[blintzing]

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.

[jpatokal]

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.

[dragonwriter]

> 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]

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-ap...)

[aesthetics1]

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".

[_noqo]

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]

Precisely my point!

[snogglethorpe]

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...

[aiiane]

Why else do you think we're turning down the old one? :)