You must log in or register to comment.
Of course they are.
Google’s gonna Google
Add another casualty to the list:
They aren’t really, they are just upgrading it to a full set top box and rebranding it.
But it went from a dongle to a set top box for more than 3 times the price. It’s not really the same device, just similar functionality.
Yeah, I don’t see myself carrying this thing to every hotel I stay at… Even less because I am not buying it lol.
Lol I said these exact words a second before I read this. Google is such a fucking awful company.
🙄 it’s as dead as the Nexus. Try to keep up.
In place of the Chromecast, the company will offer the newly announced $99.99 Google TV Streamer,
They’re replacing it with a very similar product. Nothing to see here.
A more expensive, clunkier product, with a bunch of needless fluff in it.
Enshitification 101
For which they will be able to offer subscriptions in a year or 2.
Now with AI!
I’m not sure why they didn’t just call it the chrome cast gen whatever though.
So you could just ask it for anything and it could make it up?
“Google, show ‘Ow! My Balls!’”
I wonder how far away we are from AI being able to create video on demand like that?
I think overall it’ll never be able to create quality entertainment.
But Ow! My Balls! isn’t quality entertainment. I’m sure it can create all kinds of clips of things smashing into groins for ultra low-brow entertainment. Probably today.
Shitposting is one area where I have no issues using AI.
Or literally just reuse the Android TV name
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.
My Chromecast has no storage and no remote. It’s fine.
Cool. Keep using it.
until they decide that their new device needs more sales, so they depricate the protocol and you can’t use it anymore
Deprecate the casting protocol? Sure Jan. The new device still supports casting.
They killed support for the first gen Chromecast and the YouTube “app” has been broken for 3+ years. They’ll just stop supporting it one day and you’ll have to buy a new one.
You haven’t been paying attention to Google in the last few years, have you?
Chromecast ultras are already broken if you try to use your own DNS.
That’s the only reason I had to replace my previous 2 steaming devices.
The streaming backend got updated and the app in my device no longer supported it. And there was no updated app made available for that device.
Until services stop supporting it.
None of which changes the fact that it’s more expensive and clunkier, and none of which feels necessary.
And ethernet port!
You can get an Ethernet adapter for the Chromecast
Yeah, exactly. You needed to buy an extra adapter before. Now you don’t.
This TV Streamer costs significantly more than a CCwGTV combined with an adapter.
Yes! I hadn’t seen that highlighted anywhere in articles really, only saw it on the damn Google Store after looking just now.
Seems an all around solid update on the previous device.
Just gotta stick FLauncher, SmartTube, Jellyfin, and Stremio on it and it seems solid.
I changed from FLauncher to Projectivity Launcher a little while ago and definitely recommend it
My wife is used to FLauncher and will probably get annoyed if I change the Shield’s interface (again…) but maybe I’ll try it out on the Google TV Chromecast I have for holiday trips.
And now I can install all those things without worrying about my internal storage filling to capacity!
Regular Chromecast work perfectly as YouTube jukebox.
What do you mean regular Chromecast?
What do you mean regular Chromecast?
Just regular Chromecast, not that Google TV stuff. That round dongle that does nothing but accept casting streams via that cast button in many Android apps.
So the one from 2013? Sure. It was fine for that. This is a different thing, as not every device, service, or whatever supports casting. I wish they did, but they don’t.
Secondarily, I don’t want to use a screen to control a screen. I prefer a physical remote that I can have muscle memory for.
But I get why people liked the device. I did too. But fortunately or unfortunately, it’s been 10 years and technology has moved. Which is probably why they are giving this a new name being an generally good upgrade on the last Chromecast 4K.
Christ, this one even has a built in Ethernet port and doesn’t put strain on my HDMI port by just dangling there.
So the one from 2013? Sure. It was fine for that. This is a different thing, as not every device, service, or whatever supports casting. I wish they did, but they don’t.
Well, the story is about Google ending that line of products.
Yeah, I have a smart TV and would appreciate some faster processing in there. Or if I can flash a simplified ROM, but dunno if those exist. As long as I get control over what it does, I’d take it. Can just Velcro it on the back of the TV so it’s invisible.
It’s also twice the price of the Onn 4k Pro (Walmart house brand) that’s built on the same chip and has the same features running the stock Google TV experience.
They’re supposedly using pretty much the same chipset. So the most important part is still underpowered, these Android boxes generally work fine even with 2-3GBs of RAM.
From OP article
such as a processor that’s 22 percent faster
It’s supposed to use S905X3 with ARM Cortex-A55.
There’s already plenty of devices on the market with this chip, and it’s fine, but in real world as a user you won’t really see any improvement over something like a nearly 10 year old Nvidia Shield that’s still using a more powerful chipset.
Which is sad for a new device…
Does Nvidia even make new mobile chipsets still? At least… Relatively cheaply? I know there’s something of an Nvidia tax.
I don’t think so. Maybe they’ll have something new for the next Nintendo Switch?
In fact, the Shield is using the same chip as the Switch (same for the newer revisions).
Similar product that costs 4 times as much and has AI features…
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.
This $100 box from Google runs on the same SoC as the $50 streaming box from Onn (Walmart). The only major differences are the Google box as 4GB of RAM vs 3GB, a 1Gb Ethernet port instead of 100Mb (both have WiFi 6), and the Google box has a USB Type C port for power/data and would need an OTG adapter/hub while the Onn box has a Type A and a barrel plug for power.
TBH, the biggest issue there is the 100Mb port on the cheaper box. That is actually too low to stream a quality high-bitrate video file.
They’re replacing it with a very similar product. Nothing to see here.
Like they do with messengers every couple of years.
Or music streaming apps.
Seemed monthly at one point 🤣
and before that they already replaced it with google tv with chromecast
Swallowed the clickbait, hook, line and sinker.
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.
I really hate what they’ve become.
What’s funny is that was actually the start of them becoming who they are now. There’s a litany of evidence they stole the Chromecast technology
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)
What changed? I thought that is still what they did.
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.
Also they made it reliant on the Google Home app, which makes it really hard to change WiFi networks. It’s a pain in the ass if you have multiple WiFi networks setup at your house.
Remind me, what app did it use before? I have had Chromecast since gen 1, can’t remember any other app, but that’s probably my memory failing.
Honestly I don’t remember. I had a gen 1 Chromecast as well and I think it was just a Chromecast app. Now it’s all integrated with Google Home.
Edit: I tried googling it and under the Wikipedia page description it showed the following. But what’s funny is if you go to the Wikipedia page, that text is no longer there.
Originally called simply “Chromecast”, the app was released concurrently with the original Chromecast video model …
Why on earth would you have multiple WiFi networks in your home?
I take my Chromecast on holiday, you basically have to factory reset it every time to change network. But my recollection is that you’ve always had to do that.
That makes perfect sense, and switching is definitely annoying then… But the person I responded to said they had multiple WiFi networks at home… E.g. Not on holiday
My solution: get a travel router and have it broadcast the same SSID (and use the same password) as you use at home.
All your devices should successfully connect to it and you don’t need to factory reset them.
Many of them have the ability to navigate through a captive portal too (since I got mine all the hotels I’ve gone to have just needed a password, so i haven’t needed to test that).
I have a travel router as well, I just prefer to keep the SSIDs different. It is definitely paranoia, but if someone sees your travel router at a hotel, they know your not home, and your home can be found on wigle.net.
Its not that bad to reset the Chromecast, and I do it infrequently, so I’m happy with that.
I personally have a Comcast router/modem with its own network. I have a network switch that I plug into the router that I use for hard coded stuff. Mostly my PC and a couple other things that I want to run fast instead of convenient. Then I have a WiFi mesh network that I run for most of my other devices, including my phone.
So for my Chromecast, if I want to stream from my phone on the mesh network, I have it on one network. But if I want to stream from my PC, I have it on another network. While with most devices, changing the network you’re connected to is simple, it’s a massive pain in the ass with a Chromecast.
What you need to do is put devices which you want to access from multiple networks in a specific network / VLAN and then bridge it over
So as far as I understand, you have
- Outer router (Comcast), which has WiFi enabled
- Inner router (your own), which has WiFi enabled, and further meshes with other WiFi mesh devices (or is the mesh separate?)
- A plain switch, for stuff you want cabled and fast
Is that correct?
Why not get the WiFi in the Comcast router disabled, and use your inner network exclusively, such that both WiFi and ethernet devices are on the same network?
That’s what I did with my network, and I even got the ISP to put their modem/router into bridge mode, so it’s completely transparent.
I could, but I like having the router network as an option to connect to. I know the point of a mesh network is to improve WiFi connectivity overall, but every once in a while it will get a bit laggy when streaming a video. Probably because I’ve got like 90 some devices connected to it. I like having the option to switch my phone to the router network and go upstream of all the other stuff.
I have a trusted network, an IoT network (where the CC would go), and a guest network.
I know most people aren’t going to have the time or knowledge set up network segmentation, but it’s still good practice.
No need for a physically separated network, that’s what VLANs are for
I mean, yes? I’m obviously using VLANs here. I’m not running a separate switch and AP for each network…
Yeah I got one of the newer ones after having a ton of the earlier models and I was disgusted by that change. Instantly returned it and bought one of the discontinued Ultras for 4K.
I did the exact same thing. Its such a stupid step backwards in functionality.
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?”
“Our current product offering is less than $50. We were thinking the next iteration should be $300”
It’s also built with the same SoC as Walmart’s Google TV box that sells for $50.
Me and my partner have already agreed the Onn. Dongle is what we’re getting when google inevitably “accidentally” bricks the Chromecast we got last year
Me - Ok Google, give me a open source way to turn my raspberry pi into a 4k streaming box.
Google - Got it. Playing Tyler Swift on living room tv
Me - wtf?
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.
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.
Add it to the pile of dead google projects
Dead successful projects.
Killedbygoogle com
Nope, though the clickbait title would make you believe so. Nothing is discontinued.
(They are just changing the name)
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.
That’s fair
They are literally no going to make the dongles any more
Did y’all even click the article?
It will be rebranded, basically, to become the Google TV streamer. The tech is not going anywhere.
“In place of the Chromecast, the company will offer the newly announced $99.99 Google TV Streamer, which launches on September 24th.”
$100 though … a Chromecast used to be like $35.
Rebrand to increase price by an ungodly amount to circumvent massive backlash ✅
deleted by creator
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).
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).
Another one for the graveyard
Literally all my friends know the name “Chromecast”, why would you rename it
and then add TV to it, is this now advertised to seniors?
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”.
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.
Its #1, its in the article. Has some forgettable name, haha
1 and a little of 2. New device and a new way to charge you.
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.
I’ve had good luck with Roku so far, I know they’re questionable but short of building a system to handle casting/streaming for me they seem to be the best bet right now
This is why they have no great products, they kill all the ones that are
How can it be a great product if the screen doesn’t have more ads than a '90s geocities page?
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.
Noticed this too and it’s annoying as ferk. It’s messed up many a queue between my wife and i
“okay, what successful product are we going to kill next?”
This is why I’d never invest in anything Google.
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)
I’ll stick to my Nvida Shield thank you very much. They are slow as hell with updates but when they do they even update the old 2017 devices.
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.
I had that same issue at one point. It seems to have gone away after I switched to Grayjay.
I have had the exact issue. I see a device disconnected message on my TV and typically give up.
