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
@comXyz - share some examples then
Wait me a minute to see where is it.
Edit: here you go
http://lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/999546/#Comment_999546
I only see the unmetered for one server, and other servers don't have anything about bandwidth, even in the order link.
except that does not apply anymore. in the UK unlimited has to be clearly that.
@ComXyz - You are totally correct, no statement of network either, so could be token-ring or arcnet Those were badly copied from WHT by me. But if you scroll up above 2-3 posts you'll see how they are normally presented.
@TarZZ92 - I know I filed enough complaints about it against Talktalk!
It doesn't. The ASA still allow businesses to advertise quotas as "unlimited" as long as the vast majority of customers have no issues in using as much as they want/need.
it does. and i believe it's ofcom as well, not just the useless ASA.
as you know in the UK it's now called "truly unlimited"
i recently made a complaint against the post office for this type of crap, shortly after i opened it they agreed to change advertising.
Granted, if a business has a set limit in place for a service advertised as "unlimited" then they can find themselves in trouble.
However "unlimited" still isn't "truly unlimited" in the sense that you and I would like to think it is. Businesses can still get away with a "in such a way that adversely impacts the service to other customers" clause and it's been demonstrated in the past.
I could be slightly biased in talking about this. The report I've linked above, I was one of the complainants and am left feeling let-down by the ASA. They were fobbed off with complete rubbish from Telefonica/giffgaff and bought it without sniffing their noses what-so-ever.
20TB limit and pay for more. That's much less traffic than OP's 40TB-before-warning. And may I ask how much it would cost for an unlimited gbps?
Sure but we're offering metered, they are offer unmetered. If you're offering unmetered, I wouldn't expect someone to send me a warning at all. Its unmetered, ie no measurement being taken.
TalkTalk are the worst ISP ever. Don't bother
Beyond the worst! But unfortunately the former tenant in my apartment had 18 months remaining on his phone contract so either take it over or get BT to install a new line and pay ££ for install and ££ deposit.
Hello, I found this topic because I was trying to understand online.net traffic statements (what will i have? 1gbps? or 300mbps? what is "premium"?). Now i see that i'm not the only for who was totally unclear what do they offer.
And the thing is....online.net has not yet changed their network description and traffic usage policy.
It's still written 1gbps unmetered with guaranteed premium 300mbps. So when I was reading offer i understood that my server will have 1gbps port with unmeasured traffic usage (up to 333TB which is max for 1gbps) with at least 300mbps of full duplex speed in any time. And I think this is exactly what any other normal person will understand after reading things on screenshot!
But after reading this whole thread, i understand that network policy is totally diffrent.
Since I will have 150 mbps full-duplex with unmetered traffic on 1gbps burst port. Right?..
Why they just not write in this way??...
And one more thing, thanks to google search in their documentation I found that their servers have from 250 to 750mbps connections or something like that. So why do they still use "1gbps" in servers network description...Noone will ever be allowed to use 1gbps unmetered until it's explicitly asked as PAPATE option.
I totally agree with topic starter and MarkTurner.
"no limit = eat all you want" and you should never be asked to pay even a cent more!!!
P.S. even here http://documentation.online.net/en/serveur-dedie/offres/serveur-dedibox-classic-2015/server-dedibox-classic-2015
they do claim that their offer include 1gbps connection !!
No, what's on your screenshot means 300 Mbit in + 300 Mbit out.
As for in general - stop whining, stop using so much bold text, stop bumping half year old threads, most people won't have any issue with b/w usage, and you should be thankful that b/w abusers get a warning first, not terminated outright.
Yup.. would be nice to know if 300 mbit/s means 90TB or 180TB(duplex).
Noone is whining since i'm not client. I just blame online.net for having unclear policy and using that to attract people.
You... what? I use 100TB+ all the time on Online (on a 15EUR box) - Nobody cares. It's as far as "unmetered" for 14EUR goes.
I mean - that in the hell do you expect, Gbit unmetered for 2.99-100EUR? Really? You live in a dream world, obviously this has a catch.
What's advertised needs to be delivered. There are a tuckfon of great promotional offers here on LET and they all have no catch.
Man, if you have "300mbps flat/1gbit burst" (300mbps 95th%) than your 100TB+ is exactly maximum of traffic you can drain, if "+" stands for burst °overuse° ratio....
As of expectations. Like @4n0nx said ..I expect exactly what is advertised in offer even if it's value is 1 cent and it's written "100GE unmetered"...ok?
No doubts, that it has a catch, because if it would have a catch - i would not be advertised in this way.
Gbit unmetered @ less than 100$? Link? We'll see what that really delivers.
@William, no link, he is just saying exactly the same thing as me....
If online.net says "1gbps unmetered with 300mbps guaranteed", I sould get "1gbps unmetered with 300mbps guaranteed" and not "300 95th%" or °1gbps with 100TB°
and on other hand...
online.net CEO might be son of Telia or Level3 CEO, and could be selling even 1Tbps unmetered for 1 buck...
I want to emphasize what's being said between your posts by others: it's not what one would expect but rather what's advertised. If a provider doesn't really provide what's being offered, then they shouldn't advertise it. As simple as that.
Ideally. But you have to remember that all these providers are in a competitive marketplace. It's a nice plan to advertise and deliver 100Mbit unmetered, but if the next guy is advertising 1Gbit you might have a hard time staying in business. What should be obvious to everybody is that none of these providers can deliver 1Gbit unmetered for 15EUR/mo without incurring massive losses.
That being said, I'm not sure online.net did anything really atrocious here. When you drill down to the legal frameworks of these hosting providers, there's always some legal boilerplate that allows the provider to change the plan properties whenever they feel like it, or at least whenever the plan renews. So you really only have a case if they shift the rules on you in the first month, or you paid in advance for a year. And, no question, you're going to lawyer up too, because many starving lawyers are waiting to take on your lawsuit for recovering $200 or so from the hosting provider.
I perfectly understand the context but as a customer what I demand is honest advertising. I cannot accept (and nobody should) that one company advertises services they can't later provide just because some other companies do so.
Have you guys ever seen a 300mbit/s Ethernet interface? It seems perfectly clear that you have a 1gbit/s port on the server and you can use those full 1gbit/s internally within online.net. You have a 300mbit/s guaranteed internet bandwidth that is unmetered.
Ever heard of rate limiting? They could hard rate limit you to 300Mbps if they wanted.
Did you notice, that many of the best providers are not offering unlimited bandwidth? I think from that list (http://lowendbox.com/blog/top-provider-poll-2014-q3-the-results/) only Catalyst had some unlimited plans and I know, that those plans were also not unlimited.
So it is a competitive marketplace and yes there probably is a legal boilerplate that allows the provider to change things, but I think the top lists of providers proves, that setting clear expectations and then deliver is a good thing indeed.
@singsing @tomle @chrisp
You are missing the point. The customer expects "I can plow through 300 mbit/s and maybe more if the pipe is free at the moment". The customer gets "if you use more than the amount of TB equivalent to 300 mbit/s over a month, we will ask you to cough up money".
If it's "only" 150 mbit/s duplex that you are allowed to have on average, it would be even more of a disappointment.
Hence, an appropriate description for their offers would be "1 gbit/s with 90TB [or 180TB if duplex) bandwidth". This description affects all of their servers, not only the cheap ones.
They could just use "300mbps unmetered bandwidth". Clearest solution imho. There is no need to state 1gbit interface or 100gbit interface. Clients want to know maximum sustained speed and maximum traffic they can use with that speed.
If they still like to promote "gbps" letters, just add "/1gbit burst".
gg
You should limit you bandwidth to 100mbps and than you can use it 24/7 with no fear to be warned or throttled directly