Google is discontinuing the Chromecast line
Open link in next tab
Google is discontinuing the Chromecast line
https://www.theverge.com/2024/8/6/24214471/google-chromecast-line-discontinued
Another device heads to the Google graveyard.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
until they decide that their new device needs more sales, so they depricate the protocol and you can't use it anymore
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.
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.
None of which changes the fact that it's more expensive and clunkier, and none of which feels necessary.
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.
The large used market exists because Google has been producing them. When Google stops producing them, that supply will dry up.
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.
Cast protocol is only one of the many many things that you can stream through a chromecast device.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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).
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.
They’re replacing it with a very similar product. Nothing to see here.
Like they do with messengers every couple of years.
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)
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 ...
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 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.
I mean, yes? I'm obviously using VLANs here. I'm not running a separate switch and AP for each network...
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.
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.
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
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 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.
Badly copy (see Gemini)
Tf are you smoking dude, Google has been working on AI long before ChatGPT was a twinkle in Sam Altman's eye. They didn't release any public models because they wanted to go about it safely and not just dump the world's best misinformation creator on the open market for anyone to use with little safeguards. All that went out the window when ChatGPT got all the press and google decided they wanted a piece of the hype, but pretending they "didn't do any innovation of their own" in regards to AI is ludicrous. They have been at the forefront of AI development for the last decade, and the fact you think otherwise shows your only knowledge about AI is from after ChatGPT headlines started coming out.
That's what they did until OpenAI started making noise and management pushed out everybody working on safety and quality to cut corners and rush something out to compete (poorly)
"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"
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
Really, rebranding from Chromecast to Google TV Streamer? Who the fuck was the genius that greenlighted this?
Hi, I'm the project lead on Chromecast and I'm here to talk about what my team's been up to maintaining this popular product
The board: yawn
Hi, I'm the project lead on the new Google TV Streamer that we've just launched, let's look at these exciting new adoption numbers and talk about how we plan to keep this incredible momentum going
The board: Wow! Amazing stuff plz take this large bonus
I knew someone who worked at a really well loved local restaurant. One day a new manager came in and IMMEDIATELY wanted to change the name. According to him, you should change a restaurant's name every 2 years
Why would you ruin the recognition you already have? He was also planning on changing the name to be the exact same as a business down the street. I think he was an idiot
Because the dude comes from a corporate world where everybody's known for stagnation, not quality, so changing the name gets rid of an association with stagnation BUT also gets rid of an association with quality if that's the reputation you've built up and these types can not understand that because they've never worked in a place putting quality first
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?
•
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.
•
Yeah, I'm thinking of trying it out once my fan less N100 box arrives from china. Should have much better AV1 performance and subtitle rendering performance than my Google TV.
I had a "fun" experience the other month with my Google TV where it was refusing to connect to my Jellyfin server. Turns out Google hasn't updated the HTTPS CAs in over 2 years, and it was no longer compatible with the latest Let's Encrypt X2 certificates which was announced back in 2020. Android TV has some good apps, but it is a software, ads, and security nightmare.
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.
Nope, though the clickbait title would make you believe so. Nothing is discontinued.
(They are just changing the name)
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."
I mean this is what Google does though. Some new exec comes in, rebrands existing tech to solve some problem, support continues for a few tears, rinse and repeat until google decides it isnt worth it and kills the entire platform.
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).
RIP to a real one.
Back in the day when streaming was cheap as hell and made sense as all things were on Netflix, having a Home Mini with and a Chromecast was bliss.
I used to have a shortcut for the phrase "I'm so tired", it would start playing Star Trek TNG from Netflix on the Chromecast monitor and it just werked. Saved me from a bad trip once too, I was really uncomfortable on 135ug so in a desperate attempt to hold onto reality I said "alexa...uhmm...uh...hey google play RoboCop" and it just worked.
Only thing is it played the wrong RoboCop (2014) but that only distracted me from spiraling further, like "hold up Samuel L Jackson was in this?"
It feels weird to say but I was a genuinely happy customer. Then the home mini stopped working as well, started triggering by itself, didn't hear words right, then the Chromecast had trouble updating firmware and rebooting. Then Netflix platformed that douchebag chapelle.
Now all that's left of it is the pihole I used to block ads for it.
I pretty much exclusively used my chrome cast to bypass smart TV bullshit and stream my movies and TV shows stored on my pc and phone to my TV.
The Chromecast was one of the few things I really liked made by Google. I always have one in my travel bag and it's basically like bringing your own home theater to the hotel with you. I had a time where I lived in hotels and AirBnB's for almost a year and this thing was god send.
They have some other device which they want to sell which will replace it, but that one is big and clunky, not meant for traveling: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSSI_Ht6Mis
Connecting a classic (non-Google TV) Chromecast to a new WiFi (or heaven forbid a hotel WiFi with a capture portal) was always such a pain. And casting over networks without mDNS is flaky at best and otherwise downright impossible.
By contrast, I've loved taking along my Chromecast with Google TV to hotels, along with:
- A VPN client installed it already,
- An Android phone that can create a WiFi AP while connected to the hotel WiFi,
- A Bluetooth speaker and my Bluetooth headphones paired to it so I get great audio as well.
This has been a complete gamechanger and a genuine upgrade over yesteryear's Chromecasts.
I take my raspberry pi 400 and a mouse with me ($70). I don't like to travel with expensive things. Once connected to a hotel tv, i have a full pc. I watch movies in 720p to have more fps. In case I have something important to do but no TV, I vnc to my phone.
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".
•
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).
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.
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
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
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)
Old, dumb or smart TVs without a connection to the internet but still want to either cast to or browse on.
I use mine to avoid using the Samsung UI which I also piholed the hell out of for Samsung ad services...
•
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.
It didn't have planned obsolescence in it. People bought the 3 devices they needed for their house, and have been coasting off them for a decade. Maybe with the occasional refresh for 4k or a worn out USB port or whatever.
Just corporate greed on display here. People stopped buying them because the product was simple and did what it was supposed to for a long time. Gotta enshitify it so we see those $$$ roll in again.
Edit - they also probably thought it would be a revenue stream for buying videos through Google or get their cut from some android app, but people instead watched their media from sources outside their pay umbrella
Yeah I've had the same Chromecast since close to when they first came out. Haven't had any problems outside of apps not supporting it very well sometimes, which isnt really a problem with the device itself. Still works perfectly even with pretty constant use as I use it for having videos on while I fall asleep.
dit - they also probably thought it would be a revenue stream for buying videos
Jokes on them, I enabled "App-only" mode which only displays installed apps
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 have had the exact issue. I see a device disconnected message on my TV and typically give up.
I had that same issue at one point. It seems to have gone away after I switched to Grayjay.