Picked up a Chromecast the other day. It was delivered yesterday. And today, am getting used to seeing it in play with my Chromebook. So, of course I had the thought: why couldn't this be used with the N9?

Ignoring the whole "dead platform" argument, this would actually seem like something of a nice accessory to play along with the N9. Anyone already walking down this line of thought/programming? Or better, want to use me as a tester for something fun w/it?

Chromecast is a failure in my eyes, and a terrible decision by Google.

Its a device that does all the processing itself and feeds it to your dumb/smart TV. It requires a USB or power input. And while it works with many devices, it doesn't work with many content.

So why is it terrible?
Because Google is a company with the muscles to push forward a standard by itself. And pushing out Chromecast would likely mean any potential alternatives/competitors will get a "backseat" in their efforts.

And what are the alternatives??
Miracast.

It can be supported on all those devices Chromecast works on, and more! (ie N9, WP7+).
All the device needs is a Dualband-N Wifi connection (ie Wifi Direct ready)... and the OS/App to initiate Miracast-ing.

Basically mirroring your screen will bypass all the DRM nonesense so you (the user) won't have to worry. It will work with anything your device shows, like your documents, your games, your web browser and ofcourse photo, music and videos. Chromecast simply can't compete. Not to forget its proprietary!

The upsides of Miracast:
- Open Standard (unlike Ccast)
- Works on a widespread standard (Wifi) (Google is attempting to create a new standard)
- Works on many devices (just needs a Miracast App) (more than Ccast)
- Dongle can be simple/won't require power (tie)
- Setup takes 10-15seconds (Ccast takes 3+mins each setup, making it "less portable")
- Displays all content (unlike Ccast)
- Doesn't worry about DRM "issue" (Ccast is working around those "issues")

The downsides of Miracast:
- Delay time 100-200ms, usually 150ms. (Actually pretty great, delay on Ccast is 15+ seconds)
- Video quality is good, but not superb (Ccast offers great quality playback)
- Small performance hit on phone (Ccast doesn't have this problem, its not connected to your phone its connected to your Google account)
- Battery drain on phone. This one is a definite, but I've seen it greatly exaggerated by people. This point may become even more moot once Miracast takes advantage of Low-Power cores in devices like the Tegra and LITTLE.big SoC's.

The TRUE downsides of Miracast as a "ecosystem" is this:
- The dongles/boxes so far are crap (nothing that's good quality and portable and affordable)
- Google has NOT finished implementing Miracast into Android. There's many bugs in there, and some of them are responsible for the "Unable to Connect", "Random Disconnects" and the "Battery Drain" on the device.
- If Google does fix them, and there's a dongle that can compete with Ccast... and other companies decide to jump on board (eg WP8 getting Miracast, Samsung/LG TVs having the feature installed inside etc etc) then it'll be a great boon for consumers

Anand for one totally flushes Miracast down the toilet from the current UX POV.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7186/g...35-hdmi-dongle

Doesn't mean it won't get better, but it is what it is today.

Anand is right about Miracast.
Its a WIP (Work in Progress).

The UX sticks.
It has the worst device connectivity (interpolarity) there is.
And the minor drawbacks are evident.

In the end, a polished up Miracast will always be superior to the Chromecast (which is a polished up proprietary solution for Wireless Streaming). I just hope we get to that stage, that Google hasn't abandoned the open-standard Miracast in favour of its own agenda (Chrome, Google Services, Data mining, Ads).

I've never used miracast, as I don't have any compatilibe devices. Also, it looks quite a bit like a limited version of UPnP/DLNA. Those could also be used to screencast, but more than that, UPnP can act as media servers. The N9 with its built-in Rygel and in combination with PushUp and TweakUp performs admirably in this regard. The screencast is missing though, apparently due to somewhat crappy hardware mpeg4 encoding in the Nokia GStreamer plugin or something.

It seems as if all those companies think they have the superior solution (perhaps they do), or need to have a different name for the standards-based solution. Marketing really seems to hate advertising the support of open standards, because supporting an open standard is an unique selling point or something. Damn those id1ots.

The net effect however are incompatible devices and consumers totally unaware that in fact they do have compatible hardware.

I despise those closed standards. They will vendor-lock you, the support will drop sooner than you want, there will be less compatible devices and it will be more expensive. Don't let marketing believe you otherwise.

Meanwhile, I'll go watch an episode of a certain popular tv-series. An MKV, for which I would have gladly paid if that was even an option, downloaded (which is legel here) using an open protocol, streaming from my open source mediaserver to my TV using UPnP in full 1080p.

I just pulled up an add by google for Chromecast and it states


"Chromecast works with devices you already own, including Android tablets and smartphones, iPhones®, iPads®, Chrome for Mac® and Chrome for Windows®. Browse for what to watch, control playback, and adjust volume using your device. You won't have to learn anything new."

That last sentence is just so annoying...

Whatever people here think, Chromecast is a huge success, and Gogol is now expanding its sale to new countries.
I've pickup one, and would love to see an N9 application....
SDK is released too.

I've also picked up one two days ago... Its awesome!!! Especially because I have a dumb TV.. Now I don't have to plug my laptop onto my TV to watch stuff!!! I can just use my phone... I like it.