You mean twice the ram (1 gig more than the shield), 4 times the storage (32 gigs), and a better remote (chirping find my remote feature, programmable button, and less shitty volume buttons)?
Yep. Sure sounds worse considering it also supports all the same features of the chromecast 4k and AV1 decoding.
The low-power streaming box is dying. It’s not completely without reason, 4k playback is actually a bit demanding.
We are in a place where the 2017 nVidia Shield is beginning to show its age and that leaves the AppleTV as the only powerful and capable consumer set top box on the market. This new option from Google will at least provide some competition and an option outside of Apple's ecosystem.
I feel the original Chromecast was probably the last truly great original Google product, it was simple, it was inexpensive and it worked - you just plugged it in, joined your network and you were off, there really wasn’t anything like it at the time.
The remote playback control over network patents? I can't see why those patents should be valid, everything there has prior art done in the 80's
What I'm more pissed about is how Google killed Miracast (it's technically still around but Google removed it from default Android and OEMs have to choose to enable it) and how they fought against 3rd party implementations to keep the Chromecast protocol closed.
I see there's ongoing work for a Matter based standard for casting, I really hope that ends up getting broad support. We need something better than DLNA (and Miracast is technically DLNA over WiFi Direct). We need an open casting standard supporting Chromecast-like remote interactive content (the device is essentially a remote controlled web browser)
Chromecast with Google TV made the "simple" casting worse for some apps like Netflix. Instead of it casting directly, it would spawn the Netflix app and make you use the remote to reselect the show you wanted to see.
I feels like they either badly copy (see Gemini) or don’t think about what they’re offering (see Stadia’s busted business model) they’re content to milk the existing services they’ve already got and make them worse by cramming in more ads (see YouTube, Google’s search result pages) and they cut out or dictate the web through their monopolies (see AMP and Chrome) rather than working with other parties to make good products.
They feel like Hooli in Silicon Valley, basically the definition of a fat tech giant who doesn’t do any innovation of their own.
"Yes I know the customer learned that product name and has a good connotation with it, but how about we change the name to something completely different?"
Hi, I'm the project lead on Chromecast and I'm here to talk about what my team's been up to maintaining this popular product
The board: yawn
Hi, I'm the project lead on the new Google TV Streamer that we've just launched, let's look at these exciting new adoption numbers and talk about how we plan to keep this incredible momentum going
The board: Wow! Amazing stuff plz take this large bonus
I knew someone who worked at a really well loved local restaurant. One day a new manager came in and IMMEDIATELY wanted to change the name. According to him, you should change a restaurant's name every 2 years
Why would you ruin the recognition you already have? He was also planning on changing the name to be the exact same as a business down the street. I think he was an idiot
Because the dude comes from a corporate world where everybody's known for stagnation, not quality, so changing the name gets rid of an association with stagnation BUT also gets rid of an association with quality if that's the reputation you've built up and these types can not understand that because they've never worked in a place putting quality first
KDE Plasma Big screen looks promising. Combine it with TV friendly apps like Jellyfin and plasma tube, and it should be pretty competitive and actually receive updates.
Thanks for mentioning KDE Plasma Big Screen it's an interesting attempt. It's written in Qt, like many of the TV UIs today anyway. I need to check it out.
HardKernel makesa a few ODROID models that come with available Android TV builds. Some have the same chipset as the AMLogic on the CCwGTV 4K and they aren't terribly expensive. If I wanted an open source Chromecast replacement I'd go for that.
The Chromecast is a small $35 dongle that goes behind your TV. This new thing is a whole $99 set-top box with an AI integration. They're not really the same product.
It's a different device. Already, the existing google tv workflow is different than the chromecast, which was phone control first. Now, it brings up an app which favors navigation with the remote. If I want a set top box, I'll put a kodi box in...I wanted a dumb dongle which could be controlled from a phone. It's fundamentally a different product.
My hope is that casting decouples as a concept from being a google protocol. Even though Amazon is backing it now, I hope MatterCast can become an open casting standard. My vision is having MatterCast be an installable add-on to Kodi, and then an ultra-light image can be made for super low-end devices supporting audio and video (or both).
Back in the day when streaming was cheap as hell and made sense as all things were on Netflix, having a Home Mini with and a Chromecast was bliss.
I used to have a shortcut for the phrase "I'm so tired", it would start playing Star Trek TNG from Netflix on the Chromecast monitor and it just werked. Saved me from a bad trip once too, I was really uncomfortable on 135ug so in a desperate attempt to hold onto reality I said "alexa...uhmm...uh...hey google play RoboCop" and it just worked.
Only thing is it played the wrong RoboCop (2014) but that only distracted me from spiraling further, like "hold up Samuel L Jackson was in this?"
It feels weird to say but I was a genuinely happy customer. Then the home mini stopped working as well, started triggering by itself, didn't hear words right, then the Chromecast had trouble updating firmware and rebooting. Then Netflix platformed that douchebag chapelle.
Now all that's left of it is the pihole I used to block ads for it.
The Chromecast was one of the few things I really liked made by Google. I always have one in my travel bag and it's basically like bringing your own home theater to the hotel with you. I had a time where I lived in hotels and AirBnB's for almost a year and this thing was god send.
They have some other device which they want to sell which will replace it, but that one is big and clunky, not meant for traveling: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSSI_Ht6Mis
Connecting a classic (non-Google TV) Chromecast to a new WiFi (or heaven forbid a hotel WiFi with a capture portal) was always such a pain. And casting over networks without mDNS is flaky at best and otherwise downright impossible.
By contrast, I've loved taking along my Chromecast with Google TV to hotels, along with:
A VPN client installed it already,
An Android phone that can create a WiFi AP while connected to the hotel WiFi,
A Bluetooth speaker and my Bluetooth headphones paired to it so I get great audio as well.
This has been a complete gamechanger and a genuine upgrade over yesteryear's Chromecasts.
I take my raspberry pi 400 and a mouse with me ($70). I don't like to travel with expensive things. Once connected to a hotel tv, i have a full pc. I watch movies in 720p to have more fps. In case I have something important to do but no TV, I vnc to my phone.
It seems so, some people in the thread complained their parents don’t use ChromeCast because it needed the phone to use. Apparently seniors are also better if you want to sell an expensive subscription when the opportunity arises.
Chromecast naming scheme did get weird - it's difficult for someone who doesn't follow these things to know if they want the chromecast ultra or chromecast with google tv. I agree though they should have just called the new product something like "Chromecast Box 2025".
Not surprised. Like chromecast audio, chromecast couldn't really serve an adequate amount of ads. Basically it's only value was it forced you to use stock youtube app to stream preventing any adblocking, but if you cast your screen, then it can't stop adblocks, so it makes sense to discontinue this product. There's some open source projects out there that might be worth looking into, NymphCast is one I saw, uses a rasberry pi.
You can just install bubbleUpnp on any android device and cast every app or website to your TV, including non-stock youtube (using it with Tubular, previously known as Newpipe).
Don't know anything about newer Chromecast but I really love my older one. Its just a dumb stick with no apps built in that I can cast stuff from my phone to. The only recent annoying thing with it is that the YouTube app changed the behaviour when you're connected, so now instead of tapping on a video to bring up a menu asking whether to play it now or add it to the queue it now just defaults playing it now when you tap on it. Makes setting up a queue of videos really annoying now cause you have to tap on the three dots to add it to the queue now.
They actually have a great product, and they're canceling it? The new ones were kind of expensive already, but every app supported it and it was very nice
Maybe they’re coming out with something new and more expensive, or they’ve entered a licensing deal with another -cast-able company so they can charge you or get licensing fees without the manufacturing overhead.
Or maybe they’re just being Google and cancelling yet another thing that people like to use.
They are, I saw an article for it the other day. Some compact set top box running Android TV that costs way more than any Chromecast ever did.
Casting is nice but I'm thinking now is a good time to consider switching to something like Apple TV if you need a dedicated streaming device since there's basically no price difference anymore.
It's already rolling the dice to see if they enshitify things fast enough to ruin it for me, but now you know they will just kill whatever you have been using on a whim
Isn't Chromecast built into most devices now? Why would someone need a dongle to do what the TV can do natively? Otherwise something like an Nvidia Shield is a better option anyway.
No? Some of the most popular TV brands like LG and Samsung don't. And if your TV doesn't have Android, buying a Chromecast is a super cheap way to get it.
I have an amazing 4k oled TV but it doesn't have android so I still had to buy a Chromecast for it because otherwise I had no way to watch TV.
Because some smart TVs will up and brick themselves by irreparably filling their storage with various updates to the point of no longer being able to install or even update anything on the TV whatsoever THANK YOU Samsung)
It didn't have planned obsolescence in it. People bought the 3 devices they needed for their house, and have been coasting off them for a decade. Maybe with the occasional refresh for 4k or a worn out USB port or whatever.
Just corporate greed on display here. People stopped buying them because the product was simple and did what it was supposed to for a long time. Gotta enshitify it so we see those $$$ roll in again.
Edit - they also probably thought it would be a revenue stream for buying videos through Google or get their cut from some android app, but people instead watched their media from sources outside their pay umbrella
Yeah I've had the same Chromecast since close to when they first came out. Haven't had any problems outside of apps not supporting it very well sometimes, which isnt really a problem with the device itself. Still works perfectly even with pretty constant use as I use it for having videos on while I fall asleep.
Hmm, so, last month I began to have issues with my Chromecast for the first time. I have an old 3rd gen Chromecast attached to my bedroom television (not a smart tv) for the purpose of casting obnoxiously long video essays to fall asleep to. After like a decade of essentially hassle free operation, it suddenly stopped being able to maintain a connection to my phone. I cast a video, and after approximately 10 minutes, the cast disconnects and I get a message on my phone saying "this video cannot be played in the background". I've tried ever troubleshooting technique I can think of.
I know I shouldn't attribute to malice what can be explained by other causes, but boy, seeing this news today sure makes me think about things like planned obsolescence.
Planned obsolescence is built into googles processes.
They've created an environment where your primary method of advancing in your career is only creating new things and there's little to no options when choosing to support existing things. Some things have survived by chance and/or something to keep employees busy, but it's unintentional.
Won't Chromecast still exist as a service? Just because they aren't making the dongle doesn't mean all the Chromecast enabled devices are just going to stop working or even being made. Just about every display that's made has Chromecast built in now.
Uggggggghhhhhh another one for the pile. I love Chromecasts but to be fair the latest one with Google TV was a sign that things were getting shitty soon. 22% more CPU for a YouTube machine? Who cares? A home hub that needs my TV to work? Who cares? It's like the tech industry regrets putting everything on your phone and now they want to separate it out again. Fuck off.
The one with Google tv is an excellent ship for sailing the Black Sea. Get yourself a vpn, streamio, and realdebrid, and you're set. Not that I would know
I think it just means google would stop selling it as the new google TV streamer is up for sale. My Chromecast from 2015 is still working till this day.
I'm actually upset you can't use Nest Audio speakers as audio out. Apple TV lets you do it with home pods, Google said they were working on it, guess they were too busy adding AI garbo to the new device.
Eh, not really. This product had a full run, will continue to work and the features are all still available in their newer products. Killed by Google usually implies they have a service that just ceases to exist.
My god does anybody else downvote an article if it's blatant clickbait? How does it have 520 score? You were supposed to be better than r**dit remember?
Switched to apple TV already. Googles lame ad infused cheap plastic remote did the trick on me. They have to pay ME if they want a Youtube and Netflix ad laying on my table at home.
Anyone looking for a streaming box look into the Walmart Onn 4k Pro, came out earlier this year and it works great. The remote has an annoying button on it, but that's my only complaint.
And? Do they plan to put all the software open source so that the millions of hardware they sold would not go to waste in some years? We should force them to by law.
So what's the best android tv box nowadays? Still the Shield TV?
I have the latest chromecast with android tv (i think, who knows with these garbage model names), and it's always been quite sluggish to use, and I can't replace the home screen on it to one without ads since they locked down the bootloader.
So I'm looking for one that's a bit snappier, and preferably with an unlockable bootloader, or at least the ability to replace the default launcher.
Eh as long as the protocol stays the same who cares? Everything has it built in nowadays, and even if it doesn't, I bet China won't stop making Chromecast dongles
I don't like google as much as the next person but they haven't made just Chromecasts for awhile now they have just been Google tv boxes so it's basically just a rebrand to increase price with the same features and hopefully better specs at least
I don’t allow my TVs to touch the internet. I hadn’t realized how much they phone home until disabling upnp on my router locked the tv up and I couldn’t navigate the Home Screen without a terrible delay. The telemetry collection is out of control and they fingerprint everything you watch from a connected device. No thanks.
Still works better for traveling. Hotel smart TVs are even worse than the home models, but if you have an open HDMI port on it and can work out the wifi, you're in business.
Very few reasons for people with technical ability, which the Fediverse overrepresents. It's easy to get the idea that anyone can pick up something like a Pi and install and configure an OS image on it. It seems simple to us, but 95% of people will not/cannot do this. They have better things to do than learn IT skills.