[tukantje]

Cursor still has the advantage UX wise. The biggest reason I avoid using them though is their pricing structure being abysmal.

I can't randomly throw credits into a pit and say "oh 2000$ spent this month whatever". For larger businesses I suspect it is even worse.

If they had a 200$ subscription with proper unlimited usage (within some limits obviously) I would have jumped up and down though.

[redox99]

I don't understand where $2000 comes from.

Relatively heavy cursor usage in my experience is around 100USD/month. You can set a limit to on demand billing.

[wbond]

I work at a company with thousands of engineers and have people hitting $200 limits in just a few days. I think the shortest was around 1.5 work days.

[redox99]

I'm sure out of thousands you can have outliers, either people doing very large refactors or being kind of wasteful.

Something like 90th percentile usage is what I'd call relatively heavy.

[hbrundage]

I think your definition of heavy is different than lots of other folks I know -- I'm at $1500 / mo and am actively holding back.

[hetspookjee]

I had the same and switched to Claude code max and have been continuing the way of working on Opus. Now with the lower credit burn of Opus 4.5 i haven’t had a rate limit since. Imo the Claude Code token proposition and the Claude ecosystem far outweigh the benefits of cursor. This stuff is far too effective to hold back on

[bloppe]

Even 100/mo is a lot when you can get unlimited Sonnet for 20/mo.

[Ragnarockooo]

Even 20/mo is a lot when you can run local open source models for the cost of electricity.

[Terretta]

> If they had a 200$ subscription with proper unlimited usage (within some limits obviously)

I don't understand the "within some limits" people ask for.

If we use a service to provide value, and it is worth the value it provides, why would we ever accept a limit or cap? We want to stop adding value until next calendar month?

Or if the idea is $200 plus overages, might as well just be usage based.

Imagine a rental car that shut off after 100 km instead of just billing 20 km overage to go 120 km. Would you be thrilled for a day of errands knowing the hard cut off? Or would you want flex? You go 60 km out, 40 km back; now it's not worth paying to drive the last 20? If that's the case, probably should have walked the whole way?

Perhaps not a terrible analogy if some devs think of using these models like hitchhiking. Mostly out for the hike but if I can get an Uber now and then for $200/month, then I can do some errands faster, but still hike most places…

OR, hitchhikers don't think they need that much, they only run an errand a week, in which case, back to usage pricing, don't pay for what you don't use.

- - -

As an example: The primary limiter for our firm's wholesale adoption of Anthropic are their monthly caps. The business accounts have a cap! WTH, Anthropic, firms shouldn't LLM review code for the last week or two of the month? It can't be relied on.

To be clear, there's no cap on the usage per se, the cap is at the billing, even if you have it on a corp card that recharges fully constantly, it can tick over at $1500/day for 3 days, then halfway through day 4, it won't recharge again, because you hit $5k/month limit.

If you write to them and ask (like the error messages tells you) they say: Move to Enterprise, it's X users. Well, no, we don't have X people? Sure, but Enterprise is X users. What if we buy empty seats? Um...

(The simplest explanation is that $5k/month really burns more than $5k/month of costs so every API call loses them money, and they'd rather shepherd people to occasional subscription usage where they train them to leave it idle most of the time. Fine, offer usage at cost instead of loss, see who bites.)

Meanwhile, we use unlimited from their competitors, and have added several other ways to buy Anthropic indirectly, which seems weird they'd want to earn less per API call but someone somewhere is meeting their incentives I guess.