4 ms·

I am curious why they aren't automatically migrating all existing user content from "+Photos" to the new "Photos" service? Seems like it would be an easy win.

jeffgreco 11y ago
I'm not sure they aren't. All of my Google+ photos wound up in Google Photos without any work on my part, other than maybe actually accessing photos.google.com.
- blintzing 11y ago
  Isn't it funny that we're even having this conversation? That Google can offer two products, differentiated by a single character (Google+ Photos and Google Photos), with few obvious indicators as to which I should use? It's confusing to me, but trying to explain it to my mom is absolutely impossible. I wonder whether the average user even knows there's a difference between the two. It's a perfect example of unnecessary redundancy.
  - aiiane 11y ago
    Why else do you think we're turning down the old one? :)
  - aesthetics1 11y ago
    I really feel like it is just to cleanse it of the connection to Google+. The product should have been an evolution of Google+ Photos, but they are clearly trying to de-couple services from Google+. Look at the Inbox vs Gmail experiment for example. While not tied to Google+, Inbox runs parallel to Gmail and accesses the same things. Just a different window dressing. I'm sure many at Google want to see Inbox take over Gmail at some point. This is one of the reasons I doubt we ever see a Material Design Gmail. I think they'll run with it until Inbox is "ready".
    - snogglethorpe 11y ago
      Gmail and Inbox are very different. The latter is not a replacement for the former, which many many people depend on, so the only way Gmail is going away is if Inbox evolves to be it...
    - pablo-massa 11y ago
      I think that the strategy there was make a new product (Inbox) to test how to reinvent Gmail. Gmail needs a redesign but have a very large user base to take the risk of make mistakes. With Inbox they are free to innovate and try to fix the email problem without carrying a giant on they shoulders. I think even Google don't know yet what's is going to do after.
      - aesthetics1 11y ago
        Precisely my point!
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > Isn't it funny that we're even having this conversation? That Google can offer two products, differentiated by a single character (Google+ Photos and Google Photos), with few obvious indicators as to which I should use? Google Photos was announced May 2015, explicitly as the future of what had been Google+ Photos. It has been clear since then that that's what would be supported going forward, and then Google+ Photos was deprecated legacy.
    - blintzing 11y ago
      How many grandmas (or even casual Google users) knew that though? Do they read Google's blog? (Also, not to be picky, but I see no mention of Google+ Photos (let alone its status as "deprecated legacy") on the announcement blog post: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/picture-this-fresh-approach-to-photos.html http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/picture-this-fresh-ap...)
  - jpatokal 11y ago
    For the average user, there is no difference, all that's happening is that "Google* Photos" is moving to a new domain and getting a bit of a facelift.
- richdougherty 11y ago
  Glad to hear it. The announcement sort of suggests that photos are automatically migrated: https://plus.google.com/+googleplus/posts/d1XubVAZ5hV https://plus.google.com/+googleplus/posts/d1XubVAZ5hV Don’t worry, all your photos and videos will still be saved and available after you switch to the new, stand-alone Google Photos app.
aiiane 11y ago
Any photos that were in G+ Photos are now in Google Photos.
ChrisClark 11y ago
They are. It's really just a renaming of the service and putting it on it's own domain.
gd2 11y ago
this is confusing. I'm not seeing any photos that need to be manually transferred, but I don't like the uncertainty.

jeffgreco 11y ago

I'm not sure they aren't. All of my Google+ photos wound up in Google Photos without any work on my part, other than maybe actually accessing photos.google.com.

blintzing 11y ago
Isn't it funny that we're even having this conversation? That Google can offer two products, differentiated by a single character (Google+ Photos and Google Photos), with few obvious indicators as to which I should use? It's confusing to me, but trying to explain it to my mom is absolutely impossible. I wonder whether the average user even knows there's a difference between the two. It's a perfect example of unnecessary redundancy.
- aiiane 11y ago
  Why else do you think we're turning down the old one? :)
- aesthetics1 11y ago
  I really feel like it is just to cleanse it of the connection to Google+. The product should have been an evolution of Google+ Photos, but they are clearly trying to de-couple services from Google+. Look at the Inbox vs Gmail experiment for example. While not tied to Google+, Inbox runs parallel to Gmail and accesses the same things. Just a different window dressing. I'm sure many at Google want to see Inbox take over Gmail at some point. This is one of the reasons I doubt we ever see a Material Design Gmail. I think they'll run with it until Inbox is "ready".
  - snogglethorpe 11y ago
    Gmail and Inbox are very different. The latter is not a replacement for the former, which many many people depend on, so the only way Gmail is going away is if Inbox evolves to be it...
  - pablo-massa 11y ago
    I think that the strategy there was make a new product (Inbox) to test how to reinvent Gmail. Gmail needs a redesign but have a very large user base to take the risk of make mistakes. With Inbox they are free to innovate and try to fix the email problem without carrying a giant on they shoulders. I think even Google don't know yet what's is going to do after.
    - aesthetics1 11y ago
      Precisely my point!
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > Isn't it funny that we're even having this conversation? That Google can offer two products, differentiated by a single character (Google+ Photos and Google Photos), with few obvious indicators as to which I should use? Google Photos was announced May 2015, explicitly as the future of what had been Google+ Photos. It has been clear since then that that's what would be supported going forward, and then Google+ Photos was deprecated legacy.
  - blintzing 11y ago
    How many grandmas (or even casual Google users) knew that though? Do they read Google's blog? (Also, not to be picky, but I see no mention of Google+ Photos (let alone its status as "deprecated legacy") on the announcement blog post: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/picture-this-fresh-approach-to-photos.html http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/picture-this-fresh-ap...)
- jpatokal 11y ago
  For the average user, there is no difference, all that's happening is that "Google* Photos" is moving to a new domain and getting a bit of a facelift.
richdougherty 11y ago
Glad to hear it. The announcement sort of suggests that photos are automatically migrated: https://plus.google.com/+googleplus/posts/d1XubVAZ5hV https://plus.google.com/+googleplus/posts/d1XubVAZ5hV Don’t worry, all your photos and videos will still be saved and available after you switch to the new, stand-alone Google Photos app.

aiiane 11y ago

Any photos that were in G+ Photos are now in Google Photos.

ChrisClark 11y ago

They are. It's really just a renaming of the service and putting it on it's own domain.

gd2 11y ago

this is confusing. I'm not seeing any photos that need to be manually transferred, but I don't like the uncertainty.