Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple now lets you transfer your iCloud Photos to Google Photos

support.apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 355 posts

Re: Apple now lets you transfer your iCloud Photos to Google Photos

#271

Post by intrasight »

sigjuice wrote: post #136
reaperducer wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like they plan to support migrating to other services at some point but not yet? Considering the fourth word of the second paragraph is "initially," I think you're correct — this is a work in progress. I hope that Apple will eventually allow bulk downloads of iCloud photos to the desktop. Right now you can only do 1,000 at a time, and it took me almost a week to make a local backup of my wife's iCloud photos…

Easy bulk downloads to the desktop (and hopefully to any attached external drive) would give me real peace of mind. Right now, I am a bit nervous with iCloud being the only full copy of my photos. None of my computers have enough storage to hold all my photos. It would be even cooler if my Synology could download all my photos directly from iCloud.

That would be sweet.

I'll mention that with the Synology app, you can have your photos be automatically copied to your Synology. I've been doing that since I got an iPhone, so I don't have the need to download from iCloud. Actually, I don't sync my photos to iCloud since I have my local copy.

Re: Apple now lets you transfer your iCloud Photos to Google Photos

#272

Post by intrasight »

miles wrote: post #34
reaperducer wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like they plan to support migrating to other services at some point but not yet? Considering the fourth word of the second paragraph is "initially," I think you're correct — this is a work in progress. I hope that Apple will eventually allow bulk downloads of iCloud photos to the desktop. Right now you can only do 1,000 at a time, and it took me almost a week to make a local backup of my wife's iCloud photos…

> I hope that Apple will eventually allow bulk downloads of iCloud photos to the desktop. Right now you can only do 1,000 at a time When downloading directly from iCloud.com that's true (and annoying), but you can also bulk download all of the originals via Photos.app (making sure to check "Download Originals to this Mac" rather than "Optimize Mac Storage").

I wonder if you can do this using an AWS instance of a mac. And then move the photos to S3.

Re: Apple now lets you transfer your iCloud Photos to Google Photos

#273

Post by kemayo »

oarsinsync wrote: post #205
azinman2 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, someone (who?) comes out with a standard, and then everyone just freezes capabilities then? Nothing evolves? Or if it does, it does so very unequally? Already in this announcement is the non-transfer of Live Photos because presumably Google doesn't support it. Apparently they also have a 20k per album cap, which at that point you get different behavior than you're expecting. These are just a few examples of where…

> Already in this announcement is the non-transfer of Live Photos because presumably Google doesn't support it. Google Photos definitely supports Live Photos, I've successfully uploaded and shared lots of Live Photos via the Google Photos for iOS app. Which then raises the question of why doesn't the tool support it?

Assuming that they're using the Google Photos API for this, maybe the upload media API calls [1] don't trigger whatever handling is needed for Live Photos? The Google Photos app might be doing something undocumented/unavailable-in-the-public-API that triggers the Live Photo behavior, since a Live Photo is two associated pieces of media.

Or Apple might just not be uploading the videos that accompany the photo for some reason.

[1]: https://developers.google.com/photos/library/guides/upload-m...

Re: Apple now lets you transfer your iCloud Photos to Google Photos

#274

Post by jwagenet »

oarsinsync wrote: post #205
azinman2 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, someone (who?) comes out with a standard, and then everyone just freezes capabilities then? Nothing evolves? Or if it does, it does so very unequally? Already in this announcement is the non-transfer of Live Photos because presumably Google doesn't support it. Apparently they also have a 20k per album cap, which at that point you get different behavior than you're expecting. These are just a few examples of where…

> Already in this announcement is the non-transfer of Live Photos because presumably Google doesn't support it. Google Photos definitely supports Live Photos, I've successfully uploaded and shared lots of Live Photos via the Google Photos for iOS app. Which then raises the question of why doesn't the tool support it?

Just spitballing here: when I copy photos from my iPhone via usb to pc there are two files: the image and a .mov for a Live Photo. My guess is the metadata is lost when exporting to google photos, like usb, so you lose the “Live Photo”.

Re: Apple now lets you transfer your iCloud Photos to Google Photos

#275

Post by chipotle_coyote »

Barrin92 wrote: post #211
puszczyk wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does the Facebook get out of it?

absolutely nothing, it would subject their applications to genuine competition (they could of course still offer their own client) and destroy their walled garden, which is the entire point. The purpose such regulation is to benefit consumers, developers, and the health of the market overall. not Facebook. I assume they would be kicking and screaming.

> it would subject their applications to genuine competition (they could of course still offer their own client) and destroy their walled garden, which is the entire point.

Hmm. At least in the case that the OP was taking about -- third-party Facebook clients -- I don't think it would "destroy their walled garden" any more than third-party Twitter clients did back when those were meaningfully a thing. Standardized APIs aimed at enabling full-featured third-party social network clients wouldn't really contribute to a robust market in competing social networks; they'd just contribute to a robust market in, well, third-party social network clients.

What it seems to me you want is a couple steps beyond data portability, which honestly really isn't enough on its own. What I actually need is a way to import the user's social graph from Facebook or Twitter. That's arguably how Instagram bootstrapped its success initially: if you gave it your Twitter account, it would download all your followers/following info. (And, of course, that's why Twitter shut down that API after that.)

"But doesn't that violate GDPR?" someone is raising their hand to say, and: yes. GDPR as written does help protect privacy, but it's also an incredible boon to social network incumbents: it under it, your social graph can't be treated as your data, because by definition it contains personally identifiable information about all your contacts. For your regulation idea to be meaningful, GDPR and similar privacy regulation around the world would have to be overhauled -- if all the "open API" can do is import/export my personal data sans social graph, it becomes little more than a backup mechanism and a convenient way to fill out registration forms.

Re: Apple now lets you transfer your iCloud Photos to Google Photos

#277

Post by nicoburns »

lxgr wrote: post #230
nicoburns wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah I see. To be honest I feel like paying for storage capacity is a much more reasonable pricing model.

It definitely is more reasonable for Google, and probably many users too. But I always liked the idea of never having to worry about storage space and was willing to pay a premium for it. I doubt that in the end I had more than 100 or 200 Gigabyte stored there, so Google would be a better deal for me even as a fairly heavy user, but I'd be willing to pay that premium for peace of mind. If Backblaze can offer unlimite…

I find it a bit odd that an unlimited plan gives you peace of mind. An unlimited plan is never truly unlimited, and unlike a quota'd plan there is always a very real risk that you'll end up having the rug pulled out from under you.

I pay £2.49/month for 200GB which would cover your usage for cheaper. Or you can 2TB for £7.99 which would mean you'd never have to think about storage.

Re: Apple now lets you transfer your iCloud Photos to Google Photos

#278

Post by airstrike »

etxm wrote: post #261
amelius wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still can't insert a USB drive into an iPad without hassle.

I still can’t download a car.

If anyone's trying to make that a reality, I just want to say I'd much rather download pizza.

Re: Apple now lets you transfer your iCloud Photos to Google Photos

#280

Post by aetherspawn »

amelius wrote: post #250
planb wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you could always do this. Apple seems to go a step further and does this on your behalf. I think that’s newsworthy.

I still can't insert a USB drive into an iPad without hassle.

My friend showed me a sandisk doodad he bought off eBay the other day that had an iPad plug coming off it. I was impressed. So strike that one off.
Post reply on HN