It is indeed a applaudable approach taken by the Cursor team to introduce the new Unlimited plan, which allows unlimited tab completions, unlimited agent requests, and access to most features. However, right now users have no way of knowing what they’re opting into, because we have no idea when we might hit a rate limit.
Why is this important? If I knew the limit, I could choose to do some tasks manually or switch to a cheaper model for lighter tasks and save credits. That’s exactly what I used to do with the 500 request limit on the old plan.
So I request that Cursor implement a rate limit meter even if you don’t want to show us the exact numbers.
We will agree to disagree. I’ve been in software dev for over 20 years and lead a multidisciplinary team of engineers. We never keep information from our clients that could affect their workflow.
Yes I believe we will agree on that and great to know your experience, I’ve been in the field for 14 years so I understand transparency, albeit in terms of dealing with a mass aggregation of users on a freemium product gets challenging to be completely visible due to bad actors and variations of different prices users want
But that’s where you’re wrong. This product isn’t free, we pay for it. All we are asking for is transparency on our individual pressures with regards to limit ceiling. We are not asking how they calculate the rating factor, engineers need numbers so they know what they’re dealing with, this entire black box concept and hope for the best is just crazy. Yes, I can enable usage, yes I can upgrade (but I suspect this is their gamification plan). Let the power users subsidise the lower tier users.
I did 27 requests and 7 failed and I got limited, that i just ridiculous.
Yes you pay for it, but the amount in which you pay (which I’m assuming is the $20) is not anywhere significant to the cost you would generate without it using the same models, as someone who also has used Roo Cline and seen the costs, this product is essentially Freemium as they are covering quite the costs as well and yes the rate limiter addition would help people to be aware but it would also lead to more complaints on people hitting it fast etc
@erophames I understand both sides, but at the end of the day, I side with you on this. @Jeremy is absolutely right that this is an excellent value, without a doubt. But at the end of the day, it is paid and we have the right to know where our cut off is. I don’t understand the potential “abuse” aspect… If it’s a hard limit, we will get capped there anyways, no? And if they have it too out of wack, they should adjust it to where it can’t be “abuse”, no?
It’s marketing speak that’s why. Because if they truly reveal how they rate limit and things change over time and get worse, we know that the system is being gamed, which is clearly visible already. 5 requests with none max and well under the context window, and I’m limited. Please, lol, if that is not dubious, then I don’t know what is.
