The Chromecast has a Netflix promotion, and... it’s gone

Google is no longer offering three months of Netflix with the device.

Read the whole story

 

[JPan]

ws3[/url]":1auauao8]

JPan[/url]":1auauao8]Ever since I have seen that it CAN'T duplicate your tablet/computer screen its pretty much dead to me. This is borderline useless and Airplay is much better. Now if Apple would stop trying to box people into their ecosystem. If there was Android Airplay support I would buy an AppleTV in a second.

Face it Apple most households will have mixed electronics, if you try to restrict your stuff to Apple only you will loose out in the end.

Airplay is used to sell Apple hardware, not vice-versa.

From Apple's point of view, if you aren't willing to buy all the pieces from Apple to do Airplay, then you are not supposed to have Airplay.

Totally understand that. And it is fucking stupid. There was a really tiny period of time ( 1-1.5 years) where it looked like they could pull off something like Microsoft style domination. And then Google and Samsung curb stomped that.

The future will be diverse, there will only be a really small amount of Apple only households. And the more they tighten the grip the more people will be put off by the whole thing. I like Apple products and I would buy more if they would play nicely with my non Apple stuff. The refusal to do so is one of the biggest detriments of their products.

 

[JPan]

kgersen[/url]":20h4ghet]

JPan[/url]":20h4ghet]Ever since I have seen that it CAN'T duplicate your tablet/computer screen its pretty much dead to me. This is borderline useless and Airplay is much better. Now if Apple would stop trying to box people into their ecosystem. If there was Android Airplay support I would buy an AppleTV in a second.

Face it Apple most households will have mixed electronics, if you try to restrict your stuff to Apple only you will loose out in the end.

Dead to you not everyone else.

Why is full desktop/tablet mirroring so important when most of our contents are coming from the Web ? Because AirPlay does it so everyone else should do it too ? I don't get the reason.

Desktop/tablet interfaces are made to be displayed on their respective screen size not a big screen. What matters is the content not the interface. if the content is only local you can still 'cast' it on the TV using a Chrome tab. This doesn't work yet from a tablet/phone, it's only on Desktop (Windows/Mac/Linux) but I'm sure new apps will come soon that can do that. Also Chrome on Android/iOS will catch up and have it probably.

Meanwhile you can install the Google Cast extension to Desktop Chrome (https://chrome.google.com/webstore/deta ... cfkmllpafd) and send stuff to your ChromeCast. You can even cast a tab running Chrome Remote Desktop of the same computer and bam :there you go , here is your full desktop mirroring. happy now ?

Yes dead to me not everybody else. But the limits are huge. How do I get my video collection, my iTunes library, my divx or mkv files I store on my tablet or PC over to the TV? Perhaps media that can only be played by something like VLC? No fucking chance. It first needs to be somewhere in the web. Not even the Chrometab thing fixes that. You only can broadcast stuff that is in the internet as far as I understood it. Or lets talk about my picture library that I do not have in the web but in iPhoto?. Or my iTunes music library again not uploaded.

This thing is only useful for people who have moved 95% of their media into the net and stream mostly. And the question is if you want that ( restrictions might be download limits of your ISP, bad internet connections or simply the convenience of having 1000 hours of DVD quality video on a 2.5" external harddrive. Never really understood the appeal of online storage for that. My offline videos do not buffer, fast forward instantly and load in a split second.

I know that this is not the target audience of Google. Google envisions customers who have stored EVERYTHING online on their servers. And this is fine. But I am not one of these customers.You might be. But I think the HUGE limitations have not been mentioned clearly enough. Fair?

 

[JPan]

No Sir. What he is trying to tell you is that you can strem *local* stored files.. via the Chromecast extension. So stuff that is not on a remote server, but on your local PC.. you can stream that through Chrome the browser. That feature of Chromecast, is what currently still only works on desktop and is in beta and still needs to come to mobile.

Then as far as I see it he is wrong.
http://www.theverge.com/2013/7/25/45569 ... -tv-failed

"Unfortunately, Chrome tab projection isn’t really a useful workaround. WebRTC doesn't have the same benefits of low-latency and high-bandwidth that you get with something like AirPlay or even Miracast. In our brief testing, videos streamed over Google Cast had audio sync issues"

"Although, as Chandra says, "there's no restrictions on what can be done" with tab projection when it comes to content restrictions, streaming a Hulu video will not be an enjoyable experience. "

And even if it was fast you can still only project a Chrome browser tab. I fail to see how that helps me with showing an iPhoto library, a local iTunes Playlist or a movie playing in VLC. They do not run in browser tabs or do I completely misunderstand the feature.

In the end it does not look like that:
"Calling streaming local content an "open question," Chandra says "I'm not going to say we're not going to do it." For now, users will need to find a way to get their content into the cloud where either Chrome or an app can access it and stream it. "

So no it doesn't look like Chromecast fixes those problems now and it doesn't look like it will in the future. Its just a really limited device and the marketing doesn't make that clear.

 

[JPan]

See above, Wired had a better experience with Chrome Tab casting and its still in Beta.

And anyways, I really dont see how Google is misleading with the marketing in their ad they do not show people casting their iPhoto or VLC? Its literally loads of Youtube clips, from your phone, tablet or PC, and Chrome tab casting, all of which it can do now.

The fact that it can even do so much local streaming through the browser, and again, cross platform, at $35 is big plus.

Yay a beta feature for PCs only just for the stuff you can drop into the browser. With apparently bad lag and audio problems. Sounds like an awesome feature. This doesn't solve the questions about audio Playlists, photo libraries not in the web and videos that Chrome doesn't play and forget playing a mobile game on the TV. (for example)

To summarize this is a product for cloud media only. And this is fine its Google after all. But they did not make this clear. And finding a crappy workaround doesn't change the basic truth that it is not useful for offline content. And I am sure a lot of people will be disappointed. And if by any chance everybody understood the limitations and it is just me then fine its only dead to me specifically. Fine?

 

[JPan]

kgersen[/url]":2ij32n5u]

JPan[/url]":2ij32n5u]

See above, Wired had a better experience with Chrome Tab casting and its still in Beta.

And anyways, I really dont see how Google is misleading with the marketing in their ad they do not show people casting their iPhoto or VLC? Its literally loads of Youtube clips, from your phone, tablet or PC, and Chrome tab casting, all of which it can do now.

The fact that it can even do so much local streaming through the browser, and again, cross platform, at $35 is big plus.

"

Yay a beta feature for PCs only just for the stuff you can drop into the browser. With apparently bad lag and audio problems. Sounds like an awesome feature. This doesn't solve the questions about audio Playlists, photo libraries not in the web and videos that Chrome doesn't play and forget playing a mobile game on the TV. (for example)

To summarize this is a product for cloud media only. And this is fine its Google after all. But they did not make this clear. And finding a crappy workaround doesn't change the basic truth that it is not useful for offline content. And I am sure a lot of people will be disappointed. And if by any chance everybody understood the limitations and it is just me then fine its only dead to me specifically. Fine?

the tag line on the product ordering page is:

"The easiest way to enjoy online video and music on your TV" that's not CLEAR enough ?!!

source: http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/de ... hromecast/

The press and a lot of media made the error of comparing this to Apple TV and Airplay and DLNA and Miracast and whatever. Google never made such comparison. That's not their goal. They even said they'll keep GoogleTV and add the functionality to it not replace it. big difference.

It's a cloud streaming device with as a BONUS a way to stream local content using Chrome. Nothing more.

If you have tons of local contents you better buy a media player/NAS combo. There are already tons of solutions out there. Some open, some completly closed like the AppleTV/Airplay combo.

It's your choice but don't expect a $35 device to replace a $300 SetTopBox/NAS... that's non sens.

Also the device is 1 day old, the local streaming option is still in beta and you already bashing the thing on features it's not made for... that ridiculous.

An 99$ apple TV or roku can do a lot more. We are not talking about 300$ setop boxes. Airplay is much more powerful the problem is that it is closed. Although this is closed as well up to a point. And no the limitations were not clear. Just because they say it's for online content doesn't mean they should not have offline streaming as well. And I am not bashing it. I am saying it is not for me because it works only (well) with cloud content. Which some of the articles should perhaps mention. That Google doesn't print it on the Web page I understand.

 

[JPan]

RickyP784[/url]":2pyyswko]

JPan[/url]":2pyyswko]

*snip*

So no it doesn't look like Chromecast fixes those problems now and it doesn't look like it will in the future. Its just a really limited device and the marketing doesn't make that clear.

If by "really limited" you mean a device that *initially* only streams Netflix, Youtube, and Google Play Services and mirrors Chrome tabs at launch (oh, wait, Roku only streams Netflix out of those listed), then by all means, feel free STFU and stick to your Apple TV. It's $35 dollars, and they just announced it roughly 36 hours ago; it's not designed to launch Global Thermonuclear War from your living room.

Google built it along with the Chromecast API; other services will come soon. Get your panties out of your crack and lighten up on the hissy fit.

Wow bitchy much? Google fan boys are new to me. I knew apple fan boys and even some Microsoft fan boys weird as that is. But this Google defense force thing is getting weird. Google is a big company they do not need your help. And it's clear that this chrome tab feature is no valid way to stream offline content and this is a 99% cloud only device. Even if you guys dispute that 50 times it doesn't change. What clarifying this has to do with a hiss fit I am not sure. Its ok if you love it despite that. Seriously this thread is getting weird.