That include line rental? Or is it just an excuse to squeeze more money out of us only here in the UK? I paid ~£27 for a good 50/10 connection, back when I lived in Bristol, which is supposed to have some of the fastest internet in the country (I didn't go for 100+ since I didn't need it). You guys have it good.
As for the monitor/resolution speak, just had a look at Steam user stats, the most common monitor resolution is 1080p at 35.11%, while only 1.34% of Steam users have 1440p monitors. 4k usage is at 0.07%, so overall the uptake of higher resolution monitors isn't too high. That said these are Steam statistics and they aren't necessarily fully representative of all PC gamers, but a good indication nonetheless.
I guess monitor resolution is like upgrading to an SSD. Before one uses higher resolution, they don't know what they are missing. But once one experiences it, they never want to go back.
It's got me wondering, is the relatively low purchase rate the reason why the good monitors are priced so high? One of the reasons I don't own a 1440p monitor is because the good ones (i.e. with G-sync/IPS/144Hz) are very costly at the moment. Other reason is that I'm waiting till I have a single GPU that can make the most of that 144Hz refresh limit at 1440p. Hopefully Polaris/Pascal will perform amazingly at higher resolutions.
Most folks (once again according to Steam survey) have 970/390 level cards at the moment, which are best 1080p. The most popular of the higher end cards is the 980 and even that doesn't beat out older/weaker cards like the 750ti/960 in terms of popularity (how many people use one). I guess I'm not alone in waiting for a better GPU before getting a better monitor.
Link to Steam survey if anyone is interested.