10 Best Archbee Alternatives for Improved Knowledge Management in 2026

I’ve spent the last few years helping teams build documentation systems that people actually use, from customer-facing help centers to internal wikis that don’t slowly rot. So when I started looking at Archbee alternatives, I wasn’t browsing out of curiosity. I had teams hitting real limits with Archbee and needing something better.

According to a study by IDC in 2023, employees spend an average of 2.5 hours per day searching for information, and companies lose an estimated $31.5 billion annually due to poor knowledge sharing. Choosing the right knowledge platform is not a minor configuration decision; it shapes how your whole team creates, shares, and finds knowledge every day.

Archbee has real strengths: it is developer-friendly, handles API documentation well, and has a clean editor. But after enough time with it across different team types, I kept running into the same friction points. This guide covers the 10 best Archbee alternatives I have tested, what they genuinely do well, and who each one is right for.

Why Look for Archbee Alternatives?

Before I get into the list, here is where Archbee consistently let teams down in my experience.

1. The pricing model becomes expensive quickly

Archbee uses a modular add-on pricing structure. The base plan starts at $50/month, but core features like AI assistance, help widgets, and API access are sold separately. By the time you add the features most teams actually need, the real cost is significantly higher than the headline number suggests.

2. It is built for technical teams, not general use. 

Archbee shines for developer documentation and API references. But non-technical teams, customer support managers, and HR departments frequently find the interface and feature set too code-centric for their needs.

3. Analytics are too basic for content-driven decisions

There is no way to track failed searches, measure article-level engagement, or identify content gaps natively. Teams that want to improve their knowledge base based on data end up flying blind or wiring up separate tools.

4. Customization options are limited for non-developers

Branding and design customization in Archbee requires some technical knowledge. Teams without a developer available often end up with a knowledge base that feels generic or off-brand.

5. No built-in help widget for in-app support

Unless you purchase it as a paid add-on, Archbee does not give you a way to surface help content inside your product. For SaaS teams that want contextual in-app help, that is a significant gap compared to alternatives.

10 Best Archbee Alternatives to Consider This Year

I spent time going through knowledge management tools to find the most credible alternatives to Archbee. I tested platforms firsthand, reviewed real user feedback from G2 and Capterra, and compared how each holds up for teams that depend on documentation daily.

Here is a quick summary of the top 10 options worth your attention.

1. ProProfs Knowledge Base – Easiest Customer Support Help Center & Internal Employee Knowledge Base in One

I highly recommend ProProfs Knowledge Base to teams that want a to simplify the ceration of a fully functional help site, user manual, or internal knowledge base, without needing a developer in the room. I’ve set it up for customer support teams, HR departments, and SaaS companies, and each time, the onboarding is refreshingly fast.

You pick a template, start writing, and publish. No installation, no coding, no steep learning curve.

ProProfs Knowledge Base comes loaded with AI that handles your entire content workflow. AI Writer drafts full articles in seconds and refines them on command. AI Search Assistant skips the link list and returns one precise answer. 

AI Article Suggestions surface the right content even from casual queries, while AI Style Guides keep every article on-brand, and AI Article Translation converts it into multiple languages without losing formatting or accuracy.

Built-in analytics can help your team track failed searches, article ratings, top-performing articles, and reader engagement without any third-party setup. Overall, If your team needs both a public help site and a private internal wiki from one platform, this is the fastest way to get there.

Pros:

• AI Insights and Reports to flag knowledge gaps and surface what to fix next.
• AI SEO Optimization to generate metadata that gets your articles found faster.
• AI Guide Creator to turn screen recordings into step-by-step guides automatically.
• Internal comments for collaborative authoring
• Pre-approved user manual templates for creating user manuals with ease

Cons:

• Cloud-access only; no on-premise
• No dark theme mode

How Does ProProfs Knowledge Base Compare to Archbee?

Archbee is purpose-built for technical documentation; ProProfs serves a much wider range of teams and use cases. Where Archbee requires technical familiarity and charges separately for AI and help widget features, ProProfs includes AI writing, AI search, SEO optimization, in-app help widgets, and native analytics in a single platform starting at $49/month. For teams that need both a customer-facing help center and a private internal knowledge base, ProProfs handles both in one account, something Archbee is not designed to do. The Forever Free plan also makes it accessible to small teams that cannot justify Archbee’s modular pricing.

Pricing: Free plan available with all premium features for up to 25 articles. Paid plans start at $49/author/month

2. Guru – Best for Internal Knowledge Surfaced Directly Inside Slack and Teams

Guru is the tool that finally solved something I had struggled with on multiple internal knowledge base projects: nobody actually visits the knowledge base. They ask a colleague on Slack instead. Guru flips that dynamic by embedding verified knowledge directly inside Slack, Microsoft Teams, and your browser, so answers surface where people already work, not in a separate tab they have to remember to open.

The verification workflow is what I find genuinely clever. Each knowledge card is assigned an owner and has a review interval. When a card goes stale, the owner gets a nudge to verify or update it. I have seen this single feature dramatically improve knowledge accuracy for teams where outdated documentation was a chronic problem.

Guru is built primarily for internal knowledge, so if you need a customer-facing help center or public documentation site, it is not the right fit. The product is not designed for external audiences, and trying to stretch it that way creates more friction than it is worth.

Pros:

• Slack/Teams integrations surface knowledge cards inside employees’ existing workflows
• AI suggestions proactively push relevant cards based on current work context
• Verification workflows assign every card an owner and scheduled review date
• Analytics reveal which cards are used, ignored, or missing entirely

Cons:

• Per-user pricing becomes expensive quickly for larger teams
• Card-based structure limits long-form documentation like manuals or SOPs

How Does Guru Compare to Archbee?

Archbee and Guru solve different problems. Archbee is built for creating and publishing structured technical documentation; Guru is built for making internal knowledge instantly accessible without context-switching. If your team’s biggest pain point is employees not finding or trusting internal documentation, Guru’s approach is more targeted than anything Archbee offers for internal use cases.

Pricing: Free plan for up to 3 users. Paid plans start at $10/user/month.

3. Bloomfire – Best for Collaborative Authoring

Bloomfire is the tool I reach for when teams need a knowledge base that the whole company can actively contribute to, not just a dedicated documentation team. It is designed around the idea that knowledge lives with people, and the platform makes it genuinely easy for employees across departments to author, share, and refine content together. I have seen sales teams, customer success managers, and product teams all contributing to the same Bloomfire instance without friction.

The AI-powered search is a genuine differentiator. It deep-indexes every word in every uploaded document, including PDFs, PowerPoints, and video transcripts, so users find the right content even when they do not know exactly what they are looking for. For organizations with large, mixed-format content libraries, this breadth of indexing is difficult to replicate elsewhere.

The honest trade-off is that Bloomfire is not the right choice for technical documentation or developer-facing content. Its strength is broad organizational knowledge sharing, not code documentation or API references, and teams with primarily technical needs will find other tools better suited.

Pros:

• AI deep search indexes every word across docs, PDFs, and video transcripts
• Community Q&A turns one-off employee questions into reusable knowledge articles
• Role-based permissions keep content quality high across organization-wide contributions
• Native analytics track search behavior, engagement, and knowledge gaps by article

Cons:

• Per-user pricing can make scaling expensive for smaller or growing teams
• Not designed for external customer-facing documentation or public help centers

How Does Bloomfire Compare to Archbee?

Archbee excels at structured technical documentation for developer-facing audiences; Bloomfire excels at broad internal knowledge sharing across non-technical teams. If your knowledge problem is that expertise is siloed across departments and hard to surface, Bloomfire addresses that more directly than Archbee. If your primary need is API documentation or developer guides, Archbee remains the stronger technical choice.

Pricing: Paid plans start at $25/user/month. Contact for enterprise pricing.

4. Bitrix24 – Best for All-in-One Internal Knowledge With CRM and Project Management

Bitrix24 is the platform I recommend when teams come to me not just looking for a knowledge base, but for a single workspace that can handle documentation, project management, CRM, and internal communication without stitching together multiple tools. The knowledge base module sits alongside task management, a shared inbox, HR tools, and a full CRM, which means context does not get lost between systems.

What I find particularly useful for documentation-heavy teams is Bitrix24’s CoPilot AI assistant, which is built into the knowledge base editor. You can prompt it to generate article drafts, expand on a section, summarize a long document, or check content for errors, all without leaving the editing interface. For teams that contribute knowledge base content alongside other work, having AI assistance in the same tool they use for tasks and communication reduces friction significantly.

Bitrix24’s breadth is also its main limitation for teams with focused documentation needs. The knowledge base module is capable but not as specialized as dedicated tools; teams that need advanced analytics, SEO controls, or deep customization for a public help center will find the knowledge features functional but not best-in-class.

Pros:

• Knowledge base integrates natively with CRM, tasks, and internal communication tools.
• CoPilot AI drafts, expands, summarizes, and proofreads content inside the editor.
• Granular permissions scope knowledge bases to specific departments or workgroups.
• Free plan includes unlimited users and full knowledge base module access.

Cons:

• Knowledge features are less specialized than dedicated standalone documentation platforms.
• Setup feels overwhelming for teams that only need knowledge management.

How Does Bitrix24 Compare to Archbee?

Archbee is a focused technical documentation tool; Bitrix24 is a broad all-in-one business platform with a capable knowledge base module included. If your team is already using or considering a unified workspace for CRM and project management, Bitrix24 adds knowledge management without an additional subscription. If dedicated, specialized documentation is your only need, Archbee’s technical depth may still be the more precise fit.

Pricing: Free plan available with unlimited users. Paid plans start at $61/month per organization.

5. Confluence – Best for Large Teams That Document Everything Alongside Project Work

Confluence is the enterprise documentation workhorse I have helped deploy for teams that are already deep in the Atlassian ecosystem. When your engineering team is running Jira for project management and Bitbucket for code, having documentation in Confluence creates a level of cross-tool traceability that is hard to replicate elsewhere; you can link a Confluence page directly to a Jira ticket, an epic, or a sprint, keeping context in one place.

Beyond the Atlassian integrations, Confluence has matured significantly as a standalone documentation platform. The template library is extensive, real-time co-editing works well, and the permissions system is granular enough to serve complex organizational structures. I have seen it used effectively for engineering specs, HR policies, product roadmaps, and department wikis all within the same instance.

The honest reality with Confluence is that it is heavy. For small teams or companies not already using Atlassian products, the setup overhead and pricing feel disproportionate. Without regular governance, Confluence spaces also tend to accumulate stale content that becomes hard to audit or clean up over time.

Pros:

• Deep Jira integration links documentation directly to tickets, epics, and sprints.
• Extensive template library reduces effort for technical specs and product docs.
• Space-based organization gives each department independent permissions and navigation.
• Enterprise admin tools support content lifecycle management and compliance at scale.

Cons:

• Feels bloated and expensive for teams outside the Atlassian ecosystem.
• Meaningful analytics require third-party add-ons, adding cost and setup work.

How Does Confluence Compare to Archbee?

Both Confluence and Archbee serve technical teams, but their strengths diverge clearly. Archbee is better for API-first documentation and developer-facing content; Confluence is better for large engineering and product organizations that need documentation woven into their project management workflow. If Jira is already in your stack, Confluence is the natural extension. If your need is purely standalone developer documentation, Archbee’s lighter setup has an advantage.

Pricing: Free for up to 10 users. Paid plans start at $5.16/user/month.

6. SupportBee – Best for Simple Editor and Embedding Multimedia Content

SupportBee is the tool I recommend to support-oriented teams that want a knowledge base that feels genuinely approachable, not a complex documentation platform that requires onboarding. The editor is refreshingly straightforward: you add text, images, videos, PDFs, and embedded files without wrestling with configuration. For teams where support agents are also content authors, that simplicity matters more than it might seem.

What sets SupportBee apart for customer support teams is how tightly the knowledge base connects to the shared inbox. Agents can search for and insert article links directly into ticket replies using the Snippets search bar, without switching tabs or tools. I have watched this single integration meaningfully reduce average handle time for support teams that previously had to hunt for content manually.

SupportBee is not a match for teams that need enterprise-grade analytics, multi-language support, or advanced SEO controls. Its strength is simplicity and tight help-desk integration, and teams with more complex documentation or content governance needs will hit its ceiling relatively quickly.

Pros:

• Snippets lets agents embed knowledge base articles inside ticket replies instantly.
• Multimedia embedding supports images, videos, PDFs, and ebooks in any article.
• Customer portal combines knowledge base and ticket tracking in one experience.
• No-configuration editor lets support agents create articles without documentation training.

Cons:

• Native analytics are too basic for teams needing article-level performance data.
• Branding and customization options are restricted compared to dedicated KB platforms.

How Does SupportBee Compare to Archbee?

Archbee and SupportBee are aimed at very different audiences. Archbee is built for technical writers and developer documentation; SupportBee is built for support teams managing customer-facing help content and ticketing. If your knowledge base need is tied to a shared inbox and ticket deflection rather than API documentation, SupportBee is a far more natural fit. For technical documentation use cases, Archbee remains the stronger choice.

Pricing: Paid plans start at $13/user/month. No permanent free plan; 14-day trial available.

7. Nuclino – Best for Fast Internal Collaboration

Nuclino is the internal wiki tool I recommend when teams tell me they want something that just works: no long setup, no steep learning curve, no bloat. It lives up to that promise better than almost anything else I have tested. From account creation to publishing a first page takes minutes, not days, and the clean interface stays out of your way so teams can focus on the content itself.

What I find particularly useful is Nuclino’s multiple view modes. The same content library can be viewed as a traditional list of pages, a visual graph showing how pages connect to each other, or a Kanban board for tracking documentation tasks. For teams that think visually about how their knowledge relates, the graph view alone is worth exploring.

Nuclino is deliberately streamlined, which means it does not have the depth of analytics, customization, or integration options that enterprise-grade platforms offer. It is a strong fit for small-to-medium teams that prioritize ease and speed over configurability, but larger organizations with complex governance requirements will outgrow it.

Pros:

• Minimal setup means teams start documenting immediately with no IT involvement.
• List, graph, and board view modes suit different team thinking styles.
• Real-time collaborative editing with inline comments keeps feedback loops tight.
• Nuclino AI generates, summarizes, and translates content across languages and time zones.

Cons:

• Integration options are more limited than Confluence or Notion for complex stacks.
• Simple permissions won’t satisfy organizations with strict governance requirements.

How Does Nuclino Compare to Archbee?

Nuclino is easier to set up and more accessible for non-technical teams than Archbee, but it does not have Archbee’s technical documentation capabilities. If your use case is developer documentation, API references, or OpenAPI integration, Archbee wins. If your use case is fast, lightweight internal collaboration for a mixed team, Nuclino is the simpler and more enjoyable day-to-day experience.

Pricing: Free plan available. Paid plans start at $6/user/month.

8. ServiceNow – Best for IT Documentation and Service Management

ServiceNow is the platform I bring up when a team’s knowledge problem is really an IT service management problem in disguise. It is not a knowledge base tool in the conventional sense; it is a full enterprise service management platform, and the knowledge module sits inside a broader ecosystem covering incident management, change management, HR service delivery, and IT operations.

What makes ServiceNow’s knowledge management genuinely powerful is the feedback loop between documentation and service resolution. When a ticket is resolved, the resolution can be captured and converted into a knowledge article directly. Over time, this builds a knowledge base that reflects real support patterns rather than hypothetical ones, which meaningfully reduces repeat incidents.

ServiceNow is not for small teams or lean budgets. The implementation requires professional services involvement, the licensing is enterprise-grade, and the configuration overhead is significant. Teams that need only a knowledge base will find it far more platform than they need, and the cost will not be justifiable without broader IT service management use cases.

Pros:

• Documentation lives in the same system as incidents, changes, and service requests.
• Resolved tickets convert directly into reusable knowledge articles automatically.
• Advanced approval workflows support formal article review and retirement at scale.
• Analytics cover article usage, deflection rates, and contribution metrics enterprise-wide.

Cons:

• Enterprise pricing and implementation costs make it inaccessible for most teams.
• Platform complexity requires significant setup investment before knowledge is functional.

How Does ServiceNow Compare to Archbee?

These tools are not really competing for the same audience. Archbee is for technical writers and development teams building API and product documentation. ServiceNow is for large IT organizations that need knowledge management embedded within a full service management platform. If you are an enterprise IT team already on ServiceNow, the knowledge module is the obvious choice. If you are a product or development team looking for documentation software, Archbee or most other tools on this list are more appropriate.

Pricing: Custom pricing only. Contact ServiceNow for a quote.

9. Slab – Best for Clean Internal Knowledge With Unified Cross-App Search

Slab is the internal knowledge base I recommend when teams want something more structured and searchable than Notion but lighter and more focused than Confluence. The editor is genuinely clean, the topic-based organization keeps content from sprawling, and the platform has a deliberate focus on making team knowledge findable rather than just storable.

The feature I come back to most when recommending Slab is Unified Search. It does not just search Slab content; it reaches into connected tools like Slack, Google Drive, GitHub, and Asana simultaneously. For teams where relevant information is spread across multiple platforms, this single search bar is a meaningful time-saver and one of the clearest differentiators in the category.

Slab is cloud-only with no self-hosting option, which rules it out for teams with strict data residency requirements. The customization options are also more limited than tools like Confluence or Notion, and teams that need granular permissions, advanced analytics, or customer-facing publishing will find those capabilities are not Slab’s priority.

Pros:

• Unified Search queries Slab and connected tools like Slack, Drive, and GitHub simultaneously.
• Topic-based organization keeps internal wikis structured and easy to navigate.
• Version history and rollback make multi-contributor editing safe and reversible.
• Clean editor lets non-technical contributors create professional documentation effortlessly.

Cons:

• Cloud-only deployment rules it out for teams with data residency requirements.
• No customer-facing publishing makes it unsuitable for building a public help center.

How Does Slab Compare to Archbee?

Archbee is built for external technical documentation; Slab is built for internal team knowledge. If your need is publishing developer docs, API references, or customer-facing help content, Archbee is the better fit. If your need is a clean, well-organized internal wiki that surfaces knowledge across your entire tool stack, Slab is the more focused and enjoyable tool for that job.

Pricing: Free plan for up to 10 users. Paid plans start at $6.67/user/month.

10. Notion – Best for Creating Internal Wikis for Teams

Notion is the Swiss Army knife I have seen teams reach for more than almost any other tool, and I understand why. It combines notes, wikis, project management, and databases into a single flexible workspace. For internal team knowledge, company handbooks, onboarding docs, meeting notes, and team processes, Notion is remarkably capable and genuinely enjoyable to use.

What I have found works particularly well is using Notion as a living team wiki. The block-based editor makes it easy to embed tables, databases, toggle lists, and even Kanban boards right inside a documentation page. Team members who might resist writing documentation often find Notion approachable because it feels less like a formal authoring tool and more like a collaborative notepad.

The honest caveat I always share is that Notion’s flexibility is also its liability. Without strong structural discipline, Notion wikis tend to sprawl: pages get buried, nothing is findable, and the knowledge base that started clean becomes a labyrinth within months. It is a tool that rewards organized teams and punishes disorganized ones.

Pros:

• Flexible block-based editor supports text, tables, databases, and Kanban views.
• Notion AI summarizes pages, drafts content, and answers questions about your wiki.
• Granular sharing controls let you keep pages internal or share them publicly.
• Large template library covers wikis, SOPs, onboarding docs, and product specs.

Cons:

• Open-ended flexibility leads to sprawling, unnavigable workspaces without strong discipline.
• Advanced search and permissions at scale require the costly Business or Enterprise plan.

How Does Notion Compare to Archbee?

Archbee is purpose-built for technical documentation with structured API references and developer-first features; Notion is a generalist workspace that can be shaped into almost anything. If you need to publish polished developer docs with code blocks and OpenAPI integration, Archbee is more purpose-built. If you need a flexible internal workspace that handles documentation alongside project management and meeting notes, Notion offers far more versatility.

Pricing: Free plan available. Paid plans start at $10/user/month.

How Did I Evaluate the Top Archbee Competitors?

I didn’t put this list together from spec sheets and pricing pages. I tested each tool directly, setting up knowledge bases, creating content, running searches, checking analytics, and putting the collaboration features through their paces. My evaluation is built on six key factors:

User Reviews / Ratings: I analyzed real user feedback and ratings from reputable platforms like G2 and Capterra to understand how these tools perform in day-to-day use. This helped me gauge overall satisfaction and flag recurring pain points that teams commonly experience.

Essential Features & Functionality: I closely examined the core capabilities of each system, including content creation, internal collaboration, templates, co-authoring, and reporting. This allowed me to assess how well each tool handles the actual demands of modern knowledge management.

Ease of Use: I evaluated how intuitive each platform is to navigate, from getting started with an article to automation settings. I paid special attention to whether documentation experts, regardless of technical skill, could hit the ground running without a steep learning curve.

Customer Support: I looked at the quality of support each vendor offers its own users, including response times, available channels (live chat, email, documentation), and how effectively they help teams during onboarding and when issues arise.

Value for Money: I compared each tool’s pricing against the features it offers, factoring in plan tiers, user limits, and any hidden costs. The goal was to help you determine whether the investment is justified for your team’s size and needs.

Personal Experience / Experts’ Opinions: My evaluations are further informed by hands-on testing and insights from customer support professionals. These perspectives helped me go beyond feature lists to assess real-world performance and reliability. 

My Top 3 Picks for Archbee Alternatives

After testing all of these tools across real projects, these three consistently rise to the top for me.

1. ProProfs Knowledge Base

ProProfs Knowledge Base is my first recommendation for most teams. The combination of a truly free starting plan, AI-powered content creation, built-in analytics, and dead-simple setup makes it the most accessible and immediately useful tool on this list. Whether you are building a customer help center, an employee handbook, or a user manual, ProProfs gets you there fast without requiring any technical skills.

2. Guru

Guru is my pick for teams whose documentation problem is really an internal communication problem. If knowledge exists but nobody can find it because it lives outside their daily workflow, Guru’s Slack and Teams integration solves that in a way no other tool on this list does.

3. Confluence

Confluence earns its spot as the choice for large engineering and product organizations that are already in the Atlassian ecosystem. When documentation needs to be tied to project execution at scale, Confluence is the most natural and capable choice.

Ready to Move Beyond Archbee? Start Here

Archbee is a capable tool for the specific audience it was built for. But if your team has outgrown its technical focus, is frustrated by modular pricing, or needs a knowledge base that works for non-technical contributors and customer-facing content, the alternatives on this list are genuinely better fits.

If you are not sure where to start, start with ProProfs Knowledge Base. It is free to get going, the AI features make content creation significantly faster than anything I have seen at this price point, and the native analytics give you visibility that Archbee’s basic reporting simply does not provide. You will have a working knowledge base in an afternoon, and you will know within a week whether it is the right long-term fit.

The best knowledge base is the one your team actually uses. Go build one.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why do people look for Archbee alternatives?

The most common reasons are editor bugs, weak search accuracy, limited integrations with tools like Salesforce and Microsoft Teams, and a modular pricing model that becomes expensive once add-ons are factored in. Non-technical teams also frequently find Archbee too developer-centric for their documentation needs.

Is Archbee good for non-technical teams?

Archbee is primarily built for developers and technical writers, so non-technical teams often find the interface and feature set more complex than they need. Teams without a dedicated documentation specialist tend to find simpler, template-driven tools a better fit.

What is the difference between Archbee and a general knowledge base tool?

Archbee is designed specifically for technical documentation like API references and developer guides, with features like OpenAPI import and GitHub integration at its core. General knowledge base tools are built for a broader range of users and support customer-facing help centers, internal wikis, and employee documentation alongside technical content.

Does Archbee have a free plan?

Archbee does not offer a permanent free plan; it provides a free trial so teams can evaluate the product before committing. Most alternatives on the market offer a free tier with limited features, which makes them more accessible for small teams or those still evaluating their options.

Can I migrate my content from Archbee to another tool?

Most knowledge base platforms support content import via HTML export, Markdown files, or CSV, and some offer dedicated migration assistance through their onboarding team. It is worth confirming that your chosen alternative supports URL redirects to protect any existing links to your documentation.

What features should I prioritize when evaluating an Archbee alternative?

The most important features to compare are search quality (especially AI-powered natural language search), native analytics, customization and branding controls, integration breadth, and whether the tool supports both internal and external knowledge bases. If your team is non-technical, ease of content creation and template availability should also be high on the list.

Is Archbee suitable for building a customer-facing help center?

Archbee can publish external documentation, but it lacks the dedicated help-center features most customer support teams need, such as ticket deflection widgets, SEO optimization, and article performance analytics. Teams focused on reducing support tickets typically find purpose-built knowledge base tools more effective for that use case.

How does Archbee's pricing compare to its alternatives?

Archbee's base plan starts at $50/month, but its modular add-on model means AI features, help widgets, and API access each carry separate costs that push the real price significantly higher. Several alternatives offer all core features, including AI and analytics, in a single flat-rate plan starting at comparable or lower price points.