UPDATE: After a bit of research, I found that if you change the quality from high def to standard before casting a browser video from you computer - the video on the TV is pretty smooth and the audio is in sync.Overall, I am happy with the quality and functionality of this feature after all.I already have a Roku and Tivo which can stream, so Chromecast doesn't offer much more functionality.What you do get from Chromecast is the ability to use a phone/tablet as the remote. As far as I see - this has to be why you want it.If you buy a chromecast and wish it came with a remote, then you should just buy a Roku or blu-ray player with wifi apps.The ability to navigate on a tablet and queue up shows on the TV is the main draw here.If you think about it - when you imagine a millionaire watching TV, the remote you picture is probably similar to a large smartphone or tablet, right? So Chromecast allows you to use your expensive smartphone to enhance the TV navigation experience.For that, I think the price is just right.Netflix and youtube worked well. I tried casting video from my computer chrome browser and it did not work well.Choppy, and it really had the computer working hard to stream the video.If they figure out how to get the Chromecast to stream directly from a URL rather than streaming through your computer - they would have a real valuable feature. That is why I got it, but really for $35 - its cool enough to keep. 

Question: How is the image quality like?
Answer: the video on the TV is pretty smooth and the audio is in sync