I’ll mostly breeze past your ad hominem tone, and agree with some of what you’ve said.
or have the understanding to determine it.
On the contrary, I’ve been using Cursor for well over a year (as well as various other LM tech on a day to day basis) and I’m pretty familiar with its limits. If you think I’m only using it for small stuff, check out An Idiot’s Guide To Bigger Projects for context.
Those are not seconds.
… your misunderstanding of how this slow request mode works
You really piled in hard on this point huh? 
But actually I was very much talking about my experience of waiting 320 seconds, no misunderstanding. The change to showing the queue order is a very new feature. For the longest time, seconds is exactly what you got, and not even estimated seconds, but a real full-on three hundred and twenty second countdown. It sounds like you didn’t have any experience of that, and in which case I’m very happy that you haven’t had the same frustrations as me. I’m also pleased to see the new queueing-based approach come into action. But I did not misread or misunderstand anything here.
In case you still don’t believe me, it’s pretty easy to try searching the forums for other examples, e.g.,
- Claude-3-opus slow requests with 320 second wait 100% always connection failed
- After the update for every request. Waiting time of 320 sec and 100% failed connections
- 320 seconds wait time for a response then failing
- Cursor after reaching 320s for get-4o-128k in long context chat
(and those are just some with 320 seconds in the title)
This basically amounts to ‘I don’t want to’
You’re right I absolutely do not want to pay for credits I’ve already paid for. That is most definitely financially worse. Note the emphasis in my original post – “on top of that subscription”. Nowhere have I said that pay per use isn’t a viable model. I’ve said that paying for credits in a subscription, having them summarily taken away, and then being made to pay for them over again is poor.
I don’t disagree with your point about a change having the potential to make Cursor less money, you’re right it could, done badly.
But a decrease in profits per capita doesn’t necessarily result in lower long term gains. There’s a reason shops don’t charge $85 per loaf of bread. Much like Laffer curves, there’s a sweet spot for optimum yield and I’m not convinced that we’re at that sweet spot right now. Nor do I think we can assume that sweet spot will never change, especially as competitors appear and the technology accelerates.
I believe I was more articulate than just saying “if you think about it” too. I’m not suggesting anyone merely ‘has a think’; “a serious, data-driven review of usage and pricing” is what I asked for and I stand by that. It’s something the development team alluded to over a year ago in conversations I had on these very forums, but it hasn’t happened yet.
So returning to my original point – we’ve been promised a review for over a year and it hasn’t been forthcoming. Now I’m renewing my call (politely begging and pleading without being aggressive or trying to undermine anyone personally) for the expertise at Cursor HQ to be applied to all that rich usage data they have, and see if they can’t do better.
For themselves, and for us.