4 ms·
While I instinctively knew Google is not to trust with the word "free", especially since "you're the product" isn't applicable as easily here as with other prod
by mittermayr 6y ago
While I instinctively knew Google is not to trust with the word "free", especially since "you're the product" isn't applicable as easily here as with other products, I still decided to thoroughly test Photos for a long while to see if they'd introduce some limits. They are a corporate entity out to make money (and externally pressured to make more quarter by quarter), so I fully get it. But for Photos, it almost seemed like it could be a long play for them. A fantastic place to upsell users into all the other Google products. One that could just possibly stay free, forever. So, the fool I am, I started recommending it to just about anyone. Helped onboard relatives, many friends and so forth.
And now, this. We're at the next step of a funnel they could've (and should've) been more transparent on from the start: they're starting to apply force to add "a form of payment". After which, naturally, they'll be able to keep on raising those prices freely with such an impressively solid lock-in at hand. The more data stored inside Google Photos, the harder it'll be to migrate it away.
I am, once again, contemplating to give up entirely on the "cloud" and figure out something else. The issue isn't paying for services, but I do have a problem with intransparent funnels. It's not about paying a buck or two a month, it's about them now being able to raise prices without mercy, regardless of actual storage pricing going down!
To migrate away will be quite the effort once we're storing past 100 GB+. Frustrating. Fully to be expected, but still. Google is acting so desperate, their struggle with milking the good ole' advertising cow is becoming more obvious by the minute. I wonder how long Chrome (not Chromium) is going to survive until it'll end up in a monetisation funnel.
- actuator 6y agoI don't get this honestly. None of us will like if our photos are used for ads as they are deeply personal. How do you think this should be monetized then?
- mittermayr 6y agoDefinitely not with ads, sorry if it came across like that. I meant that Google Photos (as a product) already got me to stay logged in to my Google account. So it can be a driver for Google account usage. The sharing features may be useful to get other people to sign up for Google (and Google storage for other things). I used to run a free site that had a lot of users, and I mostly kept it up and running because I placed ads for my other (paid) SaaS services on it, and it converted like crazy. So my ideal scenario for Google would be to have a few of those launching pad products, where they show we can trust them on their word (and with our data), and that makes me want to invest more in the wider brand (buy a Pixel phone, get Google Home devices, Chromecast, etc.)
- aaomidi 6y agoYou know how costco deeply subsidizes it's chicken and hotdog to incentivize people to use them? That's how. Not every single thing you offer needs to be profitable. Losing money on some stuff is worth it if it increases brand loyalty.