And just like that I gave up on casting and shifted back to a dedicated streaming PC like it’s 2010. I changed the way I consumed my media for you, Google, and your thanks in return was betraying us by retiring the equipment that we came to rely on left and right. I’m still pissed about Chromecast audio.
The response time to my phone is laggy/janky at times but the picture is crisp and clean once it’s going. If the picture itself has issues you have bad internet or a bad unit.
I’ve got probably 6 or 7 chromecasts I use between my home and my parents’ home. Some are 5+ years old. Never had a single picture issue.
Comparing it to a Shield or Apple TV it’s clear how weak it was. In fairness, seems like they could just sell both but of course it’s important that Google have a performant offering
It didn’t need to compete with them. From a consumer perspective it just needed to be functional at a fraction of the cost, which it was.
I hate google at this point but chromecast did exactly what it needed to do. Always have one in my backpack when I travel. Sometimes “good enough” is all people want.
I was thinking the same. Matter integration and a faster processor. I think the hard part for users is the price point. They’re “upgrading” the Chromecast, which is good, but they are using a higher tier product to do it, so it will be treated as a graveyard project.
And just like that I gave up on casting and shifted back to a dedicated streaming PC like it’s 2010. I changed the way I consumed my media for you, Google, and your thanks in return was betraying us by retiring the equipment that we came to rely on left and right. I’m still pissed about Chromecast audio.
God I’m tired of this shit.
They’ve done this so many times now, one of these days we’ll know better
When they disco’d them I found like 6 at Walmart for 3.99.
I bought them all. Lol
They are still in a box… But Ill have a use for them… Probably
So tired…
So dramatic, it looks like a decent upgrade! The last device was laggy anyways
For like $25 I don’t care if it’s laggy. I just want to be able to stream into any HDMI port
I’d rather my TV run smoothly, crippling performance to save $40 is not something I’m interested in, personally.
The response time to my phone is laggy/janky at times but the picture is crisp and clean once it’s going. If the picture itself has issues you have bad internet or a bad unit.
I’ve got probably 6 or 7 chromecasts I use between my home and my parents’ home. Some are 5+ years old. Never had a single picture issue.
Comparing it to a Shield or Apple TV it’s clear how weak it was. In fairness, seems like they could just sell both but of course it’s important that Google have a performant offering
It didn’t need to compete with them. From a consumer perspective it just needed to be functional at a fraction of the cost, which it was.
I hate google at this point but chromecast did exactly what it needed to do. Always have one in my backpack when I travel. Sometimes “good enough” is all people want.
I was thinking the same. Matter integration and a faster processor. I think the hard part for users is the price point. They’re “upgrading” the Chromecast, which is good, but they are using a higher tier product to do it, so it will be treated as a graveyard project.