So... the new dongle is powered by a chip that has some Bluetooth component. Does that mean I can finally connect to it from my phone via Bluetooth and play music that way?
The lack of that feature is my biggest gripe with the current dongle. The Cast protocol is a pain in the butt in terms of apps that support it.
>Does that mean I can finally connect to it from my phone via Bluetooth and play music that way?
I don't know about this device, but what you are describing is the antitheses of how chomecast is intended to work (or at least it was, from the beginning of chromecast to the last time I checked).
The idea is that you never stream anything from your phone, but rather your phone is a remote control and service authentication device for the chromecast.
I'm guessing the target market here is TV manufacturers, the same way chromecast is built into tvs these days. They're more high touch and are going to get sales calls about it regardless, so the site just needs to convince them to accept the meeting invite.
Who is this website designed for? I'm on Chrome and it took me about a dozen presses of the space bar to get an idea of what Google TV is/does and then a bunch more to get some specifics and a price. I assume it looks different on mobile, maybe better / more useful?
Remember the old book/saying "Don't Make Me Think"? (Krug, 2000. Wow, it's 20 years old now?!)
This site made me think in ways that seem really unnecessary.
Serious question, why is this site designed like this, I honestly don't understand the goal here. It's like a slideshow? People in general are so interested in this they do actually page through it? I feel like it took some real effort to finally learn things that should've been on page 1.
I find this kind of scrolljacking presentation page incredibly annoying. I get it, it's beautiful and impressive, but it feels like a present that's wrapped with 15 different layers of paper.
It's designed for regular scrolling. Spacebar jumps break the flow. The goal here isn't to give you information fit for a short one-pager -- it's to create a story and bring you along. It works surprisingly well in Opera (chrome-based).
No, it's jarring for anyone using a mouse with scrollwheel as well. The motion ends up being very choppy. In fact, I'm convinced that this style of web page is designed by designers using apple touchpads (eg. MBP) who think everyone else uses them as well.
I agree that it's jarring and choppy with a scrollwheel. (I'm in no way condoning the design.)
You can file it under dark patterns, but I think it may be an accepted limitation - you have to consciously scroll in order to read the individual pseudo-slides. Overscroll? Go back til it's right. You can't just skim this 'presentation'. It's like a user has to 'pull' the information. And the variety of information types (as opposed to a typical webpage that may feature just one type of animation) keeps someone scrolling to 'see what's next'. The user is forever pushed to keep going 'just a little bit more'.
My only problem is I've scrolled through the whole thing and I'm still not clear if Google TV is a website, a piece of hardware, a bundle of content, or what...?
It's clearly not just hardware because it says "Chromecast with Google TV". But then it definitely involves an app because it says "Use the app" and "Coming soon to smart TVs."
But I still am not exactly clear how it integrates with the streaming apps? In fact I have no idea whatsoever. Do I watch HBO and Netflix through Google TV? Or is Google TV just a glorified playlists app that lets me get recommendations across services, that then links out to watch them in separate apps? Is it a free app or a paid subscription service? Does it give me access to exclusive content? Or network TV?
I'm left with no idea why I would use this or not because I still don't know what it is.
I'm on Firefox mobile for Android and I had to scroll over and over with elements moving all over the place so I abandoned it to come and read comments so I can find out what it is really about.
They send a memo out to the 17 groups working on various TV related projects about consolidation. Then those 17 group heads worry about who is going to be irrelevant by the end of process. Furious game of throne style events take place. And you get what you see. It will all be shutdown and written off by Christmas so don't worry about what it is too much.
If it doesn't get shutdown by Christmas its probably because they working out how to integrate it into Google Docs.
I'm really confused as to whether this is Google's blessed Android TV spin (like Android TV with a different home screen), or a rebranding of Android TV.
Oh Google. So this is a reskin and rebrand of Android TV, launching for the first time on the new "Chromecast with Google TV". Not to be confused with a different Google TV from 10 years ago. It's unclear if they are sunsetting Android TV or supporting 2 branches of Android based TV interfaces. Side note, I have a TV with Android TV and it is chock-full-o-bugs. Only in the Google-verse.
right, but that headline doesnt answer the underlying question. This chromecast runs Android TV, so what is Google TV? Is it an interface on top of Android TV, or the successor to Android TV as we know it? It says its coming to future TV's, so what about the Sony TV I just bought? There's so many questions about what this software even is.
The new Android TV interface premieres on the Chromecast with Google TV. It’s coming to third-party set-top boxes and TVs as well, although you’ll have to wait until 2021 before it reaches non-Google hardware. This doesn’t replace Android TV, to be clear — it sits on top. Google is just separating the ‘skin’ for Android TV from its underlying platform.
https://www.androidauthority.com/google-tv-android-tv-116260...
So Google TV is a skin that sits on top of Android TV which has a separate skin called Android TV which isn't being used in new products but will continue to be supported in current products. And my Android TV I have right now is an Android TV with Chromecast, but the launch product for Google TV was Chromecast with Google TV, which I can plug into my Android TV when Android TV running Android TV is EOL but Android TV running Google TV is still supported so that I don't need to buy a new TV with Google TV. That clears it up, thanks!
I suspect that people with older Android TV's who cant upgrade the os or play services, will be able to install the Google TV app to circumvent the lack of updates, similar to Play Services separating from Android.
My phone app (Movies & TV) updated to Google TV automatically.
I'm just kidding myself, theres no way itll work that cleanly.
When not even a site full of techies can tell what you’re tech-product is after studying its product-page intensely... You know you’re in for a hell of a marketing phase later on.
Putting on my consumer hat, I really don't know why I need this over Android TV. Is it an upgrade? Does it have new features? Unclear. My Android TV already had Google Assistant on the remote and could "Hey Google, Play Tiger King."
"Android TV" isn't really a thing for consumers. You buy a media box or TV which is powered by it. If you like that device, great. If not, buy a Chromecast.
Android TV is definitely a thing for TV customers. My TV was sold to me as an "Android TV with Chrome cast built in". Now I'm worried this is going to turn into the usual Google abandon ware.
It appears that Google TV is a centralized chromecast database. Normally with chromecast if you want to stream HBO, you need the HBO app which supports chromecast. If you want to stream netflix, you need the netflix app which supports chromecast. With Google TV, you link your account into it and then you just go to one app to find all of your streams.
I go back and forth. It is a good price for a little computer you attach to your tv that can sideload apps and do a lot of the same audio/video things your phone can do. But then, the beauty of the original Chromecast was that it was a wireless external display for your phone, so you didn't need to manage apps and logins on yet another device, just hit the cast button to play music, video, pictures or games on your tv. It was incredibly versatile and really had all capabilities of your phone, with zero setup or fuss. I know you could just use the new Chromecast like the old chromecast by Chromecasting, but sometimes more is not more. I also really hope that little chromecast icon isn't going away in media apps anytime soon.
I agree that for us the old one was perfect, but for less tech savvy people, using their phone to control the TV never worked. For my parents this is perfect.
> Not to be confused with a different Google TV from 10 years ago
The Google TV 10 years ago was rebranded as Android TV, so the Android TV reskin and slowmo rebrand is literally the linear successor.
(Of course, they are also rebranding Play Movies & TV on Android as Google TV, which makes me wonder what the Google Play Movies & TV app on Android TV is going to become Google TV on Google TV?)
youtube tv is sold in the US, not in the UK. youtubetv subsidizes the cost of the dongle in the US and not in the UK. much like netflix also subsidizes the cost of the dongle. Apparently, google is valuing its ability to push youtube tv with it a lot.
This might be the wrong place to complain about this issue. But "smart" TVs need to be replaced with "dumb TV + set top box" bundles. As it is now, the best panels are obsolete after a year.
You can always plug a box into the TV, even if it’s a smart TV.
The software can still update. Does the hardware needed to play a video really become obsolete in 1 year? Why, do hardware decoders improve that fast? People aren’t using these panels for games
My smart tv constantly gets in the way. If I boot up a game device it starts with a footer bar with apps and such that won't disappear for up to a minute. I have to press back on the remote if I want it to go away faster. If I accidentally press or long press a button on the remote the whole TV will be hijacked for a voice command or something. A year or so ago the TV decided that if it wasn't getting any inputs it should switch to a video app I never installed and automatically play. The days of getting a giant monitor must be over as the profits from bundling crapware with TVs must have driven down the costs so much that they no longer cannot contain them.
I bought my TV from Costco, it has Roku built-in and I think it gets the same software updates. The full integration has some advantages, like having a single remote that stops the playback when I turn the TV off.
But now that Roku has decided they want in on the content business and the ad business you are stuck with them (as am I). I don't want a device that has to make deals with content providers to take a cut TBH. That's why HBO Max is still not on Roku.
Gotta disagree with this, I'm very happy with the integrated Roku in my TCL TV. And the TV still has HDMI ports, so I don't see how it's obsolete if I ever want to stop using the Roku.
Depends on the implementation. My parents samsung tv has become unbearably slow and a factory reset doesn't fix it. I assume updates are to blame. Others are also reporting that their smart tv started showing adverts after years of owning it.
Since the panel is expensive and the brains are cheap, it makes more sense to have them split.
My parents have an Android TV, they have to regularly reboot it to fix its (wired) network connection. Nothing else on the network has a problem.
Meanwhile I have a second-hand Apple TV and it's great, but if it weren't great I would keep my television and replace it with a Fire/Roku/Whatever device.
I suppose they could keep their smart TV and hook up a less shitty external device to do the smart things, but then the smart TV is just a dumb TV that takes 5x longer to boot and presumably wastes extra electricity in the process.
If I had any faith in these Android-based televisions to get long term software support and be at all reliable maybe it would be different, but based on track records in the ecosystem I absolutely don't. The life span of a television panel is many times as long as the effective useful period of an android device.
> But "smart" TVs need to be replaced with "dumb TV + set top box" bundles.
That's how it used to work about 20-15 years ago before flat panels become popular and still does to the some degree - at least in Poland. You had a CRT tv and DVB-S receiver and service providers were teasing all the time with revolutionary tech that will come soon and change our life; we were promised home banking, shopping, VOD, interactive channels and content, even Internet browsing with phone line used as upload channel.
Years later, we got a new flat tv and gave up on satellite tv as ISP finally upgraded infrastructure to FTTH from classic copper and it made sense to have all services in one cable and pay for it at single provider. The Samsung UHD ICU 100 receiver comes with ISP branded linux software that handles tv features like EPG, show recording etc., parental control, USB external storage playback, there are also 3 VOD choices - ISP own one, Netflix and HBO in separated "apps", weather and radio interactive channels (radio comes with predefined stations you can't change). You can check bill, change the tv plan (channels are handled by company that still operates with DVB-S; once it was possible to buy channels separately, now you gotta aim at full packet offer). There are "ads" - of shows from VOD services but nothing else; no idea if device pukes anything if you decide to not opt-out from tracking but so far, I'm satisfied. The smart tv itself become obsolete quite fast - applications doesn't load anymore, Netflix notoriously crashes upon launching, but with this receiver it's like it got a second chance.
Summing up, some ideas advertised become the reality but on a different medium - VOD, interactive channels and content is here, done by FTTH (and of course DVB - all comes what you need and what you can have, where do you live) but some stuff never arrived or become pointless to implement (Internet browsing, home banking and shopping).
I was slightly confused by this as well but I think I got the gist. It's a chromecast interface/OS so that Google knows what you're watching on Netflix, Amazon Prime and other apps
Almost a 1:1 copy of the Apple TV app just with a worse copy of website https://www.apple.com/apple-tv-app, not new but ever so disappointing Google adds so little new to ideas they decide to adopt
The tv page was fine for me but the iphone and ipad pages are horrendous. I don't know why there is this trend in web design to make the page a video except you have to scroll to progress it.
Yes, the flattery appears most sincere with this one:
Google's take on the TV app from Apple that runs on Apple TV, iOS, and Mac, serving as a common UI to content from apps that buy into the partner ecosystem.
Awkward how unclear that site is: this new app from Google is to be the UI pre-installed on future Android TVs, but for now, you can get as a thing running on a $49 Chromecast puck.
I'm interested in Google Home functionality, and I like the Google assistant the most when comparing it to Siri and Alexa. It seems to better process non-generic questions and commands better than the other two.
What I'm not keen on is a cheap box that doesn't have enough RAM, so that it'll end up lagging. I don't understand why there isn't a premium model. I also don't want to dangle a weight from my HDMI port. That's probably how the HDMI ports broke on my last TV. I also would like to have volume buttons on the remotes. A mute button is nice but not enough. I'd rather trade the youtube and netflix buttons for real volume control buttons.
Same for me, I hope it won't be laggy at all and the UI is good to use. So far I like my setup with a chromecast and my phone as the remote/tv library (youtube, netflix, amazon video, disney etc.).
I especially like that I can start watching something and at the same time I can browse around for something else to watch.
It looks like the remote has volume buttons on the right side by the way.
I owned the Logitech Google TV which I bought for about $300 early in its lifespan. After about a year they shipped some really bad updates to it that made it so slow that it was essentially unuseable and removed several key features, and then never shipped another update to it again. Logitech and Google both lost interest in it and after not long all of the apps like Netflix and even Google's own Youtube stopped working because of changes to the underlying services.
Will this be different? I doubt it. I'm not putting more money into Google hardware to find out that they'll break it and then lose interest.
Meanwhile my second gen Apple TV is working great.
Because I can't feel the buttons with my thumb and have to look down, unlock my phone, switch to the right app, and then tap. It's a horrible experience.
Or when you want to pause said movie because you're getting a call, which prevents you from pausing the movie. Happens to me all the time while Chromecasting.
I use a wireless Xbox One S controller as a shield remote. It works great; I also use it when streaming games from my PC to the TV. I tried the shield controller and was pretty unimpressed.
Has logitech ever been been good at updates in general? Why would a peripheral company even be good at home entertainment? I'd agree that Nvidia's connection to home entertainment is just as vague, but they still sound much more reliable to me than Logitech.
And as much as people love bringing up Google deprecating stuff, I still trust them far more on updating this than any outside company.
Logitech has been in the home entertainment space for a long, long time (with their Harmony remotes, which did need software to make them work). In 2015 I'd certainly have placed more trust in a Logitech device in that space than an Nvidia one.
As a Squeezebox owner, I disagree. Their tech was good, but then the company that made them, Slim Devices, was acquired by Logitech. Everything got rebranded and then... they lost interest.
Which is a shame, but the Squeezbox world was perfect in that hardware and software worked perfectly together and it could integrate with services like Spotify, but you could actually also use it with your own music. Try that now, to have a central multi-room system for audio that is not dependent on external services.
To answer the original question: I don't trust any tech company that tries to blur the lines between physical products and digital services. That is, I don't trust any of them anymore.
IIRC, in the beginning they required a desktop application to be installed, and later Logitech released a new Silverlight-based version of said application on the web.
Of course, the application needed to communicate with the remote via USB, which I don't think was natively possible in the web browser at that time.
The harmony programming software is terrible. Thankfully you only need to fight with it until you get things set up nicely. The kicker for me is the fact that it asks you every time you use it if you'd recommend it to friends and family. I made it a point to say "no" every time.
Spec-wise, that tablet also held up for longer than expected, even after being discontinued. Although that's also saying something about the abysmal Android tablet market.
The Nvidia shield is still amazing although I'll chime in saying my OG rechargeable remote has also failed. The new one takes AAA batteries. Bleh.
That's preferable in my opinion, because then you can just keep rechargeable AAA batteries on hand and switch them out. Cheaper than proprietary un/removeable rechargeable batteries, more accessible than those coin batteries. (At least here)
I bought two of them and loved them for a couple years, at least for the content it opened up.
However casting was unreliable. I never figured it out but I remember posting on HN about it years ago and other people had the same complaint.
Then the YouTube app on my android phone would hang or crash. My Android phone kinda rotted after 4 years or so. I had a dedicated one for chromecast.
Now I just use a wireless keyboard and an Ubuntu box connected to the TV. Works quite well, I can get all the apps and content I want through the browser.
Yes, although the frame rate really sucks. I think that is a separate issue though. (You really notice it on action scenes)
I don't see why there would be any problem with Netflix in HD in the browser on Ubuntu ?
This PC is also from 2012 or so, so I think I should upgrade and maybe the frame rate will improve... I haven't isolated the issue. It's fine for most shows.
But I suspect Netflix encoding quality also sucks, because most people don't care as much as I do, so I haven't debugged it.
> I don't see why there would be any problem with Netflix in HD in the browser on Ubuntu ?
Because there isn't a browser released on Linux that has the right DRM capabilities to run Netflix's DRM, and thus Netflix on Linux is limited to less-than-HD, hence why I asked if you were able to get it working.
I just use Firefox on Ubuntu and it seems fine? Doesn't seem SD. Maybe I'm missing something -- is there a way to check?
The thing I notice is more the frame rate than the resolution. The resolution looks HD to me -- I can tell the difference with offline videos.
Hm I suppose it is possible I am getting some degraded quality from Netflix. I always thought it was because of the old PC and/or their bad encoding quality.
I mainly watch non-demanding video on Netflix, like a cooking show or standup comedy ... YouTube is definitely HD for me.
The last time I checked, Netflix was capped at 720p on non-Android Linux machines, but it's been a while since I've actually checked. I think the sentiments and conclusions in this thread[1] reflect the state of streaming HD content from Netflix on Linux, still.
I use a useragent changer to look like Edge and that seems to be all it takes to get the full-scale HD on Linux. Doesn't seem like Netflix go out of their way to disable it, though useragent sniffing is... Something you should never be doing.
Search for the video "Test Patterns". There's several different resolutions and framerates some with HDR too. That should help you figure out what you're getting.
Mine still "work" but something changed around 2017 and they became so unreliable I don't bother any more.
The Chromecast to Device connection is lost after about 10 minutes, making all controls not work. Can't pause, skip, select a new episode, etc.
The fix is seemingly random - maybe 50% of the time recasting from the app (Netflix, Hulu, etc) works. 30% of the time mucking around in the Google Home app will work, and 20% of the time I just have to unplug it.
Near as I can tell it's agnostic of client device, casting app, Chromecast gen (I've got 3 different versions around), or router.
Had the same problem. The solution seemed to be a stronger WIFI signal. Adding an extension cable to move the chromecast further away from the TV prevents the tv from blocking signals.
I had a similar problem, turns out my router was dropping bonjour/upnp packets. I think that was preventing my devices from properly discovering what services were available on my network. I never found a solution for the problem (OpenWRT+WRT3200ACM), but bought a different router and the problem magically went away (OpenWRT+R7800).
Could be any number of reasons why you are having issues unfortunately.
Interesting. Thanks for the information. Might be a project for a cold night this winter, or we just are pretty happy with Rokus now.
I'm certain the onset of the problem didn't coincide with a new router, and I've gone through a couple since it started so I assumed that wasn't the issue.
Yeah, who knows. In my case it worked for 1 to 72 hours after rebooting the router, then would drop 100% of the packets until the next reboot. It took some time to figure out what was going on.
I had the same problem, including the deteriorating performance when it used to be reliable (I don't know if the timing is the same but sounds about right), and the router fixed it for me as well. Maybe there were protocol / firmware changes that increased the demand on the router?
I went from a bargain router to a nicer mesh setup this spring and the problem just vanished overnight.
The fix for this is supposed to be go to into your Android settings and turn off battery optimization for Google Home and each app you cast.
It didn't work for me but loads of people reported success with it. It's a shame because I loved the Chromecast but had the exact same issue as you describe.
The only issue I have with OG Chromecasts is that YouTube channels with 1080p60 videos tend to make the system stutter like crazy. Other than that the original Chromecasts I bought still work pretty much flawlessly.
> The 1080p60 bug can be fixed by cutting the plastic lid off the Chromecast and adding a fan.
I can't tell if you are serious.
I can imagine circumstances where this would work, but... they involve the chromecast having a temp sensor and software to lower the clock speed to prevent overheating, resulting in skipped frames, but at the same time somehow not be able to lower the bitrate of the video stream.
Pretty much every single processor made in the past decade, if not two, has a core temperature sensor along with overheating regulation. Even the Raspberry Pi.
Typically embedded linux systems use the linux CPU frequency scaler, which uses various inputs including CPU temperature to scale the CPU clock frequency.
There is an extra element here... All of what you said is true, but the actual issue is not with the video decoding, but with the thread that feeds data from the network to the video decoder. That thread has some long running stuff running on it, which causes the task to enquire data to the video decode hardware to be delayed.
It used to work years ago, but as more and more software bloat has been added to run in this thread, the delays have increased to the point of stutteryness.
Some videos are jumpy because they have fewer seconds buffered in the hardware decoder.
Fan leads to the CPU throttling less, so the long-running events on the main thread run faster and delay the tasks that load data into the video decoder less.
This infuriates me. Google must know about this, and can surely lower the bitrate for these old Chromecasts, yet have chosen not to. Every time I encounter this on my old Chromecasts it reminds me of how they ruined the Nexus 7 with its final major os update. Blatantly trying to get people to buy new devices. Do no evil, my arse.
Chromecast Gen 1 never supported 1080p@60 and was advertised upto 1080p@30 or 720p@60. So I don't know how is it okay to expect a device that continues to function after 7 years(I have 2 still functioning) to support something it was never intended to in the first place.
Can't YouTube serve up the videos in formats that the original Chromecasts can consume? Surely either YouTube can know which Chromecast is making the request, and serve up an appropriate quality, or allow the Chromecast to request a lower quality version of the video. To be clear, I don't expect to be able to see videos in higher quality than was available at the time of purchase. I expect to be able to 'watch YouTube' as was advertised on the device's box.
I have an occasional issue where the chromecast just doesn't show up on wifi. You have to power it off and then on again. Has happened with a couple of different ones in a couple of different houses (i.e. different wifi networks).
Remember that Android TV and Google TV (the original one) are completely different products.
Reason Shield TV is still doing great is because they didn't cut any corners and future proofed in a way no one expected it from nvidia. It's great. It complely replaced my 6700K + GTX 1080 powered HTPC because streaming games from my PC to shield was easier than using windows from 10 ft away.
I was a little worried that it stops getting updates, but now I just have no reason to upgrade it because it's getting all the updates and performing great. I got the new dongle tho because it cost as much as new remote for shield...
Only weak points of 2015 shield to me: game pad was trash, remote control was large and yet easy to lose and bend.
While (I think) it has rudimentary YouTube support, it does not have an AppStore, or any sort of “ecosystem” around it that would need as much maintenance as an Android device or the APLE TVs running fully fledged tvOS these days, so I don’t think it’s an entirely fair comparison.
In the UK it doesn’t have iPlayer, which is probably the most popular VoD app after YouTube.
The Google TV predates the Chromecast by about a year. It's probably why Google lost interest in it. That's my point: Google's product ADHD will happily drop your chromecast too, especially with the launch of this new Google TV product.
I hear you. Google nerfed my Nest Hello last year without explanation, while letting my other Nest products pretty much die on the vine, even if I want to pay $X/month to enable my multiple $150+ cameras to be useful.
There is just so much wasted potential there. We have a "legit" security system that my wife wants to turn on expensive $50/month monitoring on, and I have been fending her off saying look we have all these motion detectors and cameras in the house, Google will pull this all together and do it 10x better, but it seems that day is never coming.
Did Google manage to convince Netflix to allow them to monitor what you watch on Netflix? This is one of the biggest holes in Apple TV (the app, on Apple TV, the box) - it knows most of what you watch and can make recommendations for Hulu, HBO, Prime, etc. and manage your queue except for Netflix.
Not exactly. When you install an app on android tv you can create a "channel". App developers get one channel "for free" and more channels requiring implicit consent from user.
Netflix chose to use recommendations as their first channel. Google TV acts as aggregator for those channels.
Ok, maybe I'm the only one, but I'm actually excited about this.
It appears to be an aggregation service. Instead of individually searching across N platforms for content (hulu, disney+, youtube, crunchyroll, netflix, etc), you can now just use a single app (Google TV) which will allows you to search and stream across all platforms you are subscribed to.
Furthermore you can cast stuff directly to chromecast from Google TV as well as watch locally on your device.
It's also been on Apple TV and Amazon's Fire TV for a long while now. Agreed, it's not novel. However, maybe Google's recommendations are better? Google tends to have the best AIs.
Look. I am not willing to pay for movies and mainstream shows.
Why should like me get such aggregation services that require 4 different subscriptions that add up to 600 Euro per year?
I never got these aggregation services - and there are already MANY of them. Here in Germany the Telcos are having setup boxes that are more powerful than this Google TV thing as they aggregate subscriptions AND are able to stream live TV via Cable. Just google Magenta TV and GIGA TV.
The success of Netflix proves people are willing to pay. What people are not as willing to do, is constantly pay more and more as studios try to wring more and more profit out of people. When you attempt to overcharge or to make the experience too burdensome, people don’t want to keep paying for it. “I want a reasonably priced service that is convenient” is not the same as “I want everything for free”.
My issue with these services is that they enable user profiling.
I have no issues with Amazon (or Netflix, which I don't use) knowing what I stream, but I do have an issue with Vodafone or Telekom knowing which TV channels I'm watching at what time.
If it's anything like Apple's TV app, it'll probably be awful.
The idea is sound: Let's use a common interface to all the content offered by the apps you already have installed.
But in practice (on Apple at least), it's awful. There's no telling whether you'll actually be able to view the content you see, or if it's just going to lead to some screen where you need to buy the content individually. Want to watch Family Guy? Oh it turns out YouTubeTV (your TV provider) has it but it's not donated to the AppleTV app, so you get a purchase link to buy an episode for $5, even though YouTubeTV actually has the same episode in your DVR library.
Want to watch the $sportsteam game that's on? Oh there's a link right there to watch it in the $sports_app app! Except that link takes you to a page that explains that you don't have the subscription necessary to actually watch the game. Or oops, it's blacked out in your area.
Or maybe you finally select something that's actually available to watch, so it links you out to the app that contains that content, only to have the app fail to support the appropriate intent/deep link, so you just end up on that app's home screen.
It ends up being this very hit-or-miss experience where anything you want to watch has like a 70% chance of actually succeeding, so you don't trust it, and it ends up being worthless.
I'm hoping this just means an OS update for those of us with NVidia Shield TV devices (or other Android TV devices). Better app/search integration would be nice, but I'm not giving up local/network playback options, and really don't want to see the apps languish (netflix, hulu, amazon prime, etc) too much.
Like many others, I got very confused by this branding.
Its a Chromecast (4k60 HDR HDMI Dongle) that is running Android TV (Which they appear to be calling Google TV). And a remote control with voice controls. [1]
Not sure I see any reason why someone should get this over an Nvidia Shield. Which at least has a track record of long term support. Certainly a lower price point though, so maybe a market there?
If you already have the shield may as well stick with that. But if you don't have the shield the prices are quite different and the Google TV may be more appealing.
447 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 325 ms ] threadThen I was confused again- is this an actual TV? Oh it's a dongle- no, wait, that's a Chromecast with Google TV.
Anyway, I guess this is a new content app like Hulu.
Is my 65" TV I splashed out on going to stop getting updates now...
https://store.google.com/us/product/chromecast_google_tv_com...
That page is a bit better at explaining things.
The lack of that feature is my biggest gripe with the current dongle. The Cast protocol is a pain in the butt in terms of apps that support it.
I don't know about this device, but what you are describing is the antitheses of how chomecast is intended to work (or at least it was, from the beginning of chromecast to the last time I checked).
The idea is that you never stream anything from your phone, but rather your phone is a remote control and service authentication device for the chromecast.
Remember the old book/saying "Don't Make Me Think"? (Krug, 2000. Wow, it's 20 years old now?!)
This site made me think in ways that seem really unnecessary.
Serious question, why is this site designed like this, I honestly don't understand the goal here. It's like a slideshow? People in general are so interested in this they do actually page through it? I feel like it took some real effort to finally learn things that should've been on page 1.
My only problem is I've scrolled through the whole thing and I'm still not clear if Google TV is a website, a piece of hardware, a bundle of content, or what...?
It's clearly not just hardware because it says "Chromecast with Google TV". But then it definitely involves an app because it says "Use the app" and "Coming soon to smart TVs."
But I still am not exactly clear how it integrates with the streaming apps? In fact I have no idea whatsoever. Do I watch HBO and Netflix through Google TV? Or is Google TV just a glorified playlists app that lets me get recommendations across services, that then links out to watch them in separate apps? Is it a free app or a paid subscription service? Does it give me access to exclusive content? Or network TV?
I'm left with no idea why I would use this or not because I still don't know what it is.
Like watchlist in Search, the new Google TV app, and the launcher on this Chromecast.
(Disclosure: I work for Google, but I don't work on this)
If it doesn't get shutdown by Christmas its probably because they working out how to integrate it into Google Docs.
Google merges Chromecast and Android TV with the “Chromecast with Google TV”
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/09/google-merges-chrome...
My phone app (Movies & TV) updated to Google TV automatically.
I'm just kidding myself, theres no way itll work that cleanly.
For customers, it's essentially a chromecast + remote + new interface to choose apps (which is pretty generic)
The Google TV 10 years ago was rebranded as Android TV, so the Android TV reskin and slowmo rebrand is literally the linear successor.
(Of course, they are also rebranding Play Movies & TV on Android as Google TV, which makes me wonder what the Google Play Movies & TV app on Android TV is going to become Google TV on Google TV?)
Edit: Clarify it's the dongle
£59.99 = $77.45
$49.99 = £38.72
It's actually twice the price!
The software can still update. Does the hardware needed to play a video really become obsolete in 1 year? Why, do hardware decoders improve that fast? People aren’t using these panels for games
Unfortunately some devices don't support it, but I would guess most streaming sticks/boxes do.
Since the panel is expensive and the brains are cheap, it makes more sense to have them split.
Meanwhile I have a second-hand Apple TV and it's great, but if it weren't great I would keep my television and replace it with a Fire/Roku/Whatever device.
I suppose they could keep their smart TV and hook up a less shitty external device to do the smart things, but then the smart TV is just a dumb TV that takes 5x longer to boot and presumably wastes extra electricity in the process.
If I had any faith in these Android-based televisions to get long term software support and be at all reliable maybe it would be different, but based on track records in the ecosystem I absolutely don't. The life span of a television panel is many times as long as the effective useful period of an android device.
That's how it used to work about 20-15 years ago before flat panels become popular and still does to the some degree - at least in Poland. You had a CRT tv and DVB-S receiver and service providers were teasing all the time with revolutionary tech that will come soon and change our life; we were promised home banking, shopping, VOD, interactive channels and content, even Internet browsing with phone line used as upload channel.
Years later, we got a new flat tv and gave up on satellite tv as ISP finally upgraded infrastructure to FTTH from classic copper and it made sense to have all services in one cable and pay for it at single provider. The Samsung UHD ICU 100 receiver comes with ISP branded linux software that handles tv features like EPG, show recording etc., parental control, USB external storage playback, there are also 3 VOD choices - ISP own one, Netflix and HBO in separated "apps", weather and radio interactive channels (radio comes with predefined stations you can't change). You can check bill, change the tv plan (channels are handled by company that still operates with DVB-S; once it was possible to buy channels separately, now you gotta aim at full packet offer). There are "ads" - of shows from VOD services but nothing else; no idea if device pukes anything if you decide to not opt-out from tracking but so far, I'm satisfied. The smart tv itself become obsolete quite fast - applications doesn't load anymore, Netflix notoriously crashes upon launching, but with this receiver it's like it got a second chance.
Summing up, some ideas advertised become the reality but on a different medium - VOD, interactive channels and content is here, done by FTTH (and of course DVB - all comes what you need and what you can have, where do you live) but some stuff never arrived or become pointless to implement (Internet browsing, home banking and shopping).
Google's take on the TV app from Apple that runs on Apple TV, iOS, and Mac, serving as a common UI to content from apps that buy into the partner ecosystem.
Awkward how unclear that site is: this new app from Google is to be the UI pre-installed on future Android TVs, but for now, you can get as a thing running on a $49 Chromecast puck.
I bought this for the remote. There's not really anything to "improve" here. It's a dumb box that aggregates streaming apps.
The real differentiator is google assistant (and associated google home ecosystem - if you've bought into that)
What I'm not keen on is a cheap box that doesn't have enough RAM, so that it'll end up lagging. I don't understand why there isn't a premium model. I also don't want to dangle a weight from my HDMI port. That's probably how the HDMI ports broke on my last TV. I also would like to have volume buttons on the remotes. A mute button is nice but not enough. I'd rather trade the youtube and netflix buttons for real volume control buttons.
It looks like the remote has volume buttons on the right side by the way.
https://www.theverge.com/21495609/google-chromecast-2020-rev...
That’s good news on the remote though
Client or client + server?
Will this be different? I doubt it. I'm not putting more money into Google hardware to find out that they'll break it and then lose interest.
Meanwhile my second gen Apple TV is working great.
https://www.amazon.com/Lithium-Battery-Charger-Rechargeable-...
Would you have been able to know in 2015 that the Nvidia product was going to be supported, but the Logitech one would be abandoned?
Real question actually. I doubt it, but that's a weakly held opinion.
But ... DRM.
And as much as people love bringing up Google deprecating stuff, I still trust them far more on updating this than any outside company.
Which is a shame, but the Squeezbox world was perfect in that hardware and software worked perfectly together and it could integrate with services like Spotify, but you could actually also use it with your own music. Try that now, to have a central multi-room system for audio that is not dependent on external services.
To answer the original question: I don't trust any tech company that tries to blur the lines between physical products and digital services. That is, I don't trust any of them anymore.
Of course, the application needed to communicate with the remote via USB, which I don't think was natively possible in the web browser at that time.
Harmony remotes are merely the least bad option.
The Nvidia shield is still amazing although I'll chime in saying my OG rechargeable remote has also failed. The new one takes AAA batteries. Bleh.
That's preferable in my opinion, because then you can just keep rechargeable AAA batteries on hand and switch them out. Cheaper than proprietary un/removeable rechargeable batteries, more accessible than those coin batteries. (At least here)
https://9to5google.com/2020/09/30/android-tv-replaced-google...
However casting was unreliable. I never figured it out but I remember posting on HN about it years ago and other people had the same complaint.
Then the YouTube app on my android phone would hang or crash. My Android phone kinda rotted after 4 years or so. I had a dedicated one for chromecast.
Now I just use a wireless keyboard and an Ubuntu box connected to the TV. Works quite well, I can get all the apps and content I want through the browser.
I don't see why there would be any problem with Netflix in HD in the browser on Ubuntu ?
This PC is also from 2012 or so, so I think I should upgrade and maybe the frame rate will improve... I haven't isolated the issue. It's fine for most shows.
But I suspect Netflix encoding quality also sucks, because most people don't care as much as I do, so I haven't debugged it.
Because there isn't a browser released on Linux that has the right DRM capabilities to run Netflix's DRM, and thus Netflix on Linux is limited to less-than-HD, hence why I asked if you were able to get it working.
The thing I notice is more the frame rate than the resolution. The resolution looks HD to me -- I can tell the difference with offline videos.
Hm I suppose it is possible I am getting some degraded quality from Netflix. I always thought it was because of the old PC and/or their bad encoding quality.
I mainly watch non-demanding video on Netflix, like a cooking show or standup comedy ... YouTube is definitely HD for me.
https://android.gadgethacks.com/how-to/netflix-caps-video-qu...
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/Ubuntu/comments/c26pc0/netflix_1080...
The Chromecast to Device connection is lost after about 10 minutes, making all controls not work. Can't pause, skip, select a new episode, etc.
The fix is seemingly random - maybe 50% of the time recasting from the app (Netflix, Hulu, etc) works. 30% of the time mucking around in the Google Home app will work, and 20% of the time I just have to unplug it.
Near as I can tell it's agnostic of client device, casting app, Chromecast gen (I've got 3 different versions around), or router.
We've kindof just given up and gone back to Roku.
Could be any number of reasons why you are having issues unfortunately.
I'm certain the onset of the problem didn't coincide with a new router, and I've gone through a couple since it started so I assumed that wasn't the issue.
I went from a bargain router to a nicer mesh setup this spring and the problem just vanished overnight.
It didn't work for me but loads of people reported success with it. It's a shame because I loved the Chromecast but had the exact same issue as you describe.
I can't tell if you are serious.
I can imagine circumstances where this would work, but... they involve the chromecast having a temp sensor and software to lower the clock speed to prevent overheating, resulting in skipped frames, but at the same time somehow not be able to lower the bitrate of the video stream.
Seems... mildly improbable.
It used to work years ago, but as more and more software bloat has been added to run in this thread, the delays have increased to the point of stutteryness.
Some videos are jumpy because they have fewer seconds buffered in the hardware decoder.
Reason Shield TV is still doing great is because they didn't cut any corners and future proofed in a way no one expected it from nvidia. It's great. It complely replaced my 6700K + GTX 1080 powered HTPC because streaming games from my PC to shield was easier than using windows from 10 ft away.
I was a little worried that it stops getting updates, but now I just have no reason to upgrade it because it's getting all the updates and performing great. I got the new dongle tho because it cost as much as new remote for shield...
Only weak points of 2015 shield to me: game pad was trash, remote control was large and yet easy to lose and bend.
There is just so much wasted potential there. We have a "legit" security system that my wife wants to turn on expensive $50/month monitoring on, and I have been fending her off saying look we have all these motion detectors and cameras in the house, Google will pull this all together and do it 10x better, but it seems that day is never coming.
Um, well... coming from Google this is more of a turn-off, not a selling point.
Netflix chose to use recommendations as their first channel. Google TV acts as aggregator for those channels.
It appears to be an aggregation service. Instead of individually searching across N platforms for content (hulu, disney+, youtube, crunchyroll, netflix, etc), you can now just use a single app (Google TV) which will allows you to search and stream across all platforms you are subscribed to.
Furthermore you can cast stuff directly to chromecast from Google TV as well as watch locally on your device.
(I genuinely thought it was still called Google TV so I was rather confused by this post - I couldn't work out what was new.)
The only aggregation on existing Android TV seems to be “Continue Watching” across apps.
Why should like me get such aggregation services that require 4 different subscriptions that add up to 600 Euro per year?
I never got these aggregation services - and there are already MANY of them. Here in Germany the Telcos are having setup boxes that are more powerful than this Google TV thing as they aggregate subscriptions AND are able to stream live TV via Cable. Just google Magenta TV and GIGA TV.
I have no issues with Amazon (or Netflix, which I don't use) knowing what I stream, but I do have an issue with Vodafone or Telekom knowing which TV channels I'm watching at what time.
That's why I prefer DVB-C.
The idea is sound: Let's use a common interface to all the content offered by the apps you already have installed.
But in practice (on Apple at least), it's awful. There's no telling whether you'll actually be able to view the content you see, or if it's just going to lead to some screen where you need to buy the content individually. Want to watch Family Guy? Oh it turns out YouTubeTV (your TV provider) has it but it's not donated to the AppleTV app, so you get a purchase link to buy an episode for $5, even though YouTubeTV actually has the same episode in your DVR library.
Want to watch the $sportsteam game that's on? Oh there's a link right there to watch it in the $sports_app app! Except that link takes you to a page that explains that you don't have the subscription necessary to actually watch the game. Or oops, it's blacked out in your area.
Or maybe you finally select something that's actually available to watch, so it links you out to the app that contains that content, only to have the app fail to support the appropriate intent/deep link, so you just end up on that app's home screen.
It ends up being this very hit-or-miss experience where anything you want to watch has like a 70% chance of actually succeeding, so you don't trust it, and it ends up being worthless.
Yes I'm bitter.
Movies and shows are grouped in ways that reflect your interests."
I can't be the only one who _wants_ to be surprised, out of their usual bubble of interest, at least sometimes.
How can one tell this to all these "clever" things?
Something, something, cold dead hands.
I think for 99% of people though this new Google dongle will do everything they need but cheaper.
Its a Chromecast (4k60 HDR HDMI Dongle) that is running Android TV (Which they appear to be calling Google TV). And a remote control with voice controls. [1]
Not sure I see any reason why someone should get this over an Nvidia Shield. Which at least has a track record of long term support. Certainly a lower price point though, so maybe a market there?
[1] https://store.google.com/us/product/chromecast_google_tv_spe...