Hello. I am Marc, and I write runcheap.dev — a small blog of executable technical guides.
Not "executable" as in "here is a snippet". As in: the commands, the config file, the deploy, and the monthly invoice at the end. I started writing it because I kept landing on tutorials that got me to a working app and then said "hosting starts at $4/month" and stopped.
Four dollars for what, exactly? How much RAM? Is the backup included? Does it survive a database that does not fit in memory?
So the rule on my blog is simple: every price carries the date I read it on the provider's own page, and every command was run somewhere before it was published. No affiliate links, no "as low as", no number I could not verify myself.
That rule has an awkward consequence, and it is the part I actually want to write about.
Last week I rewrote a comparison between two European hosting providers. One of them served me no prices at all — its storefront marked every plan as currently unavailable and showed no figures. The easy move was to quote the prices from an older version of my own article. Instead I wrote down what I saw: no prices served, model line changed, price it yourself on their calculator before you budget.
An empty cell with an explanation is more useful than a confident wrong number. It just does not look as good in a table.
What you will find here: cross-posts of the guides I publish on runcheap.dev, one at a time, with a canonical link back to the original. The cost breakdowns first — those are the ones people actually need and the ones nobody wants to write.
If a number here is wrong, tell me. It gets fixed and republished with a new verification date, not quietly deleted.
Top comments (1)
git commit -m "swap confident $4/month for an honest empty cell + verification date"The most trustworthy changelog a tutorial blog could have. Dating every price is such a simple habit, and it turns a guide into something readers can check for themselves.🔥