Your View On 'Unlimited' Hosting?

Status
Not open for further replies.
easyhostmedia said:
if the disc is 500GB that than is the max. quota you can use on that disc.

i suggest Art close this thread as it is getting nowhere.
Click to expand...

I believe this thread should remain open. It could be a very valuable learning experience for new readers who are trying to determine what an unlimited hosting plan truly provides, and what the general difference between limited and unlimited actually are.

As long as this doesn't turn into an irrational argument, I see no reason as to why this thread should be closed.
Then again, I'm obviously not an administrator here, so my opinion doesn't matter much in the long-run.
 
easyhostmedia said:
if the disc is 500GB that than is the max. quota you can use on that disc.

i suggest Art close this thread as it is getting nowhere.
Click to expand...

Its getting nowhwere because some refuse to listen and learn

"max quota" has nothing to do with anything. You would have the same max quota as me. The difference is I don't use a quota system and you do. So "max quota" is only relevant to your plan model. There is no such thing as a "max quota" if you don't use quotas. Moreover, the quota is created by the provider and is independent of what is created by the hardware manufacturer
 
The question is could I host my 20gb site on an account with you? You say you do not have a quota so I then should be able to.
 
Collabora said:
Its getting nowhwere because some refuse to listen and learn

"max quota" has nothing to do with anything. You would have the same max quota as me. The difference is I don't use a quota system and you do. So "max quota" is only relevant to your plan model. There is no such thing as a "max quota" if you don't use quotas. Moreover, the quota is created by the provider and is independent of what is created by the hardware manufacturer
Click to expand...

regardless of quotas if a disc has 500GB of space then their is no way of getting more than the 500GB use from that disc. so the disc is LIMITED to 500GB
 
bunnykins said:
The question is could I host my 20gb site on an account with you? You say you do not have a quota so I then should be able to.
Click to expand...

You forgot to mention the fact that your 20 GB site also uses 100 GB of bandwidth every day. :)
Bandwidth is a limitation here, too. Even more so on a shared network. (not just in regards to unlimited, but all shared providers)
 
easyhostmedia said:
regardless of quotas if a disc has 500GB of space then their is no way of getting more than the 500GB use from that disc. so the disc is LIMITED to 500GB
Click to expand...

This is true, but how many times do we have to repeat: unlimited refers to the quota not the hardware!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By default Windows has no disk quota. Look in your windows disk properties and check out the quota. If you haven't changed anything it will be set with "No Limit." This is the same as unlimited. It will say No Limit whether that drive is your c: drive or an sd card. Do you need screen shots?
 
Last edited:
bunnykins said:
You can not separate the 2 though.
Click to expand...



Here is why they are indeed separate:

Physical disks don't come with quotas and therefore cannot enforce one. If I or Windows put a quota on the disk, removed the disk and installed it on another server that quota would be gone! A quota is an abstraction. Its an OS configuration. It is not attached to, or belong to, the hardware. Quotas are created and enforced by the provider and only the provider (or his tools). Unlimited simply means the absence of quota imposed by the provider. The hardware is only the object of the quota

We come across unlimited features every day. And all of them are ultimately connected to something limited. It can be unlimited talk time limited by the number of minutes in a day, unlimited mileage limited by the length of roads and gallons of fuel, unlimited email, unlimited databases, unlimited web sites and yes, even unlimited disk space limited by physical hardware. They all have one other thing in common: what is offered as unlimited is simply the absence of the provider imposing the limit, not nature.
 
Last edited:
Alright, this has now turned into an argument. We're no longer sharing information that could be of any use to anyone.

Could an administrator please lock this thread? (but possibly keep the poll itself open)
 
Sidular said:
This is in no way against the law, and if a host is sued for these actions, the host will in no way be held accountable for any loss of data or problems that the client may have experienced, as the host is providing the services advertised.
Click to expand...

Here in the UK, the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) disagrees:

http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2012/2/UK2-Group/SHP_ADJ_170798.aspx
ASA Adjudication on UK2 Group



UK2 Group

29th Floor
1 Canada Square
Canary Wharf
E14 5PY



Date:
29 February 2012

Media:
Internet (on own site)

Sector:
Business


Number of complaints:
1

Complaint Ref:
A11-170798

Ad


A website promoting web hosting packages, seen on 29 August 2011, included the text "New unlimited packages ... MSQL Databases ...Business Cloud ...Unlimited". Further text stated "Web Hosting Space Unlimited ....MySQL Databases Unlimited ...Databases Maximum Size Unlimited".

Issue


The complainant challenged whether the claim that the Business Cloud package was "Unlimited" was misleading because he was told he could not use the package because his database was too large.

CAP Code (Edition 12)

1.73.13.113.33.73.9

Response


UK2 Group Ltd (UK2 Group) stated that it imposed no limits on the Unlimited Business Cloud web package that was offered on their website. They explained that the resources on their unlimited packages were unlimited, but were dependent on the size of the server upon which the service was hosted. They said, to date, very few customers who had used those packages had been affected by the size of that server. They also stated that the database sizes and the web hosting space were only some of the resources on the service and that the bandwidth, ram and processing powers were also included. They stated that the way in which the customer wished to use the database on their website affected how much capacity of the server was used, thus affecting the speed at which the website would then operate. They explained that customers whose needs exceeded the size upon which the servers of the Unlimited Business Cloud webhosting packages were based, were advised to use one of their other webhosting packages which they believed would be better suited to their needs.

Assessment


Upheld

The ASA noted the packages on the website that were referred to as unlimited allowed customers access to unlimited resources within the capacity of the server for that package. We also noted UK2 Group's assertion that, notwithstanding the capacity of the server, customers could make unlimited use of those webhosting packages but the more the resources of the server were utilised, the slower the operational speed of website upon which they were hosted would run.

We understood that the unlimited packages offered by UK2 Group provided customers with unlimited resources within the capacity of the server for the chosen package and noted their comments that very few customers were affected by the size of that server. However, we considered that consumers wishing to obtain a webhosting service would expect claims for unlimited 'web hosting space' an unlimited "MySQL databases" and unlimited size of those databases to mean that, when using the service, their website would operate in full, at the optimum speed, regardless of the number or size of databases that ran alongside it or the way in which those databases were utilised by the website. We therefore considered that, without qualification to indicate factors, such as server capacity, which were likely to affect the optimum operation of the website, the claim that the Business Cloud webhosting package was unlimited was misleading.

The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1, 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation), 3.9 (Qualifications) and 3.11 (Exaggeration).

Action


The ad should not appear again in its current form
Click to expand...
 
Sidular for trying to continue your argument in a PM to me , you have just been reported and you are now on my ignore list
 
easyhostmedia said:
Sidular for trying to continue your argument in a PM to me , you have just been reported and you are now on my ignore list
Click to expand...

Argument? The message I sent you was in no way intended to be offensive. I was just attempting to get a more personalized understanding as to why you disapprove of unlimited hosting services, and simply tried to answer the questions that you have already asked on this thread in a more concise and straightforward way without having to reply to other individuals.

I wasn't even aware that we were having an argument.
 
easyhostmedia said:
so the host would have a hard time defending any action in a court if he refused this.
Click to expand...

Sidular said:
This is in no way against the law,
Click to expand...

Posilan said:
Here in the UK, the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) disagrees:

http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2012/2/UK2-Group/SHP_ADJ_170798.aspx
Click to expand...

You should read your evidence before posting it. The results of the adjudication clearly recognizes the validity of the concept of unlimited hosting.

Do I really need to break it down for you line by line?
 
Last edited:
Posilan said:
You mean this bit?



?
Click to expand...

Note that it says "the ad" not the hosting.

Action: The ad should not appear again in its current form

They have to reword the ad, not change their hosting plan

Now read everything above it, especially what was upheld. Or do you need help with that too?
 
Last edited:
Collabora said:
especially what was upheld. Or do you need help with that too?
Click to expand...

No need to be patronising - I doubt that will achieve anything now, will it?

FYI "Upheld" means the complaint about the advertising of the "unlimited" service that was "limited" is valid and the company was in the wrong - in case you were confused ;)

Steve
 
Posilan said:
No need to be patronising - I doubt that will achieve anything now, will it?

FYI "Upheld" means the complaint about the advertising of the "unlimited" service that was "limited" is valid and the company was in the wrong - in case you were confused ;)

Steve
Click to expand...

I am just asking you to read what was upheld. It wasn't that unlimited hosting doesn't exist. It was the absence of qualifiers that was wrong, not the impossibility or alleged (by this threads) fraudulent nature of unlimited hosting itself.

You provided this as evidence that unlimited hosting itself is a fraud. It clearly states the otherwise. They are now in compliance and offering unlimited hosting

http://www.uk2.net/web-hosting/

Are you going to report your neighbor Terry for being in conflict with that same ruling? He offers the umlimited email, unlimited domains, unlimited databases that the ruling emphatically deplores! Why pick on the hosts that are operating legally in US and ignoring the ones that you claim are (allegedly) operating illegally in UK?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Supporters

Back
Top