/processes.

Shared systems can wrap their hosted processes with very fine-grained utilisation monitoring and reallocation, as well.

You can run your own virtual servers on a dedicated server.