12 ms·
Google Photos hooked users with free unlimited storage. Now that's changing
- cwhiz 6y agoThanks for giving us all the machine learning data. We no longer need your services.
- abdullahkhalids 6y agoI would contend that the people who do pay for Google Photos are now potential customers of lots of the other apps, and hence can be advertised to as such.
- Heliosmaster 6y agoit sucks but.. yeah, that's how it works. And that is enabled by VC funded culture, where you have million of dollars invested in companies, which can then offer services at a loss investing in something else (market share, training data, etc.). Using smaller companies which charge honestly for the services they provide is probably more sustainable in the long term.
- derwiki 6y agoIn this case though, a smaller company might not be around forever. When you’re looking at storing important photos, the service you think will last longest may be best. (I use Flickr, Gphotos and an S3 bucket but I’m paranoid)
- ghaff 6y agoI use Flickr as well but I also back up in other ways, including locally. As I wrote on another thread, I'd never depend on a photo sharing site as my primary storage.
- mvexel 6y agoFlickr changed hands a couple times, almost went under and is still struggling to stay afloat. So you're right to be paranoid. I have been a paying Flickr Pro user since the beginning of time, but I don't feel that my photos are any 'safer' there than they would be on Google Photos. Also, Flickr has done an arguably nastier bait and switch when they announced the end of their unlimited free storage. At least Google seems to be willing to keep the photos already uploaded around. For now.
- awinder 6y ago> Using smaller companies which charge honestly for the services they provide is probably more sustainable in the long term. Smaller companies also commonly get acquired, shuttered, or become big companies in their own right. There's no panacea here. I think by the third or fourth time I was migrating from "the honesty priced option" the reality settled in that "honestly priced" is usually just an uninventive advertising moniker used for overpriced underdeveloped products.
- tiborsaas 6y agoBut users also benefit from it. You can search for the contents of the images in your private gallery.
- cwhiz 6y ago“private”
- rockengineer84 6y agohas Google ever made your data public?
- manquer 6y agoNot private doesn't mean public. Can google guarantee this data is not used to fuel their ad or other businesses in anyway ? Can they guarantee US Law Enforcement Agencies(LEA) will not have access without due process and informing you ? Can they guarantee LEAs from other countries will not given access to this data ?
- bobsoap 6y agoPrivate = only you, and no one else, not even Google.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- cwhiz 6y agoGoogle has had data leaks and hacks, yes. It’s not private unless you own it and control it. If you send it to Google it is unequivocally not private.
- minikites 6y agoWe benefit daily from all sorts of horrors, that's not a justification to keep doing horrors.
- 6y ago
- OscarTheGrinch 6y agoThe google AI will think cats rule the earth.
- rockengineer84 6y agothat kind of statement is harsh. what gives you a guarantee that any other paid service is not going to do this "machine learning" on your data. has Google ever made public your data?
- diggan 6y agoI think the point is if you charge upfront for storing peoples data under a certain price plan, you're less likely to change anything regarding the deal because you're in the business of storing peoples data. If you do bad, people will stop using the service, and you lose your business. You're more aligned with your users. Compare it to Google, where they can operate under a loss for a particular service (like Google Photos) in order to increase profits in a different market (like AI recognition tools). Once they are done with whatever they wanted to do, they can close down the service without much consequence, the business lives on.
- Markoff 6y agoWell they still want extra 15GB.
- JoeAltmaier 6y agoCharging for storage is becoming silly. Its essentially free. Storage is growing faster than humanity can fill it, and at an ever-spiraling decreasing price. It'd be like charging for windows-up or windows-down on a taxi ride.
- coldtea 6y ago>Charging for storage is becoming silly. Its essentially free. Storage is growing faster than humanity can fill it, and at an ever-spiraling decreasing price. And yet I can't find a cheap host for 2-4TB that's not like $10/month or so... even with Glacier it's $16/4TB/month...
- tyingq 6y agoKS-3 Server - Atom N2800 - 4GB DDR3 1066 MHz - 2TB SATA $9.99/month https://www.kimsufi.com/us/en/order/kimsufi.xml?reference=1801sk14 https://www.kimsufi.com/us/en/order/kimsufi.xml?reference=18... No RAID, but it's in your desired price range.
- coldtea 6y agoYep, it's possible with a dedicated or vps with 4TB or more, but this doesn't suit my use case (backup). I want the storage replicated geo-redunduntly backed-up and safer, Glacier/Backblaze/etc-style, not just lost whenever someone breaks into the server or there's a hardware issue at the hosting company, etc. Basically "upload and forget"... Same way, I can't find any good Squarespace/Ghost/Wordpress.com style service where I can run 3-4 sites that's not like $10/month per site or so... I'd appreciate a service that charges you based on actual traffic load, not mere website count/custom domain, and that is "post content and forget".
- tyingq 6y agoMaybe https://wasabi.com/cloud-storage-pricing/#three-info https://wasabi.com/cloud-storage-pricing/#three-info ? Supposedly $5.99/TB/Month
- MontyCarloHall 6y agoRelevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1150/ https://xkcd.com/1150/
- m_st 6y agoCan't upvote that enough times. Funny how the truth hurts sometimes. Thanks for the link.
- mehrdadn 6y agoI like the comic and it's definitely hilarious, and but it's not necessarily an apt comparison. Imagine the same situation with a bank holding your money. Are you paying them? (I assume you're not... I guess if you are, you probably shouldn't be.) Does that mean they're not in the business of storing your money and should be able to just give it away if you don't claim it in a month?
- corobo 6y agoReading into this beyond what you were intending I'd love for private data to be as regulated as money
- mehrdadn 6y agoInteresting idea... are you sure? Do you want to pay extra fees to transfer it internationally, have to deal with sanctions/etc. depending on where you're sending it, pay taxes on it when you acquire it, have a copy sent to the government if it's over 10KB of data, etc.?
- corobo 6y agoYes.. that sounds honestly perfect. Make them respect the data. Send a copy though.. do you have to give the government 10 grand when you send 10 grand? Course not. But you would tell the government it exists if it goes anywhere
- 6y ago
- part1of2 6y ago> Anil Sabharwal, Google Photos’ then-head, said in a blog post when the service launched in 2015. “And when we say a lifetime of memories, we really mean it.” Most of Google’s product strategy has been bait & switch, and I saythat with all due to respect to the engineers. It’s the leaders who make these decisions
- nicoburns 6y agoTo be fair, Google's pricing on storage is more than reasonable. I pay £2.50/month for 200gb of storage which more than covers my lifetimes worth of photos so far (in full res with a fair few RAW photos in there too). And they're not deleting any photos that users already uploaded. I think Google deserve all the criticism they get for shutting down services. But this one seems to have been handled quite well.
- iamben 6y agoDiscussion from a couple of days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25060973 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25060973
- blunte 6y agoIs there yet any effective cloud to cloud migration tool or service? I don't mean cloud to PC back to different cloud ...
- whollacsek 6y agoCheckout rclone
- thelastname 6y agoLast time I checked there wasn't a google photos api for expiring photos and metadata.
- abraham 6y agoThe Data Transfer Project is working on this although I believe it's still fairly early stage. https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/20/17589246/data-transfer-project-google-facebook-microsoft-twitter https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/20/17589246/data-transfer-pr... *I work at Google but not on this
- blunte 6y agoThanks for bringing this to my attention. Somehow I had never heard of it - https://datatransferproject.dev/updates https://datatransferproject.dev/updates There does seem to be some activity, although it also seems to be slowing a bit... https://github.com/google/data-transfer-project/graphs/code-frequency https://github.com/google/data-transfer-project/graphs/code-...
- jonplackett 6y agoIf you have to start paying for photo storage, you may as well move them somewhere with better privacy.
- JorgeGT 6y agoI'm giving Amazon Photos a try, since they offer unlimited high quality storage with Prime. I will appreciate if someone shares their opinion about this service.
- oefrha 6y ago“Unlimited”, until it is limited. Amazon already bait-and-switched on unlimited Amazon Cloud Drive storage. Microsoft, too, on OneDrive, before Amazon. Now Google. What makes you believe Amazon will honor “unlimited” this time round?
- JorgeGT 6y agoOh, nothing. But until they do, why pay Google, if I already pay Prime?
- avisser 6y ago> What makes you believe Amazon will honor “unlimited” this time round? Because Amazon has an incentive to keep me as a Prime customer (I'll buy more crap on Amazon). Most people don't pay Google a single cent. So it's not that I trust Amazon, it's that the economic model for Amazon including unlimited storage in my Prime membership makes sense. (Note: I wouldn't bet on Amazon staying unlimited for the next 50 years, just providing the counter-argument.)
- oefrha 6y agoThey had an incentive to keep me as an Amazon Cloud Drive customer, too, until they decided they didn’t if I stored more than 1TB. So I canceled. In the case of Prime I doubt a non-negligible percentage of Prime customers would cancel over losing unlimited storage, so the incentive to keep it unlimited is even smaller.
- tsjq 6y agotime to do some cleanup. surely the auto-sync / auto-backup in Google Photos app has uploaded a shiploaded of photos not needed. also check gmail & drive for large attachments/files and see if they can be deleted . time-consuming, yes .
- jinzo 6y agoFrom what I understand, the photos uploaded up to that time will not count toward the used space even after that. So only newly uploaded photos will start counting toward the usage.
- marban 6y agoPreserving your life's memories has never been cheaper — regardless of where and how you store it. Pay up or shut up, seriously.
- cbg0 6y agoFor anyone looking for other options: I've been very pleased with Microsoft's Onedrive offering; I pay $70/year for access to all the Office apps plus 1TB of storage and their family plan is $100/year and supports up to 6 people, with 1TB of storage per account.
- abtom 6y agoAny idea if I can buy the family plan and use 6TB for myself?
- zombieprocess 6y agoSure can. The Microsoft plan allows you to ungoogle yourself. Get a @your-domain-name email which comes with the same corporate outlook with calendar integration and everything else that comes with it. Also, 1 TB. --- Another good option is Apple - they charge reasonably 0.99$ for 50 GB --- Finally, dropbox is really good too and I have been using them since the beginning.
- cbg0 6y agoI don't think you can use 6TB on a single account, you would probably need to create multiple accounts.
- itsrajju 6y agoTheoretically you can. You just need 6 different email addresses and add them to your onedrive account. You won't be able to use it as a single 6TB volume though.
- Markoff 6y agoYandex disk has unlimited photo storage for now and I don't think Yandex is going anywhere, at worst they will start charging for it.
- rukshn 6y agoI wrote about the same thing this is a classic bait and switch However their free storage plan is still very generous when compared to apple and Dropbox also they storage plans are very reasonably priced as well https://www.tecowly.com/2020/11/12/google-photos-to-stop-giving-free-unlimited-storage/ https://www.tecowly.com/2020/11/12/google-photos-to-stop-giv...
- Sebb767 6y agoI honestly can't see the outrage here. Sure, they've closed their free tier, but they keep up the promise for Pixel owners and do not count images previously uploaded. That's really more than one can ask for in something they get for free.
- cinntaile 6y agoThat's the thing though, you don't really get it for free do you? You just pay with your privacy and data instead.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 6y agoTo whom do you believe google has disclosed private user photos?
- baq 6y agothey're so big disclosing those photos to their algorithms is questionable privacy-wise.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- throwaway3699 6y agoIf you know this is a risk, then Google certainly does.
- rockengineer84 6y agowhat is the privacy loss outcome that you are suggesting has happened as a result of photos being disclosed to algorithms?
- bluntfang 6y agouse your imagination. Sheesh this is such a boring line of questioning that borders on disingenuous and obtuse for a social news site that caters to people in AdTech.
- qwerty456127 6y agoIn fact I didn't knew until the news yesterday. Now I'm going to get hooked - upload all my pictures (landscape-only, people pictures stay offline) before the end of the free offer. AFAIK what you have already uploaded stays there and doesn't count when the offer changes.
- ruph123 6y agoCan we talk about alternatives? I am not a Google Photos user but I struggle to find a good privacy-aware or self-hosting solution. Currently I am hosting my photos on my nextcloud instance. But the support from the iOS app for photos is really bad and there seems to be no good webdav photo viewer on iOS. So what about Piwigo [1] then? They allow self-hosting (does it run well on a raspi?) and have a pretty reasonably priced commercial solution (you have to go to the "individual" tab). What else is there? [1] piwigo.org [2] https://piwigo.com/pricing https://piwigo.com/pricing
- izacus 6y agoI've bought a Synology NAS which comes with a builtin Synology Moments application. It's pretty much a self-hosted Google Photos (including web gallery, sharing and mobile app which autobackups directly to your NAS). I still use Google Photos for convenience sake, but having a safe copy owned by myself on harddrives I own by myself is still worthwhile. And setup was very easy - couple of clicks on web UI to enable the package and installing the mobile app.
- mysterydip 6y agoWhich model did you get? I've thought about one for a while, but the prices seem more entry level business than personal.
- izacus 6y agoI used a lowend ds213j for along time but now I've upgraded to 218+ (I think there's now 220 as well?) because I wanted btrfs, hardware transcoding for Plex and ability to run some of my stuff in docker.
- ruph123 6y agoGood idea. Just looked up the „Moments“ app in the iOS app store and consensus seems to be that it is pretty bad and slow (sub 3 star rating).
- xoa 6y ago
- piokoch 6y agoI don't really understand why people complain. First of attracting customers with the low or zero price is kind of standard way of attracting customers. I've never heard people complaining that some shampoo free sample is no longer free or that some discounted item is no longer discounted. Second, another mistake people make is personification of companies. Company is not a human being, it cannot be honest, nice, make promises, etc. Company is a business entity, it just have contract with the users (officially signed or some TOS, like Google has that people agree with). Companies typically reserves the right to change terms of such contracts and it just happened. Some companies might have good PR and make PR driven promises - if someone believes that, it is only that person problem. If someone really thinks that companies support gay community because they "like" gay people, they are wrong. They support gay people only in countries where gay people are accepted and such PR move will bring them popularity (putting six colors rainbow as a company logo background costs companies $0, and they get good, cheap PR in return). If companies really wanted to support gay people they would do all those "gay pride" stuff in countries where gays are sent to jail, but, as one can easily check, they carefully omit those places.
- fraoulitsa 6y agoIt was too good to be true (for ever)
- jermeh 6y agoI don't have much of a problem with Google wanting to charge for photo storage, as services aren't free to run. However, with Google's track record of spontaneously killing services (even paid ones), I'm looking to find alternatives that are less at risk of being rebranded or shut down on a manager's whim. Does anyone have experience with a competing product?
- johnchristopher 6y agoHow likely could GMail follow the same path ?
- minikites 6y agoIt's only going to get more difficult to switch to another email provider as time passes, you should switch now.
- CaptainBern 6y agoI would even go as far as to suggest setting up your email with your own domain. This way switching providers is as easy as just changing a few DNS settings. I've been running that setup for a few years now and it has been flawless. Spam is almost entirely gone, with a catch-all address I can simply sign up to websites with <website name>@mydomain, makes it easy to track down if one of them ends up doing shady things with your mail!
- johnchristopher 6y agoI have a few domain names but I don't know which one I should use to replace my usual firstnameletter.lastname@gmail.com. Should I go for firstname.lastname@hardtochooseamongwhatsleftdomain.com or mail@firstnamelastname.com ?
- CaptainBern 6y agoI personally have a "vanity" domain that spells out my last name (the TLD forms the last two letters). So I just have <firstname>@<domain> for personal stuff, and then for example git@<my domain> for github, spotify@<my domain> for spotify etc. The mail@firstnamelastname.com approach seems like a clean way to do it as well.
- Sosh101 6y agoThat would decimate google user accounts if it happened.
- 6y ago
- jqpabc123 6y agoFirst and foremost, Google is an advertising company. And this is reflected in everything they do. The idea that Google is a technology company --- is really just another marketing facade. Their technology is only as good as it has to be to further their advertising objectives. Any product they offer is subject to the whims of their advertising needs. All of which leads to the current state of affairs. You wouldn't expect "free" technology or data storage from a restaurant. And you shouldn't expect it from an ad company either. Any disappointment here is really a reflection of unrealistic expectations and naive acceptance of Google's marketing hype.
- Taek 6y agoIsn't this the classic pattern followed by almost all startups? Create a product that loses money and attracts users. Sustain it with VC money until you have a large number of users who are highly dependent on the product. Then switch to profitability, knowing you can do so because you've already hit critical mass and users aren't easily able to switch away. You don't have to like it, but it is legal and it is how many of the most celebrated startups got to where they are today.
- nomad543 6y agoOwning slaves was also "legal" some point in time.
- rtkwe 6y agoGoogle isn't a startup any more and hasn't been for a decade or more at this point. Google Photos was only launched in 2015 far out of the scrappy startup stage and into the area of using their success in other areas to crush competition in a new area by willingly losing money while starving the competition.
- Igelau 6y agoThere will probably be a handful of users who go bananas with rage and start blindly uploading everything they can before the cutoff. I have a feeling there will be some very interesting stuff accidentally being uploaded in the coming months, and we will probably hear about some it.
- hankchinaski 6y agoprobably going to migrate to icloud soon
- sarasasa28 6y agoIf they don't charge you for the product, then, you are the product, eh? Well, guys, does anyone use amazon prime photos? Is it as good at google photos? My main usage was automatically backing up all my phone pics.
- nomad543 6y agoIt's not about entitlement, it's not about wanting something for free as some other replies are trying to justify this kind of practice. It's about how offering something for free destroys genuine competition. Once the competition is destroyed, users will have no other option but to pay the price Google is asking. Users can't search for a better price or better service because there is no other competing business that can offer a better anything.
- iliketosleep 6y agoYour comment hits the nail on the head. It's anticompetitive behaviour, and in the end consumers don't have a choice because competitors have gone out of business. If it's a valuable product or service (e.g. lifetime memories), consumers are then held to ransom. It has been going on for years, and it will continue to get worse until we rearch some kind of tipping point where people start to really care.
- zzbzq 6y agoIt didn't work though, there's like 1 billion ways to store photos. At the end of the day DropBox started as just a wrapper around Amazon S3 buckets, it's not exactly a high barrier to entry.
- chronofar 6y agoThe storage is a small piece of the Google Photos offering. Good luck searching for a persons name or "sunsets", getting time hops, stylized suggestions and collages, or easy group sharing on a trip in solutions like DropBox or S3, especially for the average user. That's the weirdest thing to me about this conversation. People act like storage is the main thing Google Photos does, but that's not by a long shot the most compelling piece of the offering.
- chronofar 6y agoThis seems specious. Others absolutely have competing options, Apple's photos the most notable (since it's by the other Phone OS maker). None as good as Google photos imo (at least not that I've tried), but on release there was nothing as good as Google Photos either. And now that they are charging, presumably there's space for competition to arise again no? Just as if they started charging at the outset?
- blisterpeanuts 6y agoI pay $99/year for the consumer 2TB plan. It lets us store full size stills and videos. To put it in perspective, one family night out at a seafood restaurant costs about that much, and a couple of frappuccinos a month can add up to that much in a year. Then again, a 5TB hard drive is, what? $119 or less? It's hard to figure the sweet spot, but the convenience factor is huge.
- thehappypm 6y agoYeah, and Google Photos you can easily access no-nonsense from your phone, your friend’s house, multiple laptops, etc.
- blisterpeanuts 6y agoThat's the main thing for me, and probably for the majority of people who don't want to or can't set up a home storage system with backups and redundancy etc.
- SamuelAdams 6y agoI got married recently. We really enjoyed the shared photo album feature of Google Photos. Apple has this too, but Google Photos is platform-agnostic. It works on Android, iOS, and the plain old web. We were able to set up a shared photo album, text a link to friends, and they could add all their photos to the album pretty easily. Trying to organize that using other apps would be difficult. Apple requires everyone to have an iCloud / iOS device. Other services require someone to sign up / download an app. Since most people have a google account already Google Photos was very easy for this use case.
- emaildanwilson 6y agoI think it's terrible that the next step up from that plan is $999/year up to 20TB. Consumers shouldn't have to pay in orders of magnitude for storage they "could" but are not yet consuming. I'm not sure what I'll do when I hit the 2TB limit.
- 6y ago
- foxhop 6y agoNows the time to purchase that Dell r720xd and install TrueNAS on it. The software is mature and the hardware is up for a steal pre-owned. https://twitter.com/RussellBal/status/1323778579273043968 https://twitter.com/RussellBal/status/1323778579273043968
- nickcw 6y agoI can tell you from personal experience that r720xd are VERY LOUD and use a huge amount of power 200-300W! If that isn't a problem then go for it, they last forever in my experience.
- foxhop 6y agoYou must have had a issue with your hardware or firmware because my r720xd is quiet. Only loud during post boot test.
- KoftaBob 6y agoCalifornia's unfair practices act says: "It is unlawful for any person engaged in business within this State to sell any article or product at less than the cost thereof to such vendor or to give away any article or product, for the purpose of injuring competitors or destroying competition." Could a case be made that Google did this with their free unlimited storage move?
- wmeredith 6y ago> Could a case be made that Google did this with their free unlimited storage move? Among other things Google has done, yes. (IANAL)
- juloi 6y agoWe need to get used to paying for online services from the start. It would change the dynamic of dumping hundreds of millions of dollars in VC money into startups that only focus on user growth. If smaller startups were profitable, we would have more alternatives for all the basic online needs we now have like storage, and search products for digital content we cherish. Offering free products at a loss for years to steal users from competitors would not be as good a strategy as it now is.
- imvetri 6y agoHaha. Cost savings from management at Google.
- asah 6y agowhat I want to know: why would storage prices increase when storage costs continue to plummet (and network ingress costs remain cheap due to asymmetric use vs serving) spitballing... - gphotos was free when google wanted the data for training algorithms. They now have the data they need and it's become a cost center. Given Android integration, that amount is substantial. - the paid plans are underperforming, and this seemed like an easy way to catch up. - the overall google "fleet" is facing capacity pressure across storage-intensive apps (e.g. gmail ?) and photos seemed like the easier solution, i.e. start charging and people will use less storage. - mobile device camera resolution may be growing faster than storage costs are decreasing ? - online photo hosting also requires serving the images (not just "backup") and users can't wrap their heads around a split charge for serving ? - online storage costs are now dominated by the cost of power, real estate etc ? but as drives double in capacity, their power/etc costs should be halved as well... thoughts?
- wmeredith 6y agoMuch like when you pay for a good meal, the majority of what you're paying for is labor. Hardware is cheap. IT departments are not.
- asah 6y agoRight. But storage costs are per-GB, so as disks get denser then all costs drop per GB.
- mattlondon 6y agoI expect that the issue is more likely that 99.999% of people are using the service are doing so "normally", but the 0.001% who are not are using disproportionally large amounts of data/abusing the service at the detriment of others etc. I have no doubt that there are people out there doing shady/dodgy things to abuse the free "unlimited" storage and pumping in huge huge huge amounts of data or have hacked up some crazy system to use it as some sort of hacked-up rsync, using it for bulk image classification instead of spin up their own service etc etc etc Charging a relatively small fee to high users while leaving it free for the vast majority seems like a fair way of trying to slow down abuse to me - I think they did the same thing with the Google Maps APIs a year or two ago (i.e. turn down the free tier significantly and make it cost a small-but-not-zero amount to stop people abusing it) I currently pay £1.33 a month for more storage - so like half a starbucks coffee. Seems fair to me considering how many years of photos I have in there.
- swiley 6y agoI wish they would do this with gmail. My dmarc reports say I'm authenticated and aligned but mail from my server goes to spam even though I'm the only user on the domain and never send automated or group emails. Relaying it via icloud fails everything but gets delivered to people's mailbox. WTF?
- hestefisk 6y agoIn short, if it’s free, there’s usually a catch...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- hikerclimb 6y agoDon’t forget they also mined your photos to improve their algorithms
- nickcw 6y agoWhile we are talking about Google Photos, I'm sure people will be thinking of how to extract their photos from the service. I'd love to be able to recommend rclone here, but the Google API is just too limited for downloading photos: https://rclone.org/googlephotos/#limitations https://rclone.org/googlephotos/#limitations Stripping the metadata and the resolution changes is unacceptable. (The resolution change only seems to affect videos for me but others have seen it on photos too). I know Google engineers will be reading this - please fix the Google Photos API so it can be used to upload and download full quality, unaltered images or videos. I'm certainly getting the feeling that the Google Photos Web app (which is excellent) isn't eating the dog food of the Google Photos API. In the mean time use Google takeout to extract your images.
- subpixel 6y agoI'm still bitter that they removed the Google Drive to Google Photos sync. That allowed me to organize my photos on disk, and control what lived in Google Photos. Without that setup Google Photos is like a vast sea of images that you can only scroll by date. There is no filtering, etc. so if you want to edit your Google Photos, you're limited to in-browser selection and album creation which is of little use with tens of thousands of images.
- Simulacra 6y agoI moved everything over to Amazon Prime which is now the unlimited free storage choice for photos. When they bring the hammer down, I'll move it to the next website of the day.