Related
This might sound crazy but what if we can eventually hack the Chromecast to cast the actual phone/tablet screen (such as you can currently with the desktop of a computer) and play Android games on an HDTV. Yes, we can just get the Ouya but this would be awesome. Now I have no idea if hacking something like this will make it possible, but this would be pretty cool down the road.
Edit: Something like this actually would be perfect. Had no idea this existed:
Miracast:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYx9YNoD014
tanw42 said:
This might sound crazy but what if we can eventually hack the Chromecast to cast the actual phone/tablet screen (such as you can currently with the desktop of a computer) and play Android games on an HDTV. Yes, we can just get the Ouya but this would be awesome. Now I have no idea if hacking something like this will make it possible, but this would be pretty cool down the road.
Edit: Something like this actually would be perfect. Had no idea this existed:
Miracast:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYx9YNoD014
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that the accessibility of this device and it's price are 2 things what will greatly help the community develop on this. Just like Samsung's All-Share Dongle, i do think it's only a matter of time before we can mirror our screen
I don't think you will be able to play local games from your table or phone in the near future for the simple reason that everything is being streamed from the cloud. Even Chromecasting the current tab or the full desktop, what happens is google sends your full desktop or tab to their cloud and then streams it back up. That adds the 1 second delay between what you see on your screen and what appears on your TV. Trying to play a real time game with a 1 sec delay will be nearly impossible. Maybe in the future when everyone will have a fiberoptic connections, if they can cut that delay down to 10ms, then I would say yes/maybe. But that much fast bandwidth is still out in the future.
The thing though about Chromecast is that Google has the right idea on where things are headed. This is by far the best innovation out there for your TV.
larryvand said:
I don't think you will be able to play local games from your table or phone in the near future for the simple reason that everything is being streamed from the cloud. Even Chromecasting the current tab or the full desktop, what happens is google sends your full desktop or tab to their cloud and then streams it back up. That adds the 1 second delay between what you see on your screen and what appears on your TV. Trying to play a real time game with a 1 sec delay will be nearly impossible. Maybe in the future when everyone will have a fiberoptic connections, if they can cut that delay down to 10ms, then I would say yes/maybe. But that much fast bandwidth is still out in the future.
The thing though about Chromecast is that Google has the right idea on where things are headed. This is by far the best innovation out there for your TV.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the most likely avenue for this would be to write an app that turns the phone (or laptop) into a "local cloud" that is streaming just like Netflix or Play Music. It would obviously take some development but I don't think it's too outlandish.
The problem with screen mirroring is lag. From what I have seen 250ms lag is the norm with Miracast. There is just no way around it with current tech. I think that is part of the reason for chromecast. It partially eliminates the need for screen mirroring. Chromecast gives the same ability of using your phone/tablet to browse and select content as does Miracast, but you get a full-screen experience with the best possible resolution depending on internet bandwidth. It is also not depending on your device to be the streamer as is the case with Miracast.
I expect to see another Google TV type device with the new Jellybean update and Chromecast that will be more geared towards gaming on the big screen. I predict we will see it in Q4 or Q1 of next year.
Lag might be there on some level, but it definitely doesnt have any impact the probability of chromecast and screen mirroring. Its not about how well it does it, it's about if i can. Its a 35$ gadget, lets not overthink this. If it's at all possible, 250ms lag would still be more than acceptable. Of course, thins would never be a gaming device where real time information in crucial
larryvand said:
I don't think you will be able to play local games from your table or phone in the near future for the simple reason that everything is being streamed from the cloud. Even Chromecasting the current tab or the full desktop, what happens is google sends your full desktop or tab to their cloud and then streams it back up. That adds the 1 second delay between what you see on your screen and what appears on your TV. Trying to play a real time game with a 1 sec delay will be nearly impossible. Maybe in the future when everyone will have a fiberoptic connections, if they can cut that delay down to 10ms, then I would say yes/maybe. But that much fast bandwidth is still out in the future.
The thing though about Chromecast is that Google has the right idea on where things are headed. This is by far the best innovation out there for your TV.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I'm unsure of how it exactly works, I don't think everything is necessarily streamed through the cloud. Using your phone or tablet to play netflix or youtube videos from the cloud - yes...
...but I was able to stream a local mkv video in a chrome tab on my desktop to the chromecast. I doubt it makes the round trip through google since I know my upload speeds are pretty bad. My guess is that google just executes the handshake and the video streams through your intranet directly.
pjsnyc said:
While I'm unsure of how it exactly works, I don't think everything is necessarily streamed through the cloud. Using your phone or tablet to play netflix or youtube videos from the cloud - yes...
...but I was able to stream a local mkv video in a chrome tab on my desktop to the chromecast. I doubt it makes the round trip through google since I know my upload speeds are pretty bad. My guess is that google just executes the handshake and the video streams through your intranet directly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are correct about chrome tab mirroring. It goes straight over your local network, but the native codec support of the current Chromecast device is lacking which may be improved by savvy developers found right here. However, since tab mirroring only works from PCs, I think it is a step backwards.
007shark said:
You are correct about chrome tab mirroring. It goes straight over your local network, but the native codec support of the current Chromecast device is lacking which may be improved by savvy developers found right here. However, since tab mirroring only works from PCs, I think it is a step backwards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My understanding is that if you have the correct codecs installed on your desktop/laptop with chrome, you should theoretically be able to play any file type. I saw a video of it working with plex or simply navigating your local drives with chrome. Whether or not native codec support is lacking on the chromecast is moot imho. Tab mirroring on a phone or tablet should eventually come, I just think the devices need more horsepower so to speak.
polish_pat said:
Lag might be there on some level, but it definitely doesnt have any impact the probability of chromecast and screen mirroring. Its not about how well it does it, it's about if i can. Its a 35$ gadget, lets not overthink this. If it's at all possible, 250ms lag would still be more than acceptable. Of course, thins would never be a gaming device where real time information in crucial
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am with you. I think this little device will be one of the more popular developer projects on xda.
---------- Post added at 01:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:36 PM ----------
pjsnyc said:
My understanding is that if you have the correct codecs installed on your desktop/laptop with chrome, you should theoretically be able to play any file type. I saw a video of it working with plex or simply navigating your local drives with chrome. Whether or not native codec support is lacking on the chromecast is moot imho. Tab mirroring on a phone or tablet should eventually come, I just think the devices need more horsepower so to speak.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, so it is transcoding on the fly. I agree with you on not yet on the phones because of lack of processing power. Miracast is still the better option with portable devices even with the minor lag.
I guess I am dreaming for, because Google surprised me with this gadget and I was unable to get one before they were all sold out, an all encompassing gadget that has DLNA, Miracast, and Chromecast in the same form factor. I think the DLNA might be able to be added to this. I doubt Miracast would be able to, though.
007shark said:
...
I guess I am dreaming for, because Google surprised me with this gadget and I was unable to get one before they were all sold out, an all encompassing gadget that has DLNA, Miracast, and Chromecast in the same form factor. I think the DLNA might be able to be added to this. I doubt Miracast would be able to, though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I kinda like it the way it is. While DLNA has been around for a while, I honestly havent seen a simple implementation of it yet (unless you lock yourself into one brand/ecosystem). I am excited that the hacking community is already tearing this thing apart, but the simplicity of setting it up and just getting it to work for the masses is ridiculous at this price.
I lucked out in getting mine - my coworker was able to arrange a pickup at bestbuy and sold it to me at price when he realized he couldn't mirror a mobile chrome tab.
pjsnyc said:
I kinda like it the way it is. While DLNA has been around for a while, I honestly havent seen a simple implementation of it yet (unless you lock yourself into one brand/ecosystem). I am excited that the hacking community is already tearing this thing apart, but the simplicity of setting it up and just getting it to work for the masses is ridiculous at this price.
I lucked out in getting mine - my coworker was able to arrange a pickup at bestbuy and sold it to me at price when he realized he couldn't mirror a mobile chrome tab.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I like the DLNA for getting photos, videos, and music from my device to the TV. Samsung's AllCast from their phones/tablets work great this way even with non-Samsung DLNA devices. If Google implemented DLNA with Chromecast then a phone/tablet's native gallery and video apps could seamlessly work as the Netflix and YouTube apps do without a normal consumer understanding how it works. And also without having to sync everything to the cloud.
007shark said:
I like the DLNA for getting photos, videos, and music from my device to the TV. Samsung's AllCast from their phones/tablets work great this way even with non-Samsung DLNA devices. If Google implemented DLNA with Chromecast then a phone/tablet's native gallery and video apps could seamlessly work as the Netflix and YouTube apps do without a normal consumer understanding how it works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess this is where you and I disagree. The 'understanding how it works' part. For example - once you get chromecast set up with your laptop on your couch, sharing photos and videos with other people in your livingroom from facebook is easy to understand for anyone. 'Native' for the masses is what is currently showing in the browser tab.
pjsnyc said:
I guess this is where you and I disagree. The 'understanding how it works' part. For example - once you get chromecast set up with your laptop on your couch, sharing photos and videos with other people in your livingroom from facebook is easy to understand for anyone. 'Native' for the masses is what is currently showing in the browser tab.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is exactly the difference. I don't use a laptop in my living room. I use my tablet and/or phone. I think that is also the growing trend at least from my circle of friends and family.
EDIT: I use to watch TV with a laptop in my lap, but haven't done that in a couple years since I got a tablet.
For games we could see some games go to cloud based solution. This could work by your phone/controller sending information to the server that in turn sends back appropriate results to the Chromecast. So games aren't played on the phone but on the server the phone just sends commands.
Yeah miracast is sick
Sent from my SPH-L720 using xda premium
pjsnyc said:
I kinda like it the way it is. While DLNA has been around for a while, I honestly havent seen a simple implementation of it yet (unless you lock yourself into one brand/ecosystem). I am excited that the hacking community is already tearing this thing apart, but the simplicity of setting it up and just getting it to work for the masses is ridiculous at this price.
I lucked out in getting mine - my coworker was able to arrange a pickup at bestbuy and sold it to me at price when he realized he couldn't mirror a mobile chrome tab.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://elinux.org/DLNA_Open_Source_Projects ?
007shark said:
I am with you. I think this little device will be one of the more popular developer projects on xda.
---------- Post added at 01:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:36 PM ----------
Okay, so it is transcoding on the fly. I agree with you on not yet on the phones because of lack of processing power. Miracast is still the better option with portable devices even with the minor lag.
I guess I am dreaming for, because Google surprised me with this gadget and I was unable to get one before they were all sold out, an all encompassing gadget that has DLNA, Miracast, and Chromecast in the same form factor. I think the DLNA might be able to be added to this. I doubt Miracast would be able to, though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't see any hardware limitations for Mircacast at this moment, still digging through the tech specs and kernel though
Will it be possible at some point to use Chromecast as a gateway to use the TV as second independent monitor, rather than a mirror of the laptop/desktop with a browser extension, maybe in conjunction with Ultramon?
I have Ultramon installed in my laptop. When I turn my iPad into a second monitor using an app like AirDisply, Ultramon immediately picks it up as the second monitor and provides all the functionality for a second monitor - position, resolution, task bar, etc.
Can I achieve something similar with Chromecast + Ultramon, if not now in the future?
New Daddy said:
Will it be possible at some point to use Chromecast as a gateway to use the TV as second independent monitor, rather than a mirror of the laptop/desktop with a browser extension, maybe in conjunction with Ultramon?
I have Ultramon installed in my laptop. When I turn my iPad into a second monitor using an app like AirDisply, Ultramon immediately picks it up as the second monitor and provides all the functionality for a second monitor - position, resolution, task bar, etc.
Can I achieve something similar with Chromecast + Ultramon, if not now in the future?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No the CCast wouldn't do that since it would be a waste since the CCast connects to the same network the Android device does so why send it to CCast when you could send it to the Device directly.
CCast does however act as a second monitor for Android and other devices...
New Daddy said:
Will it be possible at some point to use Chromecast as a gateway to use the TV as second independent monitor, rather than a mirror of the laptop/desktop with a browser extension, maybe in conjunction with Ultramon?
I have Ultramon installed in my laptop. When I turn my iPad into a second monitor using an app like AirDisply, Ultramon immediately picks it up as the second monitor and provides all the functionality for a second monitor - position, resolution, task bar, etc.
Can I achieve something similar with Chromecast + Ultramon, if not now in the future?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Future, maybe, but the 1-2 second lag from having to compress the video (and Chromecast having to decompress it at the other end) would be annoying at best.
bhiga said:
Future, maybe, but the 1-2 second lag from having to compress the video (and Chromecast having to decompress it at the other end) would be annoying at best.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh... I never noticed any annoying lag when I use iPad with AirDisplay. I guess iPad has lot more processing power than Chromecast.
AirPlay is designed for screen mirroring and hence low latency. The current methods of Chromecast desktop mirroring essentially make the desktop a video stream first.
Likely this will change once they're screen mirroring is implemented by devices.
Sent from a device with no keyboard. Please forgive typos, they may not be my own.
bhiga said:
AirPlay is designed for screen mirroring and hence low latency. The current methods of Chromecast desktop mirroring essentially make the desktop a video stream first.
Likely this will change once they're screen mirroring is implemented by devices.
Sent from a device with no keyboard. Please forgive typos, they may not be my own.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm telling you. With AirPlay, there is more than mirroring. You can use the iPad as a second monitor. It works perfectly with Ultramon.
New Daddy said:
I'm telling you. With AirPlay, there is more than mirroring. You can use the iPad as a second monitor. It works perfectly with Ultramon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, and screen mirroring/output isn't the core intent of Chromecast, and I'm not sure screen mirroring will ever make it to iOS for Chromecast.
Long story short, we all can want Chromecast to be more than it is and it's growing steadily, but there will be limits based on its core design.
Thinking about it more... I think Google could (and probably is) making the screen mirroring similar to how RemoteX works in Windows - instead of sending a picture of a red box, send a command to draw a red box - much less data and identical result as long as both source and Chromecast share the same drawing language and techniques. Definitely possible for Android-Chromecast, not sure if/how it could be implemented outside of code that Google owns though, including Windows as a source.
Apple has a definite advantage there as they can make sure iOS, AppleTV and MacOS all share a common drawing implementation.
Sent from a device with no keyboard. Please forgive typos, they may not be my own.
Problem is, can't use computer when full screen for other tasks
You cannot use the computer screen for anything else when using Chromecast. thios would be a win win
Get it whilst its hot.
Stream all those mp4 clips of 'nature' and documentaries with ease.. Definitely not porn. No.
Good stuff. :good:
Bonus! sky sports web videos now playback in non flash mode.. If u wait a second the vget icon appears top left of video.. Pleased
Sent from my Nexus 7
This is so full of win it's not even funny.
Works great.
Tried and works great. Streams seem to be more stable than with both Avia or BubbleUPnP for some reason.
So, on which sites would this be useful? I tried it on amazon prime, it didn't work. I wanted to see if it would work on byutv.org, it didn't work. Any suggestions on where I might use this?
primetime34 said:
So, on which sites would this be useful? I tried it on amazon prime, it didn't work. I wanted to see if it would work on byutv.org, it didn't work. Any suggestions on where I might use this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can use it to watch clips on hulu.com (not plus) and if you like searching archives (I do, it's an acquired taste) there's a ton of stuff on the Internet Archive.
https://archive.org/details/dick_tracy_detctive (be sure to use the mp4 link in the table)
It's jumpy, it's cheesy but it's the original **** Tracy.
Some good and all but lost stuff in there.
https://archive.org/details/EyesInTheNight720p1942
I'm sure you'll run across things for your tastes at other sites if you're not interested in that sort of thing. There's a lot of gems squirreled away on the net.
I'm just not getting how to use VGet with Chrome to cast an internet stream. Can someone explain it to me?
I have the VGet downloader extension and the VGet casting extension installed in Chrome on my PC.
I see a VGet icon on my toolbar.
If I start an internet video stream (like the **** Tracy example), I can can click on the VGet icon and it gives me the options to download or cast to Chromecast.
I click on Chromecast, and says it's searching for a DLNA renderer on my network (why does it need one?).
I have to turn on an Android based DLNA client like BubbleUpNP on my Android table, or it won't find anything and it won't proceed. My TV DLNA clients on Samsung or Roku aren't detected.
If I select my Android tablet as the DLNA renderer, I get a small VGet play window that looks like its trying to play something, but nothing happens. It never asks me anything about which Chromecast to use, and my Chromecast shows nothing. The BubbleUpNP client on the Android tablet shows a blank screen.
What's supposed to happen? I don't quite understand the relationship between VGet and the DLNA renderer and the Chromecast.
I'm using the vGet app for Android. On that, if you turn off desktop/Flash mode and turn on Chromecast, select an mp4, it'll cast. With desktop/Flash mode on, you get to choose - Stream (to your selected Android media player, MoboPlayer is good here), Download, or DLNA.
I didn't know that they made a desktop Chrome extension.
PS - when I said it works great - I'm using it with low quality videos that don't look worse via vGet/casting vs. any other methods I use to watch those, but it's very convenient so that's great for me.
VGet appears to work for the Webisodes Network website which is nice.
Would be even nicer if vGet had a functional back button in their internal browser. If I navigate into a site and then press the Android back button, it just bumps me out of the app.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
cmstlist said:
VGet appears to work for the Webisodes Network website which is nice.
Would be even nicer if vGet had a functional back button in their internal browser. If I navigate into a site and then press the Android back button, it just bumps me out of the app.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Odd. Must be device or Android version dependent. I get the previous page.
The problem with the app that I noticed last night is that once my phone has gone to sleep, it sometimes forgets that it's casting and remote control is lost.
Are you seeing any of that?
PS - thanks for the tip on Webisodes.
Could be version dependent. This is a Nexus 7 2012 running 4.4. The bad back button may be a quirk of the new Chromium Web view.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Eyeonanime.com tried, tested, and verified to work.
Tried a few more experiments with the PC Chrome extension and with the Android app to answer my own questions about vGet since nobody else seems to have the answers.
As far as I can tell, the vGet extension for PC Chrome does not currently support the Chromecast, although it uses the Chromecast icon. When I click the cast icon and it prompts for a "DLNA renderer", it's looking for a playback client. But it doesn't detect the Chromecast as a valid client, nor does it detect my Roku (even if it's running the DLNA client), nor my Samsung Blu-Ray player (even if it's running the DLNA client). The only thing it detects is Android-based DLNA clients on the network, like BubbleUPnP on my tablet - and it can't cast successfully to that client either, although it tries.
I can get the Android vGet app to work and cast a stream like the **** Tracy video to the Chromecast, but it's really flaky. Most of the time I just get the cast icon in the middle of the screen on the Chromecast when vGet connects, and no stream starts. A few times I got sound but no video. It takes a couple of tries to get a proper video stream to start, and as soon as it does, vGet crashes Android immediately, causing a reboot - but the stream keeps playing on the Chromecast, so it's obviously receiving it directly. If I attempt to restart vGet after Android reboots, it just crashes and reboots Android again immediately as long as the Chromecast continues to play. Only after I turn off the Chromecast will vGet start again without crashing the Android tablet.
Too bad vGet on Android isn't more robust. I'd guess it cares about the version or something. I've used it quite a bit already without those issues. Hopefully they'll fix it.
Vget forma Android is great. But only with DLNA devices.
giuliastro said:
Vget forma Android is great. But only with DLNA devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My mileage is the exact opposite.
On vGet Android, I uncheck desktop/Flash, select Cast, then tap the desired mp4 link and I'm in business.
My TV tends to suck at dealing with DLNA video.
On my TV, I'm stuck with this -
Compatible files: DLNA-supported file types and extensions are listed below.
Music – MP3 (.mp3)
Photos – JPEG (.jpg, .jpeg)
Video – MPEG1 (.mpg, .mpeg) MPEG2 (.mpg, .mpeg, .trp, .ts, .tp) DIVX (.mpg, .mpeg, .avi)
MPEG4 AVC (.mpg, .mpeg)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Between vGet, LocalCast, and RealPlayer Cloud, I'm pretty much done with DLNA.
It's fabulous when it works though, I agree.
And now it's US$5 for vGet.
EarlyMon said:
And now it's US$5 for vGet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since when? I have it for free, so if you got it free you dont have to buy a premium version or anything?
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk
impulse101 said:
Since when? I have it for free, so if you got it free you dont have to buy a premium version or anything?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since now.
If you update to 0.4.3 or newly install it, you get two weeks free, after that it's $5. I understand that one can earn more free time through a new referral plan.
0.4.2 was the last free version.
People responded with unhappiness in the Play Store comments, the dev replied -
schibum February 27 said:
We are truly sorry for those that cannot afford to spend a few bucks and have no Facebook or real live friends to refer. But basically it's simple: Developing and maintaining an App costs money. This money has to come from somewhere. For some very popular Apps, Ads may be able to pay it for you . They cannot for vGet - we tried that initially.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got the price by asking in another thread.
It's not listed in the Play Store - it simply says that an in-app purchase is added.
When I go to settings, then display then Chromecast instead of getting no nearby devices found I see the chromecast!
If I click it it says casting failed, but surely thats a sign it's definitely happening very soon?
It does it on my unrooted stock Nexus 7 and Nexus 4. And my CC is stock as well.
generationgav said:
When I go to settings, then display then Chromecast instead of getting no nearby devices found I see the chromecast!
If I click it it says casting failed, but surely thats a sign it's definitely happening very soon?
It does it on my unrooted stock Nexus 7 and Nexus 4. And my CC is stock as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes it will get here in time...
As of now I expect that the Android side is done or almost done and it will only work for Google who have a developer version that either has the Mirror App built into the CCast or a Whitelist that allows it.
There is a lot more work on the Android side to get it to work than there would be on the CCast side so it makes sense the Android side of the support would show up first and the CCast side will be unavailable to public until they announce it as officially supported.
And from what I read only Google Experience (aka Nexus) devices will have it at that time....
I definitely hope/suspect Google is making firmware changes in Chromecast to head in that direction. Likely right now it's simply sending an mDNS/Bonjour advertisement that the built-in Miracast support can see.
bhiga said:
I definitely hope/suspect Google is making firmware changes in Chromecast to head in that direction. Likely right now it's simply sending an mDNS/Bonjour advertisement that the built-in Miracast support can see.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the finding of the unit is already part of the Media Router Library in Android...Thats what most of the Apps are using I believe to find the Available devices.
What may be missing is the code to make a screen for the CCast or if that is done the actual Player side of the CCast which Google could have access to but User CCasts do not either due to it not being included in the latest updates or not white listed to work.
The Cast Screen already shows for Miracast. The MR Library already has what it needs to find the device and it probably also has the code to list in cast screen (since it has to find the device first) so it may be the stuff that happens AFTER you select the device that isn't finished or hidden from public use at the moment.
I'm hoping they put the player app into the ROM so that it will work without the need for internet load because not every place you might want to do a presentation has Internet access.
Since Chromecast OS is basically a cut-down version of Chrome OS, shouldn't the code be in Chromium OS codebase?
If so, we should build a Chromiumcast OS and port it to those MiniPC's on them market (if we have the kernel sources and drivers).
Can anyone check the possibility of the above?
However, since Chrome OS uses a different kind of boot image, we should ask Chainfire for help, since he is working on the Chromebook Pixel, as it has such a boot image.
It is funny thought, Google puts Android on a Chromebook, and we may put Chrom(ium) OS on Android devices.
Update 1: Sorry for posting this here, XDA Labs isn't letting me reply to my own thread, but why not port it?
We should make it a full Chromium OS (with the abilities to make a local owner account and recieving casts, as well as casting to another device), while we're at it.
Update 2: Apparently it's a known XDA Labs server API issue, they're working on though, for now I need to wait for there to be a 2nd page to be able to post seperately from the opening post.
If it's just a webpage, then how about packaging it for the different systems (Windows, OS X, Linux, Android, Ubuntu Touch, Firefox OS, iOS, Windows Modern (8/8.1), Windows Universal (10), Sailfish, Unix, Chrome OS, etc.)?
Yes, I'm aware that half of these technically (via ports, for example) are either Linux or Unix (and that Linux is a port of Unix).
I would have included SkyOS, however it appears to have been discontinued before even graduating Alpha... several years ago.
It's not really a cut down version of Chrome OS but more of a cut down version of the Chrome Browser sans any ability to run Chrome OS Apps.
Similar to the chrome browser you find in an Android Phone.
It has nothing to do with what the OS is based on, the important part isn't the OS, but the actual cast receiver application. I was tinkering around with it for a little while and ended up with a not-entirely-functional APK file that implemented a cast receiver, using actual google code and libraries. Installed it on a Nexus 7, which was discoverable as a cast receiver on the network. More important thing to work on led to ignoring the project for a while.
doitright said:
It has nothing to do with what the OS is based on, the important part isn't the OS, but the actual cast receiver application. I was tinkering around with it for a little while and ended up with a not-entirely-functional APK file that implemented a cast receiver, using actual google code and libraries. Installed it on a Nexus 7, which was discoverable as a cast receiver on the network. More important thing to work on led to ignoring the project for a while.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Cast Receiver is usually not much more than an HTML5 webpage.
Asphyx said:
The Cast Receiver is usually not much more than an HTML5 webpage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The cast receiver is a LOT more than a webpage.
doitright said:
The cast receiver is a LOT more than a webpage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you can browse them all in just about any browser.
Want proof
Look at the linkage in the whitelist and go to the URLs for any receiver...
Example....
https://www.gstatic.com/cv/cast/apps/receiver/webrtc/stable/receiver1.html
They may call them HTM5 Applications but when it comes right down to it there is no difference between that and a webpage. Only in rare cases will they put security that denies a browser from loading them and in most cases if it fails to work it is only because they require and use some firmware code (i.e. Video Player) to function.
Asphyx said:
you can browse them all in just about any browser.
Want proof
Look at the linkage in the whitelist and go to the URLs for any receiver...
Example....
https://www.gstatic.com/cv/cast/apps/receiver/webrtc/stable/receiver1.html
They may call them HTM5 Applications but when it comes right down to it there is no difference between that and a webpage. Only in rare cases will they put security that denies a browser from loading them and in most cases if it fails to work it is only because they require and use some firmware code (i.e. Video Player) to function.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That web page does absolutely nothing.
doitright said:
That web page does absolutely nothing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except load the receiver app that is waiting for linkage information from the app that was supposed to launch it when it connected to the CCast!
99.9% of the work is done at the controlling device not the receiver app.
That is the only thing the CCast actually loads the rest is sent to that receiver by the Controler app!
When you connect to the CCast from an app that's all the CCasts loads. Once loaded you can then send content to that Receiver.
Here is the receiver app Plex tells the CCast to load when you first connect their App to the CCast....
https://chromecast.plex.tv/production/index.html
The receivers are nothing more than webpages with various media players and java applications.
Asphyx said:
Except load the receiver app that is waiting for linkage information from the app that was supposed to launch it when it connected to the CCast!
99.9% of the work is done at the controlling device not the receiver app.
That is the only thing the CCast actually loads the rest is sent to that receiver by the Controler app!
When you connect to the CCast from an app that's all the CCasts loads. Once loaded you can then send content to that Receiver.
Here is the receiver app Plex tells the CCast to load when you first connect their App to the CCast....
https://chromecast.plex.tv/production/index.html
The receivers are nothing more than webpages with various media players and java applications.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just keep telling yourself that it actually does something. :good:
doitright said:
Just keep telling yourself that it actually does something. :good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There really is no teaching the ignorant....
That page is the only thing the CCast loads!
The rest is done on the mobile device and that receiver does nothing without the mobile device connecting to that page you say does nothing...
Tell me did you try reading the source code of that page or was that too difficult for you?
Asphyx said:
There really is no teaching the ignorant....
That page is the only thing the CCast loads!
The rest is done on the mobile device and that receiver does nothing without the mobile device connecting to that page you say does nothing...
Tell me did you try reading the source code of that page or was that too difficult for you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let me make this very clear;
1) Install https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.netflix.mediaclient&hl=en
2) Run it.
3) hit the chromecast button. Oh, there is none! Too bad.
doitright said:
Let me make this very clear;
1) Install https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.netflix.mediaclient&hl=en
2) Run it.
3) hit the chromecast button. Oh, there is none! Too bad.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Took you long enough to find the ONE RECEIVER APP (and it is the ONLY APP) that doesn't get loaded from the WEB because it is part of the CCast Firmware!
I find it interesting that in a discussion of RECEIVER APPS you show something from the play store where there are no receiver apps to try and prove your wrong point.
Just look at the Chromecast firmware, there's custom ROMs here. In theory you could just look at it and experiment...
I understand that there is no point in porting ChromiumOS, but what about the AndroidTV UI, with Cast Recieving built-in?
moriel5 said:
I understand that there is no point in porting ChromiumOS, but what about the AndroidTV UI, with Cast Recieving built-in?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be awesome!
I think it could be a perfect combo to turn a Raspberry Pi into a casting device. Chromium OS already exists for Raspberry Pi, but it still has to be improved. http://www.chromiumosforsbc.org/
DaniPhii said:
I think it could be a perfect combo to turn a Raspberry Pi into a casting device. Chromium OS already exists for Raspberry Pi, but it still has to be improved. http://www.chromiumosforsbc.org/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, but I would love if someone managed to remove the mandatory Google login, otherwise I won't use it.
Deleted my account some time back, don't want to open another one.
moriel5 said:
I understand that there is no point in porting ChromiumOS, but what about the AndroidTV UI, with Cast Recieving built-in?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was searching online for this b/c i figured someone would have done it by now. I'd really like to see android TV on chromecast
x000x said:
I was searching online for this b/c i figured someone would have done it by now. I'd really like to see android TV on chromecast
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the Google log-in should be optional, not mandatory.