641
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] wewbull@feddit.uk 75 points 1 year ago

My Chromecast has no storage and no remote. It's fine.

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago
[-] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 62 points 1 year ago

until they decide that their new device needs more sales, so they depricate the protocol and you can't use it anymore

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Deprecate the casting protocol? Sure Jan. The new device still supports casting.

[-] MimicJar@lemmy.world 62 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Oh no, my $40 device won't work after ELEVEN years. I'm being abused!

[-] lung@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Truly a golden era

[-] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 35 points 1 year ago

You haven't been paying attention to Google in the last few years, have you?

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Chromecast ultras are already broken if you try to use your own DNS.

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] LaggyKar@programming.dev 16 points 1 year ago

Until services stop supporting it.

[-] LaggyKar@programming.dev 37 points 1 year ago

None of which changes the fact that it's more expensive and clunkier, and none of which feels necessary.

[-] variants@possumpat.io 27 points 1 year ago

I don't need any of that. I just need a cheap dongle that can run one app

[-] MeatsOfRage@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The dongle still works. They reached market saturation with people who just want a dongle. They can't realistically be expected to produce these forever.

Edit

Classic Lemmy. Point out that these are not charities and companies can't keep producing niche products that you aren't buying but maybe potentially want to buy someday and get thrown down votes. Down votes without a response tell me you're just butthurt about the truth.

Sorry folks whether you like it or not it's the truth. Companies like to sell things and if these were actually being bought enough to make a profit they wouldn't be discontinued. Your TV probably has this feature built in now. Want another? Buy it second hand, the market is absolutely flooded with these second hand because they're just collecting dust in cabinets. If Google kept making these they'd just end up as unsold stock in a landfill.

Your existing chromecast dongle will continue to connect because Google needs chromecast the protocol to continue to work to compete with Apples Airplay. It's the same reason the Chromecast Audio dongle continues to work 5 years after it's end of life.

If you want to make sure you have them forever buy up your local second hand stock but otherwise no one has given a convincing argument why these need more e-waste getting produced at the factory.

[-] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

So when the current dongle breaks and you just want another, what do you buy?

[-] MeatsOfRage@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Facebook market place in my small town has dozens of these for less than $20. Why don't you pick up a few of these and recycle our current supply instead of asking companies to produce more e waste incase we someday want to buy it.

[-] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

The large used market exists because Google has been producing them. When Google stops producing them, that supply will dry up.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago

Your existing chromecast dongle will continue to connect

Will it, though?

"Sorry this device is too old to support the newest software update. For your convenience we have bricked it. Please see your authorized dealer to purchase an upgraded device"

[-] MeatsOfRage@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Sure, give me a single example where a chromecast device was taken off the chromecast protocol. Even their original Chromecast Audio device which was discontinued and taken out of production over 5 years ago still functions to this day.

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

Cast protocol is only one of the many many things that you can stream through a chromecast device.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] variants@possumpat.io 5 points 1 year ago

I mean I'd hope so because eventually this one I have won't work like the previous one so I'd like a similar product when that happens not this 99 dollar box thing. I guess I hope someone else will continue making cheap dongles I think walmart has their own thing

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] moody@lemmings.world 22 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] jeena@piefed.jeena.net 5 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

It's controlled by any phone on your wifi, it doesn't need a remote.

Or you can use it's remote and not need to use your phone for absolutely every little thing.

[-] Tanoh@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago
[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] Dasnap@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Just gotta stick FLauncher, SmartTube, Jellyfin, and Stremio on it and it seems solid.

[-] damo_omad@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I changed from FLauncher to Projectivity Launcher a little while ago and definitely recommend it

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] LaggyKar@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago

You can get an Ethernet adapter for the Chromecast

[-] woelkchen@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Regular Chromecast work perfectly as YouTube jukebox.

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

What do you mean regular Chromecast?

[-] woelkchen@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] woelkchen@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] woelkchen@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If you are mourning the loss of the casting only Chromecast, that died long ago production-wise.

Late 2022 is not long ago.

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The last casting only device (Chromecast Gen3) was originally released in 2018 (6 years ago). They stopped selling it in 2022. And it is still supported with updates. They supported the original with 10 years of updates. If all ya wanna do is cast, keep using it. I personally want more than a cast point.

[-] woelkchen@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

I personally want more than a cast point.

Great. Where did I say you cannot have that? You're acting weirdly defensively for something nobody is trying to take away from you. OK, maybe Google will in 2 years. All I said was that for casting the regular Chromecast is fine and you're turning that into something overly emotional for no reason.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year 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.

[-] sanpo@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

From OP article

such as a processor that’s 22 percent faster

[-] sanpo@sopuli.xyz 13 points 1 year ago

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...

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Does Nvidia even make new mobile chipsets still? At least... Relatively cheaply? I know there's something of an Nvidia tax.

[-] sanpo@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago

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).

this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2024
641 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

76440 readers
3346 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS