Google Discontinues the Chromecast, Announces the Google TV Streamer

[qlum]

Main draw of the chromecast was just plug it in, no hassle with a visible device, it did what it had to, it just worked. I guess now that most smart tv's have their own build in features that mostly work it's no longer needed?

Don't need one at home but at work they have been great simple devices.

To me this seems like a downgrade.

 

[A Computer Guy]

Well, looks like Chromecast will be #296 for the graveyard. The amount of abandonware Google has produced over the years is absolutely incredible.

Killed by Google

Killed by Google is the open source list of dead Google products, services, and devices. It serves as a tribute and memorial of beloved services and products killed by Google.

killedbygoogle.com

I think I have 2 or 3 of these. Guess I better make sure they are updated before updates aren't available anymore.

 

[trsttte]

The increase in price seems a bit steep when they data mine everything one does with the device, a firetv stick greatly undercuts this now, but meh, at least they changed the format to something more sensible and added the bloody ethernet port all previous versions and a lot of these cheap boxes miss.

Well, looks like Chromecast will be #296 for the graveyard. The amount of abandonware Google has produced over the years is absolutely incredible.

Killed by Google

Killed by Google is the open source list of dead Google products, services, and devices. It serves as a tribute and memorial of beloved services and products killed by Google.

killedbygoogle.com

A product evolving doesn't count as something that was killed. I'd love if they killed the chromecast as it's something that should never have existed, miracast is both simpler and more universally compatible, the only reason chromecast existed was to pad google's revenue and appease some content cartels which was stupid in both counts - miracast supports hdcp, it was simply not necessary to force a proprietary crappy technology.

The recent evolution of chromecast into google tv now with this format change from the dongle to a proper set top box is not terrible, now it has a reason to exist at least.

22 percent faster than a Chromecast is nothing to brag about. They had a real opportunity to make something decent here as lots of people use devices like Nvidia shield TV but hopefully more powerful devices are down the road.

As I understand it the previous version was very memory starved, which this one improves. In terms of processing power it's not like this will do much more than decode various streams which hw media decoders take care of.

Because including DP is a great way to piss off the HDMI consortium and get your license revoked. They truly live up to the consortium name .

Seriously!? How is everyone willing to accept that when DisplayPort is simply free? Only reason I can think of is the complete bullshit claim from MPEG LA they're owned a license fee that would make it more expensive than HDMI, I can't find concrete information on it so lawsuits should still be ongoing.

Main draw of the chromecast was just plug it in, no hassle with a visible device, it did what it had to, it just worked. I guess now that most smart tv's have their own build in features that mostly work it's no longer needed?

I'd rather TVs kept being just TVs instead of trying to bundle everything. I have an android TV because I wasn't able to find a dumb tv and the thing never got an update and the interface is bad and laggy. The only thing I do with it is change the source to the isp set top box because none of these morons seems to know how to properly implement hdmi cec.

 

[R0H1T]

I wasn't able to find a dumb tv

They're called monitors these days! I have a hard time believing a high end monitor isn't on everyone's radar nowadays for any one who doesn't want a "smart TV" as there's basically no other choice & (high end) monitors have never been better. Besides a soundbar & this set top box should take care of the rest. Unless you're still on cable or DTH/DBS there's really no reason to not go completely online. The only slight issue with monitors of course is there's not too many choices above 43" or so.

Display finder

Display finder

www.displayspecifications.com

Check this site if you want to find a bunch of them.

 

[ZoneDymo]

google discontinuing a product? well I never.....

also why dont these things allow users to hookup an external hdd to store some shows etc on....

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

They're called monitors these days! I have a hard time believing a high end monitor isn't on everyone's radar nowadays for any one who doesn't want a "smart TV" as there's basically no other choice & (high end) monitors have never been better. Besides a soundbar & this set top box should take care of the rest. Unless you're still on cable or DTH/DBS there's really no reason to not go completely online. The only slight issue with monitors of course is there's not too many choices above 43" or so.

Display finder

Display finder

www.displayspecifications.com

Check this site if you want to find a bunch of them.

Dunno, maybe because 55"+ monitors are practically unobtainable and when available are the price of an used vehicle. Even though I found a 55" 'smart TV' for $230 during the COVID shortages. Still in use as a monitor, but it is irritating to have to boot the smart tv part and cycle inputs on a regular basis.

 

[enb141]

4 GB RAM and 32 GB Storage, this device has more specs than the Nvidia shield, at a cheaper price.

I hope this device has HDMI audio pass though as well for Dolby 5.1 and DTS.

 

[HugsNotDrugs]

The original Chromecast came out at a time when TV operating systems were limited in apps and what you could access. The Chromecast was produced by Google to ensure a pathway to access Google services on TVs.

Fast forward to 2024, and nearly all TVs have comprehensive functionality that includes support for Google services, because consumers now demand it. While the Chromecast is still useful to some consumers (like me) it's not serving Google the way it did originally, thus it is being morphed into advancing Google's other initiatives, like connected home.

I'm happy to see the wired gigabit ethernet port. Hopefully the SOC can handle high-bitrate 100mbps+ media.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

Seriously!? How is everyone willing to accept that when DisplayPort is simply free? Only reason I can think of is the complete bullshit claim from MPEG LA they're owned a license fee that would make it more expensive than HDMI, I can't find concrete information on it so lawsuits should still be ongoing.

Well, it's simple. The companies behind the HDMI consortium also make the media players, like phillips and sony. They make players with HDMI because these companies like control and DRM isnt possible to enforce on displayport because its an open protocol, anyone could crack it open. So sure, you COULD make a TV with displayport, except there would be no media players that support it and no customer base that would understand why this TV cant use their DVD player. So they'd avoid the brand int he future and, if you piss the consortium off, they could suspend that company's HDMI license in the future.

Hence why they are a "consortium".

 

[trsttte]

DRM isnt possible to enforce on displayport because its an open protocol, anyone could crack it open

This is not true, DisplayPort supports and uses exactly the same DRM scheme HDMI does - HDCP. The protocol being open doesn't mean they would need to open HDCP (not that it's necessary, all versions have been broken except for the latest 2.3 but in due time it will meet the same destiny as well )

They could at least starting mixing it up with a couple of each so players are still compatible and to get the ball rolling, but I get the point the cartel could take revenge on the licensee.

 

[remixedcat]

So they ditch a known brand that rolls of the tongue and is a household name

For an apple TV knockoff with a harder to say name and ppl will have to get new devices!!

And this constant changing of staple software and hardware isn't good for the mood or the environment

 

[like.a.cactus]

So, adds nothing and costs double.

Nice move there Google. Very smart indeed.

 

[Minus Infinity]

22 percent faster than a Chromecast is nothing to brag about. They had a real opportunity to make something decent here as lots of people use devices like Nvidia shield TV but hopefully more powerful devices are down the road.

Are these using Amlogic SoC, IIRC S905 variant. Light years behind what Apple uses in their ATV 4K.

 

[eidairaman1]

Main draw of the chromecast was just plug it in, no hassle with a visible device, it did what it had to, it just worked. I guess now that most smart tv's have their own build in features that mostly work it's no longer needed?

Don't need one at home but at work they have been great simple devices.

To me this seems like a downgrade.

Tv software becomes obsolete, 2015 Sony 65 inch has no further means to upgrade

 

[ViceKnightTA]

Jesus, Mary, and Joseph...why am I not surprised. I'm really trying to be a fan of you Google, but you make it so damn hard to be one. First, you decide to handicap your Gemini AI assistant by NOT letting it do actionable things like Google Assistant can do. And now this??? You couldn't just evolve the Chromecast dongle? I now have to buy into an entire bulky set top box? Are you trying to start a retro movement? Or do you just want to move technology BACKWARDS cause you think you can? Listen, you keep doing this, guess what? I've got a stake in your competitor and their name starts with "A" because thats the level of service we get from them. Meanwhile you're name starts with "G" the closest thing to an "F"; fitting given your backwards trend.

 

[R0H1T]

Still in use as a monitor, but it is irritating to have to boot the smart tv part and cycle inputs on a regular basis.

I have a Panasonic LCD from ~14 years back & it just works. Full HD, 10bit IPS(?) & there's not a semblance of issue with it except the speakers not matching today's options. I don't have a smart TV but a friend bought one from Xiaomi 4-5 years back & it's trashed. The panel's gone 2-3 years after warranty (1 year) ended. Monitors last a lot longer, are generally more consistent & have longer warranties. Over here it's extremely rare to get (smart) TV's with more than 2 years warranty whilst we have some option from AOC, Samsung monitor with up to 5 years warranty. That's one of the biggest motivation for me to go the dumb panel/TV route. Even if the screen's fine the smart TV interface just slows down like your avg Android phone after a few years! There's simply no way around it

Dunno, maybe because 55"+ monitors are practically unobtainable and when available are the price of an used vehicle.

That's changing, the DUHD monitors from Samsung & Acer are 57" & relatively "cheap" & both are cheaper than the flagship Samsung or LG TV's at least over here.

 

[FinlandApollo]

This would be a great product if it would:

1. Be as fast or faster than Nvidia Shield
2. Have 4K upscaler like Nvidia Shield has
3. Support those HDR formats and Dolby Atmos + higher bitrate audio streams without issues

If these three are not met, for that price, it's DOA. There's already a lot of devices in that market for cheaper and many TVs already have built in Chromecast support (albeit, not that amazing but people still use it).

 

[R0H1T]

Most of the competition is riddled with ads, heck smart TV's are so cheap these days because they are adware! I'm assuming this won't have "too many" ads

 

[TheLostSwede]

Are these using Amlogic SoC, IIRC S905 variant. Light years behind what Apple uses in their ATV 4K.

As someone pointed out earlier in the comments, it appears to be based on a MediaTek chip, supposedly the same one in as in the last gen FireTV stick from Amazon, but with worse WiFi and Bluetooth for some reason.

The Verge has talked to Google about the reasoning behind the TV Streamer and the main reason for the trade-offs is that Google doesn't think they can sell a device for more than $100.

Why Google decided now’s the time to move on from Chromecast

Google wanted to make a more premium streaming device.

www.theverge.com

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

cheaper than the flagship Samsung or LG TV's

Yep. But they don't exist in the budget market.

 

[trsttte]

As someone pointed out earlier in the comments, it appears to be based on a MediaTek chip, supposedly the same one in as in the last gen FireTV stick from Amazon, but with worse WiFi and Bluetooth for some reason.

The Verge has talked to Google about the reasoning behind the TV Streamer and the main reason for the trade-offs is that Google doesn't think they can sell a device for more than $100.

Why Google decided now’s the time to move on from Chromecast

Google wanted to make a more premium streaming device.

www.theverge.com

That's a weird line of reasoning, they wanted to go after the shield that even though it's pretty old uses a beefy soc that can upscale stuff and even play games (it's the same soc used in the nintendo switch after all) but gave it a hugely inferior cpu that basically only solves the limitations of the previous gen device.

Sure, the shield starts at 150$ and this goes for 100$, but why even make the comparison then? And why try to play in a middle ground where they can't compete with better options and are easily undercut by loads of cheaper options? Google is such a weird company

 

[lemonadesoda]

Clickwheel? Did I see clickwheel?

 

[Minus Infinity]

As someone pointed out earlier in the comments, it appears to be based on a MediaTek chip, supposedly the same one in as in the last gen FireTV stick from Amazon, but with worse WiFi and Bluetooth for some reason.

The Verge has talked to Google about the reasoning behind the TV Streamer and the main reason for the trade-offs is that Google doesn't think they can sell a device for more than $100.

Why Google decided now’s the time to move on from Chromecast

Google wanted to make a more premium streaming device.

www.theverge.com

Ok cheers.

 

[TheLostSwede]

That's a weird line of reasoning, they wanted to go after the shield that even though it's pretty old uses a beefy soc that can upscale stuff and even play games (it's the same soc used in the nintendo switch after all) but gave it a hugely inferior cpu that basically only solves the limitations of the previous gen device.

I don't disagree.

Sure, the shield starts at 150$ and this goes for 100$, but why even make the comparison then? And why try to play in a middle ground where they can't compete with better options and are easily undercut by loads of cheaper options? Google is such a weird company

Yeah, the hardware is not what anyone was hoping for. Admittedly my Fire TV Stick 4K Max (1st gen) works really well most of the time, except that it doesn't appear to have enough RAM, as sometimes you have to re-boot it, possibly due to some app memory leak that makes the whole thing slow down to a crawl. But compared to the older gen 4K stick it's a huge upgrade.
However, why Google has to charge twice as much as Amazon is something of a mystery, as doubling the RAM and quadrupling the eMMC isn't going to double the price of the device.

 

[MikeSnow]

To this day I'm still not even sure what the Chromecast was capable of and I don't care.

I use it mostly to stream (sorry, cast) F1TV to my TV, since F1TV didn't bother to create a WebOS app.