Reader question: What should a team starting a Gemini project make of Google’s new access limit on the 2.5 models?
Thesis: Google’s September 18 announcement narrows Gemini 2.5 access to users who have actively used the models while explicitly keeping them in service. It is a capacity-management policy, not a published shutdown date. New projects should plan around the newer models Google names, while existing users should map their dependencies instead of assuming either a sudden cutoff or permanent eligibility.
The wording matters. Google says it is “limiting access” to the 2.5 models for users who have actively used them in the past, and says the models “are not deprecated” and will continue to be served until further notice through the API. That combination describes a gate on who can start or continue access, not a retirement announcement.
For new work, Google’s direction is explicit: use Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Gemini 3.8 Flash. The changelog ties that recommendation to capacity, saying the policy is intended to preserve reliable performance for both ongoing legacy workflows and new applications. In other words, the provider is trying to keep older traffic available while steering fresh demand toward newer capacity.
That creates two planning tracks. A team with an existing 2.5 dependency should inventory which products, projects, or internal workflows rely on it and watch how eligibility behaves over time. The relevant question is continuity: can the current workload remain served under the stated “until further notice” language, and what fallback evaluation is needed if policy changes? A team beginning a project has a different decision: Google’s named newer models are the starting point for model selection, but the announcement does not claim that either one is the best fit for every workload.
The update leaves several details open. Google does not define “actively used,” explain the enforcement mechanism, give an end date, or quantify how 2.5 compares with the newer recommendations on price, latency, or quality. It would be a mistake to read the notice as proof that every inactive account is already blocked, or as a guarantee that today’s eligibility lasts indefinitely.
Takeaway: Treat Gemini 2.5 as a supported legacy path with constrained access. Keep an eye on eligibility if you already depend on it; for a new project, start your evaluation with the newer models Google identifies and make the final choice from workload evidence rather than from the access notice alone.
Source: Google AI for Developers Gemini API changelog, September 18, 2026 entry (accessed September 28, 2026).