Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Breaks ChromeCast's Ability To Play Local Content

Posted by timothy on from the alternatives-abound dept.

sfcrazy writes "Bad news for all ChromeCast users who were thinking of being able to stream local content to their HD TVs. Google has pushed an update for ChromeCast which has broken support for third-party apps like AirCast (AllCast) which allow users to 'stream' local files from their devices to ChromeCast connected TV sets."

14 of 329 comments (clear)

  1. Well that's that by dorfed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why am I not surprised Google?

    --
    New signature coming soon.
    1. Re:Well that's that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    2. Re:Well that's that by Stumbles · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      --
      My karma is not a Chameleon.
    3. Re:Well that's that by aklinux · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    4. Re:Well that's that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      or just maybe having multiple ways of getting content to your Chromecast has presented their support people with lots of "WTH are you going?" scenarios and/or they have some plans to enable local content.

      I don't know if those other mechanisms use the Google SDK for creating the apps and serving up the files and if not then again it would not seem unusual that they try and put a stop to hacks anybody and his mother can install.

      So until someone provides proof of why they are doing this, speculating they are evil sounds like something Steve Ballmer would say.

  2. Re:Too easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

  3. Re:iTunes next? by BitZtream · · Score: 1, Insightful

    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.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  4. Apple closed by tuppe666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Apple closed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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 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.

    2. Re:Apple closed by peragrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  5. China version by nurb432 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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..

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  6. What they really broke: by FuzzNugget · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The only reason for buying a ChromeCast

  7. Re:Good argument, except... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I am much more likely to buy something off Google or one of their partners if I have a Chromecast than if I don't. I won't have one at this rate. Good luck selling me something for something I won't buy.

    Lemmings and Sheeple on the other hand ... have fun!

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  8. Would have skipped buying it by tepples · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google never said you could stream local content

    Say my brother is in a band. How should I play this band's music? Besides, Google never explicitly said that users of Android phones could do specific things with the phones that apps eventually enabled.

    All they've done is change an undocumented, unsupported API

    And replaced it with which documented, supported API? If none, then the fact that Google has taken explicit effort to ensure that the answer is none reveals something about Google's plans for this device that would make a lot of people have skipped buying the device.