Chromecast is not smart TV; it's the display-less future of mobile computing
If Google starts to get really evil its redemption will come from having given us Chromecast. This $11 piece of hardware should, unless the world is insane, kill the attached computing display for ever. Because, we should never have to lug around a laptop, or set up a room with a projector or a TV for meetings, or even have to go through the nightmare that is Hulu Plus on Tivo Premier.
We got our Chromecast last week and yes, it is not perfect, but it cost us $11 because, we are using the 3 free months of Netflix that Amazon gave us and that's that.
Even if we had paid $35 for this sucker, and even if the power supply is a bit of an ugly intrusion into our wireless lives, this is one mind-bending addition to our every day computing and TV experience.
Chromecast is going to do to Roku and Apple TV what the USB memory stick to floppy drives and rewritable CDs (I can't believe I still have memories of that stuff in my head).
We've used it with our Android phone, our Nook, our Macbook Air, our Lenovo Thinkpad, and although we couldn't get it running on Chrome on our iPad, it didn't matter.
The most awesome thing in the world is to sit on the couch and watch your phone's Chrome screen come up on your LED TV. I mean, it is awesome.
And so easy to set up. Forget about what the nerd testers say (examples below). This thing is worth every penny. I want to see Chromecasting become a verb. I want to Chromecast my Google Navigation onto the display in my car. I want to Chromecast randomly wherever I go by being able to just pick a screen and commandeer it.
I can do it all from my phone or tablet. Suck it laptop, and PC.
Suck it tablet, too, except during potty time. Tablets are still potty time friendly.
As for these guys below, they know nothing about nothing!
Say what Norman Chan at Tested??
But to say that Chromecast has a lot of potential is to admit that it's not a good enough product right now. Sure, it's "only" $35, but you should buy products for their capabilities today and not for promises made by their manufacturer. Given Google's resources and how much they want to own a piece of the living room, betting on Chromecast is probably safe. But there's also no downside to waiting until the number of compatible services improve to jump on the bandwagon, especially if that means waiting for a wired option.
Microsoft Silverlight?! Say what Richard Hall at News OK:
Another thing of note is that video players using Microsoft Silverlight or Apple QuickTime don’t support the Chromecast tech, as confirmed by Google
No offense, Aaron Pressman at The Daily Ticker, but this is not a comparison to be made:
As for Twitter... well, they get 140 characters and one Tweet probably costs more than a single Chromecast:
Another Chromecast Gotcha—It Hates The 5GHz Wireless-N Band http://t.co/HmbRfXWKmZ
— Richard Hay (@WinObs) August 8, 2013
Enough of my hyperbole. Almost overwhelmingly everyone loves the Chromecast. If only for the price. I'm just saying that now it is going to get really hard to explain a $100 or a $200 TV box. The competition is screwed.