• HakFoo@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I think there would be more sympathy if Cloudflare pointed to a specific limit breached and proposed ways to get into compliance at their current price plan.

    “Service XYZ is now consuming 500% of expected quota. Shut it down or we need to get you on a bigger plan.” is actionable and meaningful, and feels a little less like a shakedown.

    I’m sick of “unlimited” services that really mean “there’s a limit but we aren’t going to say what it is.” By that standard, freaking mobile telecoms are far more transparent and good-faith players!

    Perhaps this also represents a failing in Cloudflare’s product matrix. Everyone loves the “contact sales for a bespoke enterprise plan” model, but you should be creating a clear road to it, and faux-unlimited isn’t it. Not everyone needs $random_enterprise_feature, so there’s value in a disclosed quota and pay-as-you-scale approach: the customer should be eager to reach out to your sales team because the enterprise plan should offer better value than off-the-rack options at high scale.

    • realbadat@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Considering the way they presented what was obviously them trying to skirt the rules, it isn’t hard to believe that CF did provide that info, and it just wasn’t presented in this writeup.

      Not that I have any love for CF, just saying this is a case of no one being trustworthy.

    • macniel@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      I agree, there simply isnt “unlimited” services. Also I don’t see any mention of unlimited anything on CloudFlares tiered plans, maybe I’m blind.

      • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        They don’t say unlimited, but they also won’t say the limit of their reverse proxy service. It’s intentionally vague.