×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

329 comments

Well that's that (5, Insightful)

dorfed (2860881) | about 8 months ago | (#44672263)

Why am I not surprised Google?

Re:Well that's that (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672289)

Why am I not surprised Google?

Because removing features from already purchased hardware seems to OK with manufacturers. If they aren't getting something extra from you using it for your own purposes then they'll take that away from you. Bless their hearts.

Re:Well that's that (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672403)

Frankly I am surprised in this case. Being able to stream content is a selling point with broad appeal, unlike say Other OS on the PS3 which was only used by a tiny fraction of PS3 owners.

Re:Well that's that (1)

utkonos (2104836) | about 8 months ago | (#44672433)

They definitely don't want you to be able to stream your own content. There's a chance that your own content includes pirated stuff, so that will never happen.

Re:Well that's that (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672555)

no.. it's that there's a chance you won't buy, rent, or subscribe to any media through their store or one operated by one of their partners.. it's all about the money.. google's money, they don't give a shit about piracy, exactly.. they don't want you playing local content at all, legit or not, when there's perfectly good pay-for media available through the device for which google gets their cut.

Good argument, except... (3, Informative)

tlambert (566799) | about 8 months ago | (#44672621)

Frankly I am surprised in this case. Being able to stream content is a selling point with broad appeal, unlike say Other OS on the PS3 which was only used by a tiny fraction of PS3 owners.

Good argument, except it's unlikely they are making money on the hardware, so the goal is not to sell Chromecast devices, the goal is to allow people to buy Chromecast devices at cost in order to be able to sell content, and to sell content in order to sell advertising. For a bare-bones devices, it's unlikely that additional economies of scale are going to increase their profit margin on the hardware any, and it may in fact be a loss-leader, like the PS/2 or original XBox.

Re:Well that's that (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about 8 months ago | (#44672781)

Not only that, but sometimes the government REQUIRES them to do it.

And don't forget removing content too,....

Re:Well that's that (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672819)

And here is yet another reason my router doesn't allow connections out from "devices" on my network.

Re:Well that's that (5, Insightful)

aklinux (1318095) | about 8 months ago | (#44672971)

I don't remember Google ever advertising the ability to play local content. Allcast essentially reverse engineered their own, undocumented, API. To the best of my knowledge, the device still does everything Google advertises.

Re:Well that's that (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672661)

Which fucking retard moderated this "flaimbait"?

For many here, sunlight shines out Google's arse.

This is flaimbait, but has a lot of trueism also. Google like all business, has the sole purpose of maximizing revenue, and letting customers stream their content is nono because it competes with their business.

Re:Well that's that (-1, Troll)

Hartree (191324) | about 8 months ago | (#44672799)

We used to think that infallible truth came from the bible or the words of the Prophet. But now we know that the righteous laws of the online world are found in GoogleTube's terms of service and acceptable use policy.

There used to be horrible holy wars fought between faiths over Emacs vs VI, or MS vs Apple (And the horror of little endian vs big endian). Now there is only the eternal truth of Google.

You have now heard the word of Google (Blessings upon it's corporate charter.), netizen.

Don't let your unfaithfullness happen again or we'll turn over your info to the NSA (which we have never done and have no court mandated agreements with.)

Re:Well that's that (5, Insightful)

Stumbles (602007) | about 8 months ago | (#44672873)

Oh man and I was just about to pull the trigger on one of those. Am I soooooo glad that did not happen, I would be pissed as hell. Guess what Google; you get zero clams from me.

more like (5, Interesting)

the_fat_kid (1094399) | about 8 months ago | (#44672265)

bad news for Google, who was hoping that I would buy such a thing.

Re:more like (2)

dorfed (2860881) | about 8 months ago | (#44672395)

Well, I wanted it for netflix because my wife keeps nagging me about a way to watch it on the telly. Of course I'd prefer a XBMC plugin, but that seems impossible or at least impractical today. But when they pull crap like this, it turns me off the whole product. I guess my "smart" LG tv could have done it too, but LG can't be bothered with catering to existing customers.

Re:more like (2, Informative)

The Good Reverend (84440) | about 8 months ago | (#44672419)

Get a Roku. Cheap and awesome, and it'll go with you if you switch TVs or upgrade.

Re:more like (3, Informative)

utkonos (2104836) | about 8 months ago | (#44672441)

Do you have a Roku? You can't stream your own content with Roku either, so it essentially the same, just a different manufacturer.

Re:more like (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672477)

i'm pretty sure the roku has the plex app which lets you stream your own content

Re:more like (2)

peragrin (659227) | about 8 months ago | (#44672563)

so far the only thing I can't do on roku is youtube.

Plex lets you stream your own movies, and both the IOS and andriod roku apps not only allow you to control the roku box but stream local music and pictures from it.

Re: more like (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672595)

plex has a YouTube channel. problem solved.

Re:more like (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672981)

Others have mentioned plex but there are also some DLNA channels for it, I use chaneru.

Re:more like (1)

dorfed (2860881) | about 8 months ago | (#44672527)

I have XBMC for all that, that's not my issue. My issue is with software having artificial limitations, I hate that. But thanks for the Roku tip, I'm looking into it right now.

Re:more like (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672853)

Roku owner here, Roku's WIFI sucks. I opened it up and added an external antenna, now I at least get a consistent "poor" signal instead of flickering in and out signal. For the money avoid the Roku, go with an Android powered HDMI stick and install whatever apps you want.

Re:more like (2)

The Good Reverend (84440) | about 8 months ago | (#44672885)

Your experience isn't standard - I've got three of them, no wifi problems at all. Like everything, they're subject to interference, so you might want to move it around and see if that solves your problem.

I suppose we should all return our chromecasts (3, Interesting)

mysidia (191772) | about 8 months ago | (#44672277)

How wretched and nasty of Google to so suddenly turn to the dark side, and render the hardware useless.

Re:I suppose we should all return our chromecasts (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672511)

They seem to have really moved past the "don't be evil thing"

Re:I suppose we should all return our chromecasts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672541)

what do you mean by suddenly?

Re:I suppose we should all return our chromecasts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672609)

How wretched and nasty of Google to so suddenly turn to the dark side, and render the hardware useless.

Really. For $350 I expected more. Oops. I mean $35. Oh nevermind...

Bound to happen. (1)

solidraven (1633185) | about 8 months ago | (#44672281)

Bound to happen, Google is still obliged to follow their contracts they have with the content providers. If they say they device can't do that for one reason or another then they don't have much of a choice. And we all know MPAA would NEVER EVER dare to force a content distributor in such a position. *cough*

Re:Bound to happen. (4, Informative)

sd4f (1891894) | about 8 months ago | (#44672315)

I don't know much (even after reading the article), but it seems more like as if they just want the chromecast to dish out online content so that google can keep on feeding people adds.

Re:Bound to happen. (1)

solidraven (1633185) | about 8 months ago | (#44672387)

Sure, and a massive drop in sales is totally going to help them with that...

Re:Bound to happen. (1)

TheGavster (774657) | about 8 months ago | (#44672881)

At $35, the business model behind this thing is probably similar to a gaming console: sell it at a loss to make customers for your lucrative content. Cutting loose the local content customers is long term a cost savings measure for two reasons: a) as you no longer need to field support calls from customers who don't watch your ads, and b) it's must easier to force software upgrades (ie, less QA needed because you can test builds in the field and force fixes out to the machines that break).

Re:Bound to happen. (1)

SpaceLifeForm (228190) | about 8 months ago | (#44672695)

Whew. For a minute there, I thought they were going to start feeding people subtracts.

Oh, wait. Maybe they just did.

Some might say... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672301)

evil ??

Re: Some might say... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672331)

Hey ! Just anonymous, not cowardly (or evil !)

Order canceled (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672305)

Was really looking forward to it, now it's useless.

I was planning to get one... (4, Interesting)

sootman (158191) | about 8 months ago | (#44672317)

... and probably still will, as long as it's able to play any arbitrary content from Chrome. My idea was to drop all my media into a web-servable directory on a small server in my house and use Chrome on my laptop or phone to browse to that directory, then click the "send to chromecast" button to send it to my TV. That should still work, right? Is there anyone here who has one and is using it in that way? It's the only reason I'd get one -- I have no use at all for Yet Another Way to play hulu, netflix, youtube, etc.

Re:I was planning to get one... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672861)

AFAIK the Chrome streaming feature works by screencasting the Chrome window to the Chromecast, not by having the latter display the web page directly. Assuming the framerate keeps up both sides (a big if), you still have to deal with the inevitable framerate conversion and re-encoding going on. It's probably not going to be suitable for watching movies.

Too easy... (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672329)

Had this been Microsoft we'd be hearing that this is proof that Ballmer was sacrificing virgin children to Satan.
 
You guys really like to suck on that Google dick, don't ya?

Re:Too easy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672355)

Had this been Microsoft we'd be hearing that this is proof that Ballmer was sacrificing virgin children to Satan.

You guys really like to suck on that Google dick, don't ya?

Only because Steve Jobs is now a corpse, and Apple's is now flaccid.

Re:Too easy... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672371)

Had this been Microsoft we'd be hearing that this is proof that Ballmer was sacrificing virgin children to Satan.

You guys really like to suck on that Google dick, don't ya?

Between Microsoft and Google, one is

(1) an ad agency that
(2) monetizes your private details and
(3) has a private jumbo jet for executives.

The other sells crappy software.

Re:Too easy... (1)

Chrontius (654879) | about 8 months ago | (#44672411)

Dear coward:

You seem to have misread the tenor of this discussion, which reads to me like an indictment of Google's wholesale violation of their code of ethics with these antics.

iTunes next? (0)

DigiShaman (671371) | about 8 months ago | (#44672369)

How soon will Apple follow? Currently, I can take any files created in HandBrake and play them through iTunes. From iTunes, I can host them to be played back on my AppleTV. Freaking awesome! My guess, only digitally signed files will only have this capability. Question is, when will Apple drop the ban-hammer on current streaming functionality for non-signed content?

Re:iTunes next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672375)

They won't.

Re:iTunes next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672713)

Oh they will alright. You can rest assured of that.

Re:iTunes next? (1, Insightful)

BitZtream (692029) | about 8 months ago | (#44672401)

Have you not been paying attention to the last 10 years? Apple has repeatedly shown they've tried to beat down this sort of restrictive shit.

Remember who resulted in music losing DRM.

Apple closed (4, Insightful)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 8 months ago | (#44672457)

Have you not been paying attention to the last 10 years? Apple has repeatedly shown they've tried to beat down this sort of restrictive shit.

Remember who resulted in music losing DRM.

Apple is the rapist of ecosystems using walled prisons; proprietary connectors; proprietary API; proprietary software. They actually got caught for illegal monopolistic practices with Publishers...and have been forced to allow other companies to publish on their not your devices. The MP3 thing was a war attrition, Companies were offering DRM free on other platforms before Apple. Their not your books and movies still are.

Re:Apple closed (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672561)

The MP3 thing was a war attrition, Companies were offering DRM free on other platforms before Apple.

Steve Jobs was calling on the record labels about how music should be DRM-free [cnet.com] before those other platforms existed (which presumably is Amazon you are referring to). It only lagged behind some of those other stores because they had legacy contracts, not because they actually wanted DRMed music.

Re:Apple closed (4, Insightful)

peragrin (659227) | about 8 months ago | (#44672577)

other companies only went DRM free first because the RIAA let them to break Apple's strangle hold which only partially worked.

The only thing the RIAA and MPAA fear more than pirates, and DRM free music is another company with a stranglehold on their future business relationships with artists. the RIAA and MPAA are the only groups that can threaten to make, break or enslave artists.

I suggest you learn history.

Re:iTunes next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672521)

And remember who resulted in the most popular mobile software distribution model being "our store or GTFO".

They've been beating down DRM when it was profitable for them, when they've got the market by the balls - why would they? Cf. smaller contender iTunes breaking through other publishers with DRM-free music vs. DRM'd iBooks working together with others to make ebooks prices leap.

Re:iTunes next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672425)

If Jobs were still alive, never. As much of an asshole as he was, he at least did fight against DRM; he believed that technology shouldn't piss off users with arbitrary restrictions. Your name may be embedded into each music file you get from iTunes, but you can always use that file on anything that plays AAC.

Re:iTunes next? (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 8 months ago | (#44672955)

Wont happen, Apple is still a hardware company. There are some updates coming to Apple TV to allow guests to use it to screen mirror too.

Left In a Lurch (2)

Chrontius (654879) | about 8 months ago | (#44672379)

This leaves me still looking for a way to play arbitrary local media files on my TV; I don't terribly feel like waiting for stuff to buffer - if an online service will deign to give me a sufficiently large buffer - so I always download in advance whenever feasible.

Don't say "an HTPC" - I don't want to run a space heater to do this. Many Android dongles I've seen are out of date or will soon be out of date, and offer lousy codec support to boot. If you've found an exception to that, be my guest - a great many of us /.ers are going to be in need of a new playback device so let's try to be productive here.

Re:Left In a Lurch (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672479)

HTPC in an old laptopl They're pretty efficient (battery life) and quiet, and sleep remarkably well.

an HTPC (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672481)

In the form of 2.5 Watt Raspberry Pi running XBMC or similar. Not much of a space heater...

Re:an HTPC (1)

stewsters (1406737) | about 8 months ago | (#44672491)

I have one of these and can recommend it. The interface isnt terribly fast, but it the 720p video playback is solid. The other thing I you can look for is xbmc on an Ouya. Both can mount samba shares and play most formats.

Re:an HTPC (2)

Belial6 (794905) | about 8 months ago | (#44672967)

I would recommend the Raspberry Pi over the Ouya. I have both, and they are both cool, but the killer feature of the Raspberry Pi is that it supports CEC. This means that if you have a TV that also supports the CEC standard, you don't need two remotes. Your TV remote will automatically work for controlling your Raspberry Pi with no extra hardware and no software configuration other than ticking off the check box in XBMC and on your TV to say that you want to use CEC.

Conversely, the Ouya has a Bluetooth gamepad for controlling XBMC. CEC with the remote you are already using to control your TV is a pretty find solution.

Also, I have no problem running 1080p video on the Raspberry Pi. Even SBS 3D stuff.

Re:an HTPC (1)

Belial6 (794905) | about 8 months ago | (#44672977)

Oh yeah, the Raspberry Pi is powered via USB too. This means that if your TV leaves the USB ports powered when it is off, you can sticky tap the Raspberry Pi to the back of the TV, plug the USB power into a USB port on the back or side of your TV, and plug the HDMI in the back as well. In many cases, there doesn't need to be a single cable for the Raspberry Pi coming out from behind the TV.

Re:an HTPC (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672539)

Going to second this. Raspberry Pi rocks. Other similar options too and they're completely open.

Re:an HTPC (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672719)

The pi sucks for xbmc. The interface is really slow, you have to buy a codec to get to play mpeg and it only has stereo sound unless you have hdmi. And if you need analog input for your sound like I did youd have to buy a hdmi sound splitter. For that money I just got an itx htpc with an sdd. Fasssst and I can actually fix whatever I need. Tried to use openelec coz I wanted to not do anythning but the usb infrared dongle didnt work. Standard ubuntu now and it works like a charm.

Re:Left In a Lurch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672519)

XBMC to the rescue: http://xbmc.org/ [xbmc.org]

It runs on a number of small form factor devices that run from $100 - $300 (zotac, acer revo, appletv, etc.)

Re:Left In a Lurch (1)

jader3rd (2222716) | about 8 months ago | (#44672547)

I don't want to run a space heater to do this.

Guess it depends on what you consider a space heater. I had an Acer AspireRevo 3610, and currently have a Lenovo q180. Both have Atom processors and run cool enough that they don't need fans. Both could handle any high def resolution thrown at them. The q180 is - due to recently introduced young children - is locked in a cabinet with absolutely no air flow and it isn't over heating itself.
If you think that's still treds into "space heater" category, fine, but I don't. Some actions are obviously a bit sluggish due to the lower power CPU, but everything is certainly faster than any operation I've seen on my parents Samsung "smart" TV's.

Re:Left In a Lurch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672557)

Try an Ouya.
It has excellent Plex, XBMC, and VLC apps.
It has a proper ethernet port as well as wifi.
It supports pretty much any bluetooth or USB mouse/keyboard.
It is a fast quad core with a recent version of android and reasonable developer support.

I have previously run a full HTPC and a Boxee box. The Ouya is miles better now that the official XBMC app is available.

Re:Left In a Lurch (1)

Rob Simpson (533360) | about 8 months ago | (#44672647)

I've had good experiences with the Shuttle XS35GS [shuttle.com] series running XBMC on linux. Low wattage, fanless, fit easy on a shelf, and totally silent with an SSD.

Re:Left In a Lurch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672681)

Lol? Use an HTPC! Starts in seconds nowadays. Can be configured to shut down on inactivity by itself. Has Android remotes. Doesnt have problems with google or whoever being an ass. Has an sdd and if you really need it you can get one with really silent/no fans.

XBMC. I just did it. Get the yatse remote not the official one on Android. The official ios one is ok though.

The media is on a NAS in the basement.

Re:Left In a Lurch (1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | about 8 months ago | (#44672693)

I have a Atom with an Nvidia fanless card that will decode anything I throw at it in hardware. I tried out the Android sticks but they're woefully underpowered.

Re: DLNA ? (1)

SirJorgelOfBorgel (897488) | about 8 months ago | (#44672741)

I have a few years old Samsung TV and it plays near anything over DLNA (stream over TCP/IP from your PC), though you have to do some searching to find the right DLNA server and setup. Serviio works best for me. Buffering at movie start may be one or two seconds but certainly not more if you're on a wired (!) connection. Over Wi-Fi it's crap, of course.

Last year I connected Samsung Blu-Ray player which supported even more formats and worked even better (faster). Now, DLNA is about as shitty a protocol as possible (really, if you get down to the tech nitty gritty, "frackin' terrible" would be a compliment) so not everything always works and codec support has some limits, but some brands (including Samsung) support some non-standard stuff like additional codecs and even SRT subtitle support. Ultimately, I hacked my BR player with "SamyGO" which allows you to use network shares directly instead of DLNA which made it even better.

I've used laptops for this purpose and have even built HTPCs, but if you take a little care about what you download, by far most things will play on a DLNA setup on modern TVs and BR players (support differs per brand). My PC is usually turned on in my office room, I download my shows and movies (usually x264 720p or 1080p in mkv format with optional srt) and play them back in the living room without any additional gadgets at all.

Then again, maybe none of your TV room playback devices support DLNA or your computer isn't always-on, both will ruin this setup :)

many options (1)

Chirs (87576) | about 8 months ago | (#44672847)

I've heard decent things about the Western Digital TV Live boxes. For people that like to play with their tech, the Pivos Xios DS can be reflashed with a factory supported XBMC load. (Still basically beta, but reasonably stable.) This is a little ARM box that comes stock running Android, that has full sized USB ports, microSD slot, ethernet/WiFi, etc. I have one of these boxes, I use it for playing local media. I also have a Roku that gets used mostly for Netflix.

I played with a Raspberry Pi running XBMC...it worked, but the menus were a bit sluggish. The Xios is quite a bit quicker at navigating the menus.

Maybe not completely true? (5, Informative)

ad454 (325846) | about 8 months ago | (#44672385)

When I powered cycled my ChromeCast a couple of hours ago, I noticed that it installed a new update.

I then launch my Chrome browser and open several local files of type MP4 (video), PDF, and PPT (powerpoint), and I am still able to successfully cast these to my ChromeCast on my HDTV, with this type of URL:

file://{LOCAL_DIRECTORY}/{LOCAL_FILE}

Even the MP4 video plays nice on my HDTV in FullScreen.

I have not had time to do a packet inspection yet via WireShark, so I cannot speak about the complexity of the protocol used to transmit the content locally.

I am not denying that something with ChromeCast might have changed, since the author is likely telling the truth, and may have been using some "hack" or trick that they used to simplify incorporating their 3rd party support.

But considering that I have my Chrome browser at version 29.0.1547.57 which was not updated in the last 5 days, I would think that any 3rd party app could still be modified to support ChromeCast with the same protocol used by the Chrome browser, NetFlix, YouTube, etc.

Re:Maybe not completely true? (-1)

utkonos (2104836) | about 8 months ago | (#44672489)

If you're playing a file locally, there won't be any packets for you to inspect with wireshark. The browser is opening a file handle and reading data from the file handle.

Re:Maybe not completely true? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672805)

If you're playing a file locally, there won't be any packets for you to inspect with wireshark. The browser is opening a file handle and reading data from the file handle.

So how is the data getting from his browser to the ChromeCast ?
Maybe it's magic pixies, or even the fabled Google wormhole

Re:Maybe not completely true? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672501)

"have not had time to" usually means "don't know how to"

Re:Maybe not completely true? (1)

m1ss1ontomars2k4 (1302833) | about 8 months ago | (#44672737)

The Chrome browser uses a completely different strategy from Netflix/YouTube. Netflix/YouTube stream the content directly from the cloud. Chrome tab casting sends data from your machine.

the wisdom of youthful folly (1)

epine (68316) | about 8 months ago | (#44672405)

Corporations grow up, just like children.

If you're not a liberal when you're 20, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 40, you have no brain.

This much-laundered sentiment originated with Francois Guisot (and not as widely believed the sock-prophet Winston Churchill). The genius of Bill Gates was being twenty years ahead of his time. Unfortunately, the life expectancy of a brainy conservative is twenty to thirty years (tops), before the grizzled Ebenezer-in-Chief is forcibly defenestrated.

Roughly twenty years from now, the legacy of Brin and Page will be facing its own mop reduce. Brilliant strategy on their part to postpone the day of reckoning with a youthful sojourn into saccharine Dr Evil.

Re:the wisdom of youthful folly (2)

epine (68316) | about 8 months ago | (#44672509)

That came off slightly more cynical than I intended. In truth, I have nothing but gratitude for much of what hippie Google chose to do. My point at this juncture, however, is that that was then, this is now.

In much the same way that the terrorists succeeded in reshaping America in their own image (two crushed fingers was all it took), Facebook has succeeded in reinventing Google in their own image. Zuck, like Bill, was way ahead of his time right from the get go.

As far as I'm concerned Google+ is hardly any different than America+. Any symbol that leaves you asking "plus what?" is not to be trusted. What of this unary additive? Those who know are not entitled to say. Happily, that's as much as we need to know to guess what shape that mark will take once it reaches adult height, wreathed in flames.

Oh Yea, That's Better... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672619)

Way less cynical. I guess this is opposite day.

Not that you're at all incorrect...

Re:the wisdom of youthful folly (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672857)

If you're not a liberal when you're 20, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 40, you have no brain.

Please put this tired canard to sleep. It was invented by conservative think tanks to coax younger generations into their primitive way of thinking. There are very very few conservatives of any age that display rational thought; scientific studies have actually found that lower IQ correlates with conservative idealism, religiosity, and sociopathic behaviour. It is not something you "grow into" unless you are also relating it with senility and/or Alzheimer's. As intelligence increases, so too does the tendency towards non-conservative ideologies (and this has been shown to happen at any stage in life).

Try something more open (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672407)

My raspberry pi and Ouya still play any arbitrary content I throw at them. Take that, Google.

Try Media Center (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672453)

Xbox Media Center Extender's been doing this for years, so there's that option.

Not to defend garbage from Google ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672503)

... but that XBox will cost $300+ to get.

Unless you are a gamer, that would be a waste of money.

Local content? (0)

PPH (736903) | about 8 months ago | (#44672505)

What? You haven't moved your entire life history, personal photo albums and soul to the cloud yet?

What's wrong with you? You need to be sent to a consumer re-education camp.

Lima supports Chromecast? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672517)

The kickstarter project Lima (aka the plug) announced Chromecast support ten days ago. Is that still true?
http://techcrunch.com/2013/08/15/dropbox-alternative-lima-nee-plug-works-with-chromecast-breaks-into-kickstarter-tech-top-10/

vlc... (Sqore:200 Intense) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672523)

...is your friend. If it's not open source, trust no one.
Google appears to be the new S0ny. Do no Evil (to their corporate Gods).

CAPTCHA = 'eluded'

My Smart TV and Blu-Ray players still play media (4, Informative)

BenJeremy (181303) | about 8 months ago | (#44672623)

I still wonder why people go through all the fuss over media players... Samsung, LG and others have TVs and Blu-Ray players that are capable of playing MKV files and such from local drives or streamed from DLNA, and the players can be had for less than $50 when you catch the right sales. As a bonus, you also can play DVDs, BDs and optical discs full of loose media files.

On the negative side, I don't get a lot of fancy presentation, and I don't have emulators and such running on it, but that's fine. I never really understood the excitement over Roku boxes - I also get plenty of online streaming services through my Blu-ray players and TV (I have one "smart" TV, but the rest in the house have the aforementioned Blu-Ray players).

For anything beyond that, I'll build an HTPC so I can also leverage my Steam library (not too excited about the next gen consoles, either).

Not surprised (2, Interesting)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about 8 months ago | (#44672711)

Is this a surprise to anyone? Did anyone really think that once Google had control of hardware and software they'd eventually get around to limiting you to content purchased through them (or one of their partners)?

Don't buy a Chromecast if you want to view media you own or have made yourself. There are other similar devices that will let you do what you want to do.

The only thing that can keep a corporation from becoming totally evil is the consumers. The boardroom is an incubator for evil. If you want to keep a company from doing bad, you have to be a strategic consumer.

Be evil (-1, Troll)

kbg (241421) | about 8 months ago | (#44672763)

Well what do you expect from a company that has changed it's motto from "Don't be evil" to "Be evil"

China version (4, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | about 8 months ago | (#44672797)

I have never had a Chinese product magically lose features after i bought it. Its pretty sad, and ironic, when you have to go to Communist china to get products that support your freedom..

No confirmation (2)

BitZtream (692029) | about 8 months ago | (#44672887)

There seems to be a lot of raking Google over the coals ... but the only thing we have here is a single report, approved to the slashdot front page by timothy.

At this point, since not a single person has confirmed it on here, I'm inclined to believe there is no such breakage and this is just another example of timothy approving something stupid that he shouldn't be allowed to even read, let alone approve.

Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672909)

They want it under lockdown, What do you expect? I'll just stick to the plain ol' net thanks.

Local Servers? (1)

heezer7 (708308) | about 8 months ago | (#44672917)

Can anyone confirm this breaks playback from local servers along with direct from android devices?

ctrl+o (3, Interesting)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 8 months ago | (#44672947)

Right now, Im playing an .mp4 located on my NAS, opened from my mac and streaming to my Chromecast via Chrome tab. So what did this break?

Re:ctrl+o (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44672979)

clearly, never update the firmware

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...