By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Introducing Google Chromecast

superchunk said:
disolitude said:

"No name" and "low quality" can be debatable when all you are doing is providing a wireless HDMI signal transfer and don't insist people use your products and services.

Frankly, I really don't understand why you are so eager to start using Google services and workarounds for something they absolutely don't need to be invovled with.

1) I already use all of Google's services. Have few hundred songs in Google Music, all my pics/videos in G+ (500GB+ of data) and if I were to buy movies (I only rent anymore with RedBox), it would be digitally from Play.

2) What work-arounds? The only 'odd' thing is putting your local URL in for a movie stored on your PC. However, I'm sure in the very near future we'll see media players adding this casting feature (likely even Google themselves). Its already know Pandora and Hulu Plus are finalizing their app changes.

I say no name and low quality because that is what it is. For instance, Best Buy has the rocketfish product ($79). I've owned two different products by them and they both sucked.

There is a reason this thing sold out in minutes and when I called my local Best Buy the person answering the phone knew her stock situation for this brand new thing without even looking it up. In fact I joked that she knew it off top of her head and she laughed as she's been getting calls on it all day. Its a hot item and at $35 (actually $11 if you already have Netflix anyways and count that 3month savings) the real question is, why the hell wouldn't you want this?

Superchunk, why do you even bother so much? It's great that you are very enthusiastic about Google products and services.

Disolitude (and I'm surpirsed not to see the other usuals) is in every one of your new Google product informative threads and he's always shooting down anything that does not have to do (and in this case it does) directly or indirectly with Microsoft products and services. Come on, they are launching this new device for THEIR services (and more!) and it serves as another choice for consumers, but here he is telling you what HE has at home already. Lulz.

A neat device, but since I already have a WiiU and a PS3 sitting under the TV, I won't be needing this (I also have a HDD with tons of content hooked up on my PS3 and a HTPC that streams to the PS3 as well). Chromecast would actually make it a more direct connection to the TV but I'll have to wait and see.



e=mc^2

Gaming on: PS4 Pro, Switch, SNES Mini, Wii U, PC (i5-7400, GTX 1060)

Around the Network
superchunk said:
disolitude said:

You keep switching between:

1. this is awesome for everyone

and

2. this is awesome for me because I use google services

Which one is it?

What if I have a platform that Google doesn't make apps for? Blackberry/ Windows phone/RT come to mind...none of them are supported with this. So much for open standards... How long till they decide they don't want to support iOS or Windows down the road anymore because Android/Chrome is dominating everything and they have no need for these users?

Bottom line is that as someone that doesn't use many Google services, I absolutely see no benefits for this over Miracast. Not to mention that Google just don't need to be involved in the process of me sending a video from my tablet to my TV. As someone that knows how ecosystems work I can see the trap being set here a from a mile away... 

Whats next? Checking in with Google when you want to buy groceries?

Actually I said this is what it is and I can't wait to get it. Then I've answered some direct questions or misleading information.

I could care less if they stop supporting iOS or WinPC. I won't own Apple and I am moving away from WinPC, however those two won't go anywhere thus Google will always support. So silly example is silly.

If you want to pay 2x or more for a miracast device, then go ahead. I don't care. My point was only to provide info to those interested/curious.

You speak of traps, yet you're likely buying a XBone. Google may know my web use... but they are not installing a NSA camera in my house. lol I did that already with my security system. :) Plus, do you really think MS/Apple are any different in their tracking? Don't kid yourself.

I do use Google Drive and Google's note taking app, Keep, for my grocery shopping lol. Though I've considered using an app on my phone... but other family members won't scan stuff as they are tossing it out so that won't work very well.


Ok well now were getting somewhere...

If you use Google services, live in their ecosystem and buy groceries according to Google note taking apps, this is the product for you. If you don't care for open compatibility and can't shop outside of Best buy which obviously has overpriced Miracast adapters, Chromecast has you covered.

Should add that to the OP.

Otherwise I work in advertising and know exactly what Google and Microsoft do with tracking... I don't like it but I have no problem with it. But Id rather not tie myself to a service when I don't have to.

Apple really doesn't belong in that boat as any data they collect is probably done so to improve the experience and not to sell it for higher ad rate CPMs. Apple doesn't sell user data to advertisers.



Solid-Stark said:
superchunk said:
disolitude said:

"No name" and "low quality" can be debatable when all you are doing is providing a wireless HDMI signal transfer and don't insist people use your products and services.

Frankly, I really don't understand why you are so eager to start using Google services and workarounds for something they absolutely don't need to be invovled with.

1) I already use all of Google's services. Have few hundred songs in Google Music, all my pics/videos in G+ (500GB+ of data) and if I were to buy movies (I only rent anymore with RedBox), it would be digitally from Play.

2) What work-arounds? The only 'odd' thing is putting your local URL in for a movie stored on your PC. However, I'm sure in the very near future we'll see media players adding this casting feature (likely even Google themselves). Its already know Pandora and Hulu Plus are finalizing their app changes.

I say no name and low quality because that is what it is. For instance, Best Buy has the rocketfish product ($79). I've owned two different products by them and they both sucked.

There is a reason this thing sold out in minutes and when I called my local Best Buy the person answering the phone knew her stock situation for this brand new thing without even looking it up. In fact I joked that she knew it off top of her head and she laughed as she's been getting calls on it all day. Its a hot item and at $35 (actually $11 if you already have Netflix anyways and count that 3month savings) the real question is, why the hell wouldn't you want this?

Superchunk, why do you even bother so much? It's great that you are very enthusiastic about Google products and services.

Disolitude (and I'm surpirsed not to see the other usuals) is in every one of your new Google product informative threads and he's always shooting down anything that does not have to do (and in this case it does) directly or indirectly with Microsoft products and services. Come on, they are launching this new device for THEIR services (and more!) and it serves as another choice for consumers, but here he is telling you what HE has at home already. Lulz.

A neat device, but since I already have a WiiU and a PS3 sitting under the TV, I won't be needing this (I also have a HDD with tons of content hooked up on my PS3 and a HTPC that streams to the PS3 as well). Chromecast would actually make it a more direct connection to the TV but I'll have to wait and see.

Haha...yeah ok there. This is the only Superchunk thread I've posted in over a month. Im sure he made many threads where he talked about how Google DRM is awesome and Gmail saved kittens.

Wonder if you or Superchunk even heard of WiDi or Miracast before Google announced this. If you wanted this feature, you'd have it already...you wouldn't wait for Google to tell you what to use and how to use it.



Solid-Stark said:

Superchunk, why do you even bother so much? It's great that you are very enthusiastic about Google products and services.

Disolitude (and I'm surpirsed not to see the other usuals) is in every one of your new Google product informative threads and he's always shooting down anything that does not have to do (and in this case it does) directly or indirectly with Microsoft products and services. Come on, they are launching this new device for THEIR services (and more!) and it serves as another choice for consumers, but here he is telling you what HE has at home already. Lulz.

A neat device, but since I already have a WiiU and a PS3 sitting under the TV, I won't be needing this (I also have a HDD with tons of content hooked up on my PS3 and a HTPC that streams to the PS3 as well). Chromecast would actually make it a more direct connection to the TV but I'll have to wait and see.

I know and I expect a few peeps to do the same. My only point was to say "hey this is new" and I typically don't like to leave misinformation out there.



disolitude said:

Wonder if you or Superchunk even heard of WiDi or Miracast before Google announced this. If you wanted this feature, you'd have it already...you wouldn't wait for Google to tell you what to use and how to use it.

I had and when I looked Miracast was a bit beyond what I was willing to spend. I've stated in many threads that I've been wating for a nexus-like device to do this. I knew it would end up better (yes currently miracast is more open, but as with all Google products, it will grow) and cost less. Just like their phones and tablets.

Also, sure I found other no-name products from China on Amazon/eBay etc that are cheap enough... but quality is withstanding.



Around the Network
disolitude said:
Solid-Stark said:
superchunk said:
disolitude said:

"No name" and "low quality" can be debatable when all you are doing is providing a wireless HDMI signal transfer and don't insist people use your products and services.

Frankly, I really don't understand why you are so eager to start using Google services and workarounds for something they absolutely don't need to be invovled with.

1) I already use all of Google's services. Have few hundred songs in Google Music, all my pics/videos in G+ (500GB+ of data) and if I were to buy movies (I only rent anymore with RedBox), it would be digitally from Play.

2) What work-arounds? The only 'odd' thing is putting your local URL in for a movie stored on your PC. However, I'm sure in the very near future we'll see media players adding this casting feature (likely even Google themselves). Its already know Pandora and Hulu Plus are finalizing their app changes.

I say no name and low quality because that is what it is. For instance, Best Buy has the rocketfish product ($79). I've owned two different products by them and they both sucked.

There is a reason this thing sold out in minutes and when I called my local Best Buy the person answering the phone knew her stock situation for this brand new thing without even looking it up. In fact I joked that she knew it off top of her head and she laughed as she's been getting calls on it all day. Its a hot item and at $35 (actually $11 if you already have Netflix anyways and count that 3month savings) the real question is, why the hell wouldn't you want this?

Superchunk, why do you even bother so much? It's great that you are very enthusiastic about Google products and services.

Disolitude (and I'm surpirsed not to see the other usuals) is in every one of your new Google product informative threads and he's always shooting down anything that does not have to do (and in this case it does) directly or indirectly with Microsoft products and services. Come on, they are launching this new device for THEIR services (and more!) and it serves as another choice for consumers, but here he is telling you what HE has at home already. Lulz.

A neat device, but since I already have a WiiU and a PS3 sitting under the TV, I won't be needing this (I also have a HDD with tons of content hooked up on my PS3 and a HTPC that streams to the PS3 as well). Chromecast would actually make it a more direct connection to the TV but I'll have to wait and see.

Haha...yeah ok there. This is the only Superchunk thread I've posted in over a month. Im sure he made many threads where he talked about how Google DRM is awesome and Gmail saved kittens.

Wonder if you or Superchunk even heard of WiDi or Miracast before Google announced this. If you wanted this feature, you'd have it already...you wouldn't wait for Google to tell you what to use and how to use it.

Careful, don't fully reveal yourself there. That wasn't necessary and he's never claimed that to my knowledge.

I have. Never made the choice to use or buy it. My choice, and had nothing to do with Google since I couldn't care less. You see how it works? 



e=mc^2

Gaming on: PS4 Pro, Switch, SNES Mini, Wii U, PC (i5-7400, GTX 1060)

superchunk said:
disolitude said:

Wonder if you or Superchunk even heard of WiDi or Miracast before Google announced this. If you wanted this feature, you'd have it already...you wouldn't wait for Google to tell you what to use and how to use it.

I had and when I looked Miracast was a bit beyond what I was willing to spend. I've stated in many threads that I've been wating for a nexus-like device to do this. I knew it would end up better (yes currently miracast is more open, but as with all Google products, it will grow) and cost less. Just like their phones and tablets.

Also, sure I found other no-name products from China on Amazon/eBay etc that are cheap enough... but quality is withstanding.


Did you do a thread on Nexus 7 V2? I thought that was the cooler news from the Google conference. Other than S4 pro and not S600, that device is pretty ballin for the price...   I really don't know how Windows 8 will compete with that 7 inch market and how even apple can compete on price.



Solid-Stark said:
 

Careful, don't fully reveal yourself there. That wasn't necessary and he's never claimed that to my knowledge.

I have. Never made the choice to use or buy it. My choice, and had nothing to do with Google since I couldn't care less. You see how it works? 

You're just tipitoeing around the subject at hand with vauge statements. Why don't you keep things on point here?

Why is this awesome? Cause its new mindblowing tech? its really not...

Cause its from Google and locked to Google services? Not really according to you..

Cause its cheap? Maybe... But so will be Miracast/WiDi adapters as they become more common.

Is this really that much more expensive for an open standard wireless streaming - http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00904JILO?ie=UTF8&tag=etalecouk-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=B00904JILO



disolitude said:


Did you do a thread on Nexus 7 V2? I thought that was the cooler news from the Google conference. Other than S4 pro and not S600, that device is pretty ballin for the price...   I really don't know how Windows 8 will compete with that 7 inch market and how even apple can compete on price.

Nope. To me, the increase in a sequel product was less exciting than an entirely new one from Google. but, yes N7-2 is a fantastic looking product and I'll be looking forward to the new N10 (by Samsung) beign disclosed later in year or more specifically the next Nexus phone also likely coming later in year.

Yeah $230 for 16GB high-end tablet is a great price point.  I bought a Samsung Tab2 7" for the wife  (she likes the Samsung UI) for only $130 (new) not too long ago. I'll be buying a couple Chromebooks before I snag a tablet for myself. But when I do, it will be the N7 16GB.



Cnet review...

http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-media-receivers/google-chromecast/4505-6739_7-35823617.html

kind of confirms everything weve said here...

"Conclusion: Good enough for $35, but best for people deep in the Google ecosystem"

"But once you've lived with the Chromecast for a while, $35 feels less like a fantastic deal and more like exactly what a device like this should cost. The Chromecast lets you stream from Netflix and YouTube using your Android or iOS mobile device as a remote, with Android users also getting access to Google Music and Google TV and Movies. It also supports the ability to mirror any content from a Chrome browser running on a Mac or Windows PC, including Hulu, HBO Go, and full episodes from major TV networks like CBS, NBC, Fox, and ABC via their respective Web sites. And the hardware is delightfully compact and well-built, making it easy to toss in your bag for travel or moving from room to room.

What it doesn't do is everything else: there are no dedicated apps for many major services (including Amazon Instant, HBO Go, Spotify, Rdio, and MLB.TV), no dedicated TV interface for standalone use, no support for personal media sitting on your devices (aside from a clunky hack), and the awesome-sounding screen-mirroring feature ends up being entirely underwhelming in practice. Basically, you can stream Netflix, YouTube, and a couple of Google services; $35 feels about right."