New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
True. Bad example. Backblaze B2 is a better example. Even with non-overage AWS has tiered pricing (multi-dimensional across their regions and products) which is designed to obfuscate cost and you really can't do any estimation on your bill until you get the bill.
IMHO the overage limit for services sold as "unmetered" should be set to the contractualized bandwidth (that is, 800 Mbps in OP's case).
Why limit an 800 Mbps "unmetered" service to 10 Mbps, after it has exceeded the contractualized bandwidth of 800 Mbps for more than 36 hours (or rather, for more than enough "ignored" time slices, due to the 95th percentile)?
This way, a customer using 799 Mbps constantly would be able to use them for the whole month; while another customer occasionally spiking to 801+ Mbps for 36 hours and 5 minutes, would lead to a limit of 10 Mbps until the end of the month...
It does not make so much sense to me...
I understand that the "Limited port speed" is marked as "Coming soon", so I think that it's better to point this out now, rather than later
Now you made me cry because, you see, nothing is more important to me than your judgement. /s
fries
bag
go ahead
Agreed - would it really have gone the same way without a thread calling the provider out?
This is such a recurring thing with LET hosts btw, they do shady stuff and you can only get them to get their shit together by publicly calling them out.
This is why communities like this exist, to help providers become better today than they were yesterday. Same applies to customers when they are the ones called out at popcorn dramas.
That's a charitable view, but anyway.
I'm not trying to shit on Gigahost, they flubbed handling a ridiculous situation and in spite of my wording up there they were really just doing damage control. Welcome to business.
What I find frustrating is "us" wanting to bury this shit. Every complaint about a provider ends with one or more of you shrieking about hiding the topic.
Nobody is going to "become better" if you hide their fuckups.
I did not wish to hide the provider's mistakes in this case. I don't know what made you see my view in such perspective. I posted link to Web Archive clearly showing it's a provider's problem. Sometimes I agree with the provider, other times I don't. It depends on the case story, proof and arguments.
In this case I was with the customer because of the issues with the terms and lack of clear information on bandwidth calculation. I even provided some options to be added on the Flux panel, of which provider actually listened and implemented. In my opinion this thread is a huge success, not just for the customer who opened the discussion, but for everybody (including me as a customer).
I consider threads like this the best ones, because of the feedback and improvement. Surely we all like some popcorn drama, but the best threads are with a happy ending from which we all learn something without incurred loss or abuse.
So quick update, PR of Gigahost says they will refund me yet they keep disputing the charge with my credit card processor, Amex says this will extend for another month as investigation goes on. And this is how im asked to withdraw my chargeback?
You were supposed to drop the chargeback, so they can refund you.
What don't you understand? Chargeback getting through can seriously hurt their business, they are willing to refund you but they cannot do that with a chargeback over their head.
There is a difference between getting money back through a chargeback, and a refund/reversal initiated by them.
Not to mention your chargeback is illegitimate since you consumed additional bandwidth, and got billed for it.