I have some Chromecast enabled speakers. They used to work great through Google Home, but at some point they stopped being able to sync.
Expensive and quality speakers that are basically bricks at this point.
Moments in Chromecast's history
151–160 of 609 posts
Re: Moments in Chromecast's history
#152So they are ending Chromecast, and also just launched the "Google TV Streamer" which seems to do the same thing, but "faster, more premium" whatever that means. Seems to be a reason to charge people more for the same thing but slap the AI label all over it. But that's just first impressions. Edit: and apparently the TV Streamer thing is twice the price of the Chromecast.
Same thing + "AI" We're going to be seeing a lot of this in the next year or two.
How long until a Coca-Cola ends up in the Star Trek episode you're streaming?
Re: Moments in Chromecast's history
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or their internal fights / incentives to release new things instead of maintaining them. The chat mess with Google Talk, Hangouts, Meet, Duo, etc. was quite sad to watch because Talk was a great product.
When hangouts was a singular app for all chat/sms (and google voice even), etc was peak power user to me... loved it. Downhill since. The sale of Domains was also massive imo. No reason for half of this and their internal incentivization needs dramatic revision.
Hangouts was a shadow of the Google Talk
Re: Moments in Chromecast's history
#154What reasonably priced alternatives are there for streaming from a phone/laptop to a screen via HDMI port? Ideally a portable solution that I can use when traveling and staying in hotels or AirBnBs (as I can currently do with my Chromecast unless the hotel WiFi has an annoying sign-in process). Even more ideally, something that's free/open-source and can be guaranteed not to collect and send data to third parties.
We use a Roku, which we found out yesterday supports AirPlay from an iPad. It's an old model though, not sure if the newer ones do.
Re: Moments in Chromecast's history
#155So they are ending Chromecast, and also just launched the "Google TV Streamer" which seems to do the same thing, but "faster, more premium" whatever that means. Seems to be a reason to charge people more for the same thing but slap the AI label all over it. But that's just first impressions. Edit: and apparently the TV Streamer thing is twice the price of the Chromecast.
I think this can actually compete with, and might be better than, the nvidia shield pro. Since 2019, I don't think we've had such a device (last I checked). The "best devices" lineup has been the nvidia shield pro, Roku ultra, and Apple tv 4k, with Roku being the cheapest at $99. If you don't care about decoding support for all the different video formats, HDR10, dolby xy and z, etc., then these sorts of devices migh…
The oen thing no device currently has that the shield does that I'd need to see to replace mine is support for HD audio codecs. I play blu-ray rips on my shield through my Jellyfin server and it supports bitstreaming DTS-HD Master Audio and Dolby TrueHD without any decoding on the streaming device.
The Shield is literally the only streaming device on the market that I'm aware of that does this. Without it, I wouldn't get the Atmos/DTS:X information passed on to my receiver when watching blu-ray rips.
Re: Moments in Chromecast's history
#156They also announced Google Streamer, which is just Google Chromecast but more expensive I guess, and also with the Nest technology for smart home stuff, which they also killed iirc. I have to say, I don't really see this product strategy as being good, or working. Google's product is just a mess, they are nearing Microsoft levels of incoherence. When you compare Google with Apple, it's such a night and day experience…
I agree with your second paragraph for a lot of reasons and product lines of theirs. But -- I decided a while ago to bite the bullet and go whole hog on using Google everything for my personal life (for better or worse). The decision was either to avoid them entirely or resign and buy into the ecosystem. I have a Pixel, my home uses Nest, I use their cloud storage personally, their AI, etc. FWIW it is a better experi…
I wouldn't do that with a company that could at any moment being forced split into pieces for being a monopoly.
Re: Moments in Chromecast's history
#157So they are ending Chromecast, and also just launched the "Google TV Streamer" which seems to do the same thing, but "faster, more premium" whatever that means. Seems to be a reason to charge people more for the same thing but slap the AI label all over it. But that's just first impressions. Edit: and apparently the TV Streamer thing is twice the price of the Chromecast.
For clarity: the discussion here is about the Chromecast hardware product, the little HDMI stick. Chromecast the protocol remains supported pervasively via Google and third party products (many/most TVs take it natively, for instance). It just didn't have a home, no one wants to buy something that's already pre-installed. Ours comes out once every few months on vacation, for example.
Re: Moments in Chromecast's history
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
For reference, an Apple TV 4K costs $129.
And that can run games on par with last-gen consoles (below PS4, but significantly above Switch level in terms of raw GFLOPs)! At their original price point, Chromecasts were pretty great, but why on earth would I pay the same as an Apple TV for something containing an SoC from 2021? I wasn't able to find reliable numbers, but performance seems to be lower by 1-2 orders of magnitude.
Does the Apple TV work well without an iPhone? I worry it'll be missing half the features. With the Chromecast I can use my phone as a remote, whether that's iOS or Android, for example.
Re: Moments in Chromecast's history
#159So they are ending Chromecast, and also just launched the "Google TV Streamer" which seems to do the same thing, but "faster, more premium" whatever that means. Seems to be a reason to charge people more for the same thing but slap the AI label all over it. But that's just first impressions. Edit: and apparently the TV Streamer thing is twice the price of the Chromecast.
"Premium" in general means "more expensive," right?
It's precisely $50 premiumer than chromecast.
Re: Moments in Chromecast's history
#160Damnit. I'm so tired of buying Google products only to have them cancelled. I literally just bought chromecasts for my entire home less than 6 months ago. That's it. I'm NEVER buying another google device again.
What difference does this announcement make to you? I am still using a 2013 Chromecast for some purposes. It does all the things it originally did, even though "support" for it ended a while back.
What if stops working tomorrow?