4 ms·

It will be interesting to see if google open up the chromecast protocol to third parties. My guess is that they won't --- I expect the margins on this are low

It will be interesting to see if google open up the chromecast protocol to third parties. My guess is that they won't --- I expect the margins on this are low or non-existent, and it anyway would be very unlike google to attempt to make money out of this as a hardware product. It's clearly a strategy to sneak the web onto the TV. There seems to be little incentive for google to extend it to mobile apps, where they make substantially less from advertising. Also, I have no idea why Apple haven't released a similar dongle purely for airplay streaming. Seems like a no-brainer for them.

ZeroGravitas 13y ago
Surely low margins are a reason for Google to licence this out? It seems to be using the DIAL protocol anyway, which is intended for smart TV and plug in devices. And if you hit the "cast" button you'll also see listed any Mira-cast devices. So this mostly seems to be about making Android, and Chrome more desirable targets for video content, not an attempt to monopolise the video sending dongle market.
- chrisdevereux 13y ago
  Right, good point. Licensing to third-party manufacturers makes sense for them. I was thinking about third-party applications (which it seems they've already opened the protocol up to. never mind...)
jedc 13y ago
You mean this? https://developers.google.com/cast/ https://developers.google.com/cast/ Where it allows Android/iOS/ChromeOS/MacOS/Windows developers to integrate a little code into their apps to make it very easy to send stuff to a TV w/Chromecast?
- chrisdevereux 13y ago
  Cool. Looks like I guessed wrong...
- icesoldier 13y ago
  It looks like the Windows/OS X corners of that compatibility list are really because of Chrome. The dev kit is available for iOS, Android, and Chrome Apps: https://developers.google.com/cast/developing_a_sender https://developers.google.com/cast/developing_a_sender Since I'm completely unfamiliar with the structure of a Chrome App, I don't know what's sandboxed away in that environment. But I'm stopping short of calling full Windows/OS X compatibility there.

ZeroGravitas 13y ago

Surely low margins are a reason for Google to licence this out? It seems to be using the DIAL protocol anyway, which is intended for smart TV and plug in devices. And if you hit the "cast" button you'll also see listed any Mira-cast devices. So this mostly seems to be about making Android, and Chrome more desirable targets for video content, not an attempt to monopolise the video sending dongle market.

chrisdevereux 13y ago
Right, good point. Licensing to third-party manufacturers makes sense for them. I was thinking about third-party applications (which it seems they've already opened the protocol up to. never mind...)

jedc 13y ago

You mean this? https://developers.google.com/cast/ https://developers.google.com/cast/ Where it allows Android/iOS/ChromeOS/MacOS/Windows developers to integrate a little code into their apps to make it very easy to send stuff to a TV w/Chromecast?

chrisdevereux 13y ago
Cool. Looks like I guessed wrong...
icesoldier 13y ago
It looks like the Windows/OS X corners of that compatibility list are really because of Chrome. The dev kit is available for iOS, Android, and Chrome Apps: https://developers.google.com/cast/developing_a_sender https://developers.google.com/cast/developing_a_sender Since I'm completely unfamiliar with the structure of a Chrome App, I don't know what's sandboxed away in that environment. But I'm stopping short of calling full Windows/OS X compatibility there.