• NegativeInf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    32
    ·
    5 months ago

    You mean twice the ram (1 gig more than the shield), 4 times the storage (32 gigs), and a better remote (chirping find my remote feature, programmable button, and less shitty volume buttons)?

    Yep. Sure sounds worse considering it also supports all the same features of the chromecast 4k and AV1 decoding.

        • SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          54
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          until they decide that their new device needs more sales, so they depricate the protocol and you can’t use it anymore

            • MimicJar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              55
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              They killed support for the first gen Chromecast and the YouTube “app” has been broken for 3+ years. They’ll just stop supporting it one day and you’ll have to buy a new one.

            • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              5 months ago

              That’s the only reason I had to replace my previous 2 steaming devices.

              The streaming backend got updated and the app in my device no longer supported it. And there was no updated app made available for that device.

    • LaggyKar@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      None of which changes the fact that it’s more expensive and clunkier, and none of which feels necessary.

    • moody@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      5 months ago

      Most of the appeal of the Chromecast is that it’s a dongle you plug in once and never have to see again. It doesn’t need high performance and 32 gigs of RAM. It needs to play video. That’s its entire purpose. It’s controlled by any phone on your wifi, it doesn’t need a remote.

      For most users, this is an expensive downgrade.

      • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s controlled by any phone on your wifi, it doesn’t need a remote.

        Or you can use it’s remote and not need to use your phone for absolutely every little thing.

      • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yes! I hadn’t seen that highlighted anywhere in articles really, only saw it on the damn Google Store after looking just now.

        Seems an all around solid update on the previous device.

        • Dasnap@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          5 months ago

          Just gotta stick FLauncher, SmartTube, Jellyfin, and Stremio on it and it seems solid.

          • damo_omad@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 months ago

            I changed from FLauncher to Projectivity Launcher a little while ago and definitely recommend it

            • Dasnap@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              My wife is used to FLauncher and will probably get annoyed if I change the Shield’s interface (again…) but maybe I’ll try it out on the Google TV Chromecast I have for holiday trips.

              • damo_omad@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                I’m in the same boat, so when I changed to Projectivity I made it look pretty much the same. It’s now just so much easier to manage.

          • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            And now I can install all those things without worrying about my internal storage filling to capacity!

        • lud@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yeah, exactly. You needed to buy an extra adapter before. Now you don’t.

        • woelkchen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          What do you mean regular Chromecast?

          Just regular Chromecast, not that Google TV stuff. That round dongle that does nothing but accept casting streams via that cast button in many Android apps.

          • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            5 months ago

            So the one from 2013? Sure. It was fine for that. This is a different thing, as not every device, service, or whatever supports casting. I wish they did, but they don’t.

            Secondarily, I don’t want to use a screen to control a screen. I prefer a physical remote that I can have muscle memory for.

            But I get why people liked the device. I did too. But fortunately or unfortunately, it’s been 10 years and technology has moved. Which is probably why they are giving this a new name being an generally good upgrade on the last Chromecast 4K.

            Christ, this one even has a built in Ethernet port and doesn’t put strain on my HDMI port by just dangling there.

            • woelkchen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              So the one from 2013? Sure. It was fine for that. This is a different thing, as not every device, service, or whatever supports casting. I wish they did, but they don’t.

              Well, the story is about Google ending that line of products.

              • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                10
                ·
                5 months ago

                With a direct successor product that contains all the same features as the last Chromecast device. If you are mourning the loss of the casting only Chromecast, that died long ago production-wise.

                • woelkchen@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  If you are mourning the loss of the casting only Chromecast, that died long ago production-wise.

                  Late 2022 is not long ago.

                  • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    7
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    The last casting only device (Chromecast Gen3) was originally released in 2018 (6 years ago). They stopped selling it in 2022. And it is still supported with updates. They supported the original with 10 years of updates. If all ya wanna do is cast, keep using it. I personally want more than a cast point.

            • saltesc@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Yeah, I have a smart TV and would appreciate some faster processing in there. Or if I can flash a simplified ROM, but dunno if those exist. As long as I get control over what it does, I’d take it. Can just Velcro it on the back of the TV so it’s invisible.

              • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                I have a smart TV as well, but refuse to connect it directly to wifi. As I tried that when I bought it and it insta-bricked itself and had to go through the hassle of returning a delivered TV.

                A custom ROM for this device would be interesting. I know that the Chromecast 4K can do a custom ROM, but only if it was running an older os version before you flash it, as the bootloader couldn’t be unlocked after.

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

      It’s also twice the price of the Onn 4k Pro (Walmart house brand) that’s built on the same chip and has the same features running the stock Google TV experience.

    • sanpo@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      They’re supposedly using pretty much the same chipset. So the most important part is still underpowered, these Android boxes generally work fine even with 2-3GBs of RAM.

        • sanpo@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          It’s supposed to use S905X3 with ARM Cortex-A55.

          There’s already plenty of devices on the market with this chip, and it’s fine, but in real world as a user you won’t really see any improvement over something like a nearly 10 year old Nvidia Shield that’s still using a more powerful chipset.

          Which is sad for a new device…

          • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Does Nvidia even make new mobile chipsets still? At least… Relatively cheaply? I know there’s something of an Nvidia tax.

            • sanpo@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              I don’t think so. Maybe they’ll have something new for the next Nintendo Switch?

              In fact, the Shield is using the same chip as the Switch (same for the newer revisions).