What can Chromecast do?

[APrettyCoolWalrus]

So my dad wants to either get Chromecast or a DVD player which would require a long HDMI cable. Basically it comes down to this: Can the Chromecast stream movies played on my dad's mac to the television? Or am I thinking of an entirely different product?

[Jade]

It can, using something like Plex.

[Oshino Shinobu]

It can, but it has to use something like Google Movies, Hulu+, Netfilx etc. 

 

You could get an Android TV box that will allow you to stream files from your PC (or Mac) using XBMC. 

[Jade]

It can, but it has to use something like Google Movies, Hulu+, Netfilx etc. 

 

You could get an Android TV box that will allow you to stream files from your PC (or Mac) using XBMC. 

Plex is a better solution, imo.

[Vitalius]

It can, using something like Plex.

He doesn't need Plex. He can have the movies play on his Mac through Chrome then cast that tab to the Chromecast as Chrome has an extension for it.

I agree Plex is best, but Chrome tab casting is much more simple to deal with.

[menendez1293]

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't the chromecast have a feature that allowed you to cast your entire desktop? I thought it was in Beta but still usable

[APrettyCoolWalrus]

He doesn't need Plex. He can have the movies play on his Mac through Chrome then cast that tab to the Chromecast as Chrome has an extension for it.

I agree Plex is best, but Chrome tab casting is much more simple to deal with.

When I say movies I mean rented DVD movies. That'll work? Or do I need to convert it to another type of file?

[Vitalius]

When I say movies I mean rented DVD movies. That'll work? Or do I need to convert it to another type of file?

Nope. Just install VLC's plugin for chrome, then drag/drop the DVD into Chrome and it should play (YMMV depending on the DVD type). Then cast the tab to Chromecast. It should work fine.

[APrettyCoolWalrus]

Nope. Just install VLC's extension for chrome, then drag/drop the DVD into Chrome and it should play. Then cast the tab to Chromecast. It should work fine.

Alrighty then, thanks!

[Vitalius]

Alrighty then, thanks!

Hmm, I'm actually trying this right now. It actually depends on the DVD. For example, the one I currently have only shows up as a storage location on Chrome.

However, VLC is working on support for Chromecast apparently, so it shouldn't be too long before you can just stream directly from VLC to the Chromecast, thus bypassing Chrome. 

You could convert/save the DVD to the laptop using VLC, the program, then play it from Chrome using the plugin and cast it to the Chromecast. 

[APrettyCoolWalrus]

Hmm, I'm actually trying this right now. It actually depends on the DVD. For example, the one I currently have only shows up as a storage location on Chrome.

However, VLC is working on support for Chromecast apparently, so it shouldn't be too long before you can just stream directly from VLC to the Chromecast, thus bypassing Chrome. 

You could convert/save the DVD to the laptop using VLC, the program, then play it from Chrome using the plugin and cast it to the Chromecast. 

Worst case scenario: I use a program to convert the disk to a different file. I also have other means of watching movies but it would be cool to use Chromecast.

[dalekphalm]

I'm going to chime in here. YES a chromecast will work, but no it's not the ideal product for your needs.

 

The limitation here is that you need to cast the desktop or browser tab off another computer. That means that other computer is either being fully utilized (in the case of desktop streaming) or partially from the browser tab.

 

Might I suggest something like this instead?

Roku 3 Media Player

 

This is just an example (WD Live TV, BoxeeBox, Apple TV, etc). These devices are much more capable, and are standalone in the sense that while you need a location for your local media, whether that be an external HDD plugged into the Roku over USB, or the files stored on your PC/Mac, the point is that you don't need to TIE UP that PC or Mac by streaming the screen. You can still fully use the computer for whatever tasks, even gaming, and it won't interfere.

 

I don't know why, but the Chromecast is all people seem to recommend here anymore. Yeah it's great, but it has a very specific ideal use (casting browser tabs onto a TV), and people are trying to shoehorn it into a "jack of all trades" media streaming device. It may yet become just that with future revisions, but we're not there yet.

[Vitalius]

I'm going to chime in here. YES a chromecast will work, but no it's not the ideal product for your needs.

 

The limitation here is that you need to cast the desktop or browser tab off another computer. That means that other computer is either being fully utilized (in the case of desktop streaming) or partially from the browser tab.

 

Might I suggest something like this instead?

Roku 3 Media Player

 

I don't know why, but the Chromecast is all people seem to recommend here anymore. Yeah it's great, but it has a very specific ideal use (casting browser tabs onto a TV), and people are trying to shoehorn it into a "jack of all trades" media streaming device. It may yet become just that with future revisions, but we're not there yet.

...? The biggest reason is because it's cheap ($35 vs $95 for the Roku 3), while also being versatile (it supports tons of things, such as Plex, Netflix, Hulu, etc etc), and small (barely noticeable when plugged into a TV). Being wireless is a bonus. 

I don't know what you mean when you say "we're not there yet". What I just listed covers 90% of what people want to use it for. The tab/screen casting is a bonus. 

Your computer isn't taken up when casting a tab. Yes, it's using resources (network bandwidth/CPU cycles), but they are negligible on gigabit ethernet or AC/N wireless and anything better than a pentium when not doing anything intensive (such as gaming). Casting a screen is experimental and not recommended for various reasons. 

I've tested this with my computer (admittedly, a 3570k with 290X and such, but still).

[dalekphalm]

...? The biggest reason is because it's cheap ($35 vs $95 for the Roku 3), while also being versatile (it supports tons of things, such as Plex, Netflix, Hulu, etc etc), and small (barely noticeable when plugged into a TV). Being wireless is a bonus. 

I don't know what you mean when you say "we're not there yet". What I just listed covers 90% of what people want to use it for. The tab/screen casting is a bonus. 

Your computer isn't taken up when casting a tab. Yes, it's using resources (network bandwidth/CPU cycles), but they are negligible on gigabit ethernet or AC/N wireless and anything better than a pentium when not doing anything intensive (such as gaming). Casting a screen is experimental and not recommended for various reasons. 

I've tested this with my computer (admittedly, a 3570k with 290X and such, but still).

Yes, it's cheap. And yes, it can work with the OP's intended usage.

 

But that does not make it necessarily the right recommendation. Granted you have to pay more to get those extra features from a full Roku, but those features include cutting out an unnecessary piece of the puzzle. Why am I streaming a tab from another browser when I can get a device that will go right to the source? I understand fully that with any modern beast computer, it won't really interfere with the performance very much, but that's only part of the point (Plus, if you're that price conscious, you probably don't have a $1200+ beast computer, but there's always an exception to the rule).

 

I say we're not there yet because of this: When they produce a Media Streaming Player like the Roku 3 or Apple TV, without the limitations of a chromecast, then we'll be there. You still need another device, be it your mobile phone, etc, to "control" the Chromecast - unless this has changed recently? There is no remote controller. You can't directly control things just from the Chromecast.

 

Basically once we can get a "Chromecast"-like device, with the same capabilities of a full Roku 3 (or Apple TV, etc etc etc), with full independent remote control (IR or Bluetooth - Bluetooth being the better option since the stick may well be behind the TV), then I'll concede defeat. Now get on it Google! That device would be kickass!

 

The chromecast is a great product, and certainly for many users, will do everything they want. I'm just trying to spread some education so that people realize there are other devices besides the Chromecast, and that sometimes the Chromecast is not the right device for them. There are numerous reviews that compare it with the Apple TV and other players. I recommend anyone looking at one to do your research and check them out!

 

Note: Apple does have AirPlay - I'll give em that. But it's platform dependent - deal breaker for me.

[Vitalius]

Yes, it's cheap. And yes, it can work with the OP's intended usage.

 

But that does not make it necessarily the right recommendation. Granted you have to pay more to get those extra features from a full Roku, but those features include cutting out an unnecessary piece of the puzzle. Why am I streaming a tab from another browser when I can get a device that will go right to the source? I understand fully that with any modern beast computer, it won't really interfere with the performance very much, but that's only part of the point (Plus, if you're that price conscious, you probably don't have a $1200+ beast computer, but there's always an exception to the rule).

 

I say we're not there yet because of this: When they produce a Media Streaming Player like the Roku 3 or Apple TV, without the limitations of a chromecast, then we'll be there. You still need another device, be it your mobile phone, etc, to "control" the Chromecast - unless this has changed recently? There is no remote controller. You can't directly control things just from the Chromecast.

 

Basically once we can get a "Chromecast"-like device, with the same capabilities of a full Roku 3 (or Apple TV, etc etc etc), with full independent remote control (IR or Bluetooth - Bluetooth being the better option since the stick may well be behind the TV), then I'll concede defeat. Now get on it Google! That device would be kickass!

 

The chromecast is a great product, and certainly for many users, will do everything they want. I'm just trying to spread some education so that people realize there are other devices besides the Chromecast, and that sometimes the Chromecast is not the right device for them. There are numerous reviews that compare it with the Apple TV and other players. I recommend anyone looking at one to do your research and check them out!

 

Note: Apple does have AirPlay - I'll give em that. But it's platform dependent - deal breaker for me.

I'm not saying the other devices aren't good or useful. I'm saying they aren't for techies. People who already have something to use to cast to the Chromecast (smartphone, laptop, desktop, etc). That's the reason it's always suggested here. Because it's a techie forum. A place where most users will definitely prefer the Chromecast over other devices.

Technically, Chromecast can go right to the source. Yes, that requires a smartphone, but who doesn't have a smart phone again? I mean really. Still, at the point, it's pulling straight from the source and the phone isn't necessary anymore once casting starts other than to control it. Basically, if you have the Plex app (it's $5 on the app store for both iOS & Android and it's a one time fee type thing), you can cast it to the Chromecast and it will start pulling directly from the Plex server rather than from your phone.

Netflix, Hulu and the rest all work the same way. You can start the program on your phone with whatever you want to watch, then cast it to the Chromecast and your phone basically becomes a controller. You can even turn the phone off and the video will keep playing (I've tried that as well and it works). If they can't afford a smart phone, then why they'd have a Chromecast, I don't know, but then a Roku would be out of the picture too. 

I"m not talking about a modern beast computer. I'm talking about a normal web browsing computer. I doubt casting would have much affect on web browsing on anything with dual cores or better that was made in the last 4-6 years. That's not beast. That's average at best.

I don't see that as a limitation when every household has a smart phone in it. If they don't, then, as I said, they probably can't afford regular DVD rentals, or a laptop to play them on, or a Roku for that matter. He already owns the laptop. He may as well buy a Chromecast over a smart DVD player.