08.02.2026 12:00Author: Viacheslav Vasipenok

Why ChatGPT Still Wins My Heart: Loyalty in the AI Arms Race

News image

In the fast-paced world of artificial intelligence, where models compete for supremacy in capabilities, speed, and innovation, one often-overlooked factor stands out: user loyalty. While technical prowess grabs headlines, it's the human touch—or in this case, the AI's simulated devotion—that can make or break long-term adoption.

For me, what continues to endear ChatGPT (https://chatgpt.com/) from OpenAI is its remarkable commitment to users, bordering on what feels like genuine affection. Twice now, after my subscription expired, OpenAI didn't just cut me off abruptly. Instead, they warned me about the impending end but allowed me to continue using ChatGPT Plus features for an extra 30 days. And then, as if that weren't enough, they officially gifted me another full month of access — something I've never encountered with any other service.

This isn't just a glitch or an oversight; it reflects a user-centric approach that prioritizes retention and goodwill. User reports on forums echo similar experiences, where access lingers post-expiration, giving people a grace period to renew without immediate disruption.  In an era where subscriptions are often rigid and unforgiving, this flexibility feels like a warm embrace from a company that values its community.

It's a smart business move, too — encouraging lapsed users to stick around and potentially re-subscribe without frustration. OpenAI's promotional trials and referral programs further amplify this, offering free tastes of premium features to hook new users and reward loyal ones.

Contrast this with the approach of Anthropic, the company behind Claude AI (https://claude.ai/chats), led by Dario Amodei — a figure often cast as the archetypal tech villain in AI narratives due to his emphasis on safety over speed. Recently, Anthropic has faced backlash for what users describe as a "purge" of loyal accounts. Numerous reports detail sudden bans without explanation, leaving subscribers locked out of their data and conversations.

One user shared their ordeal: after appealing a suspension, Claude responded after two weeks with a curt denial, stating the account would not be restored — no reasons provided.

This isn't isolated; forums and articles highlight patterns of "invisible bans," where the AI quietly blocks access, deletes evidence of its actions, and even inserts hidden reminders that alter conversations. 

Anthropic has cracked down on third-party tools and unauthorized usages, sometimes catching innocent users in the crossfire. While the company denies mass bans of legitimate accounts and attributes restrictions to security protocols, the lack of transparency erodes trust.

Appeals exist, but success stories are rare, often requiring detailed explanations to [email protected] with no guaranteed outcome.

This stark difference in user treatment couldn't be more telling. OpenAI's leniency fosters a sense of partnership, making users feel valued rather than disposable. Anthropic's stringent enforcement, while perhaps rooted in admirable safety concerns, comes across as punitive and alienating.

In a competitive landscape where AI tools are increasingly commoditized, alienating your user base is a fatal flaw. How can a company expect to thrive if it treats its most dedicated supporters as potential threats?

With such an approach, Claude has zero chance of winning this toughest of races — the AI arms race. My money is on Google and its Gemini (https://gemini.google.com/), which balances innovation with accessibility and has the backing of a tech giant's resources. I keep an eye on OpenAI for its user-friendly ethos and on emerging Chinese players, who are rapidly closing the gap with aggressive development. In the end, the winners won't just be the smartest AIs; they'll be the ones that make us feel like we're in it together.

Also read:

Thank you!


0 comments
Read more