So, will the cross entitlement be via API(the current google developers credits for API) or seperate UI based and also, how much time may it take(no commitments, just a rough timeline)?
yeah guys, greed win this time
We do NOT support this decision! I’m not going to mince my words here. The rate limits are unnacceptable and need to be reversed immediately.
We came to AI Studio to have fun, relax, chat to AIs in a space we can feel like we have full control of, there’s too many good things about it. Please, do not believe in the phrase that “all good things come to an end”.
Then @Logan_Kilpatrick when will we be able to link our gemini web app subscription to our AIS? The current web app is *“Modified by moderator”*Will we have a timeline on when we get this cross entitlement?
That’s what everyone is thinking. Though they have given us credits on GCP for AI APIs.
This is a huge disappointment for me. I set up workflows in AI Studio for hobby and fun — articles, stories, even simple prompts for Suno. Now it’s completely unusable, even basic requests won’t go through due to the rate limits
I suppose it’s inevitable.
Just want to express a few things:
- The Gemini web app is extremely bad. It appears no one developing it actually uses it. The output quality of AI Studio and the Gemini app are miles apart, light years even. Important features like editing previous messages in the conversation have been tossed out in exchange for more neon in the interface. Every message you send is prepended with another document you cannot see. This system prompt pretends to improve the interaction when it actually degrades the experience (specifically coding at least), and makes Gemini extremely obnoxious to converse with.
- Is it still anyone’s idea of vibe-coding in 2026 to prompt for some one-shot front-end web app? People have come to expect more, haven’t they? I imagine people still use Build but it feels anachronistic today.
- To sum, I understand many more degradations will come. However, we need to always have some means of prompting Gemini that we can completely control. No model auto-selecting, no hidden system prompts. If we’re paying for this, we need to be able to adapt it. No more of this general trend in software to clamp the user into some narrow band of settings she can neither adjust nor see.
Yes, I noticed this too, the difference between the Gemini app and Google AI Studio is gargantuan. The model in Google AI Studio is much smarter than the one in the app. This was the case with the 2.5 Pro and is now repeating itself with the 3.0 Pro. What’s the point of even buying a Gemini subscription if we’re being given some crude, stripped-down model? Even now, the 2.5 Pro in Google AI Studio is more powerful than the 3.0 Pro model in the Gemini app.
A month is a very long time in a fast-moving AI ecosystem.
During that time, free limits were reduced, users lost practical access to AI Studio for conversational use, and the only suggested alternative remains API usage - which is simply not economically viable for people who want to use AI Studio as a chat interface, not as infrastructure.
You mentioned cross-entitlement with Google AI Pro is being worked on. That is exactly what many of us are waiting for.
Right now, the situation feels like this:
Paying Gemini users are locked into a simplified and constrained experience, while the more capable version of the same model exists in AI Studio - but is financially inaccessible for everyday use unless we switch to API billing.
One subscription should reasonably allow us to use the best available conversational experience across Google’s own ecosystem.
A month later, there has been no visible update, timeline, or clarification.
Is this still actively being worked on?
Because from a user perspective, this gap is not just inconvenient - it is pushing people toward competitors who already provide full access to their top-tier models within a single paid product.
Seems like as soon as I run out of my current reservoir of API credits I’ll be switching to Claude.