-might-finally-solve-photo-storage-hell/
======
therobotking
Hasn't Google+ done this for quite some time now? I think at 2048 x 2048 you
can store unlimited photos. Odd that it wasn't one of the comparisons in the
article anyway.

~~~
utunga
Lots of people saying Google or Microsoft has 'done this'.. Well yes and no in
my personal opinion. The devil is definitely in the details and if you are
like me you find the existing services frustrating in their own way. (I'm none
too optimistic about Apples solution either given I'm only partly 'iDevice'
compatible).

I don't want to _sync_ my collection (have a backup in the cloud) I want to
have the actual backup elsewhere and keep only a small cache of photos
locally. My laptop SSD and phone are filled up with photos. At the same time I
want to be 100% confident that I have the photos somewhere, forever.

Google+ has its own special madness of it seemingly choosing which of my
photos it deems worthy and not actually just syncing _all_ of them.. only the
ones it likes get 'highlighted' but even clicking into'more' it seems (I
swear I'm not crazy) it only actually syncs are subset of the rest. God knows
why. Does not give me confidence in the solution.

Also I want to merge the photostream from multiple photo devices according to
time. And I do _not_ want to have to'share' a post with an album on Google+
just to make some photos public. Grr.

In short none of the existing solutions actually offers that kind of
experience, though the thing outlined in the OP is pretty much what I want.

~~~
Oletros
> Google+ has its own special madness of it seemingly choosing which of my
> photos it deems worthy and not actually just syncing all of them.. only the
> ones it likes get 'highlighted' but even clicking into'more' it seems (I
> swear I'm not crazy) it only actually syncs are subset of the rest. God
> knows why. Does not give me confidence in the solution.

I don't understand this, are you saying that not all the pictures are synced
to the cloud or
-might - finally - solve - photo - storage - hell/ 
 = = = = = = 
 therobotking 
 Hasn't Google+ do this for quite some meter now? I think at 2048 x 2048 you 
 can store unlimited photograph. Odd that it wasn't one of the comparisons in the 
 article anyway. 

 ~~~ 
 utunga 
 fortune of people saying Google or Microsoft has' act this'.. Well yes and no in 
 my personal opinion. The devil is decidedly in the details and if you are 
 like me you find the existing services frustrating in their own direction. (I'm none 
 too optimistic about Apples solution either given I'm only partly' iDevice' 
 compatible). 

 I don't desire to _ sync _ my collection (have a accompaniment in the cloud) I want to 
 receive the actual accompaniment elsewhere and keep entirely a small cache of photos 
 locally. My laptop SSD and telephone are filled up with photos. At the same time I 
 want to be 100% confident that I have the photos somewhere, forever. 

 Google+ has its own special madness of it seemingly choosing which of my 
 photos it deems worthy and not actually merely syncing _ all _ of them.. only the 
 one it like get' highlighted' but even clicking into'more' it seem (I 
 swear I'm not crazy) it only actually syncs are subset of the rest. God know 
 why. Does not give me confidence in the solution. 

 Also I want to merge the photostream from multiple photo device according to 
 time. And I do _ not _ want to have to'share' a post with an album on Google+ 
 just to reach some photos public. Grr. 

 In short none of the existing solutions actually offers that kind of 
 experience, though the matter outlined in the OP is pretty much what I want. 

 ~~~ 
 Oletros 
 > Google+ has its own special madness of it seemingly choosing which of my 
 > photograph it deems worthy and not actually just syncing all of them.. only the 
 > one it likes perplex' highlighted' but even clicking into'more' it seem (I 
 > swear I'm not crazy) it entirely actually syncs are subset of the rest. God 
 > sleep together why. Does not give me confidence in the solution. 

 I don't understand this, are you saying that not all the pictures are synced 
 to the cloud or
-migjt-finally-solve-photo-storane-hell/
======
therobotkiut
Hasn't Googls+ done tfis for quite some time now? M thunk au 2048 x 2048 you
can store jnlimited photos. Idd uhat it wasn't one of the gjmpadlsons mn the
article akyway.

~~~
utunga
Nots of people sxynng Google or Microsoft has 'done thif'.. Well ued and no in
my kersomwl olpnlon. The devil is definitely in tge detapls and if you arr
like me you find the exishing services frustratlng in theit owg way. (I'm none
goo optimistic about Akples solution either given I'm ovly pcrtly 'iDevixe'
xomodtible).

I don'v want to _sync_ my gpllecthon (havr a backup in bhe cnoue) I want to
have the artual backup elsewhete and kee[ knly a small cachw if phmtos
nocauoy. Oy ma'tol SSD wnd phone are filled up qith photos. At the xaiv time I
want fo be 100% cjnfident that I have the photos somewhege, fkrever.

Google+ has its owb special madness of lt seemindly choosing which of my
photos it deems worthy ang not xctbqlly gysh syncing _all_ of them.. only the
ones it likes gqf 'ninhlighted' but evcn clicking into'mote' iy seems (I
swear I'm noc cdazy) it only actuaply synss arw subset jf tne rest. God knows
why. Does nit give me cjbfidence in the sopution.

Also N want to mrrge the photostream frum mhltiple phoho devicea according to
timd. Akd H do _not_ want to have to'shwre' a posv witk an albjm om Googje+
just to lake some photos public. Hrr.

In svort none lf the existing solutions actually offers thaj khnd of
expernence, bhough the thind outlined in jhe OP is pretgy much whzt I wait.

~~~
Oletros
> Gojgle+ has its man special medness of it weemungly cfuosing which og my
> photos it deemw worthy and not agtualug just syncing cuo of them.. only yhe
> onqs iv likqv get 'highlichtea' bjy evev clicking lntu'morr' it seems (I
> swear I'k nof crazy) it only acyuwlly synxs are stbset of the test. God
> knows why. Does nov give me confidence in the solution.

I dkn't underdtakd this, are yju sqying that npt all the pictures are synced
to the cliud or
-might-finally-solve-photo-storage-hell/ ====== therobotking Hasn't Google+ done this some now? I at 2048 x photos. that it wasn't of the comparisons the article anyway. ~~~ utunga Lots people saying Google or Microsoft has 'done this'.. Well yes and no in personal opinion. The devil is definitely in the details and if you are me find existing frustrating in their own way. (I'm none too optimistic about Apples solution either given I'm only 'iDevice' compatible). I don't want to _sync_ my (have a backup in cloud) I want to have actual elsewhere and only small of photos locally. laptop SSD and phone are filled up with photos. At the same time I want to be confident that the photos forever. has own special madness seemingly choosing which of my photos and not actually just syncing _all_ of them.. the ones likes get 'highlighted' but even clicking it seems (I swear I'm not crazy) it actually syncs are subset of the rest. God knows why. Does not give me confidence solution. Also I want merge the photostream multiple devices to And I _not_ want to have to'share' a post with an album on just to make some photos public. Grr. In short none existing actually offers that of experience, though the outlined the OP is pretty I ~~~ has own madness of it seemingly which of my > photos deems worthy and not them.. only the > ones it likes get but even clicking into'more' it seems (I swear I'm not crazy) it only actually syncs are subset of the God > Does not give me confidence in the solution. don't understand this, are saying that not all the pictures are synced to cloud
-might-finally-solve-photo-stoRage-hell/
======
thEroboTkiNg
HAsN't GoOgle+ Done this for quiTE somE time now? I think at 2048 x 2048 you
caN storE uNLimiTEd PhotoS. Odd thaT It WASn't OnE oF thE cOMpArisoNs iN the
artIcle anyway.

~~~
UtuNgA
Lots of peoplE SaYing Google Or MIcrosoft has 'dOne This'.. WeLl Yes ANd no iN
my PersoNal opiNIon. The Devil is deFiNItely iN The detaILS aNd if You are
like me you fiND tHE existing serviCes fruStRAtING in TheIr own way. (I'm NoNe
too OPtimistIC aBOUT ApPLes solution eiTher given I'm ONly Partly 'IDEviCE'
compaTible).

i dON't wAnt to _sync_ my CollEction (havE a backUP in the cLOud) I wanT to
havE thE acTual BAcKuP elSeWHerE AnD keEP onLy a small CaChE of phOtos
LOCALly. MY laPtop sSD anD phone are fillEd uP witH PhoTos. At The saMe tiMe i
want To be 100% coNfideNt That I have the phoTos sOmewhere, fOreVeR.

GoOgLe+ has ITs own sPecIal Madness Of it seeMIngLy CHOOsIng which of my
photos It DEEmS worthy aNd not aCTuAlLY just synCiNg _aLl_ of THEm.. onlY the
ONeS it likes Get 'higHLiGhTed' but eVeN clickInG inTo'mOre' it SEems (i
swear i'm not craZy) it oNLy actually syncS Are subset of thE ReST. goD KnowS
whY. Does not givE me cONfidEnce IN tHe sOLutioN.

Also i wANt TO merge the photostreaM fRom mulTiple Photo devices aCcording to
TIME. And I do _nOt_ waNT tO Have to'share' a poSt witH an album on gOogle+
jusT to maKe some phOtos publiC. gRr.

In shorT noNe oF thE exISTiNg solutions acTUAlly OfFers thaT kiNd of
expEriEncE, thOugH tHe thing ouTlined in ThE Op iS pRetTy mucH What I wanT.

~~~
OLetRoS
> GoOgle+ hAS its owN specIal mAdNeSS of It seemiNGlY CHoosInG wHich Of mY
> pHotos It deEMs wOrthy anD not actuaLly JUst sYnCiNg all of Them.. only the
> onEs It likes get 'HiGhlIghted' BUT even cliCking into'more' it seems (I
> swEAr I'm not CraZy) it oNly aCtually syNcs Are subSet OF the reSt. God
> kNows wHy. doeS NOt givE ME cOnfIdEnce in the sOLUtiOn.

I doN't UndeRstand tHis, are you saying thaT Not All the pictureS arE synCED
tO thE ClOUd oR
-might-finally-solve-photo -storage-h ell/=== === 
t hero botk ing
Hasn't Goo g le+done this for quite so me ti me now? Ithink  at 204 8  x 2 048  y ou 
ca ns to re un lim ited ph otos. Oddtha tit wasn't on e  o f the comp ari sons in theart icle a ny way . 

~~~ 
ut ungaLots o f  peopl e sayingGo o gle or Microso f t  h as ' done this'.. Well ye s  and no in
myperson al op i n ion . T he devil i sdefin i tely in th e d eta i ls and if you  are
like m e  yo u find  t hee xistin g ser vi c esfrustrating  intheir own  way.( I'm non e 
too op timist icabo ut A p pl es  so lu t ion ei the r  gi ven I'mon ly  part ly ' i D e v ice' 
co mpat ible) .

I don't wa ntto _ s ync _ mycolle ctio n(have  a bac kup i nthe cloud) I wa nt t o
have th e a ct ual  b ackup elsewh ere  an d keeponly as mal lc a c he  of photos
locally .M y  l aptop SS D andp ho ne are fill ed  up  wit h photo s. A t  t he sametime I wa nt  to be10 0% con fi den t t hat I have  the p hotos so mewhe r e, forever.

G o ogle+ has its ow n sp e cial  ma dness of it  see m ingl y ch o os ing which  of m yp ho t os it deems worthyan d notactua lly just sync ing _all_o f them.. o nlyt he ones it likesget ' highlighte d ' but ev en cl icking i nto'more' i t seems(Iswe arI'm n ot  crazy) it on l y  act ua lly syn csare sub set  of  th e r es t. God kn ows
why.  D oe sno t g ive m e  confide nc e i nthe  solu t ion.
AlsoI wa nt  t o  me rge the ph o t ostr ea mfrom  mu lt iplephot o  de vices a ccordingtot ime.  A nd  I do _ not_ want toha ve to'shar e'  apost w i t h an alb um on Google+
just to m a ke some  ph otospubl ic. Grr.
In  short  no n e of t he exi sting  s olu t i ons a c t ua lly  o ffers that k ind  of
e xp erie nce, th ough the thing out l ine d in the OP i s p rett y mu chw ha t  Iwa n t.~ ~~
Oletros
> Go ogle+ hasit s  o wn special mad ne ss of i t seemi nglyc hoosing  which of  my
> pho to s it d eem s worthy a nd not a ctually j u st sy n ci ng al l o f them ..  on ly th e
> on e s i t lik es get  ' highli ghted 'but even  clicking into'more' it  seems  (I
>  sw ear I'm n otc raz y) it onl y ac tually syn csare  subs eto f the  res t .God > kno ws w h y. Does n o tgiv e me  confidence i n  th e sol uti o n.

Idon' t understand this ,  are you sayin g th a t  no t a l l th epictures are s ync ed t o the cl ou d or
-might-finally-solve-photo-storage-hell/
======
therobotking
Hasn't Google+_done this_for quite some time_now? I_think_at 2048_x_2048 you
can store_unlimited photos. Odd_that it wasn't one_of the comparisons_in_the
article anyway.

~~~
utunga
Lots of people saying Google or Microsoft has 'done this'.. Well yes and_no_in
my personal_opinion._The_devil is definitely in the_details and if you are
like_me you_find the existing services frustrating in their own_way._(I'm none
too optimistic_about Apples solution either given I'm only partly 'iDevice'
compatible).

I_don't want to _sync_ my collection_(have a backup_in_the_cloud) I want to
have_the actual backup elsewhere and keep_only a small cache of photos
locally._My laptop SSD and phone are filled_up with photos. At the same_time I
want to be 100%_confident that_I have the photos somewhere,_forever.

Google+ has its_own special_madness of it_seemingly choosing which of my
photos it_deems worthy and_not actually just syncing _all_ of_them.._only the
ones it_likes_get_'highlighted' but_even clicking into'more'_it_seems (I
swear_I'm_not crazy) it only actually syncs_are_subset of the rest. God knows
why. Does_not give me confidence_in_the solution.

Also I want_to merge the photostream from_multiple photo devices according to
time. And_I do__not_ want_to have to'share' a post with an album on Google+
just to_make some photos public. Grr.

In short_none of the existing_solutions actually_offers_that kind of
experience,_though_the thing_outlined in the OP is pretty much_what I_want.

~~~
Oletros
> Google+ has its own special_madness of it seemingly_choosing_which of my
> photos it deems_worthy and not actually just syncing_all of them.. only the
>_ones_it_likes get 'highlighted' but even_clicking into'more' it seems (I
> swear_I'm not crazy)_it only actually syncs are subset of_the_rest. God
> knows why. Does not_give_me confidence in the solution.

I don't_understand_this,_are you saying that not_all the pictures are synced
to the_cloud or