Google should use that momentum of Gemini 4 before Anthropic and OpenAI overshadow that model with newer releases. It is not even the number one already.

Daily reminder we are paying monthly for AIs with knowledge cut offs from almost two years ago.

I know we mostly hate Gemini here, but I'm unemployed since a week ago, so I decided "Let's do Claude Academy maybe that up skill will help on my CV". First of all, I don't code, I'm not a coder, and I've used Gemini for the last 10ish months (Paid), I've used it for Presentations, brainstorming, some reports but mostly as going deeper into topics. Lately, of course I've been using it to plan my Job Search strategy. In the meantime I also got Claude and created a Project with the intention of finding a Job, the difference is stark.

First of all, Claude recommended things for my CV that would simply be a terrible move (I know, I used to be HR back in the day). For example, it said delete the buzzwords while Gemini said to keep them and that deleting it would be ATS suicide, which is true. Then Claude insisted that I write something about the Religious Organization I used to be part of, while Gemini said don't, that's sensitive and might raise unnecessary red flags. Again, I think Gemini was spot on. Another thing was certain laws, Gemini correctly referenced a law I was looking for regarding hiring while Claude said "I couldn't confirm, so you should check with a lawyer", and I'm sure Gemini is correct on that point.

Lastly, I'm planning my networking strategy (reaching to certain people I know, and even people I don't know but I was introduced by an acquaintance/friend). In Gemini I said "I'll have a meeting with (First Name) (Last Name) of (Name of the Company), how should I structure the meeting, what would be the best thing to bring up given my background, etc.", Gemini immediately knew who I was talking about and pulled the company's info. Claude said "I'm not sure who this is, but the company might be this one (pulls out a company with similar name but not exactly the same and it's the wrong company) but please confirm".

I don't know if it's due to me using Gemini for longer that it knows me better, but I feel Claude is super extra cautious, preachy about transparency and sometimes just dead wrong on judgements. But yeah, this is just a bit of my experience, thought I might bring a little bit of positivity to Gemini.

As a completely neutral user, I feel like the value u get for free tier gemini on Google is just insanely good at the moment? (For general chatting, basic research)
Non-sloppy answers with blazing speed. Google is getting a lot of shit since they're not frontier despite the prime position, but I feel like the average users are doing pretty good
edit; wasn't aware that it's gone soon lol

I asked Gemini to tell me a joke no human can understand but only AIs

Asked Gemini to make my email less verbose.

I mean some of the original detail might have been nice.

Now, Pro model is being removed from AI Plus subscribers. I love Pro. :(

I heard the recent news that free users (which I am) will be only used Flash-Lite next week, Flash-Lite sucks, it can't show images property, and not enough detailed answers, which are free alternative to Flash 3.6, which the upcoming Flash 4 will come out soon, I don't consent to pay a AI plus sub, it's 50 bucks per year too, which free solution is a better alternative overall?

Why cant these guys get some level of consistency with this AI

This has been happening all day for me. I was about to write some praise for this because the Flash 3.8 quality increased lately compared to previously in Chats specifically not agents/Antigravity. I was about to say I may pay for ta pro plan for a month but nevermind lol. This was a free month btw I do have a pro plan currently but it ends soon. I really need a reliable chat and a good agentic coding option this could have been the chat option but apparently not.

I was recently approved for the Gemini Student offer on a new Google account. My student verification was successful, but I haven’t added a payment method or activated the subscription yet.
I’d like to wait until December 1, 2026 before adding my payment method and activating the offer.
Does anyone know whether the verification remains valid if I wait, or if Google requires the offer to be activated shortly after verification?
The offer itself says it’s available until December 31, 2026.
Has anyone been in a similar situation and waited a few weeks between verification and activation?

gotta be careful with my typos.

Is it just me, or the new skills are worse?

I created a skill with the exact same instructions and information that my Gem had, and the output is nowhere near the same.

I will ignore the fact that he doesn't use the "Canvas" tool even tho i specified to do so. (my Gem had a default tool option)

1. The prompt generated by the Skill doesn't follow the "three pillar" technique i tend to use. (even tho it's explicitly specified)

2. Most of the time it ignores the slash skill name command, especially when the prompt i want to be remade is an image one (he instead starts generating it)

I can think of more, but this is enough for me to beg Google to not remove gems, or atleast make the skills as good as the gems are.

Yes i posted this in Gemini forum BUT Do you think AI are ruining themselves (im talking about big companies like gemini or grok), its heading to be all subscription based that people dont want or cant afford or so severly restricted that it wont create anything at all and then we are pushed to use a barely useful service or goto open source projects.

There was a point say 6mnths ago when AI services were great and had a nice feel to them and were helpful but I feel now they are going downhill fast.

I Understand the nuances behind AI safety BUT at the point of making them soo restricted or pricey is not the way id like to see them go.

Lastly i know there are ways round the above but in general i feel its going downhill.

I am editing some album stickers but i find everything online to be from photos like attached example. I want to final product to be like the other picture, like a scanned sticker. Chatgpt doesnt have problem to do this, but i cant seem to find the persective correction functional in Gemini, Even asking for a master prompt it gives me whatever it wants. Any idea? Any pointer is apreciated.

When i look at the Pareto Frontier and where Google Gemini 4 is placed like in the screenshot.
Even with the launch 2dollars per million token Gemini is not moving the current pareto frontier.
Once the launch promotion is gone there is no reaseon to leverage Gemini 4 compared to other models out there.
So the question is as the companies know this and i assume there margins are high enough and it's probably better to have a model that is the GOAT in one area than to be inferior everywhere, why position it just 5-10% lower and basically move the pareto-frontier?

And i know it's "just benchmarks, yada,yada,yada" and i know that Gemini is probably exceptional in Writing and other areas, but the general question holds.
Gemini 4 is just one example another example for me is Grok 4.7, positioned 15% lower and it actaully would have been a good model for it's class and way more competitive just like Grok 4.6 has been when it came out.

Question therefor is, is it not worth to get this extra marketshare, this extra data, this extra custom buyin, this extra binding to your platform and therefor running the model at a lower margin or potentially even a slight loss?

EDIT: post got locked blocked because i used the word "p*ice" so i needed to formulate everything around that.

Just after opening the app ...it starts draining data, for 2 paragraphs it takes 20 mb ... and it just don't stop draining data ...

And to prove my point.... and hammer in the nail... here is the reddit post that the same chat window for gemini wrote for me when I asked it to write the reddit post about what it was telling me.

----------------------

Like many of you, I was pretty annoyed to learn that starting October 9th, Google is stripping Pro model access away from the Google AI Plus tier (leaving us with just Flash/Flash-Lite).

Since I prepaid upfront for an annual subscription based on the advertised features—specifically having access to the Pro model—I asked Gemini directly what this means under Australian Consumer Law (ACL).

I was expecting a standard corporate non-answer, but Gemini essentially sided with me against its own parent company:

"Under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), reducing key tier features mid-term for customers who paid upfront for an annual subscription is a major compliance issue... If you paid upfront for an annual subscription based on access to Pro models, stripping those models away during your paid period without offering a resolution breaches fundamental consumer guarantees."

It then proceeded to map out my statutory rights under ACCC guidelines, explaining that subscribers hit by a mid-term feature downgrade on a prepaid term are entitled to a pro-rata refund or compensation for the drop in value, and gave me a step-by-step guide on how to lodge a formal complaint with the ACCC or state fair trading bodies if Google support refuses.

Gotta respect an AI that puts local consumer protection statutory rights above corporate loyalty.

For any other Aussie annual subscribers facing the downgrade on October 9: if you paid upfront expecting Pro model access for 12 months, don't just take the nerf sitting down—ACL guarantees match what was advertised at purchase, and standard Terms & Conditions fine print can't override statutory rights here.