Talk:Chromecast

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 July 2020 and 14 August 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ikhan94.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:03, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedy deleted as lacking sufficient context to identify its subject, because... (your reason here) --Matt's talk 17:13, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

It is a Google product. There is a link to Google, which is sufficient context.

Wrong page CSD'd, Apologies! - →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 17:20, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

DIAL

The DIAL protocol created by Google and Netflix is what makes Chromecast possible. --Xero (talk) 16:05, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Would like to see that assertion made in a reliable source we could reference. Barte (talk) 20:42, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm, reliable source? Like the official link in my comment maybe? Or one of the many internet articles from Reddit, to the Verge, to Slashdot talking about it that you could easily have researched yourself? --Xero (talk) 16:05, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

The onus is on you to provide sources, and to update the article with pertinent information. There's nobody whose job it is to evaluate every unsourced statement put forth on talk pages. If you think inclusion of the information is appropriate, add it yourself.VmZH88AZQnCjhT40 (talk) 20:23, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Here you go. Engadget Forbes The Verge Chrome App Tutorial from the Google Cast page links directly to DIAL application names on the DIAL page I posted above The DIAL Application Name Registry That should be enough references for a start. --Xero (talk) 16:13, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

To make the case that DIAL is what makes Chromecast possible, I'd want a single source that at least mentions both of them. I don't see that in the references you cite, although some come close. But that's just my opinion. Feel free to edit the article as you see fit and see how others react to it. Barte (talk) 18:43, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

The page implies that DIAL is no-longer used, instead favoring mDNS. This seems inaccurate, however, as mDNS is used by the client to find the ChromeCast, not to initiate the video stream. There is no reference showing that the use of DIAL was discontinued. Thoughts? Brian310207 (talk) 20:37, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Per Naddaf, Ali (May 1, 2014). "Google Cast Developers (Chromecast developer post)". Google+. Google., DIAL is no longer used. This admittedly isn't a secondary source, but given that Naddaf posted as a Google developer, I think it qualifies as a primary. Barte (talk) 23:17, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Nexus Q

Would it be fair to say that the Nexus Q was the predecessor to this device? Kevlar (talk) 19:17, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

USA Today (and others) think so. Barte (talk) 20:41, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Is it an embedded version of Chrome OS or Google TV?

Hi everybody!

A group of hackers have hacked and rooted the Chromecast device[1] and in a blog post by ExtremeTech they say that it is not an embedded version of Chrome OS, but the Google TV software. This article (and other blog posts posted before this group of hackers rooted the device) say it is Chrome OS. What do you think, should we change the Operating System field to Google TV?

--Avm99963 (talk) 18:19, 29 July 2013 (UTC) [1]: http://www.extremetech.com/computing/162463-chromecast-hacked-its-based-on-google-tv-and-android-not-chrome-os

I'm trying to figure this out too. The official word from Google is that the OS is Chrome OS. As long as that's the case, I think Wikipedia should include at least this information--that Google claimes it's a Chrome OS device. But according to GTV Hacker, "it’s more Android than ChromeOS. To be specific, it’s actually a modified Google TV release, but with all of the Bionic / Dalvik stripped out and replaced with a single binary for Chromecast. Since the Marvell DE3005 SOC running this is a single core variant of the 88DE3100, most of the Google TV code was reused. So, although it’s not going to let you install an APK or anything, its origins: the bootloader, kernel, init scripts, binaries, are all from the Google TV." So is GTV saying the OS is an Android variant? Or if it's Google TV, is Google TV an OS? Barte (talk) 23:06, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Have modified article accordingly, citing a YouTube video of the archived press conference which claims a "simplified version of Chrome OS" and a subsequent report that the OS is actually modified Android. I can't find any Google acknowledgment of the disparity. Barte (talk) 15:57, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I did a quick look at the source code and see references to Android Open Source Project and Chrome OS. Until there is an official clarification, your paragraph should stay as-is. Frmorrison (talk) 18:53, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Interesting. And of course, we can't resolve things here. We can only record the ambiguity. Barte (talk) 02:05, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Also, note that in the Google Chrome Releases Blog they post updates for the Chromecast. However, they don't mention any name. Avm99963 (want to talk?) 11:29, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Here is another Google reference, the first one the above, to the Chromecast being a Chrome OS device [1].Frmorrison (talk) 21:17, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Power over HDMI

Hello, the article appears to indicate that the Chromecast is powered over HDMI, but as far as I know and as far as I have read, all indications are that they are powered over the MicroUSB port that is in the back. The only places where I can find of someone claiming it is powered over HDMI is on a user review on Amazon, which is not necessarily the most reliable. Here are some links:

http://www.androidcentral.com/did-google-gloss-over-chromecast-needing-usb-power-not-hardly http://allthingsd.com/20130730/review-of-googles-new-chromecast/?refcat=news

EdwardGlashaus (talk) 18:10, 31 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by EdwardGlashaus (talk • contribs) 18:05, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

There were some reports that the device would work with MHL-powered HDMI port, thereby not needing an external power source. But a Google search seems to indicate it could be otherwise, in which case you're right. If so, I not only think the article should be changed but the image: it should show a cable connected to the MicroUSB port. I've not seen any clarification from this from Google itself Barte (talk) 18:27, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Pogue and Mossberg both claim an external power source is needed. I've cited both and edited accordingly. Barte (talk) 18:50, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the help! EdwardGlashaus (talk) 19:52, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for point it out. Barte (talk) 23:19, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I've removed these sections that mention HDMI-ML power because it's just not true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.54.46 (talk) 23:44, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Local content streaming

"Chromecast does not currently allow users to stream video and music stored locally on their own devices." I put that in, citing the report in The Verge. But what about the "cast tab" option on the Chrome browser? It's in beta; the reviews say it's sketchy, but should we include? Barte (talk) 18:10, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Superfluous column in tables?

Does the Web/Chrome column in the two tables have any meaning? Seems to me that all these web apps, current and in development, can already be mirrored via the tab cast function, as can other web apps not mentioned. If no objections, I'm going to remove the column. Barte (talk) 15:13, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, there was some confusion with the meaning of Web, Android, and iOS column values. In the table for existing apps, it was intended to signify whether or not the app supported Chromecast on that platform. Whereas in the "in-development" table, it was intended to signify whether or not an app existed for that platform. I think it would be appropriate to remove all of the platform columns from the "in-development" table, and re-create the Web/Chrome column in the existing app table to identify which services have Chromecast support in their web app(s). Txaggiemichael (talk) 05:30, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

This works for me. I've revised the intro paragraph to reflect the table changes. Barte (talk) 06:20, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Table: "Ready" vs. "In development"

I understand the intended distinction. But I don't understand how we know: the references in the table don't specifically say that an app is ready, pending approval. Barte (talk) 02:02, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Apps Not Listed in Table

A couple of Chromecast-compatible apps aren't listed in the table. Tic-Tac-Toe for Chromecast (iOS: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/id725532362 Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.swishly.cast.tictactoe ) and Google Santa Tracker (Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.santatracker ). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.177.36.37 (talk) 16:00, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

If you'd like to see the two you've mentioned added, please feel free to add them. According to a recent Gigaom article, "'hundreds of developers' have signed up to add Chromecast capabilities to their apps." i.e., it will be difficult to keep the table current and definitive, and all help in that direction will be appreciated. Barte (talk) 16:40, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm sure there will be thousands of apps soon, so we need to not make the list all inclusive. --Pmsyyz (talk) 16:14, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Table: status of pending apps

Now that the SDK is released to all takers, I'm wondering how long the pending status of some apps--listed as "In development" or "Ready"--should be maintained. If they are formally launched, they are (presumably) real. If they are not, at some point they are vaporware. I'd like to give it a month. Reasonable? Barte (talk) 01:19, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I'd approve of this idea, I think we may also want to consider moving the table to List of apps with Chromecast support or similar if it gets too large. --Nicereddy (talk) 01:08, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree--the chart is probably going to justify its own entry. I've noticed elsewhere online that the table, in particular, is getting linked. People are looking for a definitive list, and while the table isn't intended as that, it is perceived as usefully comprehensive. Barte (talk) 05:26, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

One month later, there being no objections, I've removed them. (Another editor, with good justification, already removed the "Ready" status listings.) This has always been at best a weak correlation: many of the released apps were never announced as "in development", while most of the apps purportedly "in development" have never been released. Barte (talk) 17:32, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

One of the "in development" apps, MyShoebox, appears to be available with Chromecast support now: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.couchlabs.shoebox&hl=en — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.164.79.72 (talk) 18:48, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. Barte (talk) 18:57, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

I've now spun off the app list to List of apps with Chromecast support, as suggested above. Wezzo (talk) 14:02, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't think that was necessary. Until a few months ago, there was nowhere where one could find a comprehensive list of supported apps. Now Google's Chromecast page does that. Furthermore, it will become too difficult to maintain a comprehensive list of this ourselves. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 14:27, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm not a Wikipedia policy expert, but I don't think the fact that Google have their own list is reason enough to preclude a Wikipedia list, too. Is this really that different a deal, to, say, List of free and open-source Android applications? - Wezzo (talk) 14:31, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Seems rather similar, but there's over 10,000 apps now that support Chromecast, so a list may be impractical to maintain. I've opened the article up for a deletion discussion to see what others think. Feel free to weigh in. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 14:57, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Streaming video from phone/computer?

Can the chromecast show a movie that's stored on a local computer or phone? If so, which app would be used for that? This should be added to the article. AxelBoldt (talk) 16:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. I took a crack at it; feel free to improve. Barte (talk) 20:25, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Natively

I'm unclear how "natively" is being used here--as in "the second allows mirroring of most content displayed by the web browser Google Chrome running on a personal computer, as well as content displayed natively on some Android devices" Meaning, directly from the screen as opposed to from Chrome? Barte (talk) 16:28, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Ethernet Adapter for Gen 2

I've gotten the Ethernet adapter to work with Gen 2, anybody know a reliable source I can cite so I can add that info to the article? xnamkcor (talk) 22:26, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

The entry already mentions the adaptor. And I think it would be assumed that the device would work with both Chromecast models. Barte (talk) 23:34, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

It's omitted from the "Connectivity" row of the table in the Gen 2 column. And technical compatibility between devices on Wikipedia is hardly a place to rely on "common sense". xnamkcor (talk) 01:14, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, I haven't read that it isn't compatible with the two new models, so I inserted it into the table, twice. If anyone objects, please revert . Barte (talk) 01:34, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Gen 2 Doesn't Support "b/g/n"?

The Gen 1 table entry lists b, g, and n, but the Gen 2 column only lists "ac". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xnamkcor (talk • contribs) 05:16, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Per the sources we cite, that's the case. Barte (talk) 05:46, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

From what I can tell, ac is backwards compatible with those. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:46, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Additionally, I've tested the Gen 2 with 802.11n and it will only connect using a 40mhz connection (300mbit/s), while my WAP Supports 60mhz (450mbit/s max) connections. For testing the devices were literally next to each other. This behavior is the same on both 2Ghz and 5Ghz channels. I highly doubt it would easy to find documentation of this online.. Google tech support couldn't even answer me when I asked them it's connection speed (Before I realized I could check with my AirPort software). ZymeUser (talk) 11:52, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Gbit instead of MB?

Any objection to expressing the "Storage" stats in the chart in gigatbits, "Gbit", instead of converting to MB? Barte (talk) 00:34, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

I think it should be expressed in the most easily understood form, which is megabytes and gigabytes. If it requires a calculation on our part to arrive at that (and a hidden note to avoid incorrect edits), then so be it. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 00:59, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

I left the numbers unchanged and added a note. Barte (talk) 05:48, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Critics?

The german version has a section called "disadvantages and critics" with important information. I feel that this articel is not very critical at all.

What about the fact, that chromcast needs an internet connection to work? Is there a possibility to opt-out from google's data collection?

I would like to see more critics here like in the german version!

Criticism sections are generally discouraged (see Wikipedia:Criticism). I fail to see how a product that has mostly been praised and sold well needs a dedicated section entitled "Criticisms" that are mainly a collection of differences in how the product inherently works from other competing products. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 04:29, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Chromecast hasn't drawn any obvious criticism, at least from what I've seen, at least in English. This is, after all, a $35 device, so performance expectations are already tempered. Barte (talk) 06:13, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Google Cast

Just recently Google had changed the brand of the Chromecast to Google Cast so would you please move the page to a new page called Google Cast. LegendUK4WIKI (talk) 22:33, 28 March 2016 (UTC)LegendUK4WIKI

The page is correct as we have it. Chromecast is a family of two devices. Google Cast is the technology Chromecast uses. "Google Cast" redirects and is discussed here. I do think there's a case to create a new Google Cast (technology) entry. But it's not just a move, it's a project. Barte (talk) 23:35, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Bluetooth

The Chromecast uses Bluetooth for the setup phase, but Bluetooth is not in the spec 77.126.17.216 (talk) 20:15, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

I think you are mistaken. It is all done through Wi-Fi. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 20:23, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

That's my impression too and I don't see anything online suggesting overwise. Barte (talk) 20:44, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Article split

This article I think has become too big to be easy to follow for someone who is looking for information on one particular device. I suggest breaking this article into 5 distinct articles, which would make information easier to follow. My suggestions are as follows

1. Chromecast (1st generation) or Chromecast (2013)
2. Chromecast (2nd generation) or Chromecast (2015)
3. Chromecast Audio
4. Chromecast Ultra
5. Chromecast - This article would be the same as now with most of the individual products details being moved. It would describe them in summary and keep the model comparison chart.

Right now the article I find to be just too confusing. The infobox does not give people a real idea of the products offered.

Thoughts? - Galatz^Talk 20:37, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. Not every generation of a device requires its own article, particularly when the main difference between each one is the specs. What is the problem with the infobox that it does not accurately portray the 4 devices in the Chromecast family? 21:16, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

I also disagree. For the most part, these are successive generations of the audio/video product and splitting them off would just fragment the story. I do think there may be a case for a separate article for Chromecast Audio, which does seem to fall into a different product category. But said article should be more thoroughly researched, not just the material here re-posted. Barte (talk) 22:54, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Thats why I was thinking keep the current article for the "story" you mention, similar to how there is a Google Nexus article that shows how things progressed over time. The audio device I think has the least information available out of all of them. I feel individual articles could better show the picture of each device, that in my opinion gets lost here. - Galatz^Talk 23:02, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Looking at the example of the Nexus 7, I can see how this could work. A fair amount of work though, but I don't oppose if someone wants to do it. Barte (talk) 23:16, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

I don't see how there is enough information unique to any of these products to warrant a separate article. The casting functionality/operation is identical for all Chromecasts, so that information would just get repeated. The Google Cast SDK info applies to all products. All sales figures that Google publishes are for the entire family of devices. The only things that would be unique for each product (and subsequently, each article) are info on the specs/design and the specific reception to that product. I don't think that is enough to make each article stand on its own. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 01:50, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Features and operation: reduce

With the Google Cast entry (a split I agree with), parts of the Features and operation section here are now duplicated in both. I'd like to either retain the first and last paragraphs of the section and delete the rest, or do that and summarize the rest. Either way, I'd include a link to Google Cast within the section. Thoughts? Barte (talk) 19:07, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

I've tried to isolate items that are unique to Chromecast, rather than Google Cast receivers in general, in the respective articles. Unfortunately, that's not quite so easy. Obviously, there needs to be some instructional info on how Chromecasts are operated, meaning info on mobile apps, web apps, tab casting, and screencasting. Then there's info on Backdrop, which from what I can tell, is not something every Cast receiver utilizes, meaning it should stay in this article. Then there's Guest Mode, which was implemented at the Google Cast SDK level, but is available to certain Chromecasts depending on your sender device, and is not available for Android TV devices. Then there's info on HD audio and grouping Chromecast Audios together for multi-room playback, which seems to be best served in this article. There's still some detail whacking we can do, but it's a little difficult, in my opinion. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:27, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

I went over the material again and yeah, I take your point: it's tricky. And it also occurs to me: what if you're, say, a Sony Vizeo TV owner with Google Cast built in, or an LG Flow speaker owner with the same? You don't own a Chromecast, but the user interface, including the Google Home app, could be much the same. Does that mean we should reunite the entire thing under Google Cast, with a Chromecast redirect? That would be a long article. Barte (talk) 20:13, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Nah, I don't think so. I think the Google Cast article can keep the most detailed information about operating the casting functionality (such as which version of each OS is required), but we try to focus the Chromecast article on only information relevant to the player (keeping in mind that it was for a while the only implementation of the Google Cast SDK). Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 20:40, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

I can live with it. Obviously, the entire space keeps evolving, and so will we. Thanks for considering. Barte (talk) 20:59, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Chromecast Ultra

There isn't information about SOC and RAM of Chromecast Ultra. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:B07:2EC:8391:DCC9:EB7C:19FC:B2EC (talk) 07:12, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, because no one has published a teardown of the device. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:34, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

the App

I don't understand your rationale for reverting me Barte. I'm trying to get away from the confusing language used to describe the app's name changes, as well as listing things chronologically. Your edit summary only contains text from the article as far as I can see - even text I fully agree to. Instead, I need you to outline your specific complaints that made you revert. Thx CapnZapp (talk) 21:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@CapnZapp: Point taken. Here's most of what you added:

It was originally released under the name Chromecast app released at the same time as the original video model and is available for both Android and iOS mobile devices....

In May 2016, the Chromecast app was re-named the Google Cast app, due to the proliferation of products that suppoert casting that aren't the Chromecast.

IMO, the additions are awkwardly phrased with at least one glaring typo. I think I glimpse your meaning, but I'm not sure. The point of a copy edit it to improve the writing. I think these take it in the other direction. Barte (talk) 22:14, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for catching the typo. And glad you agree that without pointing to it, your edit summaries aren't really telling the other editor what reasons you have for reverting. Anyway, I'll try another tack: I'll apply the various parts of my edit one step at a time to avoid wholesale reversion of my contribution, and let me know more precisely what part, if any, that are contested. CapnZapp (talk) 22:26, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for trying again. I'll let it rest here and see if anyone else comments. Otherwise, I'll try to c.e. your c.e. Barte (talk) 22:43, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Like CapnZapp (talk) 15:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

hardware with crippleware, spyware, hard coded dns also being utilised for censorship?

This hardware device plays a network stream, whether from the internet or one's home network. Nowhere does it say on the box or in this article that usage will require a google account, or that setup can only be done with a phone and not a personal computer. This article also fails to mention the hard coded dns and whether it is being used to profile users or censor content. As hardware device, there is no technical reason for connecting to google servers either when setting up or casting. Google is insisting on knowing who we are, where we are and what we are watching when none of these things are any of their business or related in any way to device functionality. Chromecast appears to be refusing to cast content from many streaming sites. Is this really a CODEC issue? This article should explain precisely when the device contacts google, for what reason, and how that data is used. 123.211.79.178 (talk) 01:26, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

The above information should not be included in the article because Wikipedia is not a guide. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:42, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

That doesn't make it a guide. How can you reason that? 50.208.230.141 (talk) 22:41, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Edge

I find I can cast from Edge using More tools, Cast media to device. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:5988:EC00:E156:14A9:781B:BAFE (talk) 10:23, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of List of apps with Google Cast support for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of apps with Google Cast support is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of apps with Google Cast support until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

InfiniteNexus (talk) 20:20, 15 February 2024 (UTC)