Changing the difference between Codex plans to be Plus=1x Pro 100=5x Pro 200=10x
twitter.com
twitter.com
Unfortunately, they reserve the right to change the terms after the fact.
What bothers me about these cuts is the assumption that because the models are supposedly getting better and cheaper, less usage is somehow equivalent value. That may be true from their perspective, but they don't get to decide how much utility those extra capabilities have for every user.
It also leads to the AI version of "you’re holding it wrong" (i.e. you’re prompting it wrong/use a cheaper model/skill issue).
And I can't help wondering how much of this is also about shifting capacity toward the latest persistent-agent offering they're pushing. If that's the case, existing subscribers are effectively being asked to give up quota for a product direction they may not even care about.
Been a customer since GPT 5.3 Codex. This is the first time that I'm thinking of dropping the sub.
This is the strangest part of the messaging here. $200/mo is a lot of money, and it came with the expectation, for me at least, that I was paying for the deluxe version of this service—the best one could get. Why am I supposed to be comforted by the idea that halving my usage limits (in the near but not immediate future) will lead to “everyone” getting more usage overall? Why should I internally reframe the (expensive) investment I made for personal gain as being some sort of altruistic endeavor?