• _pete_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    150
    ·
    4 months ago

    I feel the original Chromecast was probably the last truly great original Google product, it was simple, it was inexpensive and it worked - you just plugged it in, joined your network and you were off, there really wasn’t anything like it at the time.

    I really hate what they’ve become.

    • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      What’s funny is that was actually the start of them becoming who they are now. There’s a litany of evidence they stole the Chromecast technology

      • Natanael@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        The remote playback control over network patents? I can’t see why those patents should be valid, everything there has prior art done in the 80’s

        What I’m more pissed about is how Google killed Miracast (it’s technically still around but Google removed it from default Android and OEMs have to choose to enable it) and how they fought against 3rd party implementations to keep the Chromecast protocol closed.

        I see there’s ongoing work for a Matter based standard for casting, I really hope that ends up getting broad support. We need something better than DLNA (and Miracast is technically DLNA over WiFi Direct). We need an open casting standard supporting Chromecast-like remote interactive content (the device is essentially a remote controlled web browser)

      • CameronDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        43
        ·
        4 months ago

        Chromecast with Google TV made the “simple” casting worse for some apps like Netflix. Instead of it casting directly, it would spawn the Netflix app and make you use the remote to reselect the show you wanted to see.

        • jballs@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          4 months ago

          Also they made it reliant on the Google Home app, which makes it really hard to change WiFi networks. It’s a pain in the ass if you have multiple WiFi networks setup at your house.

          • CameronDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Remind me, what app did it use before? I have had Chromecast since gen 1, can’t remember any other app, but that’s probably my memory failing.

            • jballs@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Honestly I don’t remember. I had a gen 1 Chromecast as well and I think it was just a Chromecast app. Now it’s all integrated with Google Home.

              Edit: I tried googling it and under the Wikipedia page description it showed the following. But what’s funny is if you go to the Wikipedia page, that text is no longer there.

              Originally called simply “Chromecast”, the app was released concurrently with the original Chromecast video model …

            • CameronDev@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 months ago

              I take my Chromecast on holiday, you basically have to factory reset it every time to change network. But my recollection is that you’ve always had to do that.

              • FrederikNJS@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                4 months ago

                That makes perfect sense, and switching is definitely annoying then… But the person I responded to said they had multiple WiFi networks at home… E.g. Not on holiday

              • tjhart85@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                My solution: get a travel router and have it broadcast the same SSID (and use the same password) as you use at home.

                All your devices should successfully connect to it and you don’t need to factory reset them.

                Many of them have the ability to navigate through a captive portal too (since I got mine all the hotels I’ve gone to have just needed a password, so i haven’t needed to test that).

                • CameronDev@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I have a travel router as well, I just prefer to keep the SSIDs different. It is definitely paranoia, but if someone sees your travel router at a hotel, they know your not home, and your home can be found on wigle.net.

                  Its not that bad to reset the Chromecast, and I do it infrequently, so I’m happy with that.

            • jballs@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              I personally have a Comcast router/modem with its own network. I have a network switch that I plug into the router that I use for hard coded stuff. Mostly my PC and a couple other things that I want to run fast instead of convenient. Then I have a WiFi mesh network that I run for most of my other devices, including my phone.

              So for my Chromecast, if I want to stream from my phone on the mesh network, I have it on one network. But if I want to stream from my PC, I have it on another network. While with most devices, changing the network you’re connected to is simple, it’s a massive pain in the ass with a Chromecast.

              • FrederikNJS@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                So as far as I understand, you have

                • Outer router (Comcast), which has WiFi enabled
                • Inner router (your own), which has WiFi enabled, and further meshes with other WiFi mesh devices (or is the mesh separate?)
                • A plain switch, for stuff you want cabled and fast

                Is that correct?

                Why not get the WiFi in the Comcast router disabled, and use your inner network exclusively, such that both WiFi and ethernet devices are on the same network?

                That’s what I did with my network, and I even got the ISP to put their modem/router into bridge mode, so it’s completely transparent.

                • jballs@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I could, but I like having the router network as an option to connect to. I know the point of a mesh network is to improve WiFi connectivity overall, but every once in a while it will get a bit laggy when streaming a video. Probably because I’ve got like 90 some devices connected to it. I like having the option to switch my phone to the router network and go upstream of all the other stuff.

                  • FrederikNJS@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    That sound like you need a more serious setup, where you can control the network priorities and set a QoS, so the devices that you use interactively get priority over the other devices.

              • Natanael@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                What you need to do is put devices which you want to access from multiple networks in a specific network / VLAN and then bridge it over

            • foggenbooty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              I have a trusted network, an IoT network (where the CC would go), and a guest network.

              I know most people aren’t going to have the time or knowledge set up network segmentation, but it’s still good practice.

                • foggenbooty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  I mean, yes? I’m obviously using VLANs here. I’m not running a separate switch and AP for each network…

        • jpeps@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yeah I got one of the newer ones after having a ton of the earlier models and I was disgusted by that change. Instantly returned it and bought one of the discontinued Ultras for 4K.

      • _pete_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        4 months ago

        I feels like they either badly copy (see Gemini) or don’t think about what they’re offering (see Stadia’s busted business model) they’re content to milk the existing services they’ve already got and make them worse by cramming in more ads (see YouTube, Google’s search result pages) and they cut out or dictate the web through their monopolies (see AMP and Chrome) rather than working with other parties to make good products.

        They feel like Hooli in Silicon Valley, basically the definition of a fat tech giant who doesn’t do any innovation of their own.

        • ealoe@ani.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          4 months ago

          Badly copy (see Gemini)

          Tf are you smoking dude, Google has been working on AI long before ChatGPT was a twinkle in Sam Altman’s eye. They didn’t release any public models because they wanted to go about it safely and not just dump the world’s best misinformation creator on the open market for anyone to use with little safeguards. All that went out the window when ChatGPT got all the press and google decided they wanted a piece of the hype, but pretending they “didn’t do any innovation of their own” in regards to AI is ludicrous. They have been at the forefront of AI development for the last decade, and the fact you think otherwise shows your only knowledge about AI is from after ChatGPT headlines started coming out.