641
Google is discontinuing the Chromecast line
(www.theverge.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2024
641 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
61227 readers
3606 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
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.
Oh no, my $40 device won't work after ELEVEN years. I'm being abused!
Truly a golden era
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.
I don't need any of that. I just need a cheap dongle that can run one app
Most of the appeal of the Chromecast is that it's a dongle you plug in once and never have to see again. It doesn't need high performance and 32 gigs of RAM. It needs to play video. That's its entire purpose. It's controlled by any phone on your wifi, it doesn't need a remote.
For most users, this is an expensive downgrade.
The remote was the biggest upgrade for me on the Ultra though. I always struggled to find my phone and do stuff on it just to watch some YouTube or Netflix videos. And the Kids don't even have a phone and they want to watch on the TV in the livingroom too sometimes. With the remote it's easy for everyone to use it without fiddling with the Phone.
My parents have the one without the remote and they basically never use it because my mom doesn't have a mobile phone and my dad newer has it with him, it's always not charged or in some other room.
Or you can use it's remote and not need to use your phone for absolutely every little thing.
And ethernet port!
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
You can get an Ethernet adapter for the Chromecast
Yeah, exactly. You needed to buy an extra adapter before. Now you don't.
Regular Chromecast work perfectly as YouTube jukebox.
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.
Well, the story is about Google ending that line of products.
With a direct successor product that contains all the same features as the last Chromecast device. If you are mourning the loss of the casting only Chromecast, that died long ago production-wise.
Late 2022 is not long ago.
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
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).