or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Google's Chromecast is a Roku alternative, not a cheaper Apple TV AirPlay option
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google's Chromecast is a Roku alternative, not a cheaper Apple TV AirPlay option - Page 4

post #121 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

I'm not confused.  I understand the Apple TV interface perfectly.  It's a piece of shit.  To type in the password it puts up a keyboard on the screen and then makes me push a button to move from one letter to the next until I reach the desired alphanumeric character and select it.  There is nothing confusing about that.  It is a total piece of shit interface.  

 

 

Once, then it remembers and you never have to see it again...

 

...then you can use the iOS keyboard in Apple Remote on an iPhone, iPod Touch or iPad.

 

btw it's not a "keyboard", it's more of a game console scroll and select interface.

 

Have some advice (***LANGUAGE WARNING***):-

 

A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #122 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

 ...I own a Mac Pro, MacBook, MacBook Air, 4 iPhones, Apple TV, 3 iPod touches...

 

....I do use Airplay.  There are two MAJOR problems with Airplay: (i) it drains the battery, (ii) prevents me from having access to my phone while I'm streaming...

 

So why are you using your "main" phone for airplay when you apparently have 3 others, 3 iPod touch's 2 laptops and a PC which will all do the exact same thing?

 

(see my earlier post for what you need to do)

 

HTFU

A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #123 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

 ...the brilliance of Chromecast: It uses the iPhone as the interface for the TV...

 

Brilliant, yawn, been there, done that.

 

HTFU

A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #124 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott R View Post

The approach of having the iPhone tell the Apple TV what it wants to play, but letting the ATV actually go out and fetch the content and do the "heavy lifting" makes perfect sense, and I've posted about this over a year ago.

 

Over a year?

 

This has been around well before that.

 

If you want to go around posting sales pitches, maybe you should know your competitors product.

A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #125 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

I'm not confused.  I understand the Apple TV interface perfectly.  It's a piece of shit.  To type in the password it puts up a keyboard on the screen and then makes me push a button to move from one letter to the next until I reach the desired alphanumeric character and select it.  There is nothing confusing about that.  It is a total piece of shit interface.  

 

Secondly, the brilliance of Chromecast is that it uses the iPhone or Android device to provide the interface and then it streams the content from the cloud.  Why is that a bad comparison.  Airplay only works by streaming from the portable electronic device (e.g., iPhone) which drains the battery.  

 

Pause for a second and maybe the clarity of my argument will sink in.   I think you'll realize that Chromecast just kicked Apple's ass in a area that Apple has historically been king.....user interface and simplicity.  

No, you're still confused. Let me clarify because you don't seem to be bright: What is the interface of AirPlay?

post #126 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

ok, I was wrong about the not being able to use the phone.

LOL. You were wrong about a lot of things, hence: you're confused but I don't blame you. Maybe you're excited because it's being "cheap".


Edited by matrix07 - 7/27/13 at 11:56pm
post #127 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

The big question is how does Google plan to stream advertising to you on one of these things, They can not continue to give away hardware and not have some sort of revenue stream to make up the loss. Maybe this is hobby like Apple TV was for many years, But I do not believe Apple ever gave away hardware and hopes to make up the loss somewhere else.

 

The strategy you are talking about is called "loss leader." No, Apple has never sold loss leaders.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

Because Apple doesn't innovate?
And where/when has Apple "whined" about the competition?

 

tom95521 fantasizes about Apple being envious of this cheap Android web player dongle, like a classic movie villain who has been foiled again by Capt. Hero.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieWallieWhiskers View Post

doesn't a power cord defeat the purpose of a dongle?

 

That's "innovation."

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #128 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbruinsma View Post

I find articles such as this to be very amusing. The article was written with a significant slant without hands on experience. It provides pundents with ammunition without first hand trials and comparisons. I will wait and see it first hand. Particularly amusing are the references to copying and innovation while holding up Apple as an example. In the words of Steve Jobs' "Good Artists Copy, Great Artists Steal". One needs only look at iOS7 for a real world example of Jobs' legacy. The interface is clearly inspired by several other OS's.

I understand the premise though. Without the slant the article would never be featured. Sacrifice integrity for notoriety. As I said, thank you for the amusement. 1smile.gif

 

Slant, yes. But also factually correct about what Chromecast is, its features and limitations, and how it works. Most fandroid responses in these forums are like yours: just squirming and fussin' because you can't find anything factually incorrect about the article. So, lash out if you must at DED's slant, or other targets like iOS7. Your "amusement" sounds more like nervous laughter to convince yourself that it's OK that Chromecast falls short of the competition. The one thing you cannot do is say that DED is wrong about what Chromecast does, how it functions, Google's past TV failures or Schmidt's misplaced swagger.

 

There's a lot of competition for content delivery into the living room. And while I'm partial to AppleTV, there is some very strong competition from Xbox, PS3, the "Steam box" from Valve, Roku, and various off-brand streaming media devices. This dongle is a waste of a perfectly good HDMI port.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #129 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by GloriousUnseen View Post

That being said, Apple TV does have my attention and it's a serious product. But iPhones and iPads aren't the best in my opinion so I can't get an Apple TV. Which is unfortunate because I was actually excited about that device.

 

Enough with the FUD.

 

Your don't need any iOS device to use AppleTV.

You don't need a Mac.

Just plug it in and use it, the way you would use a Roku.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #130 of 143
"However, in the UK, you cant receive Iplayer, ITV Player, 4OD or 5 on Demand"

The UK is a clown country that censors the internet. I wouldn't expect Apple to care about what happens in that sort of place.
post #131 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

I'm an Apple zealot and I hope chromecast is widely successful.  Why should I be scared?  I'll be streaming content from the internet to my Sony TV using my iPhone as the control.  What matters most about Chromecast is that any iPhone app developer can include a chromecast button in their iPhone app to allow me to switch a streaming video from my iPhone to my TV.   That means I can browse through TV or movie content on the internet using my phone, select the content and hit play and it shows up on my TV.  Fantastic!  I couldn't care less whether its Apple or Google that provides this functionality.  Its going to be awesome.

 

Ironically Apple f'ed up with the Apple TV interface.  They make me navigate an onscreen menu using a 1980's style dumb ass remote. It is probably the most pathetic user interface Apple has ever produced. Then some bright engineer thought to fix the problem by virtualizing the dumb ass remote in an iPhone app. Sorry, but a virtualized dumb ass remote is still a dumb ass remote.

 

Google nailed it with this one.

 

 

Have you used AirPlay? Watching some video on your iPad or iPhone or in iTunes you just send it to AirPlay and Apple TV begins playing. There's no "navigate an onscreen menu using a 1980's style dumb ass remote" to deal with, and no remote is needed. 

 

Also, you don't have to wait for developers to add Chromecast support to their apps. Virtually anything that plays back audio or video can automatically use AirPlay.

post #132 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott R View Post

 

I posted elsewhere that Google's approach for streaming Netflix content is superior, IMO.  The approach of having the iPhone tell the Apple TV what it wants to play, but letting the ATV actually go out and fetch the content and do the "heavy lifting" makes perfect sense, and I've posted about this over a year ago.  The big issue for me is the number of network hops that have to happen.  If I want to play a Netflix show and want to use my iPhone/iPad to find the show I want, I then hit play and send it over AirPlay to my TV.  If I'm lucky, my ATV is hard-wired via ethernet to my router.  Even then, my iPhone is doing a wireless hop to the router which then goes across the internet to get the content from Netflix.  OK, no way around that...no big deal so far.  But then my iPhone has to re-transmit the content it's getting wirelessly again back to my router, which then transmits it to my ATV.  If I'm not so lucky, the router-to-ATV connection is wireless as well.  The Google approach would be superior for any internet-based content (iTunes, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon VOD, etc.).  The battery savings is a definite plus as well, but I do think that's being blown a bit out of proportion.  Someone would need to do some measuring to see just how much battery drain the Netflix streaming plus Airplaying causes in the course of an hour or two.

 

That's not how Netflix works on Apple TV. If you watch Netflix or YouTube or Vimeo or anything else from Apple TV, it plays directly from the cloud. There's no relay through your phone. Google didn't invent this.
post #133 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Brilliant, yawn, been there, done that.

HTFU

Or even DLNA, which I prefer since you don't need a dongle or a set-box to use. Well that's if your TV has it built in that is.
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #134 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott R View Post

I posted elsewhere that Google's approach for streaming Netflix content is superior, IMO.  The approach of having the iPhone tell the Apple TV what it wants to play, but letting the ATV actually go out and fetch the content and do the "heavy lifting" makes perfect sense, and I've posted about this over a year ago.  The big issue for me is the number of network hops that have to happen.  If I want to play a Netflix show and want to use my iPhone/iPad to find the show I want, I then hit play and send it over AirPlay to my TV.  If I'm lucky, my ATV is hard-wired via ethernet to my router.  Even then, my iPhone is doing a wireless hop to the router which then goes across the internet to get the content from Netflix.  OK, no way around that...no big deal so far.  But then my iPhone has to re-transmit the content it's getting wirelessly again back to my router, which then transmits it to my ATV.  If I'm not so lucky, the router-to-ATV connection is wireless as well.  The Google approach would be superior for any internet-based content (iTunes, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon VOD, etc.).  The battery savings is a definite plus as well, but I do think that's being blown a bit out of proportion.  Someone would need to do some measuring to see just how much battery drain the Netflix streaming plus Airplaying causes in the course of an hour or two.

 

You can't say "Google's approach for streaming Netflix is superior" when Apple's approach is actually for you to use the AppleTV to stream Netflix directly. Apple doesn't even require that you own any iPhone, iPad, or Mac to use AppleTV. That's a simpler approach.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #135 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

Over a year?

 

This [link to Apple page describing the iOS Remote app] has been around well before that.

 

If you want to go around posting sales pitches, maybe you should know your competitors product.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

That's not how Netflix works on Apple TV. If you watch Netflix or YouTube or Vimeo or anything else from Apple TV, it plays directly from the cloud. There's no relay through your phone. Google didn't invent this.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

 

You can't say "Google's approach for streaming Netflix is superior" when Apple's approach is actually for you to use the AppleTV to stream Netflix directly. Apple doesn't even require that you own any iPhone, iPad, or Mac to use AppleTV. That's a simpler approach.

 

Wow, touchy bunch.  I'm quite familiar with the Remote app for iOS and do use it when I think it's appropriate.  There are, in fact, two ways to watch Netflix shows on the Apple TV:

 

1) Navigate to the Netflix app on your ATV.  You can do this using an "old fashioned" remote control like the one that came in the box, or by having the ATV learn the commands from another remote you own, or (as in my case) using a learning remote like the Logitech Harmony series of remotes.  Using this method has the disadvantages of being less efficient to navigate through (more clicks) and you have to force other people to watch you navigate around.  Sometimes you *want* people to watch you do it (e.g., when your family are trying to form a consensus on what to watch), but other times it would be nice to utilize the ATV to play some movie trailers or other shows while you are simultaneously using your iPhone running the Netflix app to find what you want to watch next and get ready to hit "Play".  The iOS app called Remote is great for entering text searches, but is otherwise just as inefficient for navigating through the menu system on the ATV.  All that said, if you use this first approach for watching Netflix shows, the end result is that the ATV will stream the show from the internet, just as the Chromecast does.

 

2) The other approach is to fire up the Netflix app on your iPhone/iPad, find what you want to watch, click Play, and then use AirPlay to send it to the ATV.  This provides for a more efficient method of finding the content you want and allows other people to use the ATV for other things while you're searching for the show you want, but has the disadvantage that once you start it this way, you're doing extra network hops and using your iPhone/iPad to do the actual streaming from Netflix.  This can also introduce issues with playback pausing on occasion since you'll be using up more of your local network bandwidth.

 

What I'm arguing for is the best of both worlds.  Use option #2 but when you hit the AirPlay button, it directs the ATV to do the streaming from internet (Netflix) itself, and not consume unnecessary CPU cycles on your iPhone or unnecessary bandwidth in your local WiFi network.

 

Again, that's the *only* thing I really give the Chromecast credit for.  And as others have pointed out, even though I sometimes want to navigate/find my Netflix show using my iPhone, there are other times when I actually *want* to use a UI on my television to search for and find shows.

 

For anyone out there in agreement with me, I'll throw out a workable workaround which allows you to combine some of the pros of both approaches: You can use the Netflix app on your iPhone to search for and find the show you want, then add it to the Instant Queue.  Then, use the ATV UI to launch the Netflix app, choose your Instant Queue, and select the show you just added.

post #136 of 143
This review focuses more on Google's past failure than what this Chromecast device ACTUALLY does.

For Netflix and youtube, it's great. Video plays perfectly, as good as on my desktop.
post #137 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

So, this POS chromestick stutters and has choppy playback and out of sync audio?1biggrin.gif

I guess that it will appeal to Fandroids and other cheapskates who do not have very high standards. 1rolleyes.gif
 
Actually, I've been using it all this weekend.  It plays Netflix very well - as good as on my desktop.  Why are the people on here so personally invested in the failure of Apple's competitors?  Doesn't make sense at all.
 
 
post #138 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

You can't say "Google's approach for streaming Netflix is superior" when Apple's approach is actually for you to use the AppleTV to stream Netflix directly. Apple doesn't even require that you own any iPhone, iPad, or Mac to use AppleTV. That's a simpler approach.

That's true.  But then in the case of purely streaming Netflix, the $35 Chromecast and the $99 ATV is doing the same thing.  Streaming netflix natively.  However, the tablet/laptop interface for netflix navigation is much better than the remote control method.  If you want to use your tablet/phone to navigate netflix, you can't send that selection to the ATV to stream natively - you end up streaming from the tablet and mirroring.  

 

The thing is a lot of people here are saying that the $99 ATV ALSO does awesome display mirroring, which the Chromecast doesn't.  They're ignoring the fact that the mirroring only works if you have a 2-year or newer iPad/Macbook. 

post #139 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

 

Also, if you want something to stream "web video", isn't Roku at $50 a much better deal. You get way more than this.

 

It can't stream video and audio on your device, only on your Chrome browser. Why do people compare it to AirPlay?

 

Airplay only works if you have a 2011 or newer iDevice that's capable of GPU level h264 encoding.  If all you need is Netflix (that covers a lot of consumers), ATV's mirroring function adds no value to you.  Especially if you don't have a newer iDevice.  ATV users who don't use the mirroring are paying $64 too much.

post #140 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericread View Post

 

Airplay only works if you have a 2011 or newer iDevice that's capable of GPU level h264 encoding.  If all you need is Netflix (that covers a lot of consumers), ATV's mirroring function adds no value to you.  Especially if you don't have a newer iDevice.  ATV users who don't use the mirroring are paying $64 too much.

AirPlay *Mirroring* requires a newer device (though I'd argue that "newer" might not even be that accurate anymore - I suspect many Apple TV owners have some iOS device or Mac made within the last 2 years).  But I'm pretty sure that any app that has built-in support for AirPlay (not Mirroring) doesn't even require that new of a device.

post #141 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericread View Post

The thing is a lot of people here are saying that the $99 ATV ALSO does awesome display mirroring, which the Chromecast doesn't.  They're ignoring the fact that the mirroring only works if you have a 2-year or newer iPad/Macbook. 

Personally the more I read the more I learn and Chromecast is becoming an interest if only Google would sell it profiting from the sale and not benefitting from the sale to earn through ads. It is not for me but it is a promising product, though people should accept that there is a reason for the price difference when comparing it to an Apple TV. You're in an Apple fan page, they are not ignoring, people here just have no problem owning apple devices.
post #142 of 143
Hulu is the latest media provider announcing they'll come on board with the Chromecast, joining Redbox, Vimeo, Pandora, Discovery and apparently HBO in giving it the thumbs up.
http://variety.com/2013/digital/news/hulu-plans-to-hook-subscription-service-into-google-chromecast-1200570400/
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #143 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericread View Post

 

Airplay only works if you have a 2011 or newer iDevice that's capable of GPU level h264 encoding.  If all you need is Netflix (that covers a lot of consumers), ATV's mirroring function adds no value to you.  Especially if you don't have a newer iDevice.  ATV users who don't use the mirroring are paying $64 too much.

 

Nonsense. The ATV is also a set top box, and doesn't require a phone, whereas Chromecast does. I don't always want to use my phone to control the TV. Especially if the wife and I are watching something.

 

In fact, other than the original novelty or streaming photo slideshows, I rarely use AirPlay or Mirroring at all. Almost everything I do is through the ATV interface directly. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Google's Chromecast is a Roku alternative, not a cheaper Apple TV AirPlay option