Remember being stuck with one cloud provider’s APIs? The same trap is forming around today’s hottest LLMs… Yes, it’s the great AI lock-in.
A few years ago, everyone raced to the cloud. It seemed smart at the time. Fast, cheap, easy. But many teams later found themselves stuck. Switching cloud providers meant rewriting code, moving data at huge costs, and losing months of time.
Now, history is repeating itself — but this time, it’s happening even faster with AI.
Big platforms like OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google are building “walled gardens” around their models. At first, it feels harmless: you just want to ship your AI app faster. But slowly, your product, your data, and even your team’s skills get tied to one company’s ecosystem.
AI lock-in is not a future problem. it’s happening right now. If you don’t act early, your flexibility, costs, and security could slip away before you even notice.
Let’s break down how to stay free.
What is AI Lock-In?
AI lock-in means getting trapped inside one company’s AI ecosystem, making it painfully hard, risky, or expensive to switch later.
It happens slowly. You start by using a popular model like GPT-4o through a clean, easy API. At first, it’s just about speed: you want to launch fast.
But little by little, your business builds deeper connections. You fine-tune models on their platform. You design prompts that fit their model’s unique behavior. You store conversation histories, files, and embeddings inside their systems. Your product starts relying on their special features; like built-in tools or memory systems only their API offers.
Before you realize it, your app, your workflows, and even your team’s skills are all wrapped around one vendor. Moving to another model — like Mistral, DeepSeek, or Gemini — isn’t just a quick code fix. It’s a major rebuild.
You would face:
- Massive retraining or re-prompting costs
- Expensive data migration fees (“data egress costs”)
- Lost features that don’t exist on other platforms
- New risks in downtime, bugs, and customer frustration
- Re-educating your team from scratch
In their April 2025 piece, The Atlantic calls this the new “walled garden” of AI. They show how OpenAI, once open-source and idealistic, has shifted fully into a business model based on locking users inside.
By creating exclusive APIs, bundling premium services, and controlling access to fine-tuning and memory tools, OpenAI is making it harder for companies to leave — even if they want to.
| Feature | OpenAI / Microsoft Azure | Google Cloud (Vertex AI) | Anthropic |
| Key Models | GPT-4 series, GPT-4.5, GPT-4o, etc. | Gemini series (Pro, Flash, etc.) | Claude series (Haiku, Sonnet, Opus) |
| Primary Access | API, Integrated Azure AI Services | Integrated Vertex AI Platform, API | API (Direct or via other platforms like AWS Bedrock, Vertex AI) |
| Key Lock-in Mechanisms | Proprietary APIs & Features (Assistants, Tools), Azure Integration, Data Handling Policies | Integrated MLOps (Vertex AI), Proprietary Models (Gemini), Data Egress Costs, Platform Tooling | API Dependency, Tiered Rate/Spend Limits, Model-Specific Capabilities, Potential Protocol Control (MCP) |
| Noted Risks | High Costs, Data Privacy Concerns, Vendor Instability, Functional Lock-in | Platform Dependency, Data Egress Costs, Service Deprecation History, Data Usage Policy Concerns | Scaling Costs/Limits, API Reliance, Potential Protocol Dominance Risk |
It’s not just OpenAI. Other big players like Google (Vertex AI) and Anthropic (Claude) are racing to build their own locked ecosystems too. They all know: whoever controls the foundation controls the future.
That’s why understanding AI lock-in isn’t just technical; it’s strategic.
If you don’t think about portability early, you could end up stuck with costs, limits, and risks you never agreed to.
AI Lock-In: Why It Matters for Builders & Enterprises
At first, AI lock-in seems like a technical issue. However, it’s a risk that affects your budget, roadmap, and compliance posture when building real products, especially in an enterprise setting.
And the problem is growing.
In 2022, UK regulator Ofcom launched a deep investigation into whether the cloud giants — Amazon, Microsoft, and Google — were limiting competition. That case was handed to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), with a final report due in April 2025.
While the original focus was cloud infrastructure, a surprising trend emerged during the CMA’s interviews with customers: AI is creating a whole new form of lock-in.
As businesses move from AI prototypes to real-world use cases, they’re hitting invisible walls. That includes switching costs, compatibility issues, and pricing models that make it hard to change direction once you’ve picked a vendor.
One enterprise customer captured the concern perfectly in their CMA interview:
“One of the things that is a concern currently is lock-in. So for our analysis work, we’ve used AWS, its tooling, its modelling and the lock-in, in terms of AI feels a lot stronger than it does in other services. For example, the optimisation of certain models on certain clouds would make it very difficult from my understanding to move elsewhere… I don’t think we understand what the answer is currently. But it is a concern of ours, and the lock-in is a big concern because I think it takes us down a certain way of using AI with certain models.”
This isn’t just about cloud billing anymore. It’s about AI workflows that are glued to certain tools, platforms, and ecosystems.
You may want to switch from Azure’s GPT offerings to a Claude model on AWS Bedrock, or deploy a fine-tuned open model in your own region for data sovereignty. But that flexibility disappears if your data, infrastructure, and model integration are all tied together.
The CMA also noted that egress fees, which once seemed “negligible,” could quickly explode as AI workloads scale.
Right now, most orgs only move small amounts of data between clouds. However, those “negligible” costs suddenly become massive barriers to switching when AI systems require moving entire training sets, memory states, or vector stores.
This is what lock-in really looks like: not a forced contract, but a slow drift into invisible dependencies.
For builders, it means less freedom to choose the right tools. For enterprises, it means strategic risk and reduced agility — the very things AI was supposed to solve.
What makes this even more important is how fast the AI landscape is changing.
Model performance is improving nearly every quarter — with open and proprietary models both reaching new milestones. At the same time, LLM pricing is dropping rapidly. What cost $1 today may cost $0.10 in three months.
If your stack is portable, you can take advantage of those improvements immediately. If you’re locked in? You’re paying yesterday’s prices for yesterday’s performance.
Five Warning Signs You’re Drifting Into Lock-In
Lock-in doesn’t happen all at once. It creeps up on you, one decision at a time. Here are the red flags to watch for:
- You’re Using Proprietary Prompt Syntax: If you’re writing prompts or instructions that only work for one model (like OpenAI’s special function-calling format or Anthropic’s specific tool syntax), you’re locking your app into that provider. Other models won’t understand these special codes.
- Your Vendor’s Pricing Tiers Are Opaque or Shifting: If you can’t predict your costs or the pricing suddenly changes without much notice, you’re already losing control. AI vendors often use cheap intro prices to lure you in, then tighten the screws once you’re too deep to leave easily.
- Your Fine-Tuned Models Are Stuck on Their Platform: Some providers let you fine-tune models but don’t let you export them. If your improved model lives only inside their cloud, you can’t move it anywhere else. It’s a hostage situation, dressed up as a feature.
- Your Data Is Stored on Their Servers, Not Yours: If you’re saving conversation histories, embeddings, or vector databases inside a model vendor’s infrastructure, you’re trapped. Migrating data out later will cost money, time, and effort. Worse, you may lose key data altogether if the vendor changes policies or shuts down services.
- Your Product Depends on Vendor-Specific Features: If you’re using proprietary tools like OpenAI’s Assistants API, Google’s Vertex AI MLOps pipelines, or Anthropic’s special tool APIs, you’re tying your product’s core features to that ecosystem. Those features won’t exist the same way elsewhere, making migration harder, slower, and riskier.
Staying free in the AI world is a choice you have to build for from the beginning.
AI Lock-In: 7 Ways to Keep Your LLM Stack Portable
Here’s how to make sure your AI projects stay portable, agile, and under your control.
1. Use an Agent Framework That Abstracts Model Calls (👋 Hello, SmythOS)
One of the smartest ways to avoid AI lock-in is to never talk to model APIs directly from your core app. Instead, you use an agent framework that abstracts model calls — meaning it sits between your app and any AI model, acting like a translator.
This is exactly what SmythOS was built for.
The no-code platform lets you design complex AI workflows without wiring your app to one model’s quirks. Inside SmythOS, you can easily swap between models like OpenAI, Anthropic, or open-source LLMs with just a few clicks — no major code rewrites needed.
But SmythOS goes even further: you can replace an AI step with a human. If a task is too expensive for an LLM — like verifying sensitive outputs or handling edge-case requests — you can assign that part of the flow to a real person. Humans and AI work side-by-side inside one workflow. It’s cost-effective, transparent, and lets you scale smart; not just fast.
By using a platform like SmythOS from day one, you make portability a design choice, not a rescue mission later.
2. Switch Models to Reduce Costs (e.g. from GPT-4 to Gemini Flash 2.0 or 4.1-mini)
Sometimes, raw power is less important than control.
When you’re building anything sensitive — like healthcare apps, financial tools, or internal knowledge agents — it’s often smarter to use open-weight models instead of locking into closed APIs.
Open-weight models (like Meta’s Llama, Mistral’s Instruct series, or DeepSeek’s R1) let you host the model yourself, fine-tune it however you want, and keep full control of the data flowing through it. No hidden storage. No surprise training on your data. No terms of service changes out of your control.
While closed models may still outperform slightly in niche tasks, open models are catching up fast. Plus, you can fine-tune them cheaply on your own data, and nobody can yank the rug out from under you.
If your app demands trust, compliance, or custom behavior, open-weight models are the safest long-term bet.
3. Store Embeddings and Conversation Vectors in Your Own Database
Here’s a hidden trap: many developers store chat histories, search embeddings, and memory vectors inside the AI vendor’s systems. It feels easy early on. But later, you realize you can’t export them cleanly; or worse, that they charge you extra to retrieve your own data.
Smart builders always store critical AI data (vectors, embeddings, logs) in their own databases; not in the model provider’s storage.
You can use vector databases like Pinecone, Weaviate, or even self-hosted systems like Qdrant to stay independent.
This way, even if you change LLMs tomorrow, you still own the memory, the training context, and the user history that powers your app. You’re moving models, not losing your mind.
4. Use Infrastructure-as-Code to Stay Cloud-Agnostic
AI isn’t just about models. it’s also about infrastructure: GPUs, storage, APIs, queues, autoscaling.
If you manually configure all this inside one cloud (say, AWS or Azure), it becomes nearly impossible to move later without huge pain.
The solution? Infrastructure-as-Code (IaC). Tools like Terraform and Pulumi let you describe your entire cloud setup — networks, databases, storage, permissions — in simple code files.
By using IaC, you can recreate your environment on a different cloud provider (or even on-premises) by simply running a few scripts.
Need to move from Azure to AWS? From GCP to Oracle Cloud? With IaC, it’s a migration, not a rebuild.
In short: if your infrastructure lives in code, your business stays free.
5. Architect for Model Modularity (Don’t Hardwire the LLM)
Another major mistake: wiring the AI model deep inside your product’s logic.
When your LLM becomes a core part of your app’s brain, changing it later feels like brain surgery.
Instead, smart teams treat the model like a plug-in. They build modular systems where the app sends a prompt to a service, and the service sends back a response — regardless of which model is behind the scenes.
And here’s the big win: cost savings. Sometimes you don’t need the most advanced reasoning model for every task. For simple queries, switching from GPT-4 to something like GPT-4.1 Mini or Gemini Flash 2.0 can cut your token costs by up to 10x — without noticeably affecting quality. If your system is modular, those kinds of swaps are easy and immediate.
By decoupling your app from specific model logic, you gain control over both performance and cost — a rare combo in AI.
6. Negotiate Data Portability and Exit Rights in Every Contract
When you start working with any AI vendor — OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, anyone — the contract matters as much as the tech.
Smart organizations negotiate exit clauses and data portability rights right up front. This means:
- The right to retrieve all your input data, output data, and fine-tuning records in a clean format
- Advance notice of price changes or product shutdowns
- Rights to clone or replicate fine-tuned models if the vendor changes terms or shuts down services
If it’s not in writing, it doesn’t exist.
Good contracts give you a parachute before you ever need to jump.
7. Regularly Test Migration Readiness (Don’t Wait Until It Hurts)
Here’s the final piece: test your flexibility before you need it.
Don’t just hope you can switch models or clouds someday. Actually practice it.
Smart AI teams run internal drills like:
- Swapping their main LLM for a backup model
- Migrating from one cloud storage to another
- Rebuilding agents in SmythOS using a different model backend
Even if you don’t actually switch today, these drills expose weak points — hidden dependencies, bad assumptions, missing backup plans.
The more often you practice switching, the less scary real change becomes. You stay in control, while competitors stay stuck.
A Real Example: Comparing Models Side-by-Side With One Agent in SmythOS
Let’s say you’re not ready to commit to just one LLM. Smart move. You want to know which model is best for your use case — and you want to prove it with real output.
That’s exactly what SmythOS makes possible.
The screenshot below shows a Model Comparison Agent built in SmythOS’s visual editor. It connects to multiple LLMs — including GPT-4o, GPT-4.0 Mini, Claude 3.7, Gemini 1.5 Pro, and Sonar — and runs the same prompt through each model. Then it passes those responses to a separate evaluation flow that scores which model answered best.
No code rewrites. No app rebuild. Just plug in the models, run your test, and compare the results.
This kind of side-by-side benchmarking is a real technique for making smarter architecture decisions. Maybe GPT-4 answers better, but Claude is faster. Maybe Gemini gives cleaner JSON. Now you can see it live and choose what’s best for your product.
And here’s the best part: if the “best model” changes in the future, you just swap a component in SmythOS. You don’t have to rewrite your stack.
In other words, SmythOS doesn’t just help you avoid lock-in; it helps you test your way out of it.
The Future Is Open(ing): What Regulators, Banks, and Governments Are Saying About AI Lock-In
The lock-in problem is now drawing attention from regulators, banks, and entire governments.
Why? Because when just a few companies control the “brains” of modern apps, everybody becomes dependent, from small SaaS teams to national banks. That’s not just a technical risk. It’s an economic and geopolitical one.
Regulators Are Watching
In April 2025, The Atlantic reported that OpenAI’s growing control over how apps generate content, search documents, and use memory has triggered serious concerns in both the U.S. and Europe. Competition authorities are now watching for signs of monopoly behavior, especially when exclusive deals or locked ecosystems make it hard for users to switch.
The UK’s CMA, the European Commission, and the U.S. FTC are all exploring how AI platform dominance could limit innovation. Several are pushing for interoperability standards, transparency in pricing and data use, and the right to switch providers without penalty; echoing past fights over browser bundling and cloud egress fees.
Banks and Enterprise IT Are Sounding the Alarm
Large banks, insurers, and healthcare systems are also raising flags. These industries rely on AI to handle sensitive data and comply with strict laws. But if the AI provider changes terms, prices, or regions of operation — the whole system could be thrown out of compliance overnight.
That’s a massive legal and financial risk.
Financial institutions are now pushing for “model portability” in procurement guidelines, meaning any AI used must be swappable, exportable, and transparent. Some are even requiring vendors to support open-weight fallbacks in case access is disrupted.
Governments Want AI Sovereignty
Governments are beginning to see AI infrastructure the same way they see energy or defense: something they must control locally.
Countries in the EU, Asia, and Latin America are looking for AI platforms that support local hosting, open models, and regional compliance. Several are investing in their own national LLMs or supporting open-source alternatives like Llama, Gemma, or Mistral.
What they all want is simple: choice. The freedom to move, adapt, and innovate without begging one company for access.
AI Lock-In Is Creeping In. But You’re Not Trapped — Yet
Every day, more businesses slide deeper into AI ecosystems they don’t fully control. They build on one vendor’s models, fine-tune on closed platforms, and wire their products to features that can’t be moved. It starts with speed and convenience — but ends with high costs, rigid architecture, and reduced flexibility.
By the time most teams realize they’re stuck, it’s already too late.
Rewriting code. Moving data. Losing access to fine-tuned models or paying to escape. It’s not just a technical problem — it’s a strategic risk. And as The Atlantic revealed, companies like OpenAI are intentionally building systems that are harder to leave. Meanwhile, regulators, banks, and governments are sounding the alarm.
Staying portable doesn’t mean avoiding AI — it means using it wisely.
Choose open-weight models when privacy or control matters. Store your vectors and training data in your own infrastructure. Use infrastructure-as-code to remain cloud-agnostic. Write modular code that doesn’t hardwire you to one model’s behavior. And above all, design with optionality in mind.
That’s where SmythOS comes in.
It’s a platform built from the ground up to keep you flexible. You can swap models, orchestrate complex agents visually, and compare outputs across LLMs without being tied to one provider. It doesn’t just help you move fast — it helps you stay free.
If you’re serious about building for the future, don’t just build smarter. Build portable.
Article last updated on:
'%3E%3Cpath d='M28 56.5C43.464 56.5 56 43.964 56 28.5C56 13.036 43.464 0.5 28 0.5C12.536 0.5 0 13.036 0 28.5C0 43.964 12.536 56.5 28 56.5Z' fill='url(%23paint0_linear_1753_14707)'/%3E%3Cpath d='M20.4563 41.5253H14.043V22.2853H20.4563V41.5253ZM17.2509 19.72C15.477 19.72 14.043 18.2821 14.043 16.512C14.043 14.7419 15.4796 13.3066 17.2509 13.3066C19.0184 13.3066 20.4563 14.7445 20.4563 16.512C20.4563 18.2821 19.0184 19.72 17.2509 19.72ZM43.5443 41.5253H37.3785V32.1618C37.3785 29.9287 37.3362 27.0568 34.1731 27.0568C30.9626 27.0568 30.4688 29.4888 30.4688 32.0002V41.5253H24.3043V22.2712H30.2225V24.9019H30.3059C31.1294 23.3884 33.1419 21.7928 36.1433 21.7928C42.3899 21.7928 43.5443 25.7806 43.5443 30.9651V41.5253Z' fill='white'/%3E%3C/g%3E%3Cdefs%3E%3ClinearGradient id='paint0_linear_1753_14707' x1='28' y1='0.5' x2='28' y2='56.5' gradientUnits='userSpaceOnUse'%3E%3Cstop stop-color='%2337C785'/%3E%3Cstop offset='1' stop-color='%231C6C48'/%3E%3C/linearGradient%3E%3CclipPath id='clip0_1753_14707'%3E%3Crect width='56' height='56' fill='white' transform='translate(0 0.5)'/%3E%3C/clipPath%3E%3C/defs%3E%3C/svg%3E%0A){kind=small}
'%3E%3Cpath d='M28 56.5C43.464 56.5 56 43.964 56 28.5C56 13.036 43.464 0.5 28 0.5C12.536 0.5 0 13.036 0 28.5C0 43.964 12.536 56.5 28 56.5Z' fill='url(%23paint0_linear_1753_14712)'/%3E%3Cg clip-path='url(%23clip1_1753_14712)'%3E%3Cpath d='M40.6491 15.377H14.9957C13.2321 15.377 11.8051 16.82 11.8051 18.5836L11.7891 37.8236C11.7891 39.5873 13.2321 41.0303 14.9957 41.0303H40.6491C42.4127 41.0303 43.8557 39.5873 43.8557 37.8236V18.5836C43.8557 16.82 42.4127 15.377 40.6491 15.377ZM40.6491 37.8236H14.9957V21.7903L27.8224 29.8069L40.6491 21.7903V37.8236ZM27.8224 26.6003L14.9957 18.5836H40.6491L27.8224 26.6003Z' fill='white'/%3E%3C/g%3E%3C/g%3E%3Cdefs%3E%3ClinearGradient id='paint0_linear_1753_14712' x1='28' y1='0.5' x2='28' y2='56.5' gradientUnits='userSpaceOnUse'%3E%3Cstop stop-color='%2337C785'/%3E%3Cstop offset='1' stop-color='%231C6C48'/%3E%3C/linearGradient%3E%3CclipPath id='clip0_1753_14712'%3E%3Crect width='56' height='56' fill='white' transform='translate(0 0.5)'/%3E%3C/clipPath%3E%3CclipPath id='clip1_1753_14712'%3E%3Crect width='38.48' height='38.48' fill='white' transform='translate(8.58594 8.96289)'/%3E%3C/clipPath%3E%3C/defs%3E%3C/svg%3E%0A){kind=small}