Since chromecast simply get an url or data to play content already "on the cloud", it will be possibile to emulate its behaviour with a chrome extension or something like that?
I'd love to use a chromecast-like interface on my desktop pc...
p.nightmare said:
Since chromecast simply get an url or data to play content already "on the cloud", it will be possibile to emulate its behaviour with a chrome extension or something like that?
I'd love to use a chromecast-like interface on my desktop pc...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd second that. I'd love to see the ability to chrome cast TO a (widows) chrome browser.
I have a number of MCE PC's connected to HD TV's and computer with monitors throughout the house that would be great as the recipients of "casting".
At work I'd like to be able to look something up on my phone and then sent it to my nearest PC browser...
htcsens2 said:
I'd second that. I'd love to see the ability to chrome cast TO a (widows) chrome browser.
I have a number of MCE PC's connected to HD TV's and computer with monitors throughout the house that would be great as the recipients of "casting".
At work I'd like to be able to look something up on my phone and then sent it to my nearest PC browser...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You mean like this? - http://goo.gl/NOoel
You won't be able to push Netflix to the browser the same way, but you can certainly do so with web content.
Jason_V said:
You mean like this? - http://goo.gl/NOoel
You won't be able to push Netflix to the browser the same way, but you can certainly do so with web content.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah kind of like that but completely integrated into he chrome cast infrastructure and APIs so that it is compatible across all apps and is just one click on the new "cast" buttons that are cropping up at the top of all my Android apps now .... (Netflix, Youtube, Google music etc.)
There has been talk of 3rd party hardware makers being encouraged to support the standard so shouldn't be too hard to do proper chrome browser integration as a target.
I can't believe no one has thought of it yet :fingers-crossed:
here
p.nightmare said:
I can't believe no one has thought of it yet :fingers-crossed:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here you go github.com/dz0ny/leapcast
dz0ny said:
Here you go github.com/dz0ny/leapcast
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
awesome! I will definitely keep an eye on that :good: :good:
Nodecast is also an option
p.nightmare said:
awesome! I will definitely keep an eye on that :good: :good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Beside Leapcast (which is implemented in python), there is a JavaScript-/Node.js-Port in Git-Hub available. The port was made by Sebastian Mauer, the guy who wrote Cheapcast.
I spend the last weekend exeperimenting with both Nodecast and Cheapcast. Now Nodecast runs here in a Windows 8.1 virtual machine - and I'm able to stream from other Windows and Android-devices.
I wrote a few tutorials, how to setup Nodecast on Windows (it also possible to use similar steps in Mac OS X or Linux). The tutorial is currently only in German - but Google translate shall do the job.
Nodecast setup for Windows-tutorial: http://goo.gl/2ZU5Mm
Maybe it helps
Leapcast 2.0?
Anyone still working on Leapcast now that the 2.0 SDK came out? Lots of changes like going from DIAL to mDNS for one. Leapcast was very handy for running on a PC that was already connected to the TV. Sadly, all the apps compiled against the newer SDK won't work with it. They won't even discover it as a Chromecast now.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/...oakcolegkcddbk?utm_source=chrome-app-launcher
This was an attempt to do this but I never got it to work on my side.
Unfortunately, SDK 2.0 requires the Chromecast to calculate key using certificate issued by Google. We will probably wait a long time to see leapcast, CheapCast and NodeCast working again. It might not be even possible at all.
Johny_G said:
Unfortunately, SDK 2.0 requires the Chromecast to calcate key using certificate issued by Google. We will probably wait a long time to see leapcast, CheapCast and NodeCast working again. It might not be even possible at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not the best news, but thanks Johny for the insight.
If all the rooted ROMs can handle SDK 2.0 and Google's new authentication, there's probably a way to get the emulators up and running with it. Just a matter of time and determination I hope. I wish Google was a bit more open on the software side for the Chromecast. Having the new SDK for sender/receiver apps is great, but allowing companie/people to recreate the piece in the middle would also benefit them I would think. It would be tough for people to beat the Chromecast's price tag, but having other options would be good.
Averix said:
Not the best news, but thanks Johny for the insight.
If all the rooted ROMs can handle SDK 2.0 and Google's new authentication, there's probably a way to get the emulators up and running with it. Just a matter of time and determination I hope. I wish Google was a bit more open on the software side for the Chromecast. Having the new SDK for sender/receiver apps is great, but allowing companie/people to recreate the piece in the middle would also benefit them I would think. It would be tough for people to beat the Chromecast's price tag, but having other options would be good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't hold my breath. The ROMs get the upgrade essentially "for free" as it's part of the stock ROM code. Maybe the desktop players can take advantage of that, probably not, especially if it's a binary or relying on some kind of TPM or other function in the Chromecast hardware itself.
Having options is good for the consumer, but for a manufacturer, more options = more competition = more mouths to feed = lower margins = more work to keep competitive. One of the reasons Apple is so aggressive about protecting the exclusivity of its platform.
Warning! TL;DR below!
The point is, that every single Chromecast device has its unique ID, its unique MAC Address, and its (unique?) signed certificate. Also, it might have some kind of ID generated when you set the device up (similar to Push ID used in Google Cloud Messaging). Some of those (maybe all of them) have to play together to calculate the key. As soon as you pull the certificate out and put it in different environment, the result of the calculation won't match the SDK's expectations. So there is pretty good chance, that bypassing the key might be completely impossible without modifying the SDK itself (and it would require the developers to actually invest some effort to support these alternatives) and maybe the Chromecast device software as well. But who knows, the guys involved in those "emulators" are way smarter than most of us and might figure something out .
This is the biggest issue. The other one is, that everything has changed in the new SDK/API, and all of the methods used in those emulators are now deprecated and need to be implemented all over again in a different fashion to work with 2.0. This might actually be a good thing, since developers involved in testing of the way-too-rushed 1.0 seemed not to have a lot of kind words to say about it. I have attended one Chromcast block on a local conference, and it was basically 2 hours of swearing.
I've stumbled upon these issues today (and a bit of yesterday), trying to get my app working in the office (I forgot my Chromecast at home - again), and here are some sources if you are more interested in the topic:
https://plus.google.com/+SebastianMauer/posts/83hTniKEDwN
https://github.com/dz0ny/leapcast/issues/29#issuecomment-37288608
https://github.com/dz0ny/leapcast/issues/96
As a developer, I have to say, that Google is making things awfully difficult lately, and the "don't be evil" policy seems to slowly fade away. They put way too much effort into marketing decisions, and have no time to properly test APIs and SDKs before they spit them out . Mostly, when trying some new Android-related technology (to be honest, its mostly Google Play Services technology these days, so AOSP starts to be completely useless), I spend most of the time working around things that nobody thought of (i.e. the Translucency API in KitKat was obviously tailored for Google Now Launcher, and is a huge PITA tu be used elsewhere) and fixing the broken samples that come with them. It might seem weird, but sometimes (say hello to Play Games Services and in-app billing v1+v2!) the sample is inseparable part of the final implementation, so you have to fix their rushed code anyway. I shouldn't be complaining, since things like that raise the value of developers willing to go through all of this in their spare time, but the change of philosophy still bugs me a lot. Google and Android used to be strongly community-oriented, and now the marketing is pulling it all away.
Should the goal really be to emulate a Chromecast or should the effort be geared toward supporting DIAL protocol?
I would think the latter is the better option because you could support whatever the hardware supports without the limitations imposed on us from CCast Hardware.
Maybe I'm wrong but I always looked at DIAL as an extension of UPnP and separate from the CCast itself and the Chromecast SDK as not much more than a kit to add DIAL support to Android (and iOS) not meant to build anything on the CCast side at all.
Other companies like Roku are planning some DIAL support and I doubt highly they will have a CCast ID and Certificate.
In the end I think we will get something similar to this functionality from a player app like VLC on PC and MAC, or perhaps in Chrome itself.
Cause I think (and I may be totally wrong here) that it isn't the Apps we use that checks the Whitelist and IDs it is the CCast itself that when invoked to load a player app to stream it also checks the whitelist and tests security before it plays.
SO if someone created a program for PC that made the PC announce itself as a DIAL capable device that when connected to loads the app into Chrome, I bet most of it would work.
Might not work with any of the DRM sites like Netflix and Hulu but for things like local content and unprotected streams I see no reason why it wouldn't.
In fact I bet the trouble some are having with Channels in Plex and others would go away because a PC Chrome instance would be able to play many more Transport types than a CCast can currently.
Asphyx said:
Should the goal really be to emulate a Chromecast or should the effort be geared toward supporting DIAL protocol?
I would think the latter is the better option because you could support whatever the hardware supports without the limitations imposed on us from CCast Hardware.
Maybe I'm wrong but I always looked at DIAL as an extension of UPnP and separate from the CCast itself and the Chromecast SDK as not much more than a kit to add DIAL support to Android (and iOS) not meant to build anything on the CCast side at all.
.......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you. I could actually care less about emulating the specifics of what's in the Chromecast hardware. What I do want is the ability for those unrestricted apps (ie not Netflix) to be able to use their Cast button to find, connect to, and use whatever the emulator is. The new CC SDK doesn't use DIAL to do the initial search any longer. It now uses mDNS. All of the previous apps (YouTube, Pandora, etc.) are still using the old API and DIAL discovery which appears to be backward compatible with the new Chromecast stick software. If you look at the debug logs of the stick, both the v1 and v2 APIs are accounted for. As for Roku, my guess (I haven't started digging in on what they're up to yet) is that they have an app that is using DIAL for discovering the Roku and then just acting as a remote control for all the box functions. Chromecast was a bit more unique since it could basically load up anything from the web as a receiver/playback client since the software is just basically a Chrome browser with some wrappers around it. That's what made it much more dynamic without having to load "channels" in the box within a custom framework like Roku does.
And Bhiga, as for economics on Google providing the software to other hardware makers, I think it it would actually be in their best interest. The Chromecast right now has to be either close to at cost for them or a loss leader. If they can get the Cast API to become a default standard on new consumer devices, that would help them take over that space. To me, that is such a better proposition for them than trying to get the complexities of something like GoogleTV into TVs.
Averix said:
And Bhiga, as for economics on Google providing the software to other hardware makers, I think it it would actually be in their best interest. The Chromecast right now has to be either close to at cost for them or a loss leader. If they can get the Cast API to become a default standard on new consumer devices, that would help them take over that space. To me, that is such a better proposition for them than trying to get the complexities of something like GoogleTV into TVs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
mDNS actually makes discovery a lot easier - mDNS = Bonjour = what Apple and TiVo use for discovery already.
I agree with you that adoption of the API and protocols is the goal. At this stage an Android emulator probably would help adoption, but my point was that a desktop emulator doesn't necessarily add to the rate. If someone starts looking to using a desktop because they think they don't need a Google Cast device, they'll likely runs across Plex and Miracast and may decide they don't need Google Cast at all.
bhiga said:
I agree with you that adoption of the API and protocols is the goal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wish Google agreed with us.
Averix said:
I wish Google agreed with us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bet anything there are some at Google who do agree with us but when your as BIG a company as Google is it takes forever to get everyone on board and thinking along the same lines enough to manifest it into an end product.
In the end what all if this really tells us is how much DLNA Consortium has failed to standardize Media Distribution by not going far enough and thinking of it from the end user ergonomic experience.
If this discovery and launch capability was more fleshed out in the DLNA specs we might not be talking about DIAL and mDNS right now.
At some point all these protocols (DLNA, UPnP, DIAL) should be merged into one standardized protocol that any platform can use.
Probably years away though...
Asphyx said:
If this discovery and launch capability was more fleshed out in the DLNA specs we might not be talking about DIAL and mDNS right now.
At some point all these protocols (DLNA, UPnP, DIAL) should be merged into one standardized protocol that any platform can use.
Probably years away though...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My concern is that unless Google is willing to push this as a standard rather than just apps for one dongle, it will only be a matter of time before the giant (un)friendly fruit company swoops in and AirPlay becomes the defacto standard that all TV makers, set top makers, and anyone else are forced to build in. It's not quite the same as how DLNA and UPnP have become sort of irrelevant, but it could pan out that way for the Google Cast API without more hardware devices having the capability built in. Time and market pressure will tell I guess.
Related
it is possible for the g1 to print wirelessly right?
is there a program out there that i dont know about that lets you do this? , because i've been looking but found nothing.
I guess it hasn't been created yet.......?
I would love this functionality as well since my printer is wireless. Would be great but I dont know if it will happen.
It is most definitely possible, but has not been implemented.
What you need in order to print;
install CUPS,
add application support.
If you have debian installed, you most certainly will already have the ability to print.
Note that even if CUPS was installed, you would not be able to print from ANY existing android application since they lack this functionality.
CUPS is the common unix printing system (developed by Apple). In Windows, when you buy a printer, you trust that, either the manufacturer has given you a working driver to install from a CD, or that Windows' endless array of popups will find it for you.
On unix-alikes, you toss the CD and trust that CUPS and its dependencies will have a serviceable driver already.
So no, you shouldn't have to make specific devices for each printer. They should already exist if CUPS supports them.
reviving old thread
with the ability to view PDFs and office docs as well as view and edit google docs via the browser it would be great to be able to discover networked printers and spool print jobs to them, any chance of this functionality coming around sometime soon?
innerspace said:
with the ability to view PDFs and office docs as well as view and edit google docs via the browser it would be great to be able to discover networked printers and spool print jobs to them, any chance of this functionality coming around sometime soon?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I found an app awhile back that will let you print wirelessly the only thing you have to do is download a file onto the pc.
thats printershare
which is an ok solution i suppose, but does require a print server app to be installed on the host pc. I'd rather have the ability to browse the network from android and choose an existing printer as a target then use cups or try to install the driver via the web. Big issue with android apps not supporting this though, probably not going to happen. bummer really.
yeah i tried out the app and installed it on my g1 and file server. after i launched the app it showed its major flaw. If security permissions are not set on the host pc your printer shows online for everyone who is running the app. i saw printers from all over the country. i thought about sending a print job but didnt
^^lol^^
I thought the same thing. Plus it just didn't work. too funny.
Until there is a solution that uses IPP and not somebody's proprietary crud, there is no network printing solution for 'droid.
Hi All,
I've just managed to successfully intercept and change the whitelist for a flashed chromecast.
Steps:
Load custom cert onto device (replace nssdb with custom one) - nssdb I used and certs available here https://mega.co.nz/#!05wmDR4T!OMkBXwfO9D1wktt2bQpSwjNZ_Y9PB8q_Ryk3zSx4k1c
Load MITM on a linux host, route default gateway at linux host.
Route just google range towards MITM (so nothing else gets caught and just gets redirected)
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -s 192.168.178.146 -m iprange --dst-range 74.125.237.0-74.125.237.255 -j REDIRECT --to-port 8080
load mitmproxy with
"mitmproxy -T --host -s chromefree.py"
chromefree.py is available https://mega.co.nz/#!doJX1YDS!TT3lolbgXta24QOpbj40PBAYRetZkH1s9cIvQBslBN8
note that chromefree.py refrences json.dat (which requires a gzip'd json file)
example json files are available here https://mega.co.nz/#!ghwAEI7D!a-HwECm4w_8XKfdaaZOLgFrVTx9B8xLMOYJchi1PAUY
(with this I redirected youtube to a local news site, so attempting to cast to youtube pulls up stuff.co.nz)
Appears to work well, here's a picture of my TV running the revision 3 app
http://i.imgur.com/nhLI0oC.jpg
While I applaud this news, this could likely be the reason why Google has been slow to throw the doors open. The big name media providers are probably really leaning on Google to make sure these kinds of hacks can't possibly take place.
While everyone knows that no system is infallible, I'm sure that Google is under pressure to make sure that the device is as airtight as it can possibly be, and then some, before permitting the SDK to be formally released to the public.
mkhopper said:
While I applaud this news, this could likely be the reason why Google has been slow to throw the doors open. The big name media providers are probably really leaning on Google to make sure these kinds of hacks can't possibly take place.
While everyone knows that no system is infallible, I'm sure that Google is under pressure to make sure that the device is as airtight as it can possibly be, and then some, before permitting the SDK to be formally released to the public.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you really think that people would be spending so much time trying to circumvent the whitelisting if the content was available from the get go. I was very optimistic at the start but losing patience now. I bought three and was ready to buy more, but will wait and see what happens. Don't want to invest more money and time into something that might not have a future. It is sad because it has the unprecedented potential for so many different uses.
Can this be dumbed down for the newbs
ramirez3805 said:
Can this be dumbed down for the newbs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I plan to have a service available for rooted chromecast in the next few days that allows access to non-google approved applications.
Kyonz said:
I plan to have a service available for rooted chromecast in the next few days that allows access to non-google approved applications.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cant wait!!!:good:
networx2002 said:
Cant wait!!!:good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't have to! I just released last night http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2516164
Kyonz said:
Appears to work well, here's a picture of my TV running the revision 3 app
http://i.imgur.com/nhLI0oC.jpg
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What did you use as the sender app?
so i have a question how do you load up an app for use in chromecast now that i have done this ? sorry for sounding so noobish but just wondering.
ahecht said:
What did you use as the sender app?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I used the demo html app sender to launch it (sorry not entirely sure on the name as I haven't started developing for chromecast yet). I'd really like to see someone try to reverse engineer the data that the receivers require and build apps out for these though.
BurnOmatic said:
so i have a question how do you load up an app for use in chromecast now that i have done this ? sorry for sounding so noobish but just wondering.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This really is a DEV thread in that it provided the exploit for chromecast, app launching would be through the demo dev apps - please check out Kyocast (http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2516164) if you haven't and note that there are better things coming
Kyonz said:
I used the demo html app sender to launch it (sorry not entirely sure on the name as I haven't started developing for chromecast yet). I'd really like to see someone try to reverse engineer the data that the receivers require and build apps out for these though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I must be dense, as I can't make heads or tails of the Chromecast API (I usually can't understand Google's documentation for the Android API either, but there are plenty of third-party resources for that). What do you use for Launch Parameters in the demo app?
Which boot loader number is vulnerable ? I can#t find the infos :/
12alex21 said:
Which boot loader number is vulnerable ? I can#t find the infos :/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Only build 12072 has a vulnerable bootloader. You have to boot into the stock OS and set the Chromecast up (on a Wi-Fi network which doesn't connect to the internet or else it will update automatically) to check the build number.
Has anybody got this to work? I have tried, but I sure can't get it to work. I've got videos, audio, pictures, but not a powerpoint. Thanks.
I'm unsure what you are asking, but if you want to view a PowerPoint from your computer just use the CC extension and cast the entire screen. Walla, PowerPoint on CC.
MOLON LABE
Vbukit for Chromecast is like this -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8ByLPXHnP8
I'll give PowerPoint a try later today and post back.
primetime34 said:
Has anybody got this to work? I have tried, but I sure can't get it to work. I've got videos, audio, pictures, but not a powerpoint. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chromecast only scenario PPT file:
Requirements:
Android device and chromecast on the same Wireless LAN
Vbukit for Chromecast (Android app)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.creatingrevolutions.vbukitchromecast&hl=en
AND
Vbukit User (Android app)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.creatingrevolutions.virtualbucket&hl=en
Procedure:
1. Run Vbukit for Chromecast, connect it to your chromecast device.
2. Press Send To TV - it will automatically open Vbukit User.
3. Choose Send file>send Business>Send File>Pick desired PPT file from phone
4. Scan bacrode from screen
5. Wait as it takes ages to upload file
6. Vbukit User app crashes all the time(and it shouldn't), but i can see first slide on the screen
If this crapp crashes. Connect, disconnect and connect again Vbukit for Chromecast, otherwise Vbukit User will not work.
Vbukit.com makes me wonder if it's not smart and efficient data mining project.
You upload file and they can do whatever they want with it.
Privacy policy means nothing in evil NSA age and connection to the site is just in http.
Intelligence, corporate espionage, sensitive personal info...
I did exactly what the above post recommends, but it always fails on uploading the pptx file. I can upload other file types, but not a powerpoint.
Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk
PowerPoint Question
primetime34 said:
Has anybody got this to work? I have tried, but I sure can't get it to work. I've got videos, audio, pictures, but not a powerpoint. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Primetime34, I can help you concerning this issues.
But first please answer these questions.
1. Are you using the Vbukit User Android or iPhone version of the app with Chromecast?
2. Are you accessing the PowerPoint file from Phone Storage, Google Drive, or Dropbox from within the Vbukit User app?
3. Is the file a ppt or a pptx?
If you can answer these questions, i will be able to address your issue. As well, we did notice a recently introduced bug when accessing PowerPoint in the Android version of the app using Dropbox. We are on that bug and will have it resolved in the next update due out in the next 24 to 48 hours.
Thank you and I look forward to your answers so I can address this issue.
I will let you know that we have tested PowerPoint using over two dozen Android phone models from Samsung, HTC, LG, Asus, and many more, as well as testing with iPhone 5 and iPhone 5s.
So far all those phones are able to do all the file types great and cast them to not only Chromecast but also to other Smart Phones, Computers, Tablets, and Smart TV's via Vbukit.com.
I await your reply.
primetime34 said:
I did exactly what the above post recommends, but it always fails on uploading the pptx file. I can upload other file types, but not a powerpoint.
Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Application is buggy and it's programmers fault. PERIOD
If you want to see it with your own eyes just look at the comments:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.creatingrevolutions.virtualbucket&hl=en
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.creatingrevolutions.vbukitchromecast&hl=en
Privacy Question
mathorv said:
Chromecast only scenario PPT file:
Requirements:
Android device and chromecast on the same Wireless LAN
Vbukit for Chromecast (Android app)
AND
Vbukit User (Android app)
Procedure:
1. Run Vbukit for Chromecast, connect it to your chromecast device.
2. Press Send To TV - it will automatically open Vbukit User.
3. Choose Send file>send Business>Send File>Pick desired PPT file from phone
4. Scan bacrode from screen
5. Wait as it takes ages to upload file
6. Vbukit User app crashes all the time(and it shouldn't), but i can see first slide on the screen
If this crapp crashes. Connect, disconnect and connect again Vbukit for Chromecast, otherwise Vbukit User will not work.
Vbukit makes me wonder if it's not smart and efficient data mining project.
You upload file and they can do whatever they want with it.
Privacy policy means nothing in evil NSA age and connection to the site is just in http.
Intelligence, corporate espionage, sensitive personal info...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
to answer your last question.
Vbukit is based on a technology we created called Virtual Bucket which is designed from the ground up to give you not only dramatic increase in security, but also total privacy and complete anonymity.
The system is completely blind to who or where the sender is, who or where the receiver is, and what you are sending.
I know its a new concept but we make sure you actually have real privacy.
So there is ZERO TRACKING, ZERO DATA COLLECTION, ZERO ADVERTISING!!!!
And we also don't charge you for using the system either.
That being said, to make a platform that allows this much privacy, security, and work with nearly every type of device and on nearly every OS is not an easy task.
we hope that clears up any concerns you might have and appreciate what we've built and that we are constantly improving the system which only recently fully came out for public use.
thank you from the Vbukit Team.
---------- Post added at 10:07 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:03 AM ----------
We do not currently have pptx file type integrated.
We do offer ppt and you can also convert your powerpoint to pdf.
Both those should work perfect, but pptx we do not support right now.
Vbukit said:
We do not currently have pptx file type integrated.
We do offer ppt and you can also convert your powerpoint to pdf.
Both those should work perfect, but pptx we do not support right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't get me wrong man but
#1 just inform about formats supported on play store site and if app is not stable yet rebrand it to Vbukit BETA because user rating will reach rock bottom level and comments will stone app/brand to death.
#2 In app add filetype not supported prompt if someone select popular, but not supported format.
#3 It's also worth to mention other apps limitations like filesize limits
Edit:
Using HTTPS instead of HTTP would also be dramatic increase in security and anonymity you mentioned.
Also adding straight Privacy Policy would be nice. What you do to protect data, info about data retention.
Office 2010 formats (.docx, .pptx, .xlsx etc) are generally not well-supported by third party applications. I have trouble with them even in Salesforce.
The older Office 2007-compatible formats (.doc, .ppt, .xls, etc) work much better.
@Vbukit thanks for taking the time to reach out and clarify the issues here.
Pretty cool that you're not data mining, I admit that I wondered about that myself.
Answer
Chromecast's actual SDK libraries were released literally less than a week ago.
1. This is a public beta
2. This is a very complex platform that does many many things, and works on dozens of devices on multiple OS's
3. Unlike basically all others, we don't track you, advertise to you, or charge you.
So how about some positive support
---------- Post added at 12:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:56 AM ----------
Thanks for the suggestion.
actually on chromecast it is running on HTTPS. Google mandates that.
the core system runs on HTTPS, but the front end hides that so that it can work on more devices.
we've found a good number of devices such as many smart tv's still don't like https, so we found a way to overcome that issue while still keeping the security.
but thank you for the suggestion, it is a good one and we're always open to other suggestions.
1. I am using the android version
2. From phone storage (I can't get anything to show up in the google drive on vbukit)
3. It is a pptx
Thanks!
Vbukit said:
Primetime34, I can help you concerning this issues.
But first please answer these questions.
1. Are you using the Vbukit User Android or iPhone version of the app with Chromecast?
2. Are you accessing the PowerPoint file from Phone Storage, Google Drive, or Dropbox from within the Vbukit User app?
3. Is the file a ppt or a pptx?
If you can answer these questions, i will be able to address your issue. As well, we did notice a recently introduced bug when accessing PowerPoint in the Android version of the app using Dropbox. We are on that bug and will have it resolved in the next update due out in the next 24 to 48 hours.
Thank you and I look forward to your answers so I can address this issue.
I will let you know that we have tested PowerPoint using over two dozen Android phone models from Samsung, HTC, LG, Asus, and many more, as well as testing with iPhone 5 and iPhone 5s.
So far all those phones are able to do all the file types great and cast them to not only Chromecast but also to other Smart Phones, Computers, Tablets, and Smart TV's via Vbukit.com.
I await your reply.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Solution
Great, this is very helpful.
Unfortunately, pptx is not handled well, so we do not support it.
What we do support currently support is ppt.
Additionally, you can save your pptx file as a pdf and we support that as well.
But unfortunately pptx right now we don't support.
As for Google Drive. If you don't see the file, Its because as stated, we don't support pptx.
I suggest you do a save as of your pptx and save it as either a ppt or pdf file format.
Then you should be good not only in seeing it in your Google Drive, but also in being able to cast it to the screen.
I hope this helps and i'll mark a note to inform you if in the future we offer pptx, which is on our road map.
Let me know if you need anything else and don't forget to comment and rate us positively.
Apps name before my suggestion:
Vbukit for Chromecast - Android Apps on Google Play and after Vbukit Chromecast Public Beta - Android Apps on Google Play
Vbukit User - Android Apps on Google Play and after Vbukit User (Public Beta)
@ https you're right, things are loaded from amazons cloud.
What meant and didn't say - in web browsers www.vbukit.com starts HTTP session not HTTPS so MITM is theoretically possible. Partial encryption will always be partial.
Good Idea
Oh, I get what you are saying now.
Thank you, that's helpful. I'll speak with my team and look to implement it.
Please let us know if you come up with other good ideas and have a great rest of the week.
Vbukit said:
Great, this is very helpful.
Unfortunately, pptx is not handled well, so we do not support it.
What we do support currently support is ppt.
Additionally, you can save your pptx file as a pdf and we support that as well.
But unfortunately pptx right now we don't support.
As for Google Drive. If you don't see the file, Its because as stated, we don't support pptx.
I suggest you do a save as of your pptx and save it as either a ppt or pdf file format.
Then you should be good not only in seeing it in your Google Drive, but also in being able to cast it to the screen.
I hope this helps and i'll mark a note to inform you if in the future we offer pptx, which is on our road map.
Let me know if you need anything else and don't forget to comment and rate us positively.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just tried it with a ppt file and it still won't upload. It just says (after about 60 seconds of "Preparing Upload") "Can't upload file". I can upload other file types, but a ppt file just won't upload. Any other suggestions? Thanks.
We see the bug now, and are attacking it as we speak
Ok, we now see what you mean.
In the past week, we had a massive increase in the number of users and it has now revealed an instability specific to only android, in dealing with office files.
We are putting the whole team on this and will have a solution very soon, I promise. Its good you pointed this out, because oddly enough, you were the only one who said something.
having community members like you make things possible, so thank you for informing us.
So at this point i have two positive pieces of news for you.
1. If you convert your pptx to a pdf, you will be absolutely fine. That will work, i tested it myself. Its only the microsoft office files this bug causes problems with. So convert your pptx to pdf and you'll be set.
2. Because you've been so helpful and nice about this issue, unlike some internet trolls, i've stepped up work on not just solving the ppt problem, but also because of you, i've accelerated work to get pptx.
So for now, use PDF, and hopefully in a few days, you'll be able to use PPT and a very good chance we'll have PPTX.
Thanks again, and expect the fix in the next update.
have a great weekend.
Thanks for the quick response. I'll use the pdf alternative for now and hope to see the ppt/pptx support working on android soon. This is such a great app that I can think of so many different uses! Thanks again!
Vbukit said:
Ok, we now see what you mean.
In the past week, we had a massive increase in the number of users and it has now revealed an instability specific to only android, in dealing with office files.
We are putting the whole team on this and will have a solution very soon, I promise. Its good you pointed this out, because oddly enough, you were the only one who said something.
having community members like you make things possible, so thank you for informing us.
So at this point i have two positive pieces of news for you.
1. If you convert your pptx to a pdf, you will be absolutely fine. That will work, i tested it myself. Its only the microsoft office files this bug causes problems with. So convert your pptx to pdf and you'll be set.
2. Because you've been so helpful and nice about this issue, unlike some internet trolls, i've stepped up work on not just solving the ppt problem, but also because of you, i've accelerated work to get pptx.
So for now, use PDF, and hopefully in a few days, you'll be able to use PPT and a very good chance we'll have PPTX.
Thanks again, and expect the fix in the next update.
have a great weekend.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
PPTX
Well, we've worked hard to get a fast, stable, smart system to implement pptx and and its now released in todays latest update in the android market
so you can now use your PPTX files.
and i'll tell you, it was not easy to do.
enjoy
So I just saw the the little news about towelroot on the xda front page I'm wondering if that would work with the chromecast? Should I unplug this thing to stop updates or what?
Asadullah said:
So I just saw the the little news about towelroot on the xda front page I'm wondering if that would work with the chromecast? Should I unplug this thing to stop updates or what?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sadly, I don't think it has any effect on Chromecast.
The trouble is that towelroot is an APK.
Chromecast won't let you sideload APKs due to whitelist.
Non-vulnerable Chromecast won't load unsigned code from bootloader/recovery.
Because you can't "just run an app" the way to get root on Chromecast is by flashing a pre-rooted ROM.
The only way to flash a ROM is to use FlashCast, which requires a vulnerable bootloader, because FlashCast is not signed by Google.
Non-vulnerable bootloaders will only run Google-signed code.
Thus, the existing root methods for Chromecast remain:
FlashCast on vulnerable bootloaders only
Replace the firmware/bootloader via physical chip removal and reprogramming
Once the bootloader gets (auto) updated, you can't flash anything because the bootloader will not execute FlashCast.
Another possibility would be to use a Chrome sandbox escape vulnerability and try to execute the kernel exploit this way - good luck with that :/
deeper-blue said:
Another possibility would be to use a Chrome sandbox escape vulnerability and try to execute the kernel exploit this way - good luck with that :/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's an idea, but the trick is getting Chrome to execute the exploit to begin with... Essentially the Chromecast whitelist acts like parental control on a router - Chromecast can only access approved addresses unless it's been made a developer unit.
bhiga said:
That's an idea, but the trick is getting Chrome to execute the exploit to begin with... Essentially the Chromecast whitelist acts like parental control on a router - Chromecast can only access approved addresses unless it's been made a developer unit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And even if you could manage to get it to run inside CCast Chrome...I'm sure the Sandbox seals it off from making any changes to the root or bootloader status.
bhiga said:
That's an idea, but the trick is getting Chrome to execute the exploit to begin with... Essentially the Chromecast whitelist acts like parental control on a router - Chromecast can only access approved addresses unless it's been made a developer unit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is one thing that comes to mind. The Netflix client on the Chromecast runs as native code out of /netflix/. I have a feeling there is some sort of vulnerability exposed there
neobear said:
There is one thing that comes to mind. The Netflix client on the Chromecast runs as native code out of /netflix/. I have a feeling there is some sort of vulnerability exposed there
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
possible... but you gotta find it, use it, then hope the big G doesn't push an update to fix it soon after.
-= this post enhanced with bonus mobile typos =-
neobear said:
There is one thing that comes to mind. The Netflix client on the Chromecast runs as native code out of /netflix/. I have a feeling there is some sort of vulnerability exposed there
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Still have the issue being that the only way to launch it is via Netflix...
bhiga said:
possible... but you gotta find it, use it, then hope the big G doesn't push an update to fix it soon after.
-= this post enhanced with bonus mobile typos =-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
even if they do it can be rooted therefore and updates blocked.. hence mission accomplished... like Sony's ps3.. I think sunny finally had given up now...
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
persianrisk said:
even if they do it can be rooted therefore and updates blocked.. hence mission accomplished... like Sony's ps3.. I think sunny finally had given up now...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, much like the current bootloader exploit that FlashCast uses. It becomes major cat-and-mouse because Chromecast auto-updates without waiting for user intervention though.
Sony can give up more easily because a game console's success is not as heavily tied to content providers. Chromecast, on the other hand, would be sunk without any apps. Let's face, Chromecast for YouTube alone just won't cut it, even at $35.
bhiga said:
Yes, much like the current bootloader exploit that FlashCast uses. It becomes major cat-and-mouse because Chromecast auto-updates without waiting for user intervention though.
Sony can give up more easily because a game console's success is not as heavily tied to content providers. Chromecast, on the other hand, would be sunk without any apps. Let's face, Chromecast for YouTube alone just won't cut it, even at $35.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand. but Sony is equally tied to game content and also other media providers - hence when it was hacked its a bigger problem as some choose not to purchase their games whereas with rooted Chromecast you are still paying for the services even if using a proxy...
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
persianrisk said:
I understand. but Sony is equally tied to game content and also other media providers - hence when it was hacked its a bigger problem as some choose not to purchase three have whereas with rooted Chromecast you are still paying for the second albeit unusually through a proxy...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, it does create an interesting secondary market.
Looking at the Nokia 640 on metro PCs , what are you guys opinions on this phone?I had a Nokia 521 quiet awhile back but switched to android because of the lack of SD card use back then.
I can't speak to MetroPCS as a carrier, but the 640 is a great phone for its price. The biggest problem with it is the same problem every WP device will have - there aren't as many apps available for the platform as there are for Android and iOS (although there are a bunch nonetheless, and more every day) - but the phone itself is quite good unless you need high-end specs for some reason. The OS runs very smoothly on it. Also, it's upgradable to Windows 10 Mobile (yes, Microsoft changed the branding on their phone OS *again*...), so you've got a reasonably future-proof design and it'll even be able to run at least some Android apps in the future.
In my opinion windows phones are always better and safe than android phones. You can also read about technology public relations.
Play Apps?
GoodDayToDie said:
I can't speak to MetroPCS as a carrier, but the 640 is a great phone for its price. The biggest problem with it is the same problem every WP device will have - there aren't as many apps available for the platform as there are for Android and iOS (although there are a bunch nonetheless, and more every day) - but the phone itself is quite good unless you need high-end specs for some reason. The OS runs very smoothly on it. Also, it's upgradable to Windows 10 Mobile (yes, Microsoft changed the branding on their phone OS *again*...), so you've got a reasonably future-proof design and it'll even be able to run at least some Android apps in the future.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where are these claims about Android apps to WP coming from? Isn't it still a rumour?
I can't seem to find any official substanciated news about this...
As I understand it MS currently have two problems regarding the app-gap;
1) if they open WP to Play-apps, then they risk losing interest from dev's to continue making apps specifically to WP, making WP more or less another version of Android.
2) making dev's keen on making apps for a third platform, which isn't futureproof yet (even tho it's been around for long enough). This "solution" will make WP it's own and keep MS in the mobilemarket as an real and actual alternative to the established platforms.
What is sure and what are rumours?
M
Metalbuddhist said:
Where are these claims about Android apps to WP coming from? Isn't it still a rumour?
I can't seem to find any official substanciated news about this...
As I understand it MS currently have two problems regarding the app-gap;
1) if they open WP to Play-apps, then they risk losing interest from dev's to continue making apps specifically to WP, making WP more or less another version of Android.
2) making dev's keen on making apps for a third platform, which isn't futureproof yet (even tho it's been around for long enough). This "solution" will make WP it's own and keep MS in the mobilemarket as an real and actual alternative to the established platforms.
What is sure and what are rumours?
M
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They will not enable android apps to run directly on the phone like in an emulator, they developed a tool so android developers can recompile their existing app code so it can be used in windows, see the video below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qgajY4An1I
I'm really looking forward to making the switch from Android. I've always been a Windows PC enthusiast, and Windows 10 is shaping up nicely.
So, a phone to match will be nice. As for apps for phones, I hardly use any nowadays.
The biggest disadvantage of WP is the low market share of under 10% .
This means that most of the useful apps or games will not be available to WP.
But if as you say you dont use apps and you like the windows style you should go for it!
My experience switching over
I picked up a 640 on T-Mobile the other day as a new "daily driver" - my S4 went swimming once upon a time and reception was never quite the same after that, and I've been thinking about app development and the possible advantages of being a bigger fish in a smaller pond - particularly if MS manages to be successful going forward with Windows Phone. I'm sure I won't have anything available by the time Windows 10 Mobile comes out, so I'm not sure how that's going to work out in the end - perhaps Android development would be a better choice after all? But my experience with the phone overall hasn't been bad so far, particularly not for $100.
The one thing that I hate about the phone is that I can't put it on WiFi at home - something about the WiFi config puts it into a boot loop when it tries to kick in the voice over WiFi piece. Seems like it's similar to the "no iOS zone" problem that turned up for Apple back in April, except that since (relatively) nobody is using Windows Phone nobody really cares. The "fix" recommended is "reset your router to factory defaults" which might be an issue since I'm running OpenWRT..... I'm thinking about putting the Windows 10 preview on so this may go away - even if it's only due to lack of support for T-Mobile's WiFi calling. At least I have LTE coverage in most of my house and an "unlimited" data plan.
The main thing I'm really missing is browser choice - I REALLY miss having Firefox and Dolphin, because I do a lot of long-form reading in my browser and the readability view in FF is much more usable. LastPass in Dolphin is also nice to have, though it never worked for me in Firefox. I'm also missing the addon ecosystems of both browsers. Surfy is at least a nice addition, but browsers on WP seem to be at least 2-3 years behind what's on Android. Both IE and Surfy "feel" kind of like the built-in browser in Gingerbread (2.3) or maybe in the early days of Ice Cream Sandwich (4.0) before Google started pushing Chrome as the default browser. Having relatively weak browser(s) is a problem because with the lack of apps at least I can use mobile websites..... when they don't simply crash out the IE tab/window/whatever since it's not a tabbed or windowed interface.
I'm also hoping that Pocket Casts will work correctly for me after their next update (currently it hangs if I turn on sync to pull in my podcasts, then dies on app startup), but I'll survive for a while. I'm also feeling the lack of good ebook readers, I've been spoiled by Cool Reader and Moon+ Reader Pro on the Android side.
The only things besides browsers that I'm really missing:
Things tied in with Google's ecosystem - I use Google Voice for my voicemail, I've been using Location History for a long time to help me track when I arrive at and leave customer locations, and there's a group of us that uses Google Hangouts for group chat. I can get Voice notifications in email with the transcriptions then listen to the messages via URL. The Location History bit I may be able to replace with Phone Tracker, but I'm not sure what to do about Hangouts yet.
Replacement keyboards! I've been a big Swiftkey user for years and would love to have it back even without the voice recognition link (which launches Google's service). I hate having to do 4-6 extra keystrokes to enter passwords because of the switches to get to numbers/punctuation and extended punctuation (via the numbers page). There are places where Hacker's Keyboard (a much more full keyboard nice for terminal emulations) was also nice to have.
A GOOD text editor (e.g. DroidEdit which has syntax highlighting, etc.) or really even an adequate text editor. Maybe a mediocre one? Please? I've seen mention of Code Editor but was unimpressed by the "Free" version (first thing it does is throw you to the store page for the paid version, free version can't even see the "advanced" editor that's the only reason to actually consider it). The only other option that at least looks good in screenshots ("HTML+JS+CSS IDE") hasn't been updated since 2013 and has a total of 3 reviews - and the two with text are both 1-star.
CallTrack (which adds all of my phone calls to my Google Calendar, tagged appropriately and with start and end times) and SMS Backup (which uploads my sent/received SMS to GMail, tagged appropriately). CallTrack is great for going back and "Who did I talk to that day?" and SMS Backup is great for tracking down things received in old messages. I WILL be working on finding replacements for these.
And a few less-important things that I can either do without or still need to find replacements for:
My auto mileage/service tracking app - if there's something comparable to aCar then I haven't seen it yet.
OpenVPN, though the VPN service I use allows IPSEC as well so I'll need to set that up.
Lyft, though I've not actually needed to use it. I know Uber's on there, I just like what I know of Lyft better (and there's one area where my wife may need it that's on the edge of the areas for both but Lyft covers it and Uber doesn't).
KeePass - I believe I saw one implementation in the Store, but I'd want to check into the background of it given the number of scam apps I've come across.
@fencepost: Good list of stuff, there. I don't really have a good solution to much of it - I mean, Microsoft has alternatives to a lot of Google's stuff, but they are mutually incompatible so everybody you hang out with would need to switch too - but those are some good problems to list. The problem with WiFi calling is probably a T-Mobile bug, sadly; I don't have it myself but WiFi Calling on WP8.x isn't really as good as it could be. My biggest personal complaint with WiFi is that the OS is too damn desperate to stay on (unusably weak) WiFi signals even when it has cellular data; if I'm actively using my phone when I leave the apartment (for example, checking a bus schedule) it's faster to manually disable WiFi than to rely on the phone to notice that the WiFi signal is much too weak to use and fail over to cellular. Ideally I'd be able to tell the phone to use cellular by *default* and only use WiFi for stuff that it can't get ont he WAN (LAN servers, etc.), but the OS wasn't really designed to provide an optimal experience for people with unlimited data plans.
The custom keyboard thing may be fixable soon - at least, I really hope so - but for now it is indeed a problem. WP8.1 has the best *built-in* keyboard of the three leading mobile OSes, IMO, but it's not better than all the Android options.
As for a text editor, I generally avoid writing anything longer than notes or minor document edits (or emails, but usually only plain text) on the phone, so I haven't really looked. You might be able to use SSH or Remote Desktop, though; there's a number of decent apps for each (including a MS-authored one for RDP) and with unlimited data they should work. You may even find them more useful than a local editor. It might be worth setting up a Remote App server (so you'd *just* get an editor, rather than a whole desktop) for this.
OpenVPN *should* be possible to port, but it needs a driver (TUN/TAP) and MS would need to approve or provide that even more than they would need to approve a new VPN app (which I think requires a capability not normally available to third-party devs). I'm tempted to say that they really *should* allow it, but I'm also painfully aware that OpenVPN on Windows (and, possibly, other platforms) is sort of crap. I can usually beat it into submission on a machine where I have admin, but on a phone it could simply just sit there being unusable until the phone gets rebooted or something.
WP8 in general seems to have a lower risk of scam apps than Android, but it's definitely a good idea to look into any password keeper utility's trustworthiness.
EDIT: As for browsers, as far as I know there's not actually any rule against third-party browsers. Opera Mini does exist for WP8, which is cool, but so far as I know nobody has ported a Gecko or WebKit/Blink-based browser. Ideally, somebody should fix this, although getting them to work within WP8's application model might mean rebuilding a lot of the browser as well as just porting the rendering engine.
Metalbuddhist said:
Where are these claims about Android apps to WP coming from? Isn't it still a rumour?
I can't seem to find any official substanciated news about this...
As I understand it MS currently have two problems regarding the app-gap;
1) if they open WP to Play-apps, then they risk losing interest from dev's to continue making apps specifically to WP, making WP more or less another version of Android.
2) making dev's keen on making apps for a third platform, which isn't futureproof yet (even tho it's been around for long enough). This "solution" will make WP it's own and keep MS in the mobilemarket as an real and actual alternative to the established platforms.
What is sure and what are rumours?
M
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I read an article on Flipboard some while ago that MS had ditched it because of Lack of security in Open-source and it wouldnt work directly from the file system.. only if they sideloaded Android apps. Why do we want android apps anyway.. It removes the love of WP. MS need to invest more money in their WP store to entice new devs.
Let ms make a toolkit for the android devs
A toolkit to one click port it to MS ecosystem
Then the threshold to port it would be lower and a real mony maker for the devs
Sent from my C6603 using XDA Free mobile app
NightOrchid said:
I read an article on Flipboard some while ago that MS had ditched it because of Lack of security in Open-source and it wouldnt work directly from the file system.. only if they sideloaded Android apps. Why do we want android apps anyway.. It removes the love of WP. MS need to invest more money in their WP store to entice new devs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't want Android apps as such, but Android and IOS devs in the wp game.
I've had a lot of Apple and Andy devices the last eight years and have grown to like the variety of developers and want they put out for us.
WP is a good ecosystem, but the app gap is way bigger than I expected. There are just to many everyday apps I had on my other phones, which I cannot get in WP (yet).
I feel like I've walked into a grossery store and most of the shelfes are empty... I have to buy my oj and milk in another store, simply because MS can't get those dev's on board.
...And that's just a crying shame.
The 640 has a baked in WiFi calling feature rather than a separate app like almost every other Lumia device. I think it may be the only Lumia to have Wi-Fi calling baked into the SIM settings rather than running as a separate app.
Be careful if you are using any Google apps with it - Google is scared of Windows phone and they are doing everything they can to prevent app development. Any app they have taken over will never see another Windows phone release, and they are kind of crazy about it. For example Microsoft made their own YouTube app because Google wouldn't ,Google forced them to take it down. Now the YouTube app on the WP is just a link to YouTube - not because no one wants to make one for WP, but because Google won't let anyone make one.
---------- Post added at 08:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:32 PM ----------
I should add though - I have the 640 and it's awesome, extremely fast, well built, solid screen, expandable SD card slot, decent cameras for a phone and an ok flash. It's also neat the way the apps tie together with your windows 10 computer
NightOrchid said:
I read an article on Flipboard some while ago that MS had ditched it because of Lack of security in Open-source and it wouldnt work directly from the file system.. only if they sideloaded Android apps. Why do we want android apps anyway.. It removes the love of WP. MS need to invest more money in their WP store to entice new devs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have tried both Windows as well as Android Phone but everyone will agree that Android is anytime the best coz of features or benefits it has to offer. I used to be a Windows Mobile fan but now I love Android.
I would not switch to Windows again for now atleast