yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Google Chromecast] DJames1:
For me there are two big problems with the Chromecast:

1. The way that Google has locked it down (using an app whitelist, using Google DNS, and moving quickly to block the only rooting method) has greatly restricted its usefulness. Plus it's annoying - there are no cool hacks!

2. The only open-ended way to use it is tab-casting from Chrome, and the "beta" code turns out to do that job so badly that it's not really usable. I don't want to watch stuttering computer video - what is this, 1999?

It may have cost only $11 net for users who got it the first day, before they cancelled the Netflix offer, but that wasn't most of us. It may cost as little as $30 now, but I have 3 other more useful media players that I got on sale for prices ranging from $15 to $40, so that's not necessarily an outstanding price either. If it doesn't do what I want, it's $30 wasted that could have been spent on something else.

Mine was sitting unused in a drawer until last month. I would have given it away for Christmas except I didn't want to dump it on any family or friends and then have to explain why it wasn't very useful.

But it has gotten more useful to me in the last month, since it now works with Plex and I've figured out how to get around some of the limitations. I still wouldn't recommend it to anyone, but I don't consider it money wasted any more. It's just that it's nowhere near as useful as my other media players.
[Google Chromecast] bhiga:
Guess I'm lucky on tab casting... my video doesn't stutter, it just makes my CPU fans run faster.
[Google Chromecast] burrzoo:
Maybe this device will be the "Next Big Thing"

AirTame, an indiegogo project now. This is what Chromecast should have been out of the box but DRM always seems to get in the way....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3fqcP3RoNE

Here's the indiegogo info.
[Google Chromecast] wideasleep1:
Chromecast is more advanced than this. It can offload the CPU duty freeing up your remote device for real multitasking or even shut down. All we wait for is wide white listing.
[Google Chromecast] Asphyx:
And all of those accessories can be made for CCast as well...

The one that would be most desirable is the Wired Ethernet addition.
[Google Chromecast] burrzoo:
I have a brand new in box early serial number Chromecast (3724....) and have never even opened the box! I've been reading the various discussion threads here but I'm chicken to try and root it. I know it's only $35. that could be lost....Just chicken! :eek:

I have other devices that could provide what the stock Chromecast does (i.e. hacked AppleTV) so maybe I should just sell the Chromecast or just do lots more reading.....

Thanks for the reply!
[Google Chromecast] bhiga:
Very cool device, I'm going to have to consider getting one, actually...

But I disagree that this is what Chromecast should have been, though I hate DRM as well.

Chromecast wasn't intended to be a wireless display output device. It's a media player that instead of having yet another remote control, uses your phone, tablet or computer as a remote.

AirTame, Miracast and existing wireless HDMI devices are designed eliminate the cable between the device and the TV - you see on the TV what is running on the device.

That's the key difference.

Chromecast's primary intent is not to just mirror what's showing on another device, it's designed to be the showing device. You're still "tied" to the source device with AirTame and Miracast. If the source device gets shut down or otherwise interrupted - somebody closed the browser because they thought nobody was using the computer, or the phone/tablet rebooted - the TV playback goes too.

With Chromecast, TV playback continues on. It's not dependent on the device that started the cast (unless you were casting content from that device, or it was being forwarded by that device). You can't control playback without some supported device, but it doesn't even have to be the same device.

Tab and desktop casting is just a convenient add on and stop-gap for apps that don't have native Chromecast support.

I'd argue AppleTV is closer to what people want Chromecast to be - a self-contained media player that also does efficient screen mirroring - but still at 1/3 the price... So people want AppleTV for 1/3 the price - and working for Android and Windows... Well, innovation is built on dreams!

---------- Post added at 11:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:49 AM ----------

I wouldn't worry about "bricking" the Chromecast...

Either Flashcast will work and you can put Eureka-ROM on it, or Flashcast won't work and nothing changes.

But if you already have other solutions for what you want to do and don't really see a strong advantage for Chromecast in your situation, definitely see if someone wants to buy yours, since it should be rootable.
[Google Chromecast] wideasleep1:
I still don't see an advantage to rooting and huge advantage to just using it in stock form. As a cord-cutter for 6 years now I get nearly all of my A/V entertainment from the services on Chromecast and Roku channels. On demand and commercial-free can't be beat!
[Google Chromecast] bhiga:
Personally, I don't see a disadvantage to rooting if you have a unit that can be rooted.

You don't lose any functionality. All the stock stuff works as normal.

Unlike phones and tablets, you can't say No to root and change your mind later. Once rooted, however, you can one-time change your mind and un-root by flashing the stock firmware. After that, you can't re-root though.
[Google Chromecast] burrzoo:
Thank You & Bhiga for the great explanations! I really appreciate it. Certainly has opened my eyes to the benefits & possibilities of Chromecast.
[Google Chromecast] Asphyx:
Bottomline is CCast isn't perfect but neither is Miracast or Roku....

And in time CCast and DIAL will make those devices and methods obsolete provided the Mass Public buy into it.

And at $35 a pop it seems like they may get that support once they work out all the bugs and get more App Developers onboard with supporting it.
[Google Chromecast] bhiga:
Indeed.

Consider this...

If we assume the first Chromecasts off the line started with serial 3600, and we're at at least 3C01 now, that means there are at least 600 x however many are in each sequence. Assuming the last 4 places are alphanumeric minus O, B and I, that says at least 33^4 or 1,185,921

units per sequence... which means 711,552,600 Chromecasts produced.

Okay, that seems a bit ludicrous to me, but even if we divide it by 10, that's still 71 million Chromecasts. That's pretty a significant carrot to dangle in front of a developer - imagine if even 5% of those already-reduced 71 million bought something like Avia - that's still 3.5 million sales... Crazy potential.
[Google Chromecast] Asphyx:
What is even more encouraging is the fact that some TV Manufacturers have jumped onto the DIAL Bandwagon and made announcements that they would add DIAL Target support to their Units.

Local Media playback support has been all over the place on the TV side...

DIAL could standardize it in such a way as to no longer require TV Manufacturers to keep up with the fast pace of emerging Internet Media and content providers in a standardized way.

It puts all the support and programming responsibility on the content providers which is the way it should be.

The way I look at the DIAL protocol it is one of the missing links we have needed to realize the full IPTV dream we have all been talking about for ages but never seem to be able to get because there were no standards for anyone to follow which means way too many standards for any Hardware manufacturer to support.

Now I see why Google sold off the Parts of Motorola that were making Set Top Boxes...

They hope to make them obsolete, Your Tablet, Phone and Computer will serve as your TV Guide and Media selector.

All your TV has to do is act as a target!

---------- Post added at 05:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:50 PM ----------

If things go the way I expect the CCast will be diminished to something along the lines of the Box you had to buy to get Digital TV on your Analog Tuner back when we made the switch from Analog broadcast to Digital.

Since no TV that I know f currently supports DIAL the CCast will add that functionality, but in time I expect them ALL to support DIAL internally and when that happens CCasts will not be needed by anyone unless they have an old TV that can't connect to a network.
[Google Chromecast] wideasleep1:
Roku taking the same tact as seen at CES. Both tech could coexist in future hardware and I'd be quite fine with that. :)
[Google Chromecast] Asphyx:
Well if Roku Supports DIAL as a Target it would actually be redundant and no need to coexist with CCast.

Both would be serving the "My TV doesn't have network" function and the difference would be in what format can one play over the other.

Which is why at some point I expect Wired Capability to come to CCast either as an add on Cable or in the Next Gen CCast to support things like 4K, 3D and whatever other Gimmick they come up with for Video Formats. LOL

I remember when the Industry was setting the HD standard and they all claimed 1080P was way more resolution than anyone would need. LOL

Look at us now!
[Google Chromecast] h1m:
Avia and Airvidplay together add extra sites you can stream from including local files. Sites include dailymotion, vimeo, break and some porn sites. Avia is $3. Worth it IMO
[Google Chromecast] Lw00d:
Asphyx and bhiga

thanks for opening my eyes , to understand CC more.:good:
[Google Chromecast] ntajlis:
Avia (Chromecast upgrade) + Downloader and private browser (available in play store) upgrade to remove ads. With Downloader, you can download or open with Avia player to stream to Chromecast. I stream Anime HD (KissAnime. com) and dramago. Com.

SPH-L720_!
[Google Chromecast] Asphyx:
aVia has it's own issues that come with it though...It's a very good app and quite flexible but the cost of that flexibility is battery and incompatibility.

In time I expect all of the content aVia makes available will be available via other means with fewer issues of compatibility.

Anytime...I really like the DIAL concept as I think it solves one of the major hurdles that has kept IPTV from becoming a reality and easy to implement. Smart TV's were supposed to solve that but because every manufacturer decided to go their own way instead of adopting a standard way it failed to achieve the goal it was meant to...DIAL is standardized and requires even less involvement from the TV Manufacturers than their current smart systems require. If they all support DIAL as a native function of the TV then the Cable Companies will have to start thinking twice about raising your Cable bill whenever they feel like it or face massive Cable Cutting and loss of revenue. Networks will also be forced to temper their Greed as far as Cable distribution rights are concerned unless they want to spend money to maintain their own distribution system via IP. (they are getting there but slowly!)
[Google Chromecast] triavq:
Can you explain?
[Google Chromecast] diestarbucks:
Thread has been cleaned. Discussion of apps/tricks that allow copyrighted material for free, are not allowed on XDA. Just as a refresher, here are the forum rules:

6. Do not post warez.

If a piece of software requires you to pay to use it, then pay for it. We do not accept warez and nor do we permit any member to request, promote or describe ways in which warez, cracks, serial codes or other means of avoiding payment, can be obtained. This is a site of developers, i.e. the sort of people who create such software. When you cheat a software developer, you cheat us as a community.

If you see it anywhere on the forum, please report it and it will be dealt with as well.
[Google Chromecast] qryptiq:
Can the wifi be used without a router? Can it work directly connected to your phone?
[Google Chromecast] bhiga:
No, but if your phone can be a router (hotspot) then maybe. But you'll need another device to perform setup as Chromecast needs to connect to the router/AP to complete setup.

For setup

Phone in hotspot/AP mode

Chromecast

Another 2.4 GHz WiFi device to complete Chromecast setup

For post-setup operation

Phone in hotspot/AP mode

Chromecast

Note that unless you are only using local media, you will use a lot of Internet data.
[Google Chromecast] qryptiq:
I thought chromecast was ideal for presentations but its geared more for recreational use
[Google Chromecast] bhiga:
It's primarily meant for watching Internet-based content. That's why there's YouTube, Hulu, Pandora, etc on the box.

It's not really a replacement for a HDMI cable in non-media-player cases.

Presentation use is possible, but it still needs Internet access. Check out Vbukit Chromecast (runs on a device on the same network as Chromecast) and the companion sender, Vbukit User Beta
[Google Chromecast] tlipur:
Would fios mobile work with chromecast?
[Google Chromecast] bhiga:
As long as...

it can function as a hotspot

clients immediately and directly get Internet access

without requiring interaction

(ie, no password, no login, no agree to terms)

clients can communicate with each other

the hotspot does not filter out too much traffic (such as multicast)

then it should work.
[Google Chromecast] armyjeffries:
OK, just got a chromecast this weekend. I use my hotspot (through foxfi) for my home's internet (still hanging on to unlimited data.) I was able to set-up the chromecast as you suggested using my phone for the hotspot and then connected my Xoom to perform set-up. It still seems that I will always need a third device to "bridge the gap" between the phone and chromecast, as the phone cannot create the network and be on the network?

Or am I mistaken? Its not really overly problematic since I have the Xoom as a "controller," but when I am at work and have the Xoom with me, and my wife uses her phone to create the hotspot, then the only other device to control the cast is the computer. In that situation its most likely more convienent to just create the hotspot and use the PS3 to head into netflix.

Thoughts?
[Google Chromecast] bhiga:
Yes, the third device is necessary because you need to be connected to Chromecast's setup AP to go through setup, but setup also needs to see the AP that Chromecast will use. So there ends up being two APs for a while (Chromecast and your hotspot).

If the hotspot name (SSID) and key does not change per session (I don't use my phone - I have a travel router with mobile WAN support) then you shouldn't need to re-run setup each time.

Otherwise you can perform the setup from a computer *if* the computer has 2.4 GHz 802.11 so it can find the Chromecast setup AP.

Sent from a device with no keyboard. Please forgive typos, they may not be my own.
[Google Chromecast] armyjeffries:
Thanks, thats what I thought. We purposefully have our SSID and keys the same, so that the ps3 will connect to whomever has the hotspot going. We haven't tried running the chromecast off of her hotspot yet, but I'm hoping that it'll work the same as the ps3 (as far as connecting to either one.)

Assuming that the chromecast syncs up to her hotspot without setting up again, the computer would only need to be used to select something to cast?
[Google Chromecast] bhiga:
I don't believe Android keeps track of the BSSID (what makes each AP unique) so it should work like the PS3 does and connect to any AP that appears valid.

You are correct that once connected the computer should see it and be able to select things to cast from Chrome with the Google Cast extension installed.
[Google Chromecast] mardukeme:
I initially needed two devices to configure my chromecast to use my hotspot. Afterwards I can just use my phone that is running my hotspot as well to cast directly to chromecast. The two apps that will not work this way are Netflix, and Hulu Plus they detect to see if wifi is on first and will not move till you enable it. HBOGO, Allcast, Splitbrowser, Avia, and Vget all work fine. You will initially get a message stating your not connected to wifi, but, just have to click Ok and the phone will detect the Chromecast device and will begin to cast.

---------- Post added at 04:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:19 PM ----------
[Google Chromecast] mamad22:
Htpc ftw
[Google Chromecast] symanleedsuk:
Cost is irrelevant

Cost is irrelevant. Chromecast is rubbish. Your smart TV does a much better job. For example:

YouTube jerks on chromcast

Can not play local files. The apps that get round this are utter rubbish.

Cant play most videos

No 4oD

No ITV player

No 5 on demand

Only works on 2gh wireless network. Does not work out of the box if you have a 5gh wireless network. Will not work at all

Does not turn off after using. Have to manually turn input back to TV

Most of the TVs you would plug this into do all the above very well. The only good thing about Chromecast is it can cast a web page (very badly)

Google have spent a lot of time promoting this product i am sure they have paid to get good reviews.

so if i pay $30 for it i should except rubbish then ?? It should be better than the rest. This is technology and should improve.
[Google Chromecast] rbeavers:
The only "Smart TV" I've played with, a 2011 Samsung, Sucked.

It's menu and no updates it was unusable.
[Google Chromecast] bhiga:
I don't know of any wireless routers other than 802.11a ones (which is not listed on Chromecast's compatibility), that only have 5 GHz radios... It requires 2.4 GHz 802.11b, g or n - it is what it is. If you have your 2.4 GHz radio turned off, you need to turn it on.

Chromecast is not perfect. Nothing is. My 2009 Sony TV with Bravia Internet Video Link (DMX-NV1) can do a few things that Chromecast can't - like Amazon Instant Video. But the menu interface is slow and clunky, and I can't control anything from my phone or tablet. "Typing" is a major chore.

I know some of the newer Smart TVs support Bluetooth keyboards (the 65-inch Panasonic 4K TV does, and has a kind of nifty remote too) but that's a completely different price range and audience.
[Google Chromecast] Asphyx:
You know what I say...

They should spend less time trying to make TVs smart and more time making the interface designers they hired to code for their Smart Tvs smarter!

Some of those menu and navigation systems are a complete abortion!

DIAL and DLNA should be able to do away with the entire navigation system they currently use with the exception of settings and if they were even smarter they would be making android powered remote controls to go with these SmartTVs.

Every monitor should have the ability to fling media to it without having to hit menu or change inputs, load or download an app from some crappy store that has a grand total of 5 apps on it because no one will ever support it.

and when that media is done playing the TV goes back to whatever input was selected before you flung that media.

Thats what I call a SMART TV!

One that doesn't involve 600 button presses and an MIT graduate degree to navigate and see what the hell you want to see!
[Google Chromecast] k9cop:
I've never had any of the problems you are explaining. YouTube works great. Local media streams awesomely. Hulu and Netflix work great. Plus I don't know of any routers that only produce a 5 ghz signal. You must have one of those spiffy routers. Also why are you trolling the Chromecast forum?

Good day sir!

MOLON LABE
[Google Chromecast] Glucksdrachen:
You must be having issues with your router. I used to have poor wifi in my living room, where I could barely get a YouTube video to play in SD and tab casting was incredibly choppy. That is, until I converted one of my old routers into a repeater connected via ethernet to a powerline adapter. Wifi signal improved dramatically, and so did the quality of my casts. I can cast from my PC, laptop, and phone without a hitch. YouTube, Songza, Netflix, Google Play Music, and even 1080p video locally stored on my PC using Video Link - all play without a hitch!
[Google Chromecast] iandroo888:
what did u use to play locally stored videos? cant find "Video link" ?
[Google Chromecast] theroyalwe:
http://lifehacker.com/videostream-for-google-chromecast-streams-any-video-to-1570305213
[Google Chromecast] gwon:
You must be doing it wrong...

In order:

Youtube works brilliantly, no stuttering

Can play local files (number of apps support this, and just about any video file on android can be casted, certainly using my nexus 7)

Can play most videos (I use plex for the bulk of my watching, again with HD support and no stuttering)

No 4OD, ITV or Channel 5 - this is lack of support from the vendor, not a limitation of Chromecast. And to be fair, with the exception of 4OD, they're **** sources of content anyway.

Doesn't turn off after using - I can see the merit to your complaint I suppose, but how do you enable 'always ready to cast to' and 'turned off when not in use' from a technical level?

For £30, the combination of Plex + Chromecast has literally taken over my living room.

Oh, and I'm certainly not on the google payroll.

Edit: I just noticed this is a little bit of thread necromancy...
[Google Chromecast] Asphyx:
The SmartTV superiority really depends on what SmartTV you have...

Not all are any good, most have clunky and un-intuitive navigation controls, Even more have no support for MKV playback with is the preferred standard for anyone with a major full featured Video Library with multiple Audio/Commentary tracks and just about any subtitle you might need including Closed Caption.

Thats not to say CCast solves that but other software packages like Bubble and Plex (to a lesser degree) does support these kinds of formats on the CCast.

When you consider the price of buying a good SmartTV or just making your current HDTV smarter with a $35 dongle it is a no brainer that CCast is a great device that helps the millions of Early HDTV adopters who bought them before SmartTVs came out and really don't feel the need to turn that still working TV into a $1500 paperweight!

And in the end that SmartTV will be more obsolete quicker than anyone who simply adds a CCast to a dumb TV because when more and better media systems become available you can simply unplug the old brain and plug in the new and improved.

That SmartTV will rarely have the power and capability to handle the new software needed to keep up in a few years and good luck getting the Manufacturer to support it without you having to go out and buy a new TV from them!

The only reason we even have smart TVs is because everyone was forced to buy a new TV at once in order to keep TV once the switch to digital was mandated and the TV Manf realized that everyone bought a new TV and they wouldn't sell any the following year!

So first they invented 3D which gave everyone a headache and didn't sell the units and then they came out with SmartTVs....

Now just 10-15 Years after we changed to the HD standard that was going to take us through the new millenium, we are all being told we need 4K, Then UltraHD next...

Soon SuperUltraHD then Rediculously UltraSuperUltraHD right up until GoogleBrainImplant comes out and we all get android implanted in our head so we don't need monitors or devices anymore! LOL
[Fascinate Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Chainsaw32608:
I am currently running CM10.1 on my Fascinate on Verizon and it works well, when I try and flash any of the 4.2 and even the new 4.3 Slim ROM I get a status 7 error and says try again to confirm so I flash it a second time then it just boot loops and I have to odin back to stock. My question is the boot loop from the status 7 error or from it just being the wrong ROM. I have tried to format /system before installing without luck as well.
[Fascinate Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] hhp_211:
When coming up from odin are you using the the GB bootloader?

Other problem could just be from certain sd cards don't work well on fascinate.
[Fascinate Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Chainsaw32608:
Odin from Powerwashed EC09

When I start I use (Powerwashed EC09 with modem) then (CWM4) then I flash (eh03_tsm_res2.2). From there I will try to flash slim rom and I get the status 7 message but if I try and flash CM9,CM10, or CM10.1 they work. I have a 32 GB Class 10 SD card.