Wording on Digichilli Homepage

[Silver Tiger]

Is it my imagination or has the wording on the DigiChilli homepage changed. It now says "Up to speed of 256 kbps." I'm pretty sure that is not what it said 5 days ago. Does anyone agree? If you can remember the original wording, please post it.

I've been registered with DC now for 5 days, what a mess.

 

[ToxicBunny]

It has been changed, no doubt about it.

 

[Silver Tiger]

Thanks, can you remember what it used to say?

 

[diabolus]

Thanks, can you remember what it used to say?

It used to say "minimum" instead of "up to" .

When i saw it the first time i actually thought they probably made a mistake because it would imply if i had a 4mbit/s line i -can- get 4 mbit/s on the cheapest package (and why would anyone bother with any other package if that was true?). Not even Telkom can guarentee you a "minimum" speed, and i doubt they have such a clause anywhere. They only state the MAX.

So from a business/economic standpoint i knew there's no way they can logically offer a "minimum" , it just does not make any business sense .

However it did make me reconsider when i had to choose between Screamer vs Digichilli. Screamer have a "up to 384" package which are R100 more expensive, and DC's wording of "minimum of 256" implied i would most likely get the same speeds as on Screamer as the 256 is only the "minimum" (thus i could "burst" to 384 if the network allows)

But after some common-sense thinking about this, i realised it must be a grammar error, because no one , not even Vodacom/MTN with their 7.2 Mbit/s connections will tell you you will get a "minimum" speed of even as low as 256 kbps. That would be shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[Zyzzyva]

As much as it seems like a bad thing, it's an improvement because it's more honest. The pressure is still on them to offer speeds as close to 256kbps as possible - if they don't then everyone will leave.

I would also like them to state clearly on the website that the current service is a "paid beta". Not pointing that out is extremely misleading to new customers.

 

[william riker]

i thought i was going mad when i saw that cos i knew i remembered it differently

 

[Seblat5ch]

Digichilli y are you being to unprofessional about this lie to us steal our money wat next burn our houses down kill our family cause thats wat it looks like

 

[cavedog]

lol. I think that they are just covering themselfs in case a lawsuit jumps up.

 

[PC Direct]

Point is get your facts straight before launching a business service.

 

[ToAsTeD]

Point is get your facts straight before launching a business service.

+1

 

[Silver Tiger]

Changing info on webpage

The thing is, if the website said up to 256 I would have never signed up. Having a min guarantee was the only reason I signed up. I think it was less than honest from their side. Is there a good uncapped adsl ISP out there? If so, please post.

 

[Silver Tiger]

It used to say "minimum" instead of "up to" .

When i saw it the first time i actually thought they probably made a mistake because it would imply if i had a 4mbit/s line i -can- get 4 mbit/s on the cheapest package (and why would anyone bother with any other package if that was true?). Not even Telkom can guarentee you a "minimum" speed, and i doubt they have such a clause anywhere. They only state the MAX.

So from a business/economic standpoint i knew there's no way they can logically offer a "minimum" , it just does not make any business sense .

However it did make me reconsider when i had to choose between Screamer vs Digichilli. Screamer have a "up to 384" package which are R100 more expensive, and DC's wording of "minimum of 256" implied i would most likely get the same speeds as on Screamer as the 256 is only the "minimum" (thus i could "burst" to 384 if the network allows)

But after some common-sense thinking about this, i realised it must be a grammar error, because no one , not even Vodacom/MTN with their 7.2 Mbit/s connections will tell you you will get a "minimum" speed of even as low as 256 kbps. That would be shooting yourself in the foot.

I understand, and thanks for the post, but if these guys are professionals surely they can get that kind of info correct. It was misleading, and the misleading information made me sign up. I use another ISP as well. Downloaded something 36kbs changed to DG connection and got 1.4kbs, it said that it will take 28 days to download (that was DropbOx websync)
I was using a 386 adsl connection. ( please excuse if my jar-gen is incorrect, I'm not a techy )