This article is classic SEO fluff right? The Q&A style answering exactly the type of questions that people comparing the two would write into google search.
What makes it "fluff" to you? My definition of "fluff" is that it doesn't answer my question, and that I walk away from it with no idea what the product even is. This is mostly concrete and I can tell you roughly what Narrowlink is and isn't after reading their (misspelled) page.
Something like:
"Introducing NarrowLink, the world's most advanced and secure VPN solution! With our cutting-edge technology, you'll experience unparalleled speed, reliability, and security. Our military-grade encryption ensures that your data stays private and safe from prying eyes. Enjoy unlimited access to all your favorite content, no matter where you are in the world. Say goodbye to restrictions and hello to a new era of internet freedom. Join millions of satisfied customers and take control of your online experience with NarrowLink today!"
It's SEO spam. You might find it helpful, but that doesn't detract from the obvious nature that, for better or worse, it's design to rank in google and capture clicks.
I don't consider it spam due to its non-spam, grade A prime rib beef content, in actually saying what it does. But if you must, https://xkcd.com/810/ then
I found it useful - we have been considering tailscale for part of our post-VPN strategy, and as tailscale markets successfully there, the direct comparison helps. That they were fair about the OSS & centralization comparisons without explicitly punching up was also great for trust building - good job whoever wrote that.
If you want a search term for more info about it, this kind of article specifically falls under "content marketing", in this case it's a high-converting type called a "versus page".
It’s a little verbose but I’m in favor of people writing these sort of comparisons, and a Q&A format is fine. People writing more FAQ’s seems like a mostly positive side effect of SEO, if they’re accurate.
