Who says what replaces a retired model
Almost nobody. One dated row on one platform names its replacement, a later version of the same model. That successor is itself scheduled to retire and names nothing after it, so the documented chain runs one link. Every other ending in this register arrives with no destination at all. As of 2026-09-12.
| Entry | What is published | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Microsoft Foundry | A successor named for one dated row | A later version of the same model |
| Amazon Bedrock | No successor, and migration is not automatic | Stated plainly rather than implied |
| Gemini API | No replacement column on the table | Newer models documented elsewhere, as products |
| Sora | No replacement is named in the notice | So the runway led nowhere in particular |
| Every application tracked | Nothing published | An older generation on sale is not a successor |
Inclusion rule. A successor counts when the notice announcing an ending also names what follows it. A newer version existing elsewhere is not a published statement. Order. The entry naming one first, then the rest.
1A date without a destination is half a plan
The work a runway is for is testing whatever comes next, and that cannot start until somebody decides what next is. So a notice with a date and no successor hands a reader the cheaper half of the problem.
Stopping on time is arithmetic. Choosing a target and re-establishing a look on it is the expensive part, and nothing in most of these announcements reduces it.
2The obvious guess stays a guess
Most readers will assume a maker's newer model is the route, and most will be right. Writing that into the register would make every such cell unverifiable, which is the trade refused in every column here.
The cost is not abstract. A team that migrated to an assumed successor and found the pricing, the interface or the region coverage different has spent its runway on the wrong test.
3Naming is not moving
Even where a successor is named, nothing says the platform performs the change. One platform states outright that migration will not happen automatically, which is more useful than leaving it implied.
A complete disclosure therefore has three parts: a date, a destination, and whose job the move is. No entry in this register publishes all three for the same model.
- sora-2 version 2025-10-0615 July 2026retirement date, replaced by sora-2 version 2025-12-08
- sora-2 version 2025-12-0815 October 2026retirement date, no replacement named
- Named replacement modelNo date announced (as of 2026-09-12)none in the announcement
- What a date in that table commits toThe shutdown dates listed indicate the earliest possible dates on which a model might be retired
- Whether the platform moves you acrossMigration will not happen automatically
4Sources
Dates come from the vendor that makes the model; menus come from the app, and both are linked on the calendar. Read 2026-09-12. What counts as a date is on sourcing. Nearby: After the date, Can a date move, Cut off early.