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

Moments in Chromecast's history

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 609 posts

Re: Moments in Chromecast's history

#181

Post by wasteduniverse »

jerf wrote: post #134
lxgr wrote: post #24

Wow, even for Google, this seems like an exceptionally well-liked and popular brand name and device to kill. The replacement ("Google TV streamer") seems to be a quite different device – most importantly, one that will be very visible next to a TV, and not out of sight behind it like its predecessor. For anyone not particularly interested in having "AI" in their streaming stick (and this being Google, surely that wil…

I have no idea why they think that "full summaries, reviews and season-by-season breakdowns of content" is even a feature worth mentioning. The going value of that on the current market is $0. Heck, at times it's negative, you have to go out of your way to avoid the info if you don't want it. And there is no way whatsoever that this is happening locally. A $100 device is not spontaneously ingesting video, running spe…

[dead]

Re: Moments in Chromecast's history

#183

Post by no_wizard »

Blot2882 wrote: post #135
Lutger wrote: post #110

We had this coming. Over the years, the various chromecasts in our house are slowly getting worse. I had the sense they are cutting costs on the software and servers powering these devices. Spend way too much on the chromecasts and home devices. I guess they will continue to work for a few years, hopefully. After this, no more google devices for me.

> We had this coming. Over the years, the various chromecasts in our house are slowly getting worse. I had the sense they are cutting costs on the software and servers powering these devices. I can't imagine they will get better. It seems smart devices always crap out after a few years. I am regretting buying my Samsung TV last Fall because it's already slowing down. It takes 5 seconds to load the options menu.

Sometimes I wonder if this is it right here. Internally they think something like this:

Dev 1: “Well we have this backlog of bug reports and issues for Chrimecast”

Dec 2: “Ugh. I don’t want to do maintenance. Acknowledgment of there bugs will be a black mark on my career!”

Dev 1: “Lets re-brand it and close all the bugs. Now those bugs become features and we start with a clean slate!”

Re: Moments in Chromecast's history

#185

Post by qwertox »

> With ambient mode, you can turn an idle TV into a work of art. [...] or create one-of-a-kind screensaver art with generative AI [...]

Assuming a TV consumes 70 Watts, why would they want to encourage using it as a picture frame? Either they care about the environment or they don't.

Re: Moments in Chromecast's history

#187

Post by danvoell »

Lots of shade here. The Chrome served to make dumb tvs smart. It did its job. It changed the world of TVs. We don't use it anymore because TVs are smart out of the box. Google could spend the next 20 years trying to service and repurpose these things or cut technical debt and move onto the next.

Re: Moments in Chromecast's history

#188

Post by imchillyb »

https://killedbygoogle.com/

Can you see my surprised face? Me, too, neither.

Google is a serial murderer of its own parents, siblings, aunts, uncles, and cousins.

There is no product too small, or large, for Google to murder.

It is beyond my ken why any person, organization, company, or government would do business with Google or use Google's products.

You're just biding time for Google to murder your profits.

Re: Moments in Chromecast's history

#189

Post by ilrwbwrkhv »

nextos wrote: post #95
aestetix wrote: post #8

So 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.

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.

Dont forget Allo. Goes to show how much role luck plays in these companies' success and it is so strange that others still copy what Google, Amazon and these companies are doing thinking that they have some sort of management hack or routine which makes them successful but in fact they become successful despite of their bad practices not because of it.

Re: Moments in Chromecast's history

#190

Post by vel0city »

chuckadams wrote: post #99
codepoet80 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Roku has always been pretty great -- simple, straightforward, limited UI clutter (source: have been a user since 2013). However, lately they've been adding more and more suggested/sponsored content to the home screen. Most of these things can be turned off, and even with them on, it doesn't slow down the experience significantly (I'm looking at you, Fire TV) but it is a shame. I suppose they've got to make money some…

Got a Roku stick last year after two FireTV sticks bricked themselves. First thing I noticed was that the volume on the remote can only control Roku devices. Then there’s the ads that are creeping in everywhere, but I admit they do stay out of the way… for now. Going back to AppleTV for my next device. I don’t like how search steers all results through Apple, but I can work around that. Plus I can use it as an exit n…

> First thing I noticed was that the volume on the remote can only control Roku devices.

Rokus can send volume/mute commands through CEC. The volume buttons on my Roku control my home theater receiver, they controlled the volume on a sound bar on a different TV, and they controlled the TV volume.

Post reply on HN