Related
Ok so I wasn't sure if this goes in general, qa, or dev, but I figured this would be the most likely spot for an answer.
I have a home server set up & will shortly have a VPN running. Now my main question is this: I know the phone has the ability to connect to the vpn, but is there a way to stream music/movies to the phone? I having to hand pick each song I want to put on, so being able to access my collection remotely would be very nice.
Thanks!
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
bose.jhebert said:
Ok so I wasn't sure if this goes in general, qa, or dev, but I figured this would be the most likely spot for an answer.
I have a home server set up & will shortly have a VPN running. Now my main question is this: I know the phone has the ability to connect to the vpn, but is there a way to stream music/movies to the phone? I having to hand pick each song I want to put on, so being able to access my collection remotely would be very nice.
Thanks!
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This has nothing to do with development.
You didn't mention what OS you are running at home so all we can do is guess.
But FTP, Samba, DLNA - depends if you want to copy of stream and how much battery you want to suck down. Since you have a DLNA client - that would probably be the way to go if you want to stream music. or you could get a 32GB card and carry a lot with you.
If my first post didn't make me seem like a complete fool this one should make up for it. As far as I'm aware allshare only works via wifi, my goal is to stream via 3g. Using wifi tether on my captivate & setting up vpn allows me to stream to my ipad, but my goal is to stream over 3g to my phone.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
When I say this I may be wrong and come off as stupid as you think you seem, but I can't imagine how that could be possible... And unless you have unlimited data (they didn't grandfather mine), that would sure eat up your 2gb pretty fast.
Really, I can see how it's possible, but not how it's easily done. Access web server from phone; apache maybe?
streaming to phone solution
Easiest solution so far is orb.com, but I personally would prefer a solution that worked on my LAN and just allowed use of samba services instead of using an outside service. Coreplayer was great on windows mobile.
Yea, I would love to do the same thing. I have over 100GB of music on my home server and have unlimited data. I hate having to pick out the music to put on my phone only to inevitably want to listen to something I didn't happen to pick.
I think it would be possible but I don't know if there are any applications that would allow you to do it.
Subsonic
Nice! Subsonic looks great. And it runs on multiple systems since I don't run Windows for my server.
Thanks AJerman
Hi all,
myMedia WP7 has recently been released on the marketplace. myMedia WP7 is a TVersity client that allows you to stream music and video (and view pictures) from your TVersity server to your WP7 device.
The server handles all the transcoding (if required), so all videos formats are playable on your phone. For Tversity to properly identify your WP7 device you need to update the included profiles file. Instructions and the profile is available from here http://www.gordonhome.info/?p=198
myMedia WP7 has a fully functional trial mode (ad-supported) or is $1.99 US for the non-ad version.
You can get is here (Zune link) http://social.zune.net/redirect?type=phoneApp&id=27cacd23-1e94-e011-986b-78e7d1fa76f8
A video of it in action
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2OB_Om4BWc
Please post app recommendations in WP7 General.
~~Tito~~
Sounds cool. When I have a bit of time to setup Tversity, I think I will give this a go!
I already had TVersity and DynDNS installed (for separate reasons) so I set up myMedia and it works flawlessly both over my home network and from the external address.
Very nice, I can confirm the trial is fully functional & works flawlessly once you have TVersity & DynDNS (Needed if you don't have a static External IP, which most ISP's don't use) setup.
Could you explain setup using dns a little more? Also, should you not need to use a dns ip if you're just trying to use tversity with mymedia wp7 on your home network (connected through wifi)? Thanks.
Ok, got it working on home network. Now just trying to get it set up with port forwarding and using dns server.
kwill said:
Could you explain setup using dns a little more? Also, should you not need to use a dns ip if you're just trying to use tversity with mymedia wp7 on your home network (connected through wifi)? Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, you don't need to use a DNS service on your home network (or if your ISP provides a static IP address). You just put in the IP address of your tversity server.
kwill said:
Ok, got it working on home network. Now just trying to get it set up with port forwarding and using dns server.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great, let me know if you need any assistance setting up the DNS/external access portion.
Hi,
I have everything set up including the profiles file but am unable to find windows phone 7 in the dropdown list in settings - media playback device within tversity. this seems to result in every video file being unsupported when trying to stream them from my device. ány idea what i can try to resolve this please?
pencilcase said:
Hi,
I have everything set up including the profiles file but am unable to find windows phone 7 in the dropdown list in settings - media playback device within tversity. this seems to result in every video file being unsupported when trying to stream them from my device. ány idea what i can try to resolve this please?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't appear in the drop down settings (that's not what the profile does), it's automatically detected based on browser strings. The Mango Beta has thrown a spanner in the works by changing the browser string so WP7 is no longer automatically detected.
I've submitted an updated version to the marketplace that lets you force tversity to use a specific profile. By choosing this option and putting in the profile GUID (it defaults to the GUID of the WP7 profile I provide), you can force tversity to use whatever profile you want regardless of the auto detection.
Hi,
unfortunately this update did not resolve the issue.
It seems to recognize it as a Windows Phone 7 now, but Tversity is telling me: Error - Could not strart transcoding for file://.................avi
nevermind that, fixed, all working ! thanks !!!!!!!!!!
I got everything running but when I try to play a movie it gives an error... ''Sorry, can't play this file''... Or something like that...
Any ideas...?
I'd like a new icon for this app.
Sent from my Samsung Omnia 7 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
BellPego said:
I got everything running but when I try to play a movie it gives an error... ''Sorry, can't play this file''... Or something like that...
Any ideas...?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not transcoding the file
1. Did you install the profile?
2. If so, is the device being identified as a WP7 device?
3. If you're using Mango, turn the force profile detection on in the settings page.
Peew971 said:
I'd like a new icon for this app.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd like a billion dollars. I take it you're a designer and are offering to design one...
I'm not, I'm a consumer offering feedback. Isn't it why you post here, for feedback? I send feedback to plenty of devs and never had an answer like yours, I'm really unimpressed.
Sent from my Samsung Omnia 7 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
dgaust said:
It's not transcoding the file
1. Did you install the profile?
2. If so, is the device being identified as a WP7 device?
3. If you're using Mango, turn the force profile detection on in the settings page.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did that and it was a bit laggy...
Then and played aroun and found the best settings in my case...
Media Playback Device: WMV9 Video Device.
Leave the IP address blank
I have turned off HTTP Proxy.
On the Transcoder Tab
When To Transcode: Always (Important)
Mine is set to Decrease Bitrate if its too high for my network
And ticked Use DirectShow for Windows Media Encoding and choose Windows Media Video 9 in the drop down menu...
Now everything works fine in Mango...
Peew971 said:
I'm not, I'm a consumer offering feedback. Isn't it why you post here, for feedback? I send feedback to plenty of devs and never had an answer like yours, I'm really unimpressed.
Sent from my Samsung Omnia 7 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If that's the type of 'constructive' feedback you offer to developers, then I'm sure your feedback is ignored.
'I'd like a new icon for this app' is not constructive and provides no insight into what you feel is wrong with the current icon, or what could be done to improve it. Not only that, the tone of the post is arrogant and rude.
Most developers would ignore comments like those. Fortunately I don't make my living off this type of stuff so I can say what I want, how I want. In general, I'm courteous and will do everything to help out a user and work through any issues they have. On occasion, I'll talk to people in the same manner they chose to address me.
For anyone who wants to suggest genuine features or has requests for changes, I'm happy to listen. In fact, I've made a number of additions and changes based on user feedback.
I've also spent significant time assisting users setup tversity so they get the best experience using the app.
Peew971, in order to avoid feeling disappointed in future, I'd reconsider how you leave 'feedback'.
BellPego said:
I did that and it was a bit laggy...
Then and played aroun and found the best settings in my case...
Media Playback Device: WMV9 Video Device.
Leave the IP address blank
I have turned off HTTP Proxy.
On the Transcoder Tab
When To Transcode: Always (Important)
Mine is set to Decrease Bitrate if its too high for my network
And ticked Use DirectShow for Windows Media Encoding and choose Windows Media Video 9 in the drop down menu...
Now everything works fine in Mango...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BellPego,
Glad you got it streaming for you. Just a note though, that if you use those settings and have other devices it'll also affect playback on those devices.
Personally, my settings are
Mediaplayback Device
Automatic
Transcoder
Only when needed
decrease bitrate
Windows Media Encoder
Tick use directshow
Windows Media Video 9
Optimization
Quality
Compression
Average
When you insert the WP7 profile into the TVersity profiles.xml file (this will automatically be included in the next build of TVersity), and in Mango turn on the force profile detection, it will detect that the device is a Windows Phone 7 and transcode accordingly.
dgaust said:
Peew971, in order to avoid feeling disappointed in future, I'd reconsider how you leave 'feedback'.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, I said "I'd like a new icon for this app", not one more word. What is it I should reconsider, was I disrespectful to you or your work? Alright I just typed a quick sentence from my phone and didn't elaborate but I didn't deserve that sarcastic answer of yours.
I've been praising your app to friends and users here and elsewhere and that's how you address me because I said "I'd like a new icon for this app"?! This takes me back to those bad times with Dinik on the HD2 forums, talented guy but I couldn't force myself to support his work anymore after some odd posts of his.
Just... wow.
dgaust said:
I'd like a billion dollars. I take it you're a designer and are offering to design one...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Icons attached;
Since chromecast simply get an url or data to play content already "on the cloud", it will be possibile to emulate its behaviour with a chrome extension or something like that?
I'd love to use a chromecast-like interface on my desktop pc...
p.nightmare said:
Since chromecast simply get an url or data to play content already "on the cloud", it will be possibile to emulate its behaviour with a chrome extension or something like that?
I'd love to use a chromecast-like interface on my desktop pc...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd second that. I'd love to see the ability to chrome cast TO a (widows) chrome browser.
I have a number of MCE PC's connected to HD TV's and computer with monitors throughout the house that would be great as the recipients of "casting".
At work I'd like to be able to look something up on my phone and then sent it to my nearest PC browser...
htcsens2 said:
I'd second that. I'd love to see the ability to chrome cast TO a (widows) chrome browser.
I have a number of MCE PC's connected to HD TV's and computer with monitors throughout the house that would be great as the recipients of "casting".
At work I'd like to be able to look something up on my phone and then sent it to my nearest PC browser...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You mean like this? - http://goo.gl/NOoel
You won't be able to push Netflix to the browser the same way, but you can certainly do so with web content.
Jason_V said:
You mean like this? - http://goo.gl/NOoel
You won't be able to push Netflix to the browser the same way, but you can certainly do so with web content.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah kind of like that but completely integrated into he chrome cast infrastructure and APIs so that it is compatible across all apps and is just one click on the new "cast" buttons that are cropping up at the top of all my Android apps now .... (Netflix, Youtube, Google music etc.)
There has been talk of 3rd party hardware makers being encouraged to support the standard so shouldn't be too hard to do proper chrome browser integration as a target.
I can't believe no one has thought of it yet :fingers-crossed:
here
p.nightmare said:
I can't believe no one has thought of it yet :fingers-crossed:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here you go github.com/dz0ny/leapcast
dz0ny said:
Here you go github.com/dz0ny/leapcast
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
awesome! I will definitely keep an eye on that :good: :good:
Nodecast is also an option
p.nightmare said:
awesome! I will definitely keep an eye on that :good: :good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Beside Leapcast (which is implemented in python), there is a JavaScript-/Node.js-Port in Git-Hub available. The port was made by Sebastian Mauer, the guy who wrote Cheapcast.
I spend the last weekend exeperimenting with both Nodecast and Cheapcast. Now Nodecast runs here in a Windows 8.1 virtual machine - and I'm able to stream from other Windows and Android-devices.
I wrote a few tutorials, how to setup Nodecast on Windows (it also possible to use similar steps in Mac OS X or Linux). The tutorial is currently only in German - but Google translate shall do the job.
Nodecast setup for Windows-tutorial: http://goo.gl/2ZU5Mm
Maybe it helps
Leapcast 2.0?
Anyone still working on Leapcast now that the 2.0 SDK came out? Lots of changes like going from DIAL to mDNS for one. Leapcast was very handy for running on a PC that was already connected to the TV. Sadly, all the apps compiled against the newer SDK won't work with it. They won't even discover it as a Chromecast now.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/...oakcolegkcddbk?utm_source=chrome-app-launcher
This was an attempt to do this but I never got it to work on my side.
Unfortunately, SDK 2.0 requires the Chromecast to calculate key using certificate issued by Google. We will probably wait a long time to see leapcast, CheapCast and NodeCast working again. It might not be even possible at all.
Johny_G said:
Unfortunately, SDK 2.0 requires the Chromecast to calcate key using certificate issued by Google. We will probably wait a long time to see leapcast, CheapCast and NodeCast working again. It might not be even possible at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not the best news, but thanks Johny for the insight.
If all the rooted ROMs can handle SDK 2.0 and Google's new authentication, there's probably a way to get the emulators up and running with it. Just a matter of time and determination I hope. I wish Google was a bit more open on the software side for the Chromecast. Having the new SDK for sender/receiver apps is great, but allowing companie/people to recreate the piece in the middle would also benefit them I would think. It would be tough for people to beat the Chromecast's price tag, but having other options would be good.
Averix said:
Not the best news, but thanks Johny for the insight.
If all the rooted ROMs can handle SDK 2.0 and Google's new authentication, there's probably a way to get the emulators up and running with it. Just a matter of time and determination I hope. I wish Google was a bit more open on the software side for the Chromecast. Having the new SDK for sender/receiver apps is great, but allowing companie/people to recreate the piece in the middle would also benefit them I would think. It would be tough for people to beat the Chromecast's price tag, but having other options would be good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't hold my breath. The ROMs get the upgrade essentially "for free" as it's part of the stock ROM code. Maybe the desktop players can take advantage of that, probably not, especially if it's a binary or relying on some kind of TPM or other function in the Chromecast hardware itself.
Having options is good for the consumer, but for a manufacturer, more options = more competition = more mouths to feed = lower margins = more work to keep competitive. One of the reasons Apple is so aggressive about protecting the exclusivity of its platform.
Warning! TL;DR below!
The point is, that every single Chromecast device has its unique ID, its unique MAC Address, and its (unique?) signed certificate. Also, it might have some kind of ID generated when you set the device up (similar to Push ID used in Google Cloud Messaging). Some of those (maybe all of them) have to play together to calculate the key. As soon as you pull the certificate out and put it in different environment, the result of the calculation won't match the SDK's expectations. So there is pretty good chance, that bypassing the key might be completely impossible without modifying the SDK itself (and it would require the developers to actually invest some effort to support these alternatives) and maybe the Chromecast device software as well. But who knows, the guys involved in those "emulators" are way smarter than most of us and might figure something out .
This is the biggest issue. The other one is, that everything has changed in the new SDK/API, and all of the methods used in those emulators are now deprecated and need to be implemented all over again in a different fashion to work with 2.0. This might actually be a good thing, since developers involved in testing of the way-too-rushed 1.0 seemed not to have a lot of kind words to say about it. I have attended one Chromcast block on a local conference, and it was basically 2 hours of swearing.
I've stumbled upon these issues today (and a bit of yesterday), trying to get my app working in the office (I forgot my Chromecast at home - again), and here are some sources if you are more interested in the topic:
https://plus.google.com/+SebastianMauer/posts/83hTniKEDwN
https://github.com/dz0ny/leapcast/issues/29#issuecomment-37288608
https://github.com/dz0ny/leapcast/issues/96
As a developer, I have to say, that Google is making things awfully difficult lately, and the "don't be evil" policy seems to slowly fade away. They put way too much effort into marketing decisions, and have no time to properly test APIs and SDKs before they spit them out . Mostly, when trying some new Android-related technology (to be honest, its mostly Google Play Services technology these days, so AOSP starts to be completely useless), I spend most of the time working around things that nobody thought of (i.e. the Translucency API in KitKat was obviously tailored for Google Now Launcher, and is a huge PITA tu be used elsewhere) and fixing the broken samples that come with them. It might seem weird, but sometimes (say hello to Play Games Services and in-app billing v1+v2!) the sample is inseparable part of the final implementation, so you have to fix their rushed code anyway. I shouldn't be complaining, since things like that raise the value of developers willing to go through all of this in their spare time, but the change of philosophy still bugs me a lot. Google and Android used to be strongly community-oriented, and now the marketing is pulling it all away.
Should the goal really be to emulate a Chromecast or should the effort be geared toward supporting DIAL protocol?
I would think the latter is the better option because you could support whatever the hardware supports without the limitations imposed on us from CCast Hardware.
Maybe I'm wrong but I always looked at DIAL as an extension of UPnP and separate from the CCast itself and the Chromecast SDK as not much more than a kit to add DIAL support to Android (and iOS) not meant to build anything on the CCast side at all.
Other companies like Roku are planning some DIAL support and I doubt highly they will have a CCast ID and Certificate.
In the end I think we will get something similar to this functionality from a player app like VLC on PC and MAC, or perhaps in Chrome itself.
Cause I think (and I may be totally wrong here) that it isn't the Apps we use that checks the Whitelist and IDs it is the CCast itself that when invoked to load a player app to stream it also checks the whitelist and tests security before it plays.
SO if someone created a program for PC that made the PC announce itself as a DIAL capable device that when connected to loads the app into Chrome, I bet most of it would work.
Might not work with any of the DRM sites like Netflix and Hulu but for things like local content and unprotected streams I see no reason why it wouldn't.
In fact I bet the trouble some are having with Channels in Plex and others would go away because a PC Chrome instance would be able to play many more Transport types than a CCast can currently.
Asphyx said:
Should the goal really be to emulate a Chromecast or should the effort be geared toward supporting DIAL protocol?
I would think the latter is the better option because you could support whatever the hardware supports without the limitations imposed on us from CCast Hardware.
Maybe I'm wrong but I always looked at DIAL as an extension of UPnP and separate from the CCast itself and the Chromecast SDK as not much more than a kit to add DIAL support to Android (and iOS) not meant to build anything on the CCast side at all.
.......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you. I could actually care less about emulating the specifics of what's in the Chromecast hardware. What I do want is the ability for those unrestricted apps (ie not Netflix) to be able to use their Cast button to find, connect to, and use whatever the emulator is. The new CC SDK doesn't use DIAL to do the initial search any longer. It now uses mDNS. All of the previous apps (YouTube, Pandora, etc.) are still using the old API and DIAL discovery which appears to be backward compatible with the new Chromecast stick software. If you look at the debug logs of the stick, both the v1 and v2 APIs are accounted for. As for Roku, my guess (I haven't started digging in on what they're up to yet) is that they have an app that is using DIAL for discovering the Roku and then just acting as a remote control for all the box functions. Chromecast was a bit more unique since it could basically load up anything from the web as a receiver/playback client since the software is just basically a Chrome browser with some wrappers around it. That's what made it much more dynamic without having to load "channels" in the box within a custom framework like Roku does.
And Bhiga, as for economics on Google providing the software to other hardware makers, I think it it would actually be in their best interest. The Chromecast right now has to be either close to at cost for them or a loss leader. If they can get the Cast API to become a default standard on new consumer devices, that would help them take over that space. To me, that is such a better proposition for them than trying to get the complexities of something like GoogleTV into TVs.
Averix said:
And Bhiga, as for economics on Google providing the software to other hardware makers, I think it it would actually be in their best interest. The Chromecast right now has to be either close to at cost for them or a loss leader. If they can get the Cast API to become a default standard on new consumer devices, that would help them take over that space. To me, that is such a better proposition for them than trying to get the complexities of something like GoogleTV into TVs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
mDNS actually makes discovery a lot easier - mDNS = Bonjour = what Apple and TiVo use for discovery already.
I agree with you that adoption of the API and protocols is the goal. At this stage an Android emulator probably would help adoption, but my point was that a desktop emulator doesn't necessarily add to the rate. If someone starts looking to using a desktop because they think they don't need a Google Cast device, they'll likely runs across Plex and Miracast and may decide they don't need Google Cast at all.
bhiga said:
I agree with you that adoption of the API and protocols is the goal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wish Google agreed with us.
Averix said:
I wish Google agreed with us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bet anything there are some at Google who do agree with us but when your as BIG a company as Google is it takes forever to get everyone on board and thinking along the same lines enough to manifest it into an end product.
In the end what all if this really tells us is how much DLNA Consortium has failed to standardize Media Distribution by not going far enough and thinking of it from the end user ergonomic experience.
If this discovery and launch capability was more fleshed out in the DLNA specs we might not be talking about DIAL and mDNS right now.
At some point all these protocols (DLNA, UPnP, DIAL) should be merged into one standardized protocol that any platform can use.
Probably years away though...
Asphyx said:
If this discovery and launch capability was more fleshed out in the DLNA specs we might not be talking about DIAL and mDNS right now.
At some point all these protocols (DLNA, UPnP, DIAL) should be merged into one standardized protocol that any platform can use.
Probably years away though...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My concern is that unless Google is willing to push this as a standard rather than just apps for one dongle, it will only be a matter of time before the giant (un)friendly fruit company swoops in and AirPlay becomes the defacto standard that all TV makers, set top makers, and anyone else are forced to build in. It's not quite the same as how DLNA and UPnP have become sort of irrelevant, but it could pan out that way for the Google Cast API without more hardware devices having the capability built in. Time and market pressure will tell I guess.
Hey guys, so I get my raspberry pi today, and one big thing I can't find is a way to use the raspberry pi to make a http proxy compatible with ios to avoid people trying a man in middle on public wifi, and get around firewalls/restrictions. My ipad gives me the option for a server, a port, and authentication on/Off after you go to setting>wifi>network name info>http proxy set to ON. I want to create my own proxy for us on the IPad, but don't want to use a full VPN (another area of settings). The main reason is it is a school ipad with MDM profiles on it where a VPN will get me in trouble, but there is no rule against a http proxy. So if anyone knows a way to do that, that would be awesome. I am going to create a full VPN server for use with my laptop, android phone, and android tablet, but can't use it for the school ipad. Anyone help would be useful. Any chance this would work with openvpn? It seems more simple and compatible than a hamachi setup.
Out of curiosity how do they track you? Can you leave school with it? If they are watching your traffic you can always use say ssh or SSL over VPN to mask the traffic. You should check out the app fiddler for your pc and use it to see what's going on in the background of that iPad as I'm assuming you obviously would be in deep trouble if you jail broke it. ☺
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
Nizda1 said:
Out of curiosity how do they track you? Can you leave school with it? If they are watching your traffic you can always use say ssh or SSL over VPN to mask the traffic. You should check out the app fiddler for your pc and use it to see what's going on in the background of that iPad as I'm assuming you obviously would be in deep trouble if you jail broke it. ☺
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I can take it home. I'm sitting in my bed messaging you on it atm. Also I can't jailbreak it because the profiles on it won't allow me to connect to a PC. They have the mobile device management profiles on it so they can track all of my apps, wifi connection, os version, view some settings, secure their wifi password through it (fiber optics hitting up to 50 mb/s), and they have IP address filtering. I can upload it, but I got an email saying to stop playing a game and sent me a picture with my ipad name, the app name, and the IP address it was accessing. I believe with the proxy since it's under settings, and I can set the IP as a static IP to what I want at home for the pi, they won't be able to figure it out and think it a website or weird app connection, and can't tell what it is exactly. They already caught a ton of people downloading the open door app that is basically a web browser and proxy app wrapped together. I just want to use the fast speeds and not have my games and some of my blogs blocked, but not have to leave my phone in my backpack attached to my 22,000 MaH external battery to tether all day and not kill my phone. Especially with my smartwatch and bluetoothheadphones battery life is very precious.
Hi,
I have created a small html5 app that allows playing of local media on Google Chrome with playlist support. The Chrome tab can then be cast to Chromecast. This helps me play the huge collection of YouTube videos I have in my computer, on Chromecast. Just thought I'll put it on here for anybody that might find it useful.
Steps to use:
1. Open Google Chrome and go to sidscast . com
2. Browse for folder or files (Audio/Video) to add to playlist.
3. Play
4. Cast tab to Chromecast
Audio/Video Formats suppported: MP4, MP3, Wav, WebM and Ogg
Playlist support: Yes
Thanks!
Sid
Sounds promising! I'll try it when have a chance.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Works fine on Ubuntu....with Chrome
Been looking for something simple to allow playlists for chromecast....this works fine. Thanks
Works perfectly w/ windows 8.1 in chrome. This solved a very irritating limitation of existing casting software.
Thank you
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You sir, deserve more recognition. This is beautiful. Thank you.
thanks given
Thanks so much for this, works really great for streaming my local MP3 files.
Question, would it be possible in a future update to support:
1) displaying embedded album art from the streaming song
-or-
2) specifying a directory of images that can be cast to display while the mp3 is streaming.
Would be great if it can cast photos.
Amazing, the first thing I tried worked. But I'm curious why this can't be run locally, couldn't you make a browser app? They have them, but none work. Not even Videostream (They say it's my network when I have no AV, no firewall, the ports forwarded in my router, and friends who can't get it to work more often than whenever the hell it wants).
You don't mention anywhere, so I'm curious just what info gets passed back and forth between me and your server while I'm using this.
Edit: ****, last active 5 months ago.
ducky69247 said:
Amazing, the first thing I tried worked. But I'm curious why this can't be run locally, couldn't you make a browser app? They have them, but none work. Not even Videostream (They say it's my network when I have no AV, no firewall, the ports forwarded in my router, and friends who can't get it to work more often than whenever the hell it wants).
You don't mention anywhere, so I'm curious just what info gets passed back and forth between me and your server while I'm using this.
Edit: ****, last active 5 months ago.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey man, Videostream guy here. Is it just never playing the video?
The difference is how this uses the Cast Extensions tab casting method (WebRTC) instead. All you need to do, to do the same thing without this app, is drag and drop the video in to Chrome.
Our app needs TCP port access to your computer, in order to send the raw video data to your Chromecast.
Now, there's no reason why you should have been left hanging like this. If you like you can forward me your emails and I can look into why our support f'd up so hard. This is an easy fix. I can also do a remote desktop with you whenever you like and we can get this solved, asap.
[email protected] or [email protected]
acidhax said:
Hey man, Videostream guy here. Is it just never playing the video?
The difference is how this uses the Cast Extensions tab casting method (WebRTC) instead. All you need to do, to do the same thing without this app, is drag and drop the video in to Chrome.
Our app needs TCP port access to your computer, in order to send the raw video data to your Chromecast.
Now, there's no reason why you should have been left hanging like this. If you like you can forward me your emails and I can look into why our support f'd up so hard. This is an easy fix. I can also do a remote desktop with you whenever you like and we can get this solved, asap.
[email protected] or [email protected]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey, thanks for the reply.
I've been getting replies, for sure (The replies come from freshdesk, signed Rahul Kayaith), but pretty much been given the idea that it's my problem, when I can reset literally every device on my network and it still not work (I even went so far as to open the ports in my router since he made it seem like the traffic needs to pass between their servers and my computer). I'm using literally no antivirus or firewall, just Windows Defender, I've added Chrome as an exception to Defender's scans, and my network is private/home. The app hasn't worked for me at all for a couple weeks now, when previously it worked intermittently. The port fix tool has never worked, not once since I got the Chromecast. (Before it quit working altogether, it would work seemingly whenever it felt like it. Nothing that I did on purpose seemed to work)
My friend has 3 Chromecasts, uses antivirus and spyware software, a different router/modem, and a different computer. The only thing we have in common is Windows 8.1, Chrome, the Videostream app. He says it also works only intermittently. I just don't see that the problem is on either his network or mine!
I did figure out that I could "save" the SidsCast page locally and run it and it works, so I don't need to worry about what's being sent to his server, and it's working with most types of video, but not all, so I have to be careful what I "acquire," but still more reliable than Videostream has been!
ducky69247 said:
Hey, thanks for the reply.
I've been getting replies, for sure (The replies come from freshdesk, signed Rahul Kayaith), but pretty much been given the idea that it's my problem, when I can reset literally every device on my network and it still not work (I even went so far as to open the ports in my router since he made it seem like the traffic needs to pass between their servers and my computer). I'm using literally no antivirus or firewall, just Windows Defender, I've added Chrome as an exception to Defender's scans, and my network is private/home. The app hasn't worked for me at all for a couple weeks now, when previously it worked intermittently. The port fix tool has never worked, not once since I got the Chromecast. (Before it quit working altogether, it would work seemingly whenever it felt like it. Nothing that I did on purpose seemed to work)
My friend has 3 Chromecasts, uses antivirus and spyware software, a different router/modem, and a different computer. The only thing we have in common is Windows 8.1, Chrome, the Videostream app. He says it also works only intermittently. I just don't see that the problem is on either his network or mine!
I did figure out that I could "save" the SidsCast page locally and run it and it works, so I don't need to worry about what's being sent to his server, and it's working with most types of video, but not all, so I have to be careful what I "acquire," but still more reliable than Videostream has been!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
(I run Windows 8.1 too)
Yeah those are the generic fixes we give to people, Rahul is our local support guy we have working with us as an intern . Your router really shouldn't have anything to do with this.
What you could do is check (Control Panel\System and Security\Windows Firewall\Customize Settings) , or in your "Windows Firewall" settings go to "Turn Windows Firewall on or off" on the left, and make sure "block all incoming connections" is NOT checked on Public or Private.
acidhax said:
(I run Windows 8.1 too)
Yeah those are the generic fixes we give to people, Rahul is our local support guy we have working with us as an intern . Your router really shouldn't have anything to do with this.
What you could do is check (Control Panel\System and Security\Windows Firewall\Customize Settings) , or in your "Windows Firewall" settings go to "Turn Windows Firewall on or off" on the left, and make sure "block all incoming connections" is NOT checked on Public or Private.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My firewall is set to "off." I never use it, nor any third party firewall or AV. I've run through all of this with Rahul, at least since some time in March. And opening the ports in my router was just, let's say, a last-ditch effort to figure out the problem, since nothing else has worked.
ducky69247 said:
My firewall is set to "off." I never use it, nor any third party firewall or AV. I've run through all of this with Rahul, at least since some time in March. And opening the ports in my router was just, let's say, a last-ditch effort to figure out the problem, since nothing else has worked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you happen to have multiple Chrome profiles with videostream installed on all of them?
acidhax said:
Do you happen to have multiple Chrome profiles with videostream installed on all of them?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope.
ducky69247 said:
Nope.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, if you like we can try to do an ole Remote Desktop with TeamViewer if you like? If you're into it I can do it whenever. It's normally easy to diagnose as the developer. My email is up there ^--
ducky69247 said:
Amazing, the first thing I tried worked. But I'm curious why this can't be run locally, couldn't you make a browser app? They have them, but none work. Not even Videostream (They say it's my network when I have no AV, no firewall, the ports forwarded in my router, and friends who can't get it to work more often than whenever the hell it wants).
You don't mention anywhere, so I'm curious just what info gets passed back and forth between me and your server while I'm using this.
Edit: ****, last active 5 months ago.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh joy! I didn't think people were using it and finding it useful! Well, although I know this is a very late reply, but I'll answer anyway. There is no server. It's all client side. The only thing that it needs a connection to the internet for, is the ads at the side. So you can very well just have it work without an internet connection after the initial load. There's no data collection or anything of that sort.