Not at all, at this point I wouldn’t recommend anyone to subscribe to any AI plan on Google.
2 Likes
these problems really came right when I finally found a good tool, i’ve been coming back here everyday hoping for good news, but nothing at all. it looks like there’s still 4 days before the month ends, finish your subscription for the month and stop there, comeback when they start talking. don;t for get to also use credits if you;ve no plans on coming back for a while LOL
2 Likes
I feel Pro plan is a blatant …, i have already moved to Claude Code because of my productivity was taking a big hit because how google is running
1 Like
You have single-handedly destroyed any value prop you had over Cursor, and you are forcing people like me to return there or find an alternative.
Any way you try to spin it, we’re paying $250 (the most expensive plan out there) and now barely getting what lesser plans give.
The Anti-Gravity IDE is buggy, it’s slow, and it’s not as robust as Cursor. AND after using Opus extensively and exclusively for 1 month, and then having to switch to Gemini when the Opus limits started to run out after an hour, I can tell you that working with Gemini versus Opus is like working with the first version of Sonnet a year ago. It is frustrating, it is slow, it makes critical mistakes, and the rework is more costly than if I found a way to pay for Opus.
I’m not paying Google $250 for a programming solution Google right from under me, that does LESS than less expensive alternatives, and then think I’m going to pay you $250 AND THEN PAY YOU MORE TO “TOP OFF” TO GET THE SAME OUTPUT I GOT NOT 2 WEEKS AGO!
but hey, I get ad free YouTube. 
7 Likes
No one on the Ultra plan is on it for the storage or for coding with Gemini.
If you can’t keep up with the demand for Claude on AG, the Ultra plan is just a very bad deal. I’m downgrading and moving my studio to Claude Code if this isn’t fixed soon. If I can’t use Claude on AG reliably there is zero reason for me to stay on the Ultra tier.
Also Gemini Cli has been unresponsive all day today. I love Google but I have work to do.
4 Likes
It looks like the Google Team isn’t just refusing to fix the Ultra plan quotas; they’re actually tightening them even more.
My quota dropped from 80% to 20% in just 4 prompts?? Stop getting your hopes up, everyone. Just cancel your Ultra plan and switch to Claude Code.
I’ve officially lost faith.
8 Likes
Based on the way they handled Pro subscribers, this does not look like a bug at all. It looks like yet another quiet change that will eventually be normalized as fact.
9 Likes
Like many others here, I’m deeply disappointed with these unannounced changes. After this recent update, my Ultra subscription has lost a massive part of its value.
Yesterday, for the first time ever, I hit the usage limit on Opus 4.6—and honestly, I wasn’t even doing heavy workloads. On top of that, the model feels degraded; I’ve noticed it’s performing worse and making noticeably more mistakes than before.
But frankly, the severe quota reduction is what makes this completely unbearable for an Ultra user. We pay for the top-tier plan specifically to avoid these kinds of restrictive bottlenecks. Doing this with zero transparency or warning to your paying customers is unacceptable.
3 Likes
Same position here. The quotas feel worse then the pro quotas were when I upgrading.
1 Like
Unsubscribing from ULTRA here, moving to Claude!
10 Likes
Sadly’ im facing this issue as well. I only subscribed for 3 months before they started making my subscription lower and lower while paying the same amount of money.
1 Like
What the hell, Google? 
I asked like 10 questions and already out of quota. That’s ridiculous.
2 Likes
Yeah, its like they are ignoring ultra completly.
1 Like
The same automated response across all threads. What we are asking for is an explanation as to why we have paid $250 for a service that has drastically reduced its features without any prior notice to users. The service is not acceptable for professional use, and the responses are even less so.
Users demand a clear explanation.
4 Likes
well its kinda obvious to me what the issue is.
first - people are abusing openclaw to use their antigravity access to try getting free access to claude, which is crazy to me because claude is like “demo mode” here, like literally Claude lives on Codex - hes just a guest in Geminis house here in Antigravity. so thats part of whats going on, like the mob of people who are like CLAUDE CLAUDE WHERES CLAUDE are like paparazzi following a celebrity to a restaurant then getting upset the restaurant has to go on high security.
second - as a result of the heightened security, google’s security is really just not playing any games when it comes to people with multiple google accounts on their computer. does it … as a userbase, yeah sure - but is it understandable? yeah i think so. because if you really want to use antigravity (which is a beta mind you, ultra and pro have access to a lot of other features which are not beta), anyways if you really want to use antigravity – just make a new user account for your operating system for coding with antigravity. easy. literally its like sandboxing this is literally kindergarten level stuff for devs! i mean its either run a full proper sandbox like that, or you can running it like in your main but then if you end up changing your default browser from the sandbox account and antigravity finds your multiple accounts, expect to see that 7 day timer trigger off.
third - you know they added credits - are you even using credits? literally its not all the same quotas like it used to be, they moved that stuff to credits so users can have more control over where their quotas are going. its all pretty obvious to me, and the reason theres not as much noise as people complaining think there should be - is that real devs are used to this stuff, quite literally it is nothing I haven’t seen before over the last 30 years. anyways, its not complicated. i’ll leave you with a saying and i think its very fitting.
”i can only explain it to you, i can’t understand it for you”
1 Like
multiple accounts, open claw. what are you on about? Are you even a user of Ultra? If you have multiple accounts you need multiple accounts of Ultra subscription. What is the point of this post?
1 Like
your reply is exactly what i’m talking about. you don’t have the slightest idea whats going on.
you have multiple google accounts on your computer or you wouldn’t have the issue.
look at your default system browser, more than one google account. ultra isn’t your only.
I don’t really think this is googles fault. I am hearing same thing is happening to those on claude, the problem is gemni really just isn’t that great at coding. I find it creates more problems than it fixes. It totally ignores direct things it is told to do. I waste more time fixing it’s code. I would happily use all the quota related to Gemni if it was as good or better than claude unfortunately it’s not there. If the model is offered I expect the same amount of quota across the board especially with 260/m payment. There is really no reason for ultra other than antigravity imo, but even that is no longer worth it with the lack of claude quota now. What I find horrible is given that google has a vested interest in anthropic you would think they would reach out to them to fix quota. Unfortunately I’ve gone mostly back to manually coding now which is severely delayed my projects since the quota reduction. I hope that it’s fixed sooner than later or at least an offical statement is made otherwise I am likely going to cancel my ultra sub.
1 Like
first - Google claims that Claude is provided within antigravity not as a “demo mode” but as an official product. If anyone is truly bypassing restrictions to piggyback on Claude, that is a failure of Google’s backend security—please go patch the vulnerability. Using this as an excuse to impose “collective punishment” and slash quotas for all Ultra core users paying $250 per month is commercially absurd. If a high-end restaurant’s security system is so poor that it can’t keep intruders out, the correct approach is to upgrade security, not to cut the meals of paying VIP guests in half and then blame the guests.
second - In a modern development environment, being logged into multiple Google accounts simultaneously—personal, corporate, GCP testing, etc.—is a standard, perfectly normal workflow. If a top-tier development tool costing $250 has a WAF so crudely designed that it cannot distinguish between normal development behavior and malicious attacks, and even demands that users “stick to a single, fresh OS account” to accommodate an overly sensitive system—or else face an unannounced 7-day ban—that isn’t a case of developers lacking “kindergarten-level sandbox knowledge.” It is a case of a multi-trillion-dollar company failing to handle even the most basic session management and false-positive prevention. Do not package product design incompetence against users.
third - The forced transition from an ample baseline quota to a restrictive, opaque, and rapidly depleting credits system that even requires additional purchases is, in essence, a hidden price hike and a degradation of service. Please do not package a “compute rationing system” as “empowering the user.” Real developers are very clear on the logic behind this: it is simply to control server load and force future monetization, not to improve the user experience. I don’t know if you have actually tried the credits system, but if you have, I hope you can reply and tell me how many tool calls $200 worth of credits can complete, and how many tokens that is equivalent to. This system has become just like topping up an API, but completely opaque.
5 Likes