Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Chromecast

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 326 posts

Re: Google Chromecast

#241

Post by tolmasky »

chockablock wrote: post #236
tolmasky wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes I know, but: 1. The app is terrible. It takes forever to connect and the remote is harder to use than the real remote (swipe up to simulate pressing up, ugh). Typing on the phone is also frustrating when the realtime search results show up on the TV, it should all just be on the phone! 2. The remote app shows how Apple completely misses the point: the remote app is designed to be secondary to the TV. You're still…

> You're still looking at the TV while fiddling with the phone. The experience should be completely on your phone. But the people sitting with you also get to see the search results come up, and together you can decide what previews to watch, etc. This is how it works in my household, and wouldn't work as well if the phone was where all the UI action is, with the TV solely a dumb display.

The TV doesn't have to be blank while you do this. You could be searching on the phone and seeing results (best for the searcher), and the TV could solely show results (as opposed to half the screen being taken up by a ridiculous keyboard). Best of both worlds.

Re: Google Chromecast

#242

Post by etler »

pwthornton wrote: post #20
jcampbell1 wrote: post #13

> 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.

Well this is disappointing.

If your TV is capable of powering via HDMI it doesn't require a power adapter. You can't really blame them for that if the TV is out of date.

Re: Google Chromecast

#243

Post by est »

spankalee wrote: post #220
mahyarm wrote: post #217

They should make a cheaper audio only version for the speakers in your bedroom, etc. Kind of like the airport express. Maybe one with just a stereo jack and one with the same ports as the apple TV.

It doesn't even have to be cheaper, just have audio out.

S/PDIF for 5.1 surround!

Re: Google Chromecast

#245

Post by BHSPitMonkey »

dz0ny wrote: post #233
amanne wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it using Miracast internally? Will it work with Windows 8.1 which has Miracast support? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UXXNLlmz0A http://www.ubergizmo.com/2013/06/windows-8-1-supports-miraca... I hope they work with standards instead of creating proprietary and incompatible protocols.

It is using open standards upnp+rest api+websockets. The mirroring part is done with opus and vp9. Miracast on the other hand is drm(big players only) over drm(restricted content) over drm(it will only work with closed source software). Miracast will only live in heads of Balmer worshipers and maniacs, who love to to create long power point presentations with lots of bullet points.

Do you realize that Miracast has been Android's screen sharing mechanism since 4.2?

http://developer.android.com/about/versions/jelly-bean.html

Re: Google Chromecast

#246

Post by adrusi »

crazygringo wrote: post #192
tolmasky wrote: post #165

This is exactly what I've been wanting the Apple TV to be for ages. The only thing Apple TV is actually good for is Airplay. There doesn't need to be an OS or a UI for the Apple TV: your phone or tablet will be a better experience for typing and searching for content every time. Its a fool's errand to try to design a UI for a TV that isn't dreadfully painful to use: no one ever wants to interact with something 10 fee…

Wi-fi isn't good enough. I can barely get AirPlay to stream music reliably ten feet away for half an hour (oh no! somebody in the next apartment turned on their microwave!), I can't imagine video being even remotely reliable, and certainly not at decent quality. However, Netflix etc. work fine over wi-fi, because they're downloading and buffering the compressed stream itself, and then feeding that via the HDMI port t…

It would seem that you, like me, have a shit airplay receiver. Airplay should have nothing to do with distance, if you have a wifi connection, you're fine. And if you can stream hd video from the internet over wifi (ie: youtube), then you can stream it to another device on your network using the same connection.

Now if that device habitually drops the connections, or doesn't support video, it's a problem with the device, not the technology.

Re: Google Chromecast

#247

Post by umeshunni »

marcamillion wrote: post #97

This is cool....the only thing that is a bit annoying is the fact that the audio won't be 5.1, it will likely be stereo. I mean, for YouTube videos it doesn't matter. But if you are streaming a movie or something, then that may be an annoyance. But that could just be me. This is assuming that you have a digital audio source plugged directly into your receiver ofcourse, as opposed to your TV.

Does the docs say that the audio is only stereo? Is that a product limitation or an HDMI limitation?

Re: Google Chromecast

#248

Post by MichaelGG »

dz0ny wrote: post #233
amanne wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it using Miracast internally? Will it work with Windows 8.1 which has Miracast support? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UXXNLlmz0A http://www.ubergizmo.com/2013/06/windows-8-1-supports-miraca... I hope they work with standards instead of creating proprietary and incompatible protocols.

It is using open standards upnp+rest api+websockets. The mirroring part is done with opus and vp9. Miracast on the other hand is drm(big players only) over drm(restricted content) over drm(it will only work with closed source software). Miracast will only live in heads of Balmer worshipers and maniacs, who love to to create long power point presentations with lots of bullet points.

The DRM in Miracast is pretty much the same as the stuff sent over HDMI. Wouldn't surprise me if the Chromecast requires HDCP like Apple TV does.

Also, if your assertions are correct, please update the Wikipedia page, which states that "At present time, Miracast Source is mainly active on Android platforms." which seems to conflict with "only ... Balmer worshipers".

Re: Google Chromecast

#249

Post by asterix9 »

dz0ny wrote: post #233
amanne wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it using Miracast internally? Will it work with Windows 8.1 which has Miracast support? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UXXNLlmz0A http://www.ubergizmo.com/2013/06/windows-8-1-supports-miraca... I hope they work with standards instead of creating proprietary and incompatible protocols.

It is using open standards upnp+rest api+websockets. The mirroring part is done with opus and vp9. Miracast on the other hand is drm(big players only) over drm(restricted content) over drm(it will only work with closed source software). Miracast will only live in heads of Balmer worshipers and maniacs, who love to to create long power point presentations with lots of bullet points.

>Miracast on the other hand is drm(big players only) over drm(restricted content) over drm(it will only work with closed source software).Miracast will only live in heads of Balmer worshipers and maniacs, who love to to create long power point presentations with lots of bullet points.

Huh what? Not sure if you're not trolling but from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracast :

> It was created by the Wi-Fi Alliance and billed as an open alternative to Apple's AirPlay Mirroring. It allows users to, for example, echo display from a phone or tablet made by Company A onto a TV made by Company B,

..

>On 29 October 2012, Google announced that Android version 4.2 (updated version of Jelly Bean) will support the Miracast wireless display standard, and by default will have integrated features for it.[11] As of January 8, 2013, the LG Nexus 4 and Sony's Xperia Z, ZL, T and V officially support the function,[12][13] as does HTC One and Samsung in its Galaxy S III and Galaxy Note II under the moniker AllShare Cast. The Galaxy S4 uses Samsung Link for its implementation.[14]

>Microsoft also added support for Miracast in Windows 8.1, and announced this in June 2013. This functionality first became available in the Windows 8.1 Preview, and is available on hardware with supported Miracast drivers from hardware (GPU) manufacturers such as those listed above.

Looks like you should be applauding Microsoft here, not lambasting them.

Re: Google Chromecast

#250

Post by noamsml »

jscheel wrote: post #128

I'm confused. Can it grab and process the stream itself? So, if I pull up netflix on my phone, start a video, then force close netflix, will it still be playing?

Playback is cloud-to-device, not device-to-device.
Post reply on HN