Comment 9 for bug 985484

ralsina -- my suggestion might be mac-ish, I'm still getting used to the ubuntu aesthetic, but FWIW here's what I'd do:

There shouldn't be a need for a number that means unlimited -- just unchecked means unlimited.
If the box is unchecked, the selection box should be disabled, and the number in the box replaced with something like "unlimited" or "no limit". again, I don't know qt well, but in osx cocoa, that'd be grey text so you know you can't edit it, and the buttons of the text box would also be disabled.

I like lisette's suggestion of giving people context for what limit they might want - but why do people usually limit this?
Do they actually want a choice like 'leave me enough bandwidth to watch youtube', or 'leave me enough bandwidth to browse the web quickly'? That means we'd need some idea of what bandwidth they have, and how much of it we need to leave them so they can do what they want...

This is getting a little complex, but I wonder how many people have a good idea what number they want in there, and what that'd mean. If we can give them a way to say what their goal is and figure it out for them, that'd be a big improvement IMO.
(It'd also be a big improvement over DB).

FINALLY, the holy grail is just to always do the right thing and not need a preference. Can we 'nice' our network traffic so it uses max bw unless some other app with higher priority is using it? That'll take some research but doesn't that sound like something that ought to be possible?