I replaced Google Photos with Amazon Photos. Here's the good and bad 51%
By Andrew Grush0%
7/6/2026, 3:00:01 AM
Topics: Android Apps, Mobile
BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Framing Effect, and Availability Heuristic, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 22.4% saturation with 167 hits. Analysis detected 1,477 faulty-reasoning hits from 744 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 50.5% and a BS Rank of 51% (10,888 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 50.30% of the article peer group.
I’ve been using Google Photos as my primary photo and backup app for a little over a decade now, largely because I was a Pixel user for many years and became accustomed to it.
I’ve always felt the app gets the job done and that its backups work well, so I’ve never really considered using anything else.
That said, Amazon gave its own Photo app a major overhaul earlier this year, and, as a Prime subscriber, I was curious how it compared.
After about two weeks with Amazon Photos, I find that it works well enough as an alternative.
It certainly has some advantages over Google Photos, but it’s not without its flaws either.
What I love about Amazon Photos
With Google Photos, compressed images are now the default, even if that wasn’t always the case.
While it’s possible to store uncompressed photos, you have to enable the option.
Those with a free or basic storage tier might also find that these larger images eat up their allotment relatively fast.
In contrast, Amazon Photos gives you unlimited, uncompressed photos if you are a Prime member.
This means you never have to deal with compressed images, which makes it a better option for backing up important photos.
There’s also RAW support, which is great for those who prefer manual editing and want a bit more control over their images.
I also really love the Family Vault feature, which basically lets my wife, daughter, and me pool our favorite full-resolution photos into one place for easy, private sharing.
Beyond that, the layout itself was functional enough.
If Google Photos didn’t exist and I weren’t a stubborn creature who hates change?
I could see myself learning to love Amazon Photos.
Nonetheless, I find myself still craving Google’s take on the situation.
What I still prefer about Google Photos
As much as I appreciate the Family Vault and the option to store full-resolution photos, including RAW, the biggest turn-off for me is Amazon Photos’ layout.
The new Amazon curated carousel is an upgrade over the older grid layout, but I still found it a bit clunkier to quickly find what I was looking for.
That said, there is a natural language search feature that some users are being invited to use, which greatly improves the experience.
Despite these improvements, I find Google Photos much easier to navigate.
Its search works very well, and the layout makes sense.
I’m also very used to the app, and if it isn’t broke, why fix it?
I find Google Photos much easier to navigate.
Google Photos also stands out for its editing capabilities.
While both apps offer basic and AI-powered editing tools, I’ve found Google’s tools easier to use.
For example, I was trying to remove background objects from a photo, and while it was possible to do it with Amazon Photos, it took a few tries to get it exactly right.
As an Amazon Prime user, I get unlimited photo storage, which sounds great until you realize you only get a paltry 5GB of general cloud storage.
Those without Prime will find that they’re restricted even further to just 5GB of data, split between photos and data.
In contrast, Google Photos gives you 15GB of Google One storage that can be used across a variety of Google services with relatively cheap upgrade packs for those who need more space.
The bottom line is that Google Photos remains the stronger choice for those who are only interested in the free tier.
Amazon Photos vs.
Google Photos: Will I stay or go?
As both an Amazon Prime user and someone with additional paid Google One storage, the answer to this question is honestly probably that I’ll continue to use both services to some degree.
I plan to continue using Amazon Photos for storing my most important photos in full resolution, but for video and less critical photos, I’ll probably stick to Google Photos.
Honestly, more backups are never a bad thing.
The answer is completely different for those who only have Amazon Prime and are hesitant to shell out for Google One storage.
In that case, Amazon Photos is an excellent value.
Lastly, for people sticking to free tiers, Google Photos remains the better pick.
The biggest takeaway is that Amazon Photos is a solid alternative to Google Photos, but individual preferences and ecosystem dedication are the real deciding factors here.
Speakers
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.