111–120 of 326 posts
Chromecast is not available in your country. I live in Canada. Apple seems to be able to make this stuff work, why can't anyone else?
I know how you feel. Considering this thing will be sold at BestBuy, and we have BestBuy in Canada, why can't we get this thing day one?
Okay maybe this is really obvious, but how do I tell a device with no input which wifi network to connect to and what the password for it is?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It says the Chromebook Pixel works. I wonder what it is about the Pixel specifically that allows it to work. I imagine a Linux port isn't that far off, but unfortunately I don't have any windows machines left in my house.
[deleted]
Tab casting is restricted to 1366x768?
If it works as advertised, this could be disruptive. They made it dead simple to stream content from any device to your TV. So anyone can use it, particularly the older generation. Potential for number of apps that could be developed is endless. Apparently, Washington Post is building an app on top of it ( http://t.co/dTWesNOoIC ). So possibilities are endless. And good news - another step towards making cable TV irr…
That's not really new. Apple TV lets you do the same thing with AirPlay, and it works great.
Seems like a decent device, and the fact that it works with non-Apple hardware is obviously useful for people who don't have Apple households, but I don't think it's disruptive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed! The one thing that worries me about this is underpowered hardware. If they made the UI not suck (read: not take seconds to respond to button presses) then I'll be all over this. It'll end up being what Google TV should have been.
It sounds like it has no UI. It simply shows video streams.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It uses a USB cable that is indeed not shown in the marketing images, but it is mentioned in the product description.
I think it can be connected like this with the TV's USB port: http://cdn3.sbnation.com/entry_photo_images/8651907/2013-07-...
I think people aren't understanding how awesome this technology is: 1. Every time someone shows you a YouTube video, you spend 10% of your time watching it and the other 90% thinking about that one video you know of that's funnier. With Chromecast, you can queue that sucker up for nexties right from your own phone, without interrupting the video that's currently playing. 2. Chromecast does NOT use the resources of th…
> 3. If it can run Chrome, it can cast to Chromecast. That's probably the long-term goal, but currently the list of "Can run Chrome" overlaps, but does not subsume, the list of "can cast to Chromecast". Particularly, Linux and ChromeOS devices can run Chrome, but (with the exception of the Chromebook Pixel) cannot cast to Chromecast.
I did notice during the Presser that the Chrome browser had two cast icons; one in the bottom right he keyed in on, and one where normal extensions go.
> Power cord required (not shown). What the hell is this about a "power cord". The specs and details are totally not clear. Is this not powered by HDMI? If it requires a power cord, these images are deceptive marketing.
Lots of Smart TVs also have USB -- how much power does this draw? Could it not have a USB power-slurper that you could plug into the USB port of the TV fr power?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 3. If it can run Chrome, it can cast to Chromecast. That's probably the long-term goal, but currently the list of "Can run Chrome" overlaps, but does not subsume, the list of "can cast to Chromecast". Particularly, Linux and ChromeOS devices can run Chrome, but (with the exception of the Chromebook Pixel) cannot cast to Chromecast.
I'll be interested to see how this all works once I get my devices. Because its not relying on the processing power of the device in question, I wonder why it wouldn't work on any device running Chrome. I did notice during the Presser that the Chrome browser had two cast icons; one in the bottom right he keyed in on, and one where normal extensions go.
As others have pointed out on the thread, the limiting factor is probably the need to encode video on the sending device for the casting Chrome tabs feature, which probably is going to be an issue on low-end Chromebooks (but, I would imagine, would also be a feature on low-end devices running Windows Chrome.)
It may be that it relies on Chrome features that don't exist on low-end chromebooks (and, if it involves licensed technology, it may be something that isn't licensed for low-end Chromebooks.)
