I recently bought Chromecast SN:3916...(it is not shipped yed and i may choose )
Which hardware revision is it?
Asking because of i have also available 3916, 3917, 3918, 3B14, 3B15, 3B16, 3B17
Which should I pick to get Armada 1500(hw3.30)?
https://origin-www.marvell.com/digital-entertainment/armada-1500-mini/index.jsp
Is root with hardware 3.10 worth more than better chip
http://www.marvell.com.cn/digital-entertainment/assets/armada_1000_pb.pdf
According to wikidevi ""H840 REV 3.xx" is silkscreened on the board"
sources for more info on subject:
http://wikidevi.com/wiki/Google_Chromecast_(H2G2-42)]
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Chromecast+Teardown/16069
Clues:
ifixit teardown: SN:3607101ZYGMS HW:3.30
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Chromecast+Teardown/16069
anadtech teardown: SN:3626101ZXFCA HW:3.10(pcb looks like from FCC pictures)
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7186/google-chromecast-review-an-awesome-35-hdmi-dongle
mathorv said:
I recently bought Chromecast SN:3916...(it is not shipped yed and i may choose )
Which hardware revision is it?
Asking because of i have also available 3916, 3917, 3918, 3B14,3B15,3B16,3B17
Which should I pick to get Armada 1500(hw3.30)?
https://origin-www.marvell.com/digital-entertainment/armada-1500-mini/index.jsp
Is root with hardware 3.10 worth more than better chip
http://www.marvell.com.cn/digital-entertainment/assets/armada_1000_pb.pdf
According to wikidevi ""H840 REV 3.xx" is silkscreened on the board"
sources for more info on subject:
http://wikidevi.com/wiki/Google_Chromecast_(H2G2-42)]
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Chromecast+Teardown/16069
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a chromecast here with serial 36** and it has REV 3.30 printed on the board. All chromecasts should be Rev 3.30, anything earlier was a test or prototype device from my understanding.
ddggttff3 said:
I have a chromecast here with serial 36** and it has REV 3.30 printed on the board. All chromecasts should be Rev 3.30, anything earlier was a test or prototype device from my understanding.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Another thing to consider, since Chromecast is an appliance type device, even if for whatever reason the next batch started shipping with a SoC platform that was 3x faster, end-users wouldn't see much difference, if any.
It's unlikely Google and the other providers would start making different content available to Chromecasts based on their hardware revision. It would be a support catastrophe for everyone and settings a "you might more if you wait" precedent will kill sales momentum.
Consistency of operation and functionality is the key goal across any hardware revision within the same model. Sometimes that even means underclocking a chip that could perform faster, if for some reason an old chip is replaced with a faster one.
tl;dr: I really wouldn't worry too much about the platform specifics on board revisions unless you're really planning to "dig deep" and do something drastic like heavily modify the OS.
bhiga said:
Another thing to consider, since Chromecast is an appliance type device, even if for whatever reason the next batch started shipping with a SoC platform that was 3x faster, end-users wouldn't see much difference, if any.
It's unlikely Google and the other providers would start making different content available to Chromecasts based on their hardware revision. It would be a support catastrophe for everyone and settings a "you might more if you wait" precedent will kill sales momentum.
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes but one of the links he posted points to a newer more powerful chipset meant to support 1080P better.
To support those extra features may not actually be too difficult if they just add some code to the Player App that detects highest resolution of the unit when it makes the request.
It wouldn't affect the DIAL protocol at all which is really the sell point here...
Google and Netflix are trying to sell the standard and the device is secondary to that goal. They just needed one device to support it and now they would have zero issues with other OEMs making devices that were DIAL compliant
Better Surround capabilities, Better and Higher resolutions even better net connection capabilities (Full Dual Band N) I can see coming from OEMs in the future, now that may not translate to higher quality NetFlix support but it sure would make the device a lot better on the local streaming side which is good but not great and suggests thats why local took longer to get supported than the others.
I expect to see a lot of devices like Roku and others implement some sort of DIAL support.
And while it may eventually cut into Chromecast sales if the Protocol is widely adopted Google and Netflix will feel like Mission Accomplished.
What we may see is something along the lines of Chromecast Nexus where some 3rd Party makes the hardware and slaps Google's name on it!
Asphyx said:
Yes but one of the links he posted points to a newer more powerful chipset meant to support 1080P better.
To support those extra features may not actually be too difficult if they just add some code to the Player App that detects highest resolution of the unit when it makes the request.
It wouldn't affect the DIAL protocol at all which is really the sell point here...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but it's a poor customer experience when you buy a Acme 9000 and your friend buys an Acme 9000, but your friend's 9000 has a 300-yard range while yours only has a 200-yard range in the same field under the same conditions.
You're right that Google and Netflix are selling the DIAL platform, but the consumer couldn't care less what the platform is, especially for an appliance-type device. They just care that it works, not whether it runs Linux, Windows Embedded, CentOS, or MS-DOS 6.22 It's not a phone or a computer. Nobody asks what OS Smart TVs run - or maybe they do but nobody admits it...
Asphyx said:
I expect to see a lot of devices like Roku and others implement some sort of DIAL support.
And while it may eventually cut into Chromecast sales if the Protocol is widely adopted Google and Netflix will feel like Mission Accomplished.
What we may see is something along the lines of Chromecast Nexus where some 3rd Party makes the hardware and slaps Google's name on it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly - TVs and other devices supporting Google Cast, it's already starting. That's why Google's site mentions "Cast devices" and "Cast SDK" most of the time, mentioning Chromecast only when specifically referring to the Chromecast in particular.
True platform convergence for the multimedia convergence that finally arrived - that would be something! :good:
bhiga said:
Yes, but it's a poor customer experience when you buy a Acme 9000 and your friend buys an Acme 9000, but your friend's 9000 has a 300-yard range while yours only has a 200-yard range in the same field under the same conditions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get what your saying and your right, but Google essentially just did this with the Nexus 7 tablet didn't they? LOL
Related
I want to convert some videos/movies to put on my kaiser, and would like to know what is the best format to use, and highest quality/bitrate i can use. I know the ipod can play 1500kbps mp4 perfectly, but it certainly doesnt work as well on a kaiser. Is there another format perhaps, that it can decode better with a high bitrate? Divx, etc...
So far ive tried mp4 at around 500kbps and it plays pretty much fine. and i synced a movie using wmp to 384kpbs and that works fine as well, but doesnt look so hot...
I'd say stay under or at 500.. until they update the graphics and video drivers, anything over wont play too well. I tested a 700 WMV Top Gear episode (love top gear ) and it was ripping and freezing like mad..
I transfered a 300 from my friends iphone to my tilt via wifi (which by the way is freaking cool) which was 1500kpbs, it was just sad to watch it try and play. I figured dual core 400mhz proc could handle it... Guess not till drivers come out.
OK, now I KNOW the Apple PA department are performing a dark war...
Its a POWER PPC!!! video play is a basic extra to all the other stuff an Ispudge can't do!!!
Get an Ispudge and throw you 'Kaiser' away and don't come on this forum if you are not happy (or have the knowledge to use it to its capability)!
Stop moaning!!
haha. i would never trade my kaiser for an iphone. Those things suck other then the video playback. I know what my kaiser can do, and thats why I love the thing. I'm not complaining about the kaiser in general, just wish it played video a little better.
Notice i didnt mention anything about actualy wanting an iphone
Farsquidge said:
OK, now I KNOW the Apple PA department are performing a dark war...
Its a POWER PPC!!! video play is a basic extra to all the other stuff an Ispudge can't do!!!
Get an Ispudge and throw you 'Kaiser' away and don't come on this forum if you are not happy (or have the knowledge to use it to its capability)!
Stop moaning!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lets see - I paid 700 Bucks for this phone .... and you dont think that entitles me to want it to do what it is advertised to do right on the box? Why dont you take your HTC fanboy mouth and go back to kissing their butt. This forum is to discuss issues and as far as 99.9% of the community is concerned. The video playback and graphics performance in general is an ISSUE!!!.
Personally I love my Kaiser ... but I recognize its shortcomings as well.
Bratag said:
Lets see - I paid 700 Bucks for this phone .... and you dont think that entitles me to want it to do what it is advertised to do right on the box? Why dont you take your HTC fanboy mouth and go back to kissing their butt. This forum is to discuss issues and as far as 99.9% of the community is concerned. The video playback and graphics performance in general is an ISSUE!!!.
Personally I love my Kaiser ... but I recognize its shortcomings as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry to disagree but this forum is not to discuss YOUR personal gripe!, it was developed for the enthusiastic DEVELOPMENT of this equipment! and solving problems ourselves (technically, not OH I can't do it...let me sue!!!.
Get your facts in place first and come up to date with the Broadcomm v Qualcomm lawsuit (still ongoing) and find out why US does not have d3d and your phones were late in deployment. Blame the US not me pal!
Farsquidge said:
Sorry to disagree but this forum is not to discuss YOUR personal gripe!, it was developed for the enthusiastic DEVELOPMENT of this equipment! and solving problems ourselves (technically, not OH I can't do it...let me sue!!!.
Get your facts in place first and come up to date with the Broadcomm v Qualcomm lawsuit (still ongoing) and find out why US does not have d3d and your phones were late in deployment. Blame the US not me pal!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well as it has been pointed out previously to this thread - the law suit between Qualcomm and Broadcomm affects only the US. Given that HTC is not a US company, and in fact I didnt BUY my phone in the US I bought it direct from HTC. Explain to me how the lawsuit affects them developing drivers for the chip? Also Why should I have to solve the issue myself - am I not entitled to support? If you bought a car with a 300 HP engine in it and found out they didnt provide a drive shaft and you had to install one yourself ... does that sound like a good deal. This is no different. We bought the HW based on the press releases/specs all of which mention the qualcomm chip and its capabilities.
I didnt mention suing - I am in fact for the most part against litigation. I simply want either HTC/Qualcomm/MS (but mostly HTC) to step up to their responsibilities. Sometimes an LS is the only way to get companies to do that - but I for one hope it doesnt come down to that.
Bratag said:
This is no different. We bought the HW based on the press releases/specs all of which mention the qualcomm chip and its capabilities.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you actually looked and worked on this device at programming level or are you just one of the 'mob'??
Why do you think I am here??? The Qualcomm chip is working just as much as it is allowed to.!
Farsquidge said:
Have you actually looked and worked on this device at programming level or are you just one of the 'mob'??
Why do you think I am here??? The Qualcomm chip is working just as much as it is allowed to.!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No - I am an end consumer. I shouldnt have to learn how to program driver code (which by the way I can do being a programmer of drivers under linux etc and a coder by trade - of course that would actually require HW specs which we also dont have - but back to the point).
Why in the name of hell should I be responsible for fixing this issue? To use the car analogy again. If you buy a car and its under warranty and the clutch breaks - should you have to learn how to replace its clutch or do you take it back to the dealer?
I know the chip is working as much as its allowed to - the problem is the allowed amount sucks, thats the goddamn issue. You dont hear me complaining about the GPS - I use my garmin software on it and couldnt be happier with it. This is about BAD DRIVER SUPPORT!!. Its no different to ATI or NVIDIA providing bad drivers for vista when it first came out. The community went nuts when everything that used to work well under xp stopped working well. Well quite frankly my graphic ssupport was better under my wizard and thats a 3 year old + phone now. What you see here is the community expressing its displeasure at bad drivers.
Oh and if you check the d3d thread you will see I am following it - And have added what little input I can given the total lack of communication from HTC. You can see in that thread that other windows mobile phones using the qualcomm chip seem to have 3d/graphics support, why exactly can LG ect manage it and HTC not?
Farsquidge said:
Have you actually looked and worked on this device at programming level or are you just one of the 'mob'??
Why do you think I am here??? The Qualcomm chip is working just as much as it is allowed to.!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I could have sworn reading that it had 3d video drivers enabled listed in the specs.. maybe I read wrong
Bratag said:
No - I am an end consumer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry didn't want to quote your whole message as it was a bit large but just took the relevant bit!!
As in the rest of your rant! you quote about buying a car!! If you bought a car, without test driving it first, how would the laws cover you in the US???
You are one of many who are jumping on this d3d lobby. If you dont like the phone, THROW IT AWAY!!! If you check (and I mean REALLY check)all adds for this device they are not claiming anything above what you have, you are following rumour) Don't moan about what you have spent on it as with anyone SENSIBLE enough to think WHY DID YOU PAY SO MUCH TO buy a phone that does not fulfill your requirements WITHOUT CHECKING what you want????
DOH!! You are embarrasing yourself...
http://www.htc.com/support/pdf/htctytnII/Kaiser_HTC_English_Manual_web.pdf
Check out page 219/220. See the supported video formats. Go ahead and try open a h.264 video in media player. The drivers cant even do the formats that they give in the user manual.
PS: A test drive has f**k all to do with the example I quoted. You can test drive a car and not have it break - but when it does should you be responsible for learning how to fix it? More to the point car manufacturers issue recalls to fix issues all the time. Even after a TEST DRIVE. I never said I didnt like the phone BUT IT HAS A GODDAMN ISSUE. Why can you not acknowledge that when 99.9% of the user base does. If you cant then just sod off and stop posting your htc fanboy crap in the threads. All you do is troll. I am out of this. You are the one embarassing yourself. So far you havent come up with a single valid argument - from the lawsuit to your rebuttal of my example.
hes not embarrasing himself.
you are just showing how much of an ass you seem to be.
Bratag said:
http://www.htc.com/support/pdf/htctytnII/Kaiser_HTC_English_Manual_web.pdf
Check out page 219/220. See the supported video formats. Go ahead and try open a h.264 video in media player. The drivers cant even do the formats that they give in the user manual.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again You are confusing HTC's quotation of WM6 OS of what it 'SHOULD' be able to do against what it 'CAN' do.... This has nothing to do with the Qualcomm chip and HTC as a whole, they are limited by the OS and its capabilities.
Check out my LinksysWVC54GC IP cam link thread. The downstreamed mjpeg video is excellent using TCPMP (OH BTW uses d3d!! as WM player in WM6 is still limited and can not!)
Go to basics and realise WM6 and its basic apps is still requiring major changes!!!
Soz if I upset, but just putting the facts.
I'm confused
Bratag... this is *NOT* the "HTC Kaiser Consumer Support" forum. If you have a problem with HTC's Support, I suggest you contact them directly.
This forum is for people that have the phone and want to develop their own programs for it etc.
To use your car analogy; this forum is like Fred down the road, he's replaced the windscreen wipers on his own car, in his own garage, with bright flash ones that the car manufacturer didn't make. He believes that makes his car a bit better than when he bought it...
Just a short fact on the topic, I have a library of movies encoded at around 475 kb/sec at 320x240 that I've used on Archos Players, PPCs, 8525, and now Kaiser with TCPMP and they play and look perfect.
I would like the correct drivers as well to increase general video performance, the Kaiser just cuts it close right now as-is.
GTRoberts said:
I'm confused
This forum is for people that have the phone and want to develop their own programs for it etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I whole heartedly disagree
So the "xda-developers > General Discussion > Development and Hacking" is for??
Or the "xda-developers > Kaiser > Kaiser Upgrading" ?
And why are people getting all over Bratag anyway? He didn't intend to flame anyone, which can not be said by some other members.
Back on topic, I would be interested in what people's experiences are with encoding settings that DO work. It does su<& that I have to use two or more different encodings, and it is definitely disappointing that I can't even play a video file without intervention that my $150 camera can record and play, but if we get back to discussing encoding/transcoding to some particular formats and settings, we can actually help each other instead of bashing.
So for WM6, it sounds like bitrate is best to be <500. Does the fomat matter? I have heard Divx and/or AVI. Has anyone tried any others? Can a difference be seen between them?
I find some of the Freeware transcoders to be very 'hit n miss' such as PocketDivX and Pocket DVD, unable to keep audio/video sync on large files.
If you have all the necessary codecs for WM player on your PC so they will play on it (for most dowladed DivX files that end in .avi you will need latest DivX codec and an AC3 audio codec) then just sync them to your phone and they should play quite well in Pocket WM player and even better on TCPMP with RAW selected!
i think you need to calm down - its almost as if you dont want your device to support 3d or accelerated surfaces - what is wrong with you?
Just wondering if the Qualcomm MSM 7200 has ever been shown to take advantage of 3D graphics on ANY device? Isn't there a Samsung out there or something?
On the LG KS20 it has.
Guys
I just got an idea or suggestion or request….. Anyone can please look into the
O2 XDA Orbit II or O2 XDA Stellar clicks the link for specification please….
http://www.gsmarena.com/o2_xda_orbit_ii-2180.php
http://www.gsmarena.com/o2_xda_stellar-2179.php
I think I’m sure it is made my HTC for specific for O2 only…... And it has Qualcomm MSM7200, 400 Mhz processor.
So my question is……. If this phone has ATI video chip and it is comes with the video drivers or not. If yes can we dump the driver from there devices and can we use it with our HTC device…..
Please someone look into this…….
Thanks
The XDA Stellar is a plain old HTC TyTN II (no hardware accelerated graphics).
The XDA Orbit II is an HTC Touch Cruise (same problem as the TyTN II).
donatom3 said:
On the LG KS920 it has.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you may have meant LG KS20...
Search for the LG KS20
juiceppc said:
I think you may have meant LG KS20...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My bad thanks for pointing it out.
juiceppc said:
I think you may have meant LG KS20...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just found this on the KS20 on youtube. Probably doesn't do it justice but wasn't that impressed especially towards the end when he/she it the 'phone' button. Still saw the screen drawing line by line..
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=9H8Zcj2Y_sc
Here's the PR hype - if only eh? http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eiS2RuxUQ-w&feature=related
So...we should beable to get drivers off that once it's released right?
I'm not a developer (at all) but it seems that if you can find a device (the ks20 for example) that uses the same chip and has 3D drivers you should be able to isolate those drivers in that devices firmware. Once you have them all by thier lonesome I don't see why it would take a whole lot of code to patch them into an HTC. It'd be a different story if the device (KS20 again for example) firmware was written to use let's say Symbian as it operating system but since it's using WM6 it should be very similar to what we'd need for our Kaisers or other HTCs. I know it wouldn't be an easy patch but you gotta think that with some of the awesome firmwares that the XDA devs have put out that someone here could do it.
Daemos said:
So...we should beable to get drivers off that once it's released right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's been tried. Chainfire put in over 100 hours into the work but couldn't get the drivers to work on the tytn II
Besides, the 3D-support of the KS20 is not that good. For example, OpenGL ES is accelerated, but GAPI isn't working at all.
I don't know why, but I have the strange feeling that there is something wrong with the MSM7200 chipset. Why is every device that uses the MSM7200-chipset at least missing one function. For example, the KS20 has it's gps-function disabled. I find that rather strange, since the hardware is in the MSM7200-chipset and the antenna is shared with the normal antenna. So it's just a driver that needs to be added. But, the KS20 has 3D-acceleration, which is unfortunately not very good implemented. This is missing on each MSM7200-device that has it's gps enabled. Could it be that it's impossible to enable all the functions of the MSM7200 at the same time? Maybe the chip just runs to hot resulting in strange behavior? Maybe that's the real reason why no device carrying the MSM7200 has all it's functions enabled?
Ralph Smeets said:
I have the strange feeling that there is something wrong with the MSM7200 chipset.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, at least you are not alone here.
do qualcomm not publish their errata like intel and amd do?
Ralph Smeets said:
just runs to hot resulting in strange behavior? Maybe that's the real reason why no device carrying the MSM7200 has all it's functions enabled?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My bet is that the Kaiser design doesn't pass type approval testing with all functionality enabled. It may be that turning on the hardware acceleration causes RF noise that jams the bluetooth, or the GPS, or causes too many blocked channels in one of the GSM receive bands. If I'm right, there probably won't ever be an "official" software fix released, because usually the fix is at least partially in hardware.
I've seen phones get very close to production before it's realised that major changes and delays, usually a redesign of the pcb, are required to finally fix a problem. Given the rapid turnaround of new designs, it's unlikely they would put any effort into a 'version 2', because the next model would be in design long before the Kaiser was released to production, and they will take any lessons learnt on to that project.
This is all speculation, but based on many years experience as an RF hardware designer, including several mobile handsets.
Ralph Smeets said:
Besides, the 3D-support of the KS20 is not that good. For example, OpenGL ES is accelerated, but GAPI isn't working at all.
I don't know why, but I have the strange feeling that there is something wrong with the MSM7200 chipset. Why is every device that uses the MSM7200-chipset at least missing one function. For example, the KS20 has it's gps-function disabled. I find that rather strange, since the hardware is in the MSM7200-chipset and the antenna is shared with the normal antenna. So it's just a driver that needs to be added. But, the KS20 has 3D-acceleration, which is unfortunately not very good implemented. This is missing on each MSM7200-device that has it's gps enabled. Could it be that it's impossible to enable all the functions of the MSM7200 at the same time? Maybe the chip just runs to hot resulting in strange behavior? Maybe that's the real reason why no device carrying the MSM7200 has all it's functions enabled?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've been thinking this all along. What we want is NOT POSSIBLE. Because Qualcomm LIED about the specs of their chipsets. Douchebags.
i highly doubt they lied.
as said, the hardware is probably there to do it, but qualcomm recommends(?) that device manufactures dont enable the whole chipset for whatever reason (heat, battery life, RF interference, reception problems, who knows)
i'd be interested to know whats said to OEM's, but i dont think calling them douchebags is the way forward
sning said:
i highly doubt they lied.
as said, the hardware is probably there to do it, but qualcomm recommends(?) that device manufactures dont enable the whole chipset for whatever reason (heat, battery life, RF interference, reception problems, who knows)
i'd be interested to know whats said to OEM's, but i dont think calling them douchebags is the way forward
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha. Maybe not but I'm pissed. Anyway, if all the specs they claim are not "enabled" on any one phone then we have no "proof" they didn't lie...
Show us a device running that chipset with all the specs they advertise working they way they say it should and I'll shut up.
I have seen this:
http://www.sensefly.com/products/swinglet-cam/
and I want one. Trouble is they are $10k!
Got me thinking, I have a number of old GPS enabled smartphones (WM, but I also have my current Android HTC Desire).
It occurred to me that the smartphone has enough power and intelligence to know where it is, and how far off a pre-programmed track it is, and could communicate it's current location via GSM so you could track it on a laptop.
Does anyone out there think that an interface could be built to allow the smartphone to use the error from track to operate the control surfaces of a model aircraft to bring it back on track and to trigger a camera (not the awful in-built ones) to take a pre determined shot?
I have no idea how to programme such a thing, but would be willing to learn if you folk thought this had legs.
I'm sure you could have a program click some shots when its in a predetermined location... just like apps will turn on and off wifi or anything else depending on location.
Having the phone at the same time know exactly what to do with camera would be a lot more code. You'd really have to do some testing to see what would work up that high but I'm sure it could be done.
Not that it's THAT cheap, but much cheaper at $1500. It is a DIY kit so you'll have to be somewhat tech savvy, but this is just as fun if not more fun. Click the link below the vid to get to their site.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyYujjP5J-k
makr8100 said:
Not that it's THAT cheap, but much cheaper at $1500. It is a DIY kit so you'll have to be somewhat tech savvy, but this is just as fun if not more fun. Click the link below the vid to get to their site.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyYujjP5J-k
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very nice, I think it would be possible to make one of these for a lot less than $1500. The thing is, I've kinda got my head into the pilotless device - something that you can set a course and off it goes, does its thing and then comes back. When you think about it, the opportunities for that sort of device (most of them illegal) would be endless.
Thanks for your input folks.
The link I posted does have GPS, although it doesn't seem to have a GPS triggered camera. The creator uses a video camera, and with a high enough quality video camera you should be able to take still image captures. The downside is you'll be stuck with 1920x1080 resolution, which may not be high quality enough for your purposes. I'm sure it would be possible to rig a camera's button to an electrical relay triggered by the GPS unit signaling the correct coordinates.
topic.
I, for one, am paying close attention to any functionality like this to surface, then it'll truly meet my needs.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
littleemp said:
topic.
I, for one, am paying close attention to any functionality like this to surface, then it'll truly meet my needs.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would love xbmc on it. i have an old dell as my htpc and my pi as my tv computer. id love it!
I want this too.
Some people say to just get a pi but what they don't understand is with a pi which is 35$ alone you still don't get an SD card, wireless adapter, HDMI cord or even a case. Not to mention iirc Chrome cast is clocked 300Mhz higher than the raspberry with even lower power consumption.
thatbigmoose said:
I want this too.
Some people say to just get a pi but what they don't understand is with a pi which is 35$ alone you still don't get an SD card, wireless adapter, HDMI cord or even a case. Not to mention iirc Chrome cast is clocked 300Mhz higher than the raspberry with even lower power consumption.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
damn. We need someone on this stat!
Lookin forward to replacing my original xbox with this, for my new xbmc media player...
littleemp said:
topic.
I, for one, am paying close attention to any functionality like this to surface, then it'll truly meet my needs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same thing here. This is really why I bought one.
Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk 4
I cant wait for this. As soon as this happens I will buy a chromecast for all the tvs in the house
Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 4
Cast Xmbc over Chromecast using Avia Player
Hi,
You can now cast XMBC over Chromecast using Avia Player($2.99 Addon Charge). A video tutorial is up on You Tube.
Using Smartphone - XMBC can be watched over Chromecast through Avia Player which costs $2.99. YouTube Video shows how.
http://youtu.be/vS-7hwYe4nw
Using Computer - XMBC can be watched over Chromecast through Avia Player which costs $2.99. YouTube Video shows how.
http://youtu.be/NCgP0r5Dvp8
Good Luck
It will never be a XBMC stick...
What you might get though is have XBMC stream to it and support other DIAL devices, once the XBMC devs stop being stubborn and listen to what their Users have been asking for.
They seem to think DIAL isn't worth supporting since they already support UPnP.
Asphyx said:
It will never be a XBMC stick...
What you might get though is have XBMC stream to it and support other DIAL devices, once the XBMC devs stop being stubborn and listen to what their Users have been asking for.
They seem to think DIAL isn't worth supporting since they already support UPnP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My Rockchip MK808 stick runs XBMC and Cheapcast..indeed most Android phones you might have lying around collecting dust will do. I don't use it much, but the wife loves her Android games on the big xcreen.
wideasleep1 said:
My Rockchip MK808 stick runs XBMC and Cheapcast..indeed most Android phones you might have lying around collecting dust will do. I don't use it much, but the wife loves her Android games on the big xcreen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your Rockchip Stick has everything needed to navigate/control it via BT Same with Phones...CCast has none of this.
Whats more is the fact that Source compatibility is going to be a real problem there, You can't store content on the CCast and while reading from a network source is possible that source had better be CCast compatible or it won't play well.
But even if you manage to get past all those hurdles you have one bigger issue to contend with that you can't really solve....
Google will never Whitelist it as it does not conform to their UI Guidelines at all.
I would much rather see XBMC add the ability to send content to DIAL devices because the PC/MAC/LINUX versions of XBMC could easily add Transcoding to their system if they wanted to and remove the source compatibility issue and it would allow two people in the house to watch the same content on different TVs.
Asphyx said:
Your Rockchip Stick has everything needed to navigate/control it via BT Same with Phones...CCast has none of this.
Whats more is the fact that Source compatibility is going to be a real problem there, You can't store content on the CCast and while reading from a network source is possible that source had better be CCast compatible or it won't play well.
But even if you manage to get past all those hurdles you have one bigger issue to contend with that you can't really solve....
Google will never Whitelist it as it does not conform to their UI Guidelines at all.
I would much rather see XBMC add the ability to send content to DIAL devices because the PC/MAC/LINUX versions of XBMC could easily add Transcoding to their system if they wanted to and remove the source compatibility issue and it would allow two people in the house to watch the same content on different TVs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that's no surprise really. I'm still somewhat surprised folks want so much from what amounts to a hdmi-alternative wireless dongle. Sure it's handy and works great for the services it currently supports (tab casting aside..simply atrocious for me) and it's dirt cheap to be a no brainer. But to get real server services requires an entirely different approach: a front end/back end and expandable, stable database. CC ain't gonna take us there.
wideasleep1 said:
Well that's no surprise really. I'm still somewhat surprised folks want so much from what amounts to a hdmi-alternative wireless dongle. Sure it's handy and works great for the services it currently supports (tab casting aside..simply atrocious for me) and it's dirt cheap to be a no brainer. But to get real server services requires an entirely different approach: a front end/back end and expandable, stable database. CC ain't gonna take us there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's the age-old conundrum - specialized device, or general-purpose device?
It's like getting a dishwasher versus a housekeeper.
Dishwasher is predictable and doesn't ask for a raise or days off but it won't wash or fold your clothes.
Housekeeper can wash dishes and wash and fold clothes, but might ask for a raise or days off.
The best solution really depends on the individual situation.
wideasleep1 said:
Well that's no surprise really. I'm still somewhat surprised folks want so much from what amounts to a hdmi-alternative wireless dongle. Sure it's handy and works great for the services it currently supports (tab casting aside..simply atrocious for me) and it's dirt cheap to be a no brainer. But to get real server services requires an entirely different approach: a front end/back end and expandable, stable database. CC ain't gonna take us there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I guess some folks don't realize the limitations of this device and how in some cases Less is actually more!
The simplicity of how CCast works makes it much more versatile than Miracast or DLNA Dongles,
But something like XBMC or Plex frontends which requires saving files and a Database will never be one of those things it does well.
And that doesn't even address the Navigation issues. The whole point of CCast is to make a device you can display to (Like Miracast) while off loading Power, and Navigation to another device that is much easier to write code for but doesn't require tying up the device to display (Like Miracast) a very targeted solution to a very specific problem.
bhiga said:
It's the age-old conundrum - specialized device, or general-purpose device?
It's like getting a dishwasher versus a housekeeper.
Dishwasher is predictable and doesn't ask for a raise or days off but it won't wash or fold your clothes.
Housekeeper can wash dishes and wash and fold clothes, but might ask for a raise or days off.
The best solution really depends on the individual situation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just like you can run Plex off a RasPi or NAS but neither is actually a very good option to run a media server from due to the Transcoding power requirements that usually require far more power than a Pi or NAS can give you.
There are two schools of thought here....
One side wants something they can navigate and control their TV with (Lets call them the Navigators). They just want a device that will give them a better interface than their Smart TV has (Roku, GoogleTV, XBMC Etc...) or want something to make a dumb TV smart. CCast doesn't take that approach at all
The other side I'll call the ROUTERS or maybe the Remote Controllers (and I guess I am in this Group) are looking for LESS Navigation and more Mobile Device integration in the same way we have Smart Houses being controlled by our Mobile devices. I don't want to go through navigation of Menus just to see something on a particular display I would prefer to use the same controls for ALL devices and merely rout signals where I want them without having to SET UP the device I wish to display on.
Just like in a Smart House I can set the temp of one room while sitting in another I should be able to display things on a TV in another room from the same screen I am using to control the display in the room I'm in.
Essentially routing Media throughout my house the same way I do to Monitors in my production truck or TV Studio.
Imagine if I had to go to every monitor in my studio, Hit Menu, Select the app before I could get the signal I wanted on the Monitor. That seems to be what the Navigators want.
Me I don't ever want to have to change a thing on the Monitor just rout my signal to it and have it display it.
This is essentially what DIAL and the CCast is all about.
Asphyx said:
Yeah I guess some folks don't realize the limitations of this device and how in some cases Less is actually more!
The simplicity of how CCast works makes it much more versatile than Miracast or DLNA Dongles,
But something like XBMC or Plex frontends which requires saving files and a Database will never be one of those things it does well.
And that doesn't even address the Navigation issues. The whole point of CCast is to make a device you can display to (Like Miracast) while off loading Power, and Navigation to another device that is much easier to write code for but doesn't require tying up the device to display (Like Miracast) a very targeted solution to a very specific problem.
Just like you can run Plex off a RasPi or NAS but neither is actually a very good option to run a media server from due to the Transcoding power requirements that usually require far more power than a Pi or NAS can give you.
There are two schools of thought here....
One side wants something they can navigate and control their TV with (Lets call them the Navigators). They just want a device that will give them a better interface than their Smart TV has (Roku, GoogleTV, XBMC Etc...) or want something to make a dumb TV smart. CCast doesn't take that approach at all
The other side I'll call the ROUTERS or maybe the Remote Controllers (and I guess I am in this Group) are looking for LESS Navigation and more Mobile Device integration in the same way we have Smart Houses being controlled by our Mobile devices. I don't want to go through navigation of Menus just to see something on a particular display I would prefer to use the same controls for ALL devices and merely rout signals where I want them without having to SET UP the device I wish to display on.
Just like in a Smart House I can set the temp of one room while sitting in another I should be able to display things on a TV in another room from the same screen I am using to control the display in the room I'm in.
Essentially routing Media throughout my house the same way I do to Monitors in my production truck or TV Studio.
Imagine if I had to go to every monitor in my studio, Hit Menu, Select the app before I could get the signal I wanted on the Monitor. That seems to be what the Navigators want.
Me I don't ever want to have to change a thing on the Monitor just rout my signal to it and have it display it.
This is essentially what DIAL and the CCast is all about.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep...I only see the CC as and 'end" device. To introduce feature creep would complicate and obscure its real value. API release and further app development will be all the enhancement it needs. Clear purpose market wise, solid community support=widespread success. Let the specialists do their thing.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
wideasleep1 said:
Yep...I only see the CC as and 'end" device. To introduce feature creep would complicate and obscure its real value. API release and further app development will be all the enhancement it needs. Clear purpose market wise, solid community support=widespread success. Let the specialists do their thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup!
For my usage, I don't need YAR (Yet Another Remote) - I already have a HTPC, but Chromecast's interface as an extension of apps I already use is much more convenient.
wideasleep1 said:
Yep...I only see the CC as and 'end" device. To introduce feature creep would complicate and obscure its real value. API release and further app development will be all the enhancement it needs. Clear purpose market wise, solid community support=widespread success. Let the specialists do their thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For years in broadcast we have used a sort of networked transmission called "The Switch" it was little more than a network router that you could send video to any TV network on "The Switch Network".
TVs are in my mind a destination for content and it doesn't really matter what kind of content it is (Music, Web, Video, Pics). CCast can turn a TV into a destination. Until TV Manfs get on board and see this is the best way to send digital signals all over the place (by Pushing instead of Pulling) the CCast will at least get the concept rolling until those Manufacturers catch up. I know for a fact Sony would LOVE to get rid of their Smart Interface department because it generates little to no revenue and is constantly having to keep up and upgrading TVs that were already bought and sold. In time whatever money they made off the TV will be spent supporting it's Smart interface to keep up with User Demand for apps when if they merely supported DIAL they wouldn't need any SMART interface at all!
Thats kind of where I hope CCast (and DIAL standard) is taking us!
bhiga said:
Yup!
For my usage, I don't need YAR (Yet Another Remote) - I already have a HTPC, but Chromecast's interface as an extension of apps I already use is much more convenient.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's funny how the first wireless remotes used light to control but were then abandoned for Radio devices which were then Abandoned for IR (Light again) only to be usurped again by Radio in the form of WiFi! LOL
As they say what goes around comes around! LOL
There isn't a universal remote that can be bought that would be as versatile as my Tablet or Phone is....
Turning my Chromecast into my XBMC machine is literally why I logged into XDA today. GOGOGO!!!!
I can't wait for that. I currently play everything off an HTPC but if I don't ever need to turn it on again, good.
Asphyx said:
It's funny how the first wireless remotes used light to control but were then abandoned for Radio devices which were then Abandoned for IR (Light again) only to be usurped again by Radio in the form of WiFi! LOL
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed... I actually had a TV that used a sonic remote, I think it might've been Zenith.
When I printed graphics using my dot-matrix* printer, certain graphics would change the channel. It was freaky at first, and pretty funny afterward.
* Kids, look that one up or go to an automotive dealership that still uses carbon-copy forms.
Asphyx said:
There isn't a universal remote that can be bought that would be as versatile as my Tablet or Phone is....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
:good: Indeed! Harmony is close but not as slick as native control. Hard to get more native than building it into Google Play Services!
bhiga said:
Indeed... I actually had a TV that used a sonic remote, I think it might've been Zenith.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL Yes It was a Zenith....I remember My Uncle could change the channel by Whistling! Would drive my great Grandmother Nuts!
I am happy with the functionality of the Chromecast. Netflix, Play Music and YouTube function quite well. I liked briefly being able to play local media. But I can't help but wonder what will Google add to it. Roku has so many channels both official and private. Apple TV just added a couple more. Not very many but still many more then Google. Any thoughts on how Chromecast will mature.
Sent from my Xoom using XDA Premium HD app
I think so many people are caught up in the idea of playing their local media, that they had forgot that this device can do so much more!
I am personally working on a couple of preview/proof-of-concept projects, within the guidelines that Google has given us, including having my Chromecast whitelisted. And they still work just fine, aka not blocked.
One is a game (with plans to develop quite a few games).
One is a home automation/security hub integration.
There is a lot of potential for this device. And even with an unfinished SDK, the current API allows for all of this still.
Consider this. The receiver app API is 100% compatible to JavaScript and HTML5. And so much can be developed on these platforms.
The problem I see is, we have SOOOOOO many more "consumers/users" roaming this device then we do developers. And when the proof-of-concept that the CC could playback local media emerged, everyone was FLING'n to that and didn't allow their minds to see outside that box (like the pun there?).
I for one am still extremely excited for this product. As a developer, I see it as a great tool that adds an outlet to my creativity which can be integrated with current relevant apps and web experiences, and future ones.
I truly hope that the rest of the community can see this "light at the end of the tunnel" as well. I'd hate to see the CC get such a bad rep just because an ability that was never promised in the first place, got, for all we know, temporarily disabled.
Unholyfire said:
I think so many people are caught up in the idea of playing their local media, that they had forgot that this device can do so much more!
I am personally working on a couple of preview/proof-of-concept projects, within the guidelines that Google has given us, including having my Chromecast whitelisted. And they still work just fine, aka not blocked.
One is a game (with plans to develop quite a few games).
One is a home automation/security hub integration.
There is a lot of potential for this device. And even with an unfinished SDK, the current API allows for all of this still.
Consider this. The receiver app API is 100% compatible to JavaScript and HTML5. And so much can be developed on these platforms.
The problem I see is, we have SOOOOOO many more "consumers/users" roaming this device then we do developers. And when the proof-of-concept that the CC could playback local media emerged, everyone was FLING'n to that and didn't allow their minds to see outside that box (like the pun there?).
I for one am still extremely excited for this product. As a developer, I see it as a great tool that adds an outlet to my creativity which can be integrated with current relevant apps and web experiences, and future ones.
I truly hope that the rest of the community can see this "light at the end of the tunnel" as well. I'd hate to see the CC get such a bad rep just because an ability that was never promised in the first place, got, for all we know, temporarily disabled.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for this post. We finally get one of the few adult posts around here. I'm very interested in what you have planned so far.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4
Unholyfire said:
I think so many people are caught up in the idea of playing their local media, that they had forgot that this device can do so much more!
I am personally working on a couple of preview/proof-of-concept projects, within the guidelines that Google has given us, including having my Chromecast whitelisted. And they still work just fine, aka not blocked.
One is a game (with plans to develop quite a few games).
One is a home automation/security hub integration.
There is a lot of potential for this device. And even with an unfinished SDK, the current API allows for all of this still.
Consider this. The receiver app API is 100% compatible to JavaScript and HTML5. And so much can be developed on these platforms.
The problem I see is, we have SOOOOOO many more "consumers/users" roaming this device then we do developers. And when the proof-of-concept that the CC could playback local media emerged, everyone was FLING'n to that and didn't allow their minds to see outside that box (like the pun there?).
I for one am still extremely excited for this product. As a developer, I see it as a great tool that adds an outlet to my creativity which can be integrated with current relevant apps and web experiences, and future ones.
I truly hope that the rest of the community can see this "light at the end of the tunnel" as well. I'd hate to see the CC get such a bad rep just because an ability that was never promised in the first place, got, for all we know, temporarily disabled.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I look forward to the gaming part as from what I understand there is a lag between the input and display on the tv. And for gaming lag is an absolute no-no.
Unholyfire said:
I think so many people are caught up in the idea of playing their local media, that they had forgot that this device can do so much more!
I am personally working on a couple of preview/proof-of-concept projects, within the guidelines that Google has given us, including having my Chromecast whitelisted. And they still work just fine, aka not blocked.
One is a game (with plans to develop quite a few games).
One is a home automation/security hub integration.
There is a lot of potential for this device. And even with an unfinished SDK, the current API allows for all of this still.
Consider this. The receiver app API is 100% compatible to JavaScript and HTML5. And so much can be developed on these platforms.
The problem I see is, we have SOOOOOO many more "consumers/users" roaming this device then we do developers. And when the proof-of-concept that the CC could playback local media emerged, everyone was FLING'n to that and didn't allow their minds to see outside that box (like the pun there?).
I for one am still extremely excited for this product. As a developer, I see it as a great tool that adds an outlet to my creativity which can be integrated with current relevant apps and web experiences, and future ones.
I truly hope that the rest of the community can see this "light at the end of the tunnel" as well. I'd hate to see the CC get such a bad rep just because an ability that was never promised in the first place, got, for all we know, temporarily disabled.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The thing with local media streaming is that it should have been included from the start and is one of the most common and basic needs for Android users. We all have these really nice smartphones with incredible cameras and want a very easy way to push pictures or video we have taken to our big screens for reviewing as a group. I have no doubt it will come once the SDK is out of beta and it's really too bad that we all had access to AirCast because it provided a key functionality then Google took it away. Yes, it should never had happened and I understand why they had to block the hack but they also had to realize it was going to upset a lot of people. I just don't get why they didn't provide this functionality from the start, it's just such a natural solution for Android to share pictures on a big screen....
verysmartncool said:
I look forward to the gaming part as from what I understand there is a lag between the input and display on the tv. And for gaming lag is an absolute no-no.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since my proof-of-concept game does not require millisecond latency for control interface from the player to the screen, this is not an issue. Also, the lag that is present appears to be less than a second thus far anyway.
rkirmeier said:
The thing with local media streaming is that it should have been included from the start and is one of the most common and basic needs for Android users. We all have these really nice smartphones with incredible cameras and want a very easy way to push pictures or video we have taken to our big screens for reviewing as a group. I have no doubt it will come once the SDK is out of beta and it's really too bad that we all had access to AirCast because it provided a key functionality then Google took it away. Yes, it should never had happened and I understand why they had to block the hack but they also had to realize it was going to upset a lot of people. I just don't get why they didn't provide this functionality from the start, it's just such a natural solution for Android to share pictures on a big screen....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure why it should have been included. It was never advertised as having that functionality. The Chromecast website states...
The easiest way to enjoy online video and music on your TV.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It will be great once the SDK is officially released and developers can release an app for that... but it was and is sold as a solution for online video.
I am hopeful people can bring a variety of things to the Chromecast. I can stream my local files to the roku quite easily. And actually I have a slimport and a push2tv. So it is easy. I can already use the roku for angry birds. Not sure whether latency is an issue. It is true that Google did not advertise that it could play local files but they are smart enough to know that customers would want to. If they are worried about upsetting the Cable companies, etc. We have plenty of ways to stream content from our Android devices to the television. I. Can play a local file on the computer using a chrome browser. Granted it looks terrible but it works.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4