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.
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.
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.
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.
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”
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
I just hope this is still possible on the new one, I can see a future where they make it impossible but hopefully not yet.
I agree that it’s a good upgrade too, the only dowside is that it’s not portable anymore, I used to take it with me on any travel to have my own home theater set up like I like it with me when I was living in Hotels and AirBnB’s for a year on business travel. Especially in Asia the TVs are in the local language and I never have any idea how to change the language from Korean or Japanese to English so I can use the TV. But putting in the dongle and turning on the TV was always possible.
I doubt they’d block alternate launchers as they seem happy enough hosting them on Google Play.
Side-loading will be safe as Android being open is its whole deal. The EU are forcing Apple to be more open so there’s no way Google wants a target on their back.
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.
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.
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.
I have a smart TV as well, but refuse to connect it directly to wifi. As I tried that when I bought it and it insta-bricked itself and had to go through the hassle of returning a delivered TV.
A custom ROM for this device would be interesting. I know that the Chromecast 4K can do a custom ROM, but only if it was running an older os version before you flash it, as the bootloader couldn’t be unlocked after.
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.
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.
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.
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 absolutely love mine, but I’d be lying if I said it didn’t stutter sometimes when asked to perform more demanding tasks. The chip is also going to start having issues with formats in the coming years. I’d love for nVidia to put out something that used a rival to the A15 in Apple’s box. Native AV1 decoding and just raw speed is really needed to catch up to use cases in 2024 compared to 7 years earlier.
We’ll have to see if the processor is better than the shield. Google’s spec page shows it has 1 GB of RAM more than the shield but conveniently does not say what processor is in it
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.
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
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!
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
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.
So when the current dongle breaks and you just want another, what do you buy?
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.
The large used market exists because Google has been producing them. When Google stops producing them, that supply will dry up.
Lucky you, this is the perfect time to snatch up all the ones you say you need on the cheap.
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”
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.
Cast protocol is only one of the many many things that you can stream through a chromecast device.
Care to elaborate?
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
Facebook marketplace is absolutely loaded with these for less than $20. Let’s recycle the existing stock.
Because that’ll last
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
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.
I’m in the same boat, so when I changed to Projectivity I made it look pretty much the same. It’s now just so much easier to manage.
I just hope this is still possible on the new one, I can see a future where they make it impossible but hopefully not yet.
I agree that it’s a good upgrade too, the only dowside is that it’s not portable anymore, I used to take it with me on any travel to have my own home theater set up like I like it with me when I was living in Hotels and AirBnB’s for a year on business travel. Especially in Asia the TVs are in the local language and I never have any idea how to change the language from Korean or Japanese to English so I can use the TV. But putting in the dongle and turning on the TV was always possible.
I doubt they’d block alternate launchers as they seem happy enough hosting them on Google Play.
Side-loading will be safe as Android being open is its whole deal. The EU are forcing Apple to be more open so there’s no way Google wants a target on their back.
And now I can install all those things without worrying about my internal storage filling to capacity!
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.
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.
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.
I have a smart TV as well, but refuse to connect it directly to wifi. As I tried that when I bought it and it insta-bricked itself and had to go through the hassle of returning a delivered TV.
A custom ROM for this device would be interesting. I know that the Chromecast 4K can do a custom ROM, but only if it was running an older os version before you flash it, as the bootloader couldn’t be unlocked after.
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).
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
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.
I cannot believe NVIDIA has essentially abandoned its SHIELD micro console line. My Shield Pro has been an amazing sideloading fiend.
I absolutely love mine, but I’d be lying if I said it didn’t stutter sometimes when asked to perform more demanding tasks. The chip is also going to start having issues with formats in the coming years. I’d love for nVidia to put out something that used a rival to the A15 in Apple’s box. Native AV1 decoding and just raw speed is really needed to catch up to use cases in 2024 compared to 7 years earlier.
We’ll have to see if the processor is better than the shield. Google’s spec page shows it has 1 GB of RAM more than the shield but conveniently does not say what processor is in it
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.
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.