I must be missing something. I have zero issues searching for anything I've tagged or Locations in ipl. How can google or anyone else be better much less really any different? I'd imagine they are all on par in that regard.
It's not about tags and locations. Those are easy. Google Photos' search capability is far better. Can you search for 'Ocean' or 'shoes' or 'swimming' in IPL? Nope. That's one of the things which makes Google photos so amazing.
Eh not as important as who's in my photos. Or where they where taken. What do you use the ability to search for what's in the background for? Seriously I've not found a reason to so I'm curios?
And I'd search based on where things happened so you may say ocean I may say Pier and we'll both get to the pier on the ocean but mine is a bit more specific anyway...
Granted it appears it's coming to ipl now too so...
If you want to have uncompressed quality you must pay in both services actually. So this is not an argument.Hi,
what do you think that it's better?
iCloud Photo or Google Photo?
I see that google photo offer unlimited space, but it resize and reduce the quality of the photo (recompress).
Your idea?
The main argument is PRIVACY.
Google Photos are better if you don't value privacy and want your photos analyzed by Google AI bots of all kinds.
Wait what? Haven't you seen the WWDC? There is intelligent scene detection.It's not about tags and locations. Those are easy. Google Photos' search capability is far better. Can you search for 'Ocean' or 'shoes' or 'swimming' in IPL? Nope. That's one of the things which makes Google photos so amazing.
Actully, you can. See above.Not sure what you mean. In ipl you can't currently search for something like 'pier' unless you tagged the photo with that word. In GP you can.
Not sure what you mean. In ipl you can't currently search for something like 'pier' unless you tagged the photo with that word. In GP you can.
And it works offline whereas with Google Photos you need to upload it to Google servers first.It's coming and was shown off...
Edit... As the poster above just said.
And it works offline whereas with Google Photos you need to upload it to Google servers first.
So Google's solution is bandwidth and time consuming.
Saying that to use a Google product one must not value privacy, which is basically what you're saying, is a bit of a stretch. Google is not sharing your photos. Is Apple's approach more private? Yes. But if you trust Google with your email or anything else, than there is no reason not to trust them with your photos. If you already don't trust them, you're clearly not going to trust them with your photos.
The main argument is PRIVACY.
Google Photos are better if you don't value privacy and want your photos analyzed by Google AI bots of all kinds.