New Google Photos ad riffs on struggles of 16GB iPhone users

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 69
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 2,991moderator
    Samsung Galaxy S7 32GB, $672 at Verizon.
    add Google storage for all the photos you want to store: FREE
    Two years later, when you can no longer update to a new OS...
      Galaxy S9, maybe 64GB, another $600 at Verizon, after S7 trade-in.
    After two more years, sell S9 on eBay for $100

    Total cost of ownership for 4 years of Samsung Galaxy: About $1100
    And for that you get four years of the Android ecosystem and glitches

    Apple iPhone 7 128GB, $750 at Verizon or direct from Apple.
     Add $1/month for 50GB of iCloud storage to back up your most important stuff
    Enjoy your iPhone for four years, getting an iOS update after each year of ownership.
    Sell four year old iPhone on eBay for $100

    Total cost of ownership for 4 years of iPhone: About $800

    That's the reality of the iPhone versus a high-end Andriod.
    lostkiwipscooter63Deelronmontrosemacs
  • Reply 22 of 69
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,449member
    Users of Google Photos give the company a perpetual, world-wide, royalty-free license to use their photos for any purpose, including marketing. If/when users "delete" their photos from Google's cloud and discontinue using the service, the company still retains the right to use the photos for their own purposes and will likely maintain the photos. Face recognition technology is already quite good. Place recognition (especially with GPS EXIF data) and other forms of recognition are improving. By using Google Photos, even for a short time, you provide Google with more data that can and will be used in ever more sophisticated ways to track and market to you and everyone else.

    (Because AppleInsider fails to mention the above, long-known short-coming to the service, it makes me wonder if Google paid AI to post the article.)

    Use of Pokemon Go is another way for Google to map the world for free.
    edited August 2016 lostkiwipscooter63caliDeelron
  • Reply 23 of 69
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,823member
    The reality is Apple needs to boost the base storage. End of story. 
    Let me guess that people here will disagree until Apple does and then it will be crickets (see increasing RAM to 2GB).

    John Gruber posted this on his site:

    http://daringfireball.net/linked/2016/08/08/google-photos-sick-burn
    GOOGLE PHOTOS ‘FREE UP SPACE’ COMMERCIAL 

    Do you smell smoke? That’s the aroma of a sick burn wafting out of Cupertino. This Google Photos commercial is running during the Olympics, and it absolutely nails Apple right where they deserve to be nailed. This commercial is going to turn millions of people with 16 GB iPhones into Google Photos users. Running out of space is a real problem that real people face — and once storage gets tight, it will remain tight until you get a new phone.


    edited August 2016
  • Reply 24 of 69
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,278member
    cpsro said:
    Users of Google Photos give the company a perpetual, world-wide, royalty-free license to use their photos for any purpose, including marketing. If/when users "delete" their photos from Google's cloud and discontinue using the service, the company still retains the right to use the photos for their own purposes and will likely maintain the photos. Face recognition technology is already quite good. Place recognition (especially with GPS EXIF data) and other forms of recognition are improving. By using Google Photos, even for a short time, you provide Google with more data that can and will be used in ever more sophisticated ways to track and market to you and everyone else.

    (Because AppleInsider fails to mention the above, long-known short-coming to the service, it makes me wonder if Google paid AI to post the article.)

    Use of Pokemon Go is another way for Google to map the world for free.
    Google and Apple have in general the same wording when it comes to the Cloud services. Your should read and compare to confirm what I said is true.
    Those permissions you seem so concerned about are needed to supply the user features that Cloud services offer whether it's Dropbox, Apple, Google or Microsoft.

     As Google expressly stated, your photos are yours and remain yours alone, completely contrary to what you would like people to think.  They don't belong to Google and never have. To quote:
    "... Your Content in our Services
    Some of our Services (for example Google Photos) allow you to upload, submit, store, send or receive content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours..."

    The rumors that Google was supposedly going to use your Google Photos for their own purposes was FUD, plain and simple. You don't help readers by perpetuating a myth. 
    edited August 2016 singularity
  • Reply 25 of 69
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 2,991moderator
    gatorguy said:
    cpsro said:
    Users of Google Photos give the company a perpetual, world-wide, royalty-free license to use their photos for any purpose, including marketing. If/when users "delete" their photos from Google's cloud and discontinue using the service, the company still retains the right to use the photos for their own purposes and will likely maintain the photos. Face recognition technology is already quite good. Place recognition (especially with GPS EXIF data) and other forms of recognition are improving. By using Google Photos, even for a short time, you provide Google with more data that can and will be used in ever more sophisticated ways to track and market to you and everyone else.

    (Because AppleInsider fails to mention the above, long-known short-coming to the service, it makes me wonder if Google paid AI to post the article.)

    Use of Pokemon Go is another way for Google to map the world for free.
    Google and Apple have in general the same wording when it comes to the Cloud services. Your should read and compare to confirm what I said is true.
    Those permissions you seem so concerned about are needed to supply the user features that Cloud services offer whether it's Dropbox, Apple, Google or Microsoft.

     As Google expressly stated, your photos are yours and remain yours alone, completely contrary to what you would like people to think.  They don't belong to Google and never have. To quote:
    "... Your Content in our Services
    Some of our Services (for example Google Photos) allow you to upload, submit, store, send or receive content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours..."

    The rumors that Google was supposedly going to use your Google Photos for their own purposes was FUD, plain and simple. You don't help readers by perpetuating a myth. 
    "You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content."

    does not negate the point the previous poster made.   His point was clear; that you assign Google rights to use those photos in any manner they please, even as you retain ownership.  That's similar to you assigning non-exclusive rights to utilize a patented invention, in perpetuity, even though you retain ownership and can assign those same rights to others.  It's not the same as saying Google isn't going to use your photos for its own purposes, because you have indeed agreed that they can do just that.  You don't help readers in attempting to conflate the issues under discussion.
    edited August 2016 pscooter63
  • Reply 26 of 69
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 8,428member
    I'm not a bum and I don't use any EBT cards, so I just pay 99 cents a month to Apple.

    I value my privacy and my personal information. Most people do not.
  • Reply 27 of 69
    cpsro said:
    Users of Google Photos give the company a perpetual, world-wide, royalty-free license to use their photos for any purpose, including marketing. If/when users "delete" their photos from Google's cloud and discontinue using the service, the company still retains the right to use the photos for their own purposes and will likely maintain the photos. Face recognition technology is already quite good. Place recognition (especially with GPS EXIF data) and other forms of recognition are improving. By using Google Photos, even for a short time, you provide Google with more data that can and will be used in ever more sophisticated ways to track and market to you and everyone else.

    (Because AppleInsider fails to mention the above, long-known short-coming to the service, it makes me wonder if Google paid AI to post the article.)

    Use of Pokemon Go is another way for Google to map the world for free.
    This is nonsense and just FUD:

    Google's terms of service for user-created content are here:
    https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/

    "When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing you have added to Google Maps). Some Services may offer you ways to access and remove content that has been provided to that Service. Also, in some of our Services, there are terms or settings that narrow the scope of our use of the content submitted in those Services. Make sure you have the necessary rights to grant us this license for any content that you submit to our Services.

    Here are Apple's:
    http://www.apple.com/legal/internet-services/icloud/en/terms.html

    "Except for material we may license to you, Apple does not claim ownership of the materials and/or Content you submit or make available on the Service. However, by submitting or posting such Content on areas of the Service that are accessible by the public or other users with whom you consent to share such Content, you grant Apple a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Service solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available, without any compensation or obligation to you. You agree that any Content submitted or posted by you shall be your sole responsibility, shall not infringe or violate the rights of any other party or violate any laws, contribute to or encourage infringing or otherwise unlawful conduct, or otherwise be obscene, objectionable, or in poor taste. By submitting or posting such Content on areas of the Service that are accessible by the public or other users, you are representing that you are the owner of such material and/or have all necessary rights, licenses, and authorization to distribute it."

    They are extremely similar and cover the mechanics of cloud computing (where files have to be copied and displayed somewhere). The part of the Google license that mentions continuing use after you close account applies only to things like listings yo have added to Google maps - photos for example are deleted and hence no longer displayed.

  • Reply 28 of 69
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,556member
    The reality is Apple needs to boost the base storage. End of story. 
    Let me guess that people here will disagree until Apple does and then it will be crickets (see increasing RAM to 2GB).

    John Gruber posted this on his site:

    http://daringfireball.net/linked/2016/08/08/google-photos-sick-burn


    A pointless argument you're making there. Apple was always going to increase memory, and they will increase it again, and I'd be surprised if you can find anyone who said that they will NEVER increase memory. It's not a question of if they do it; it's when they choose to do it. Did you predict that? No, thought not. 

    It all looks obvious to you and Gruber because you lack the information that Apple has. Cupertino knows precisely how many 16GB phones they're selling, and more importantly, they know precisely what the people who buy them are doing with them. If you don't know that then all you're doing is repeating what every armchair CEO – who also lacks this information – has been saying for years.

    And Apple also knows that when people say 32GB should be the base phone, what they're really saying is that they want a 32GB iPhone for the price of a 16GB iPhone, otherwise they'd just shut up and buy a 32GB iPhone.

    The reason Apple has kept the 16GB phone around is because it's cheap (for an iPhone) and the people who buy it are not trying to use it for anything too sophisticated. I know a couple of people with 16GB iPhones and they have never run out of space. I also know people with 64GB iPhones and they run out space all the time. I don't imagine that's the norm (or maybe it is – only Apple knows for sure), but that's the sort of information that Apple will use when they decide when to increase anything. They certainly won't listen to journalists and forum folk because we don't have the information to tell them anything useful.

    Google made this advert because it reads forums and uses that to come up with an advertising campaign, in much the same way that you read forums and use it to form an opinion. Is it ideal? Not really, but it's better than nothing. It'll get the geeks in an uproar, but what about Apple's real customers, the everyday folk? Well, they'll watch the advert and they'll ask their friends, and they'll probably just buy a 32GB phone if the 16GB is too small for them. They're not idiots y'know. It's only people like yourself who can't stop themselves buying something they know is unsuitable for their needs.



    edited August 2016 radarthekatcaliDeelronpscooter63montrosemacsnolamacguy
  • Reply 29 of 69
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,823member
    Rayz2016 said:
    Let me guess that people here will disagree until Apple does and then it will be crickets (see increasing RAM to 2GB).

    John Gruber posted this on his site:

    http://daringfireball.net/linked/2016/08/08/google-photos-sick-burn


    A pointless argument you're making there. Apple was always going to increase memory, and they will increase it again, and I'd be surprised if you can find anyone who said that they will NEVER increase memory. It's not a question of if they do it; it's when they choose to do it. Did you predict that? No, thought not. 

    It all looks obvious to you and Gruber because you lack the information that Apple has. Cupertino knows precisely how many 16GB phones they're selling, and more importantly, they know precisely what the people who buy them are doing with them. If you don't know that then all you're doing is repeating what every armchair CEO – who also lacks this information – has been saying for years.

    And Apple also knows that when people say 32GB should be the base phone, what they're really saying is that they want a 32GB iPhone for the price of a 16GB iPhone, otherwise they'd just shut up and buy a 32GB iPhone.

    The reason Apple has kept the 16GB phone around is because it's cheap (for an iPhone) and the people who buy it are not trying to use it for anything too sophisticated. I know a couple of people with 16GB iPhones and they have never run out of space. I also know people with 64GB iPhones and they run out space all the time. I don't imagine that's the norm (or maybe it is – only Apple knows for sure), but that's the sort of information that Apple will use when they decide when to increase anything. They certainly won't listen to journalists and forum folk because we don't have the information to tell them anything useful.

    And like you, Google made this advert because it reads forums and uses that to come up with an advertising campaign. Is it ideal? Not really, but it's better than nothing. It'll get the geeks in an uproar, but what about Apple's real customers, the everyday folk? Well believe it or not, they'll probably just buy a 32GB phone if the 16GB is too small for them. They're not idiots y'know.


    Don't ever question anything Apple does because there's a reason for it and they're always the right reasons. :wink: 
    staticx57
  • Reply 30 of 69
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,449member
    This is nonsense and just FUD:

    Google's terms of service for user-created content are here:
    https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/

    "When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing you have added to Google Maps). Some Services may offer you ways to access and remove content that has been provided to that Service. Also, in some of our Services, there are terms or settings that narrow the scope of our use of the content submitted in those Services. Make sure you have the necessary rights to grant us this license for any content that you submit to our Services.

    Here are Apple's:
    http://www.apple.com/legal/internet-services/icloud/en/terms.html

    "Except for material we may license to you, Apple does not claim ownership of the materials and/or Content you submit or make available on the Service. However, by submitting or posting such Content on areas of the Service that are accessible by the public or other users with whom you consent to share such Content, you grant Apple a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Service solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available, without any compensation or obligation to you. You agree that any Content submitted or posted by you shall be your sole responsibility, shall not infringe or violate the rights of any other party or violate any laws, contribute to or encourage infringing or otherwise unlawful conduct, or otherwise be obscene, objectionable, or in poor taste. By submitting or posting such Content on areas of the Service that are accessible by the public or other users, you are representing that you are the owner of such material and/or have all necessary rights, licenses, and authorization to distribute it."

    They are extremely similar and cover the mechanics of cloud computing (where files have to be copied and displayed somewhere). The part of the Google license that mentions continuing use after you close account applies only to things like listings yo have added to Google maps - photos for example are deleted and hence no longer displayed.

    You're delusional, but I don't blame you, because Google lawyers promote this in a carefully crafted document. Google does not limit its perpetual right-to-use to "things like listings." Google would like you to think it does, but nothing in the ToS actually says that, so it doesn't. Apple limits its rights to material the user provides for public access or otherwise shares, and if the user discontinues sharing, the material is no longer covered by Apple's license. Google grabs everythingforever.

    The two ToS documents are actually very dissimilar.
    edited August 2016 Deelronpscooter63montrosemacs
  • Reply 31 of 69
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 2,991moderator
    cpsro said:
    Users of Google Photos give the company a perpetual, world-wide, royalty-free license to use their photos for any purpose, including marketing. If/when users "delete" their photos from Google's cloud and discontinue using the service, the company still retains the right to use the photos for their own purposes and will likely maintain the photos. Face recognition technology is already quite good. Place recognition (especially with GPS EXIF data) and other forms of recognition are improving. By using Google Photos, even for a short time, you provide Google with more data that can and will be used in ever more sophisticated ways to track and market to you and everyone else.

    (Because AppleInsider fails to mention the above, long-known short-coming to the service, it makes me wonder if Google paid AI to post the article.)

    Use of Pokemon Go is another way for Google to map the world for free.
    This is nonsense and just FUD:

    Google's terms of service for user-created content are here:
    https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/

    "When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing you have added to Google Maps). Some Services may offer you ways to access and remove content that has been provided to that Service. Also, in some of our Services, there are terms or settings that narrow the scope of our use of the content submitted in those Services. Make sure you have the necessary rights to grant us this license for any content that you submit to our Services.

    Here are Apple's:
    http://www.apple.com/legal/internet-services/icloud/en/terms.html

    "Except for material we may license to you, Apple does not claim ownership of the materials and/or Content you submit or make available on the Service. However, by submitting or posting such Content on areas of the Service that are accessible by the public or other users with whom you consent to share such Content, you grant Apple a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Service solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available, without any compensation or obligation to you. You agree that any Content submitted or posted by you shall be your sole responsibility, shall not infringe or violate the rights of any other party or violate any laws, contribute to or encourage infringing or otherwise unlawful conduct, or otherwise be obscene, objectionable, or in poor taste. By submitting or posting such Content on areas of the Service that are accessible by the public or other users, you are representing that you are the owner of such material and/or have all necessary rights, licenses, and authorization to distribute it."

    They are extremely similar and cover the mechanics of cloud computing (where files have to be copied and displayed somewhere). The part of the Google license that mentions continuing use after you close account applies only to things like listings yo have added to Google maps - photos for example are deleted and hence no longer displayed.

    You should read more carefully the sections you bolded.  You'll see that's there's a significant difference.  operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones is exactly what people are referring to when they say Google data mines its customers to better target them.  Because THATS WHAT GOOGLE'S SERVICES DO.  Whereas Apple's wording makes clear, solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available.  That means Apple has the right to deal with your data only in order to facilitate the purpose for which you handed them the data, such as to store it as a backup, or to share it with those YOU CONFIGURED YOUR ACCOUNT TO SHARE PHOTOS WITH.  Huge, huge difference in these terms. 
    cpsrocaliDeelronpscooter63montrosemacs
  • Reply 32 of 69
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,278member
    gatorguy said:
    cpsro said:
    Users of Google Photos give the company a perpetual, world-wide, royalty-free license to use their photos for any purpose, including marketing. If/when users "delete" their photos from Google's cloud and discontinue using the service, the company still retains the right to use the photos for their own purposes and will likely maintain the photos. Face recognition technology is already quite good. Place recognition (especially with GPS EXIF data) and other forms of recognition are improving. By using Google Photos, even for a short time, you provide Google with more data that can and will be used in ever more sophisticated ways to track and market to you and everyone else.

    (Because AppleInsider fails to mention the above, long-known short-coming to the service, it makes me wonder if Google paid AI to post the article.)

    Use of Pokemon Go is another way for Google to map the world for free.
    Google and Apple have in general the same wording when it comes to the Cloud services. Your should read and compare to confirm what I said is true.
    Those permissions you seem so concerned about are needed to supply the user features that Cloud services offer whether it's Dropbox, Apple, Google or Microsoft.

     As Google expressly stated, your photos are yours and remain yours alone, completely contrary to what you would like people to think.  They don't belong to Google and never have. To quote:
    "... Your Content in our Services
    Some of our Services (for example Google Photos) allow you to upload, submit, store, send or receive content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours..."

    The rumors that Google was supposedly going to use your Google Photos for their own purposes was FUD, plain and simple. You don't help readers by perpetuating a myth. 
    "You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content."

    does not negate the point the previous poster made.   His point was clear; that you assign Google rights to use those photos in any manner they please, even as you retain ownership.  That's similar to you assigning non-exclusive rights to utilize a patented invention, in perpetuity, even though you retain ownership and can assign those same rights to others.  It's not the same as saying Google isn't going to use your photos for its own purposes, because you have indeed agreed that they can do just that.  You don't help readers in attempting to conflate the issues under discussion.
    More FUD, and I would have assumed you had done enough reading about it to know better. "What belongs to you stays yours", not Google's. But feel free to prove they're lying by simply posting evidence of Google using images that folks put in Google Photos for Google's own uses.  I'll wait. 
    singularity
  • Reply 33 of 69
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,449member
    gatorguy said:
    cpsro said:
    Users of Google Photos give the company a perpetual, world-wide, royalty-free license to use their photos for any purpose, including marketing. If/when users "delete" their photos from Google's cloud and discontinue using the service, the company still retains the right to use the photos for their own purposes and will likely maintain the photos. Face recognition technology is already quite good. Place recognition (especially with GPS EXIF data) and other forms of recognition are improving. By using Google Photos, even for a short time, you provide Google with more data that can and will be used in ever more sophisticated ways to track and market to you and everyone else.

    (Because AppleInsider fails to mention the above, long-known short-coming to the service, it makes me wonder if Google paid AI to post the article.)

    Use of Pokemon Go is another way for Google to map the world for free.
    Google and Apple have in general the same wording when it comes to the Cloud services. Your should read and compare to confirm what I said is true.
    Those permissions you seem so concerned about are needed to supply the user features that Cloud services offer whether it's Dropbox, Apple, Google or Microsoft.

     As Google expressly stated, your photos are yours and remain yours alone, completely contrary to what you would like people to think.  They don't belong to Google and never have. To quote:
    "... Your Content in our Services
    Some of our Services (for example Google Photos) allow you to upload, submit, store, send or receive content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours..."

    The rumors that Google was supposedly going to use your Google Photos for their own purposes was FUD, plain and simple. You don't help readers by perpetuating a myth. 
    I know how to read legal documents. You apparently don't--or choose not to. If it isn't in writing, it doesn't exist--and Google does not specifically limit its usage of user-supplied content. Don't think Google lawyers didn't expend man-years constructing their Terms of Service only to leave some aspects, shall we say, intentionally "vague".
    Acknowledging the user's ownership of content does not preclude or prevent the company from taking a perpetual license to use all of a user's photos, which Google effectively does. In contrast, Apple limits its license to content the user provides for public access or shares.
    edited August 2016 pscooter63radarthekatmontrosemacs
  • Reply 34 of 69
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,556member
    Rayz2016 said:

    A pointless argument you're making there. Apple was always going to increase memory, and they will increase it again, and I'd be surprised if you can find anyone who said that they will NEVER increase memory. It's not a question of if they do it; it's when they choose to do it. Did you predict that? No, thought not. 

    It all looks obvious to you and Gruber because you lack the information that Apple has. Cupertino knows precisely how many 16GB phones they're selling, and more importantly, they know precisely what the people who buy them are doing with them. If you don't know that then all you're doing is repeating what every armchair CEO – who also lacks this information – has been saying for years.

    And Apple also knows that when people say 32GB should be the base phone, what they're really saying is that they want a 32GB iPhone for the price of a 16GB iPhone, otherwise they'd just shut up and buy a 32GB iPhone.

    The reason Apple has kept the 16GB phone around is because it's cheap (for an iPhone) and the people who buy it are not trying to use it for anything too sophisticated. I know a couple of people with 16GB iPhones and they have never run out of space. I also know people with 64GB iPhones and they run out space all the time. I don't imagine that's the norm (or maybe it is – only Apple knows for sure), but that's the sort of information that Apple will use when they decide when to increase anything. They certainly won't listen to journalists and forum folk because we don't have the information to tell them anything useful.

    And like you, Google made this advert because it reads forums and uses that to come up with an advertising campaign. Is it ideal? Not really, but it's better than nothing. It'll get the geeks in an uproar, but what about Apple's real customers, the everyday folk? Well believe it or not, they'll probably just buy a 32GB phone if the 16GB is too small for them. They're not idiots y'know.


    Don't ever question anything Apple does because there's a reason for it and they're always the right reasons. :wink:
    Nope. Don't assume reading stuff in a forum is a good substitute for a strategy backed by relevant data. :wink:
    edited August 2016 nolamacguy
  • Reply 35 of 69
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,278member
    cpsro said:
    gatorguy said:
    cpsro said:
    Users of Google Photos give the company a perpetual, world-wide, royalty-free license to use their photos for any purpose, including marketing. If/when users "delete" their photos from Google's cloud and discontinue using the service, the company still retains the right to use the photos for their own purposes and will likely maintain the photos. Face recognition technology is already quite good. Place recognition (especially with GPS EXIF data) and other forms of recognition are improving. By using Google Photos, even for a short time, you provide Google with more data that can and will be used in ever more sophisticated ways to track and market to you and everyone else.

    (Because AppleInsider fails to mention the above, long-known short-coming to the service, it makes me wonder if Google paid AI to post the article.)

    Use of Pokemon Go is another way for Google to map the world for free.
    Google and Apple have in general the same wording when it comes to the Cloud services. Your should read and compare to confirm what I said is true.
    Those permissions you seem so concerned about are needed to supply the user features that Cloud services offer whether it's Dropbox, Apple, Google or Microsoft.

     As Google expressly stated, your photos are yours and remain yours alone, completely contrary to what you would like people to think.  They don't belong to Google and never have. To quote:
    "... Your Content in our Services
    Some of our Services (for example Google Photos) allow you to upload, submit, store, send or receive content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours..."

    The rumors that Google was supposedly going to use your Google Photos for their own purposes was FUD, plain and simple. You don't help readers by perpetuating a myth. 
    I know how to read legal documents. You apparently don't--or choose not to. If it isn't in writing, it doesn't exist--and Google does not specifically limit its usage of user-supplied content.
    Acknowledging the user's ownership of content does not preclude or prevent the company from taking a perpetual license to use all of a users photos, which it does. Apple limits its license to content the user provides for public access or shares.
    Apparently you and I have very different understanding of  Google's "you retain ownership" and Apple's "We don't claim ownership". Sure sound the same to me but I'll offer you the same challenge sir. It should be very easy to prove Google is using personal and/or privately owned pictures uploaded to Google Photos for their own purposes. After all it's not a new service so those examples of Google using them should be easy to find. Juicy click-bait like that wouldn't be passed up by any tech blog.

    Since it's never happened it's just FUD, some folks spreading "fear uncertainty and doubt" for their own purposes, plain and simple IMHO. 
    singularity
  • Reply 36 of 69
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,556member
    Thinking about it, this actually explains something else about Apple. 

    When it comes to predicting their future sales and earnings (in both directions) Apple's accuracy is uncanny. Not only do they have a wealth of data, but they know how to interpret it.

    The trouble starts when they release a new product. Then they don't have a wealth of data, which is why their supply for a new product always starts off as a bit of a shambles.
    cali
  • Reply 37 of 69
    cpsro said:

    Google's terms of service for user-created content are here:
    https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/

    "When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing you have added to Google Maps). Some Services may offer you ways to access and remove content that has been provided to that Service. Also, in some of our Services, there are terms or settings that narrow the scope of our use of the content submitted in those Services. Make sure you have the necessary rights to grant us this license for any content that you submit to our Services.

    Here are Apple's:
    http://www.apple.com/legal/internet-services/icloud/en/terms.html

    "Except for material we may license to you, Apple does not claim ownership of the materials and/or Content you submit or make available on the Service. However, by submitting or posting such Content on areas of the Service that are accessible by the public or other users with whom you consent to share such Content, you grant Apple a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Service solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available, without any compensation or obligation to you. You agree that any Content submitted or posted by you shall be your sole responsibility, shall not infringe or violate the rights of any other party or violate any laws, contribute to or encourage infringing or otherwise unlawful conduct, or otherwise be obscene, objectionable, or in poor taste. By submitting or posting such Content on areas of the Service that are accessible by the public or other users, you are representing that you are the owner of such material and/or have all necessary rights, licenses, and authorization to distribute it."

    They are extremely similar and cover the mechanics of cloud computing (where files have to be copied and displayed somewhere). The part of the Google license that mentions continuing use after you close account applies only to things like listings yo have added to Google maps - photos for example are deleted and hence no longer displayed.

    You're delusional, but I don't blame you, because Google lawyers promote this in a carefully crafted document. Google does not limit its perpetual right-to-use to "things like listings." Google would like you to think it does, but nothing in the ToS actually says that, so it doesn't. Apple limits its rights to material the user provides for public access or otherwise shares, and if the user discontinues sharing, the material is no longer covered by Apple's license. Google grabs everythingforever.

    The two ToS documents are actually very dissimilar.
    Respectfully disagree.

    You can look at the specific restrictions on what "perpetual" means in the product-specific terms of services:

    https://support.google.com/drive/answer/2733115?hl=en&ref_topic=2428743

    It says in the Google Drive TOS (Photos is really part of that since Google Photos appear as a folder there - emphasis mine):

    "We do not claim ownership in any of your content, including any text, data, information, and files that you upload, share, or store in your Drive account. What our Terms of Service do is enable us to give you the services you want — so if you decide to share a document with someone, or want to open it on a different device, we can provide that functionality.

    To sum it up:

    • You control who can access your files in Drive. We will not share your files and data with others except as described in our Privacy Policy. So, for example:
      • We will not change a Private document into a Public one;
      • We will not use a Private document for marketing or promotional campaigns;
      • We will keep your data only as long as you ask us to keep it.
    • You can take your data with you if you choose to stop using Google Drive."

    Sounds pretty clear to me: they won't keep your files if you cancel your Drive Account. They won't market your files.

    Of course, people have their favorite paranoias which they like to project onto Google. 

    edited August 2016 singularitygatorguy
  • Reply 38 of 69
    calicali Posts: 3,495member
    The reality is Apple needs to boost the base storage. End of story. 
    Let me guess that people here will disagree until Apple does and then it will be crickets (see increasing RAM to 2GB).

    John Gruber posted this on his site:

    http://daringfireball.net/linked/2016/08/08/google-photos-sick-burn

    Doomed!

    I think this ad could backfire and lead to more high GB iPhone sales.

    The fact the ad ends with a knockoff device kinda kills his whole argument and again lead to upgraded iPhone sales.
    edited August 2016
  • Reply 39 of 69
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,449member
    gatorguy said:
    Apparently you and I have very different understanding of  Google's "you retain ownership" and Apple's "We don't claim ownership". Sure sound the same to me but I'll offer you the same challenge sir. It should be very easy to prove Google is using personal and/or privately owned pictures uploaded to Google Photos for their own purposes. After all it's not a new service so those examples of Google using them should be easy to find. Juicy click-bait like that wouldn't be passed up by any tech blog. 

    Since it's never happened it's just FUD, some folks spreading "fear uncertainty and doubt" for their own purposes, plain and simple IMHO. 
    You apparently don't understand that retaining ownership of content can be consistent with the owner granting a license to use the content. Google Maps contains countless user photos. How did that happen? Google's license gives the company great leeway in how it uses user-owned content now and forever.
    radarthekat
  • Reply 40 of 69
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,278member
    cpsro said:
    gatorguy said:
    Apparently you and I have very different understanding of  Google's "you retain ownership" and Apple's "We don't claim ownership". Sure sound the same to me but I'll offer you the same challenge sir. It should be very easy to prove Google is using personal and/or privately owned pictures uploaded to Google Photos for their own purposes. After all it's not a new service so those examples of Google using them should be easy to find. Juicy click-bait like that wouldn't be passed up by any tech blog. 

    Since it's never happened it's just FUD, some folks spreading "fear uncertainty and doubt" for their own purposes, plain and simple IMHO. 
    You apparently don't understand that retaining ownership of content can be consistent with the owner granting a license to use the content. Google Maps contains countless user photos. How did that happen? Google's license gives the company great leeway in how it uses user-owned content now and forever.
    That's quite a stretch in an effort to "prove" something that you can't. Attaching a profile pic connected to a user review on a Google map is not in any way similar. You specifically give Google your profile pic that you yourself chose to represent you on Google+.  Even when you decide to attach a specific picture but don't on't want it used for endorsements or reviews, Google Maps included? Opt out. Eazy-peezy.
    https://support.google.com/plus/answer/3403513?hl=en

    So again where is your evidence that proves Google using user uploaded Google Photos content for Google's personal gain such as marketing? Don't have any? Then it didn't happen. 
    edited August 2016
Sign In or Register to comment.