3 ms·

The first chromecast actually operated without external power, but it only worked with some TVs. It's possible yours didn't provide enough power via HDMI, but

The first chromecast actually operated without external power, but it only worked with some TVs. It's possible yours didn't provide enough power via HDMI, but at least ours worked just fine.

ssl-3 2y ago
It is possible that your memory of a device from a decade ago is faulty. No Chromecast has ever been able to be powered by HDMI alone. That has never been a thing. You may instead by remembering the fact only some TVs back then were successful at powering the Chromecast without an external power brick, using a USB port on the TV itself to power up the Chromecast. In applications where this worked (and it often did work, although it also often did not work), it could provide a solution that existed entirely on the back of the TV with nothing additional plugged into the wall. But it was still [micro] USB that provided the power to the OG streaming stick, not HDMI.
- kuschku 2y ago
  > It is possible that your memory of a device from a decade ago is faulty. No Chromecast has ever been able to be powered by HDMI alone. That has never been a thing. It is not - I still use my 11yo Chromecast Gen1 today. And it still works fine without USB power (as long as you don't try to play YouTube videos).
  - ssl-3 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - altcognito 2y ago
    I also had this device and would concur it was supposed to work without USB power, but in my experience worked extremely poorly.
- lightedman 2y ago
  "You may instead by remembering the fact only some TVs back then were successful at powering the Chromecast without an external power brick, using a USB port on the TV itself to power up the Chromecast." I'm looking at my first gen plugged into the ARC HDMI port on my Vizio TV. It is ONLY attached to the HDMI port and nothing else.
  - 486sx33 2y ago
    +1 my visio powers this as well It also powers lots of stuff via usb Maybe because it’s NOT a smart tv and doesn’t have some crazy android chip SoC to constantly power. I mean obviously you can make a power supply that could do both - or neither. But it likely comes down to price for the manufacturer of the tv
smileybarry 2y ago
Right, but I think it wasn't a real intended use case and that some TVs provided amperage over the spec (maybe by accident? simpler circuit bridging the same power pin for USB and HDMI?). I had the same first gen Chromecast (may even have it lying around somewhere) but it came with explicit directions to use the included power cable, so maybe they updated the included guide some time after release.
- photon_rancher 2y ago
  They probably just provide extra power over the port. It costs extra to design an extra supply for a specific port so it’s probably shared, and likewise also costs extra to current limit each port. So more than likely a cost saving measure
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

The first chromecast actually operated without external power, but it only worked with some TVs. It's possible yours didn't provide enough power via HDMI, but at least ours worked just fine.

ssl-3 2y ago

It is possible that your memory of a device from a decade ago is faulty. No Chromecast has ever been able to be powered by HDMI alone. That has never been a thing. You may instead by remembering the fact only some TVs back then were successful at powering the Chromecast without an external power brick, using a USB port on the TV itself to power up the Chromecast. In applications where this worked (and it often did work, although it also often did not work), it could provide a solution that existed entirely on the back of the TV with nothing additional plugged into the wall. But it was still [micro] USB that provided the power to the OG streaming stick, not HDMI.

kuschku 2y ago
> It is possible that your memory of a device from a decade ago is faulty. No Chromecast has ever been able to be powered by HDMI alone. That has never been a thing. It is not - I still use my 11yo Chromecast Gen1 today. And it still works fine without USB power (as long as you don't try to play YouTube videos).
- ssl-3 2y ago
  [flagged]
- altcognito 2y ago
  I also had this device and would concur it was supposed to work without USB power, but in my experience worked extremely poorly.
lightedman 2y ago
"You may instead by remembering the fact only some TVs back then were successful at powering the Chromecast without an external power brick, using a USB port on the TV itself to power up the Chromecast." I'm looking at my first gen plugged into the ARC HDMI port on my Vizio TV. It is ONLY attached to the HDMI port and nothing else.
- 486sx33 2y ago
  +1 my visio powers this as well It also powers lots of stuff via usb Maybe because it’s NOT a smart tv and doesn’t have some crazy android chip SoC to constantly power. I mean obviously you can make a power supply that could do both - or neither. But it likely comes down to price for the manufacturer of the tv

smileybarry 2y ago

Right, but I think it wasn't a real intended use case and that some TVs provided amperage over the spec (maybe by accident? simpler circuit bridging the same power pin for USB and HDMI?). I had the same first gen Chromecast (may even have it lying around somewhere) but it came with explicit directions to use the included power cable, so maybe they updated the included guide some time after release.

photon_rancher 2y ago
They probably just provide extra power over the port. It costs extra to design an extra supply for a specific port so it’s probably shared, and likewise also costs extra to current limit each port. So more than likely a cost saving measure

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]