The headline says it all: the product — and the surrounding ecosystem — feels alarmingly immature for something backed by a company of this scale.
Releases are consistently unstable. Updates break existing workflows. Previously working chats get corrupted or lost. The overall impression is not of a controlled, production-grade system, but of something being pushed live without adequate validation or regression testing.
The more serious issue, however, is the commercial side.
When I upgraded from Pro to Ultra roughly two months ago, the expectation was clear: more capacity, more reliability, and a strictly better tier. Instead, I now have less usable quota than I had before — and even that quota is frequently inaccessible due to persistent “overloaded” rejections.
This is not a minor degradation. It fundamentally alters the value of the product after purchase.
Changing plan characteristics after the fact — without clear, upfront communication — effectively breaks the agreement users relied on when making the upgrade decision. At best, this reflects poor product governance. At worst, it raises serious questions about compliance with basic consumer protection standards in multiple jurisdictions.
For a company at this level, this is not just disappointing — it is unacceptable.
If the platform is still in a state where stability and capacity cannot be guaranteed, then it should be communicated transparently. If plans are subject to change, that should be explicit before purchase — not discovered afterward through degraded service.
Right now, the gap between what is marketed and what is delivered is too large to ignore.
bro also this design here. Google what is this??? 4 SLIDERS??!?!?!? This UI is crazy xD