The easiest time to offer an incredible deal is before everybody depends on it.
Google Photos provides a clean example.
When Google launched the standalone Photos service in May 2015, one of its headline features was free unlimited storage for photos and videos uploaded under its High Quality setting. Google described the product as a new home for people’s photo libraries and promoted unlimited High Quality storage as a reason users would no longer have to worry about where to keep their snapshots. See Google’s 2015 launch announcement and its later 2015 product recap.
For years, that was an unusually generous subsidy.
Then the terms changed.
The unlimited offer ended for new uploads
In November 2020, Google announced that beginning June 1, 2021, new photos and videos uploaded in High Quality would count against the 15 GB of storage included with a Google Account or against additional storage purchased through Google One. Existing High Quality uploads made before the deadline were grandfathered and did not suddenly consume the quota. See Google’s storage-policy announcement.
Google said the change was necessary to keep up with growing demand and build the service for the future. At the time, it said Google Photos held more than 4 trillion photos and was receiving 28 billion new photos and videos each week.
Those facts matter because they prevent a lazy conclusion.
This was not evidence that Google secretly planned in 2015 to trap users and charge them later.
It is a documented example of a highly subsidized platform benefit being reduced after enormous adoption.
Dependence changes the practical effect of a price change
A storage service is not like a coupon for one sandwich.
Its usefulness accumulates.
People upload years of family photos. Automatic backup becomes a habit. Search indexes the library. Albums and shared links are created. Phones are configured around the service. Other local copies may be neglected because the cloud copy feels permanent.
By the time the economic terms change, the user is not evaluating a fresh product from zero.
They are evaluating the cost of moving an existing archive and changing an established workflow.
That is platform dependence.
Not every subsidy withdrawal is enshittification
A company can legitimately discover that an unlimited offer is economically unsustainable.
Storage costs money. Demand grows. Products change.
A responsible analysis therefore separates three questions:
- What were the original terms?
- What changed, and when?
- What switching costs had users accumulated by then?
The answer should come from documented terms and practical effects, not from pretending every price increase proves bad faith.
That distinction is important for the new section, The Enshittification Machine — Platforms That Rot After Winning.
The interesting mechanism is not simply that a service gets more expensive.
It is that platforms can spend aggressively to make adoption irresistible while users are still free to choose, then recover more value later when leaving has become harder.
The subsidy helps build the dependence.
The dependence changes what happens when the subsidy disappears.