When the Chromecast launched, I was under the impression that it was merely an Android device that was limited to streaming video/browser pages and would behave on a wireless network just like an Android device. However, I received a unit this morning and it's failing to connect to the Internet. Does anyone know of any special requirements that the Chromecast has? It obviously needs 802.11g (which we have), but I can't imagine it would need any special ports open.
I know this isn't a Q&A forum, but I figured it would be important to have this figured out and documented before millions of college students return to school over the next few months and network administrators freak out when Google provides no answers.
I've tried the chromecast on two different college networks, both without success.
From what I'm aware, the cc doesn't support 802.11. Also, many universities block multicast which also blocks chrome.
Any place with a NAC is doubtful at this point that will work
Also, most hotels will not work at this point as many have nacs, thus there is no way to log into the network. Hopefully Google comes up with a fix
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
https://support.google.com/chromecast/answer/3213084?hl=en
If you do not have access to your router settings, or if you are attempting to connect through a guest, hotel or public network with AP/client isolation, you will be unable to set up your Chromecast.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you both so much for your help. It's really disappointing being the bad guy that says students can't use X device on the network, I hope Google figures out another way to operate Chromecast.
It would be nice if they could make a way to enter in a pw after connecting. I think they will have a lot of complaints about this
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Unfortunately this is less likely a Google issue. The university and public wifis behave the way they do so people cannot see other peoples shasred devices easily, amongst other reason. Being so the ip address will be isolated and devices can't see each other.
One thing you can do is set up a router in your dorm. This is likely against protocol but they might not know
Also, you could try to share your Mac's WiFi connection, if you have one. This would potentially put your devices on the same subnet but I can't confirm. The DHCP leasing might still be handled by the university network.
Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
tommytomatoe said:
Unfortunately this is less likely a Google issue. The university and public wifis behave the way they do so people cannot see other peoples shasred devices easily, amongst other reason. Being so the ip address will be isolated and devices can't see each other.
One thing you can do is set up a router in your dorm. This is likely against protocol but they might not know
Also, you could try to share your Mac's WiFi connection, if you have one. This would potentially put your devices on the same subnet but I can't confirm. The DHCP leasing might still be handled by the university network.
Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's funny that you mention that, I'm the guy that shuts down rogue access points in the dorms. Although I can't speak for all universities, most (if not all) of the universities that we are in contact with have banned personal APs because of the interference they cause (on 2.4GHz, I usually let 5.0 slide by, but Chromecast doesn't use 5.0). I believe that sharing your Mac's wifi connection would work, but AD-HOC networks are going to cause the same problem.
I'm actually stunned that Google would use a P2P connection over wireless. It represents a huge security threat, which is exactly why universities and businesses block it.
Is your network sophisticated enough to manually permit individuals to let their own devices see each other while connected to the campus network?
Why not plug in a router to your dorm rooms ethernet.. Now you have your own wifi...
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda premium
waiters said:
Why not plug in a router to your dorm rooms ethernet.. Now you have your own wifi...
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because you didn't read post #7.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Related
i see everyone using some type of file server account. then getting your accounts suspended from too many transfers.
why don't you all create your own ftp websights and have your own servers.???????
what would be the drawbacks.
i used to have an old pc i would use for transfering funny shows from my tivo to my dad who lives 1700 miles away.
i used dyndns.com. it's free. to direct his traffic to my pc. and had a free ftp program installed on the pc.
basically i had my own ftp web address that he could tie into my pc with.
i had a folder on the pc. that allowed access. so he could see any file that was in that folder only. not the rest of the pc. but it was a dedicated pc for his use only. so i coould leave it on. and let him access and trasnfer at his discretion.
in other words. i had my own ftp websight set up on a seconday pc specifically for that purpose.
development section
This has NOTHING to do with development.... reported!
Moved to the more appropriate Q and A
I would reckon many don't want to open themselves up for potential attacks and/or potential slowdowns. Me personally would have no problem with it but I wouldn't be using FTP.
EDIT:
Now that I think about it I probably wouldn't as the significantly increased traffic to my IP would raise an eyebrow or two at Verizon. Running services violates my TOS with them. Shame as I have a decent fiber connection.
Because it ha nothing to do with servers and everything to do with bandwidth, which is still a concern if you host your own server. Although some of these links get hammered (ask Samurai about that lol), and would require good hardware (read: expensive) to properly host as well. Besides, most can barely read forums and handle their phone hardware. Setting up a raid 10 NAS with iSCSI and load balancing servers is beyond the grasp of most...
Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2
---------- Post added 25th October 2012 at 12:02 AM ---------- Previous post was 24th October 2012 at 11:58 PM ----------
Drunkula said:
I would reckon many don't want to open themselves up for potential attacks and/or potential slowdowns. Me personally would have no problem with it but I wouldn't be using FTP.
EDIT:
Now that I think about it I probably wouldn't as the significantly increased traffic to my IP would raise an eyebrow or two at Verizon. Running services violates my TOS with them. Shame as I have a decent fiber connection.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get port scanned regularly by Comcast. My Sonicwall logs are filled with the discarded packet messages.
Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2
Drunkula said:
I would reckon many don't want to open themselves up for potential attacks and/or potential slowdowns. Me personally would have no problem with it but I wouldn't be using FTP.
EDIT:
Now that I think about it I probably wouldn't as the significantly increased traffic to my IP would raise an eyebrow or two at Verizon. Running services violates my TOS with them. Shame as I have a decent fiber connection.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if you have cable. speed shouldn't be much of an issue these days. the roms aren't that big. so users could download pretty quickly.
FTP is wayyyyyyyyyy faster then https.
https has a max of 50kbps.
ftp also has a setting that one can choose for max uploads. which would suck if the entire world was trying to download at the same time.
the cheapest computer you could possibly find. is sufficient. no need for a raid and all that stuff.
it's a dedicated machine for your needs. get a virus. 10 minutes is all it takes to format and re setup. your own computer is never touched.
only problem i see as one post indicated would be the amount of uploads. and TOS if that applies.
i never got hammered and neither did my dad. when we transfered as high as 50 gigs per month on movies. i had qwest and he had ATT dsl
in all reality. really not much difference then the old days of using kazaa and napster. cept your providing your own server.
Got cut off today while finishing the Dragon Ball series. I have LTE enabled and was streaming with it. I still love t-mo though, coming from Sprint their speeds are to die for.
Didn't see a thread about this.
Edit: not to say they ever implied it was unlimited in the first place, but it would seem so with root.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
which plan are you on?
PhantomGamers said:
which plan are you on?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unlimited 4G with 500MB hotspot. Took Sprint 2.5 years to catch me tethering without paying with hot spot hack on sph-d700 (epic 4g)
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Well the hotspot of all their plans it technically only 500mb then you have to pay an extra $10 for another 1gb. Using data on the phone is unlimited. They probably saw your user agent string and noticed it was for a computer rather than your phone. Still you got a lot more than 500mb of hotspot out of it, so not too bad a deal.
Edit: beat me to it
They probably noticed quickly because it was so much data in a short period of time. If you spread out the tethering more (maybe less video), they probably wouldn't notice. I'm on the $30 prepaid plan and tether around 5gb a month but I spread it out over a couple days (maybe 500-2gb a day) and haven't been caught yet.
lazer155 said:
Well the hotspot of all their plans it technically only 500mb then you have to pay an extra $10 for another 1gb. Using data on the phone is unlimited. They probably saw your user agent string and noticed it was for a computer rather than your phone. Still you got a lot more than 500mb of hotspot out of it, so not too bad a deal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah but compared to Sprint, T-mo is really keeping an eye out for the tether'ers. Glad I got as far as I did though lol. Any way around the user agent string?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
tdoglablarezigzaguno.1.3.13 said:
Yeah but compared to Sprint, T-mo is really keeping an eye out for the tether'ers. Glad I got as far as I did though lol. Any way around the user agent string?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you can spoof it on your computer i guess but im not so sure that's the problem
PhantomGamers said:
you can spoof it on your computer i guess but im not so sure that's the problem
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Smasung series 3 Chromebook? If not it's cool. Guess I gotta wait till I can wait to get a PC and patience for anime episodes lol
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
tdoglablarezigzaguno.1.3.13 said:
Yeah but compared to Sprint, T-mo is really keeping an eye out for the tether'ers. Glad I got as far as I did though lol. Any way around the user agent string?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah you can spoof it by changing your browser setting. Depending on your browser you can look it up: http://www.howtogeek.com/113439/how...user-agent-without-installing-any-extensions/
It's a feature built into basically all browsers.
It decreases your chances of being detected but it really depends on how tmobile detects tethering. The user agent way is the simpliest and quickest but they can also do it by TTL (time to live) of the packets your computer requests as you for example watch videos or browse. They can also detect it other ways but those are 2 of the more common ones.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=734138 Post 8 explains the TTL method a bit more
Basically changing your user agent is the quickest method that my help a bit (depending on if they favor that detection method). Using a vpn on your computer might further and better prevent detection. (I've never tried this myself but in theory it might help more than a simple user agent change. You can find guides of other methods people use to try and get around it. I haven't heavily investigated any other methods aside from the vpn and user agent since I've never been cut off so I don't really know of of any specific ones.
I personally think the thing that really tips them off is a huge spike in usage for a short time period.
If you tether over bluetooth or USB, you basically never get caught in my experience as well as several others I know who do the same. So I would try that. It's a bit slower but not bad.
I'd suggest bluetooth or usb tethering next time and see if that prolongs your hotspot usage. But as I mentioned, I really think it is the massive usage spike in a short time that tips them off so you may still get caught. When I use bluetooth and usb tethering, I still try not to go to heavy on usage over short periods.
I suspect that the TTL method may be more commonly used since it's not easily avoidable so you are best off slowing your usage when you are tethered. It would be very easy for them to see a spike in usage and check the TTL of your packets, realize you're tethering, then cut it off. It's more reliable than user agents.
edited
It's funny though that I can go to G+, FB, and G-Mail but not uanime.com or any forums, whether USB or wireless tethering now. Guess I'll try spoofing.
Edit: Override the user agent in the browser on ChromeOS to resemble a GNex and it works, thanks. Although some web pages are now literally half the size they used to be, it doesn't effect full screen videos.
I could kiss you lazer155 haha thank you so much, I wish I could thank your post multiple times
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
They blocked all the user agents I used to be able to use. They certainly are beefing up their detection abilities.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
tdoglablarezigzaguno.1.3.13 said:
It's funny though that I can go to G+, FB, and G-Mail but not uanime.com or any forums, whether USB or wireless tethering now. Guess I'll try spoofing.
Edit: Override the user agent in the browser on ChromeOS to resemble a GNex and it works, thanks. Although some web pages are now literally half the size they used to be, it doesn't effect full screen videos.
I could kiss you lazer155 haha thank you so much, I wish I could thank your post multiple times
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol no problem, glad it works for you now. :highfive: Yeah that is the downside I forgot to mention. You can try to fix that problem by experimenting with making your browser look like other desktop browsers (for example maybe tmobile doesn't block some of the more obscure desktop browsers like opera etc.) or copying your phone's desktop style user agent in chrome. That might result in desktop style pages but tmobile will think you are a phone requesting desktop. (the user agent actually shows your operating system too so if you spoof that part to android you should be able to get desktop style while still staying hidden) You'd have to look up the android chrome desktop user agent though. I don't know what it is.
sub1287 said:
They blocked all the user agents I used to be able to use. They certainly are beefing up their detection abilities.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah they do seem to figure out the user agent trick eventually if you use it several times. That's happened to other people I know. I think if you keep using a lot of data when tethering eventually they review your usage more carefully with their other methods like the TTL check.
Absolutely no less than 90% of this has been used while connected via native wifi tethering, and this usage is over the course of only 2 weeks. I have unlimited 4g (prepaid) and no tethering plan at all.
I've gotten a page that says I'm either not authorized to tether or over my limit two or three times in the last 3 days, but I just disable/re-enable tethering and reload the page....that's solved it every time.
just in case anyone is wondering, I'm using native wifi/usb tether on official PA (always the latest build) and franco M3 kernel....I've also got the chrome user agent switcher installed on my phone and set to desktop. I'm sure that doesn't matter, but I thought I should mention it. I'm also using chrome on my ubuntu PC with no user agent switcher installed.
I'm curious how much data everyone else who has had a problem tethering have used. I'm pretty sure my usage is way heavier than probably 99% of their customers...even those of us here
You guys have me all kinds of curious about tethering now.
Are any of you using mostly LTE?
If so, what's the battery life?
Stability of tethering?
CrashTestDroid said:
You guys have me all kinds of curious about tethering now.
Are any of you using mostly LTE?
If so, what's the battery life?
Stability of tethering?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I stay on LTE, no serious difference in battery lifeand I'm usually plugged in while I tether, so battery life doesn't matter much there. Perfectly stable until T-Mo discovers you're over the limit.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
I wonder if whether or not T-mobile can measure how much data you've used for tethering without using their hotspot app (what they use on T-mobile branded phones to meter tethering usage) depends on the APN you're connected through?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
Update wow, I got my Chromecast today and viewed The Hunger Games and a few episode of Breaking Bad through Netflix and it really sky rocketed my data usage. I guess it'll take some time for T-Mo to catch on to Chromecast tethering. Someone let me know if I should delete this post in case T-Mo is watching.
Sent from my Nexus⁴ using Tapatalk 2
duce102 said:
Update wow, I got my Chromecast today and viewed The Hunger Games and a few episode of Breaking Bad through Netflix and it really sky rocketed my data usage. I guess it'll take some time for T-Mo to catch on to Chromecast tethering. Someone let me know if I should delete this post in case T-Mo is watching.
Sent from my Nexus⁴ using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think that has anything to do with chromecast. You streamed a ton of high res media. That uses data. Don't you have WiFi where your TV is?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
duce102 said:
Update wow, I got my Chromecast today and viewed The Hunger Games and a few episode of Breaking Bad through Netflix and it really sky rocketed my data usage. I guess it'll take some time for T-Mo to catch on to Chromecast tethering. Someone let me know if I should delete this post in case T-Mo is watching.
Sent from my Nexus⁴ using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So is the Chromecast connected via Wi-Fi to your home router or to your phone (acting as a hot spot)?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
pwc realtor said:
So is the Chromecast connected via Wi-Fi to your home router or to your phone (acting as a hot spot)?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Phone, I don't see much point in paying two different companies for the same service lol
Richieboy67 said:
I don't think that has anything to do with chromecast. You streamed a ton of high res media. That uses data. Don't you have WiFi where your TV is?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, I know it's not the Chromecast at fault, just stating I was using that to stream though. I'm surprised at how well its working and I've never streamed 1080p before so the jump in data usage caught me off guard a bit.
Hello everyone,
I currently have a friend who is somewhere in the middle east doing something (if you've ever been in the military you'll understand) and she recently purchased Amazon Prime not knowing it was only usable in the US and very few select countries. The issue I am running into is she's using wifi since she's on her Kindle and the p2p guards I know of don't work with wifi so I am hoping someone here in the xda community has an answer for me.
If your asking what I think your asking, its basically how can I use amazon prime videos and not be in the USA? If so I have never tried this to see if it works and I can't now that I'm on cm without reflashing, but I think if she proxies through a USA server it may work, don't know the militaries stance on you proxying though. Its completely legal to do but just like at school or at work they tend to get mad if u go through a proxy because it can bypass their firewall for website blocking and such. I think the kindle has the option to set a proxy but I prefer using proxy droid because I can save a list of proxies I use. You need root access to use it though. Once u have that u would just need a USA proxy server off the internet. Idk if this would work, but if they only check your country based off your IP then I would think it would work. Note when proxying your bandwidth will go down usually, the further from the server the more the bandwidth will suck. By the way what did you mean by p2p guards? I know p2p usually is involved in torrenting, so if your suggesting anything about torrenting be very careful, its bounds for getting banned I think if u mention much more than that.
Sent from my Amazon Kindle Fire HD running CM10.1 Tablet UI using xda-developers app
I am a Plex newbie. I was wondering if Plex allows the ability to stream broadcast (free) TV. I do not have cable and I do not have satellite. I cannot receive broadcast TV due to my location (distance from TV transmission towers and also local terrain). Is there a way for me to LEGALLY get broadcast TV content (sporting events, etc.) and then cast it via Chromecast?
My computer is not powerful enough to cast a tab, so that is not an option.
Thank you.
NealJ777 said:
I am a Plex newbie. I was wondering if Plex allows the ability to stream broadcast (free) TV. I do not have cable and I do not have satellite. I cannot receive broadcast TV due to my location (distance from TV transmission towers and also local terrain). Is there a way for me to LEGALLY get broadcast TV content (sporting events, etc.) and then cast it via Chromecast?
My computer is not powerful enough to cast a tab, so that is not an option.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If your provider has subscribed YouTube channels, Google says that should work.
If someone figures out how to add other dlna servers to Plex, I could try cable TV. I have a SiliconDust HD Homerun with cable card which has it's own dlna server.
Sent from my XT926 using Tapatalk
Plex can't help you with streaming live broadcast network TV. There's only a few sources for streaming live network TV over the internet, and they are generally expensive subscription services and restrictive in their terms and conditions (e.g., geographically limited to residents of one specific state, or requiring you to be a current subscriber to cable or satellite service for those channels). The best bet is probably USTVNow, which offers all the major networks and some premium channels - it's restricted to U.S. residents, but you can use it while traveling after signing up. However it only offers Eastern time zone feeds, and it's quite expensive after the free trial. And of course it's not supported on the Chromecast. You can get the client on Roku.
However you might want to consider what is "live" broadcast TV these days? Virtually everything being broadcast is pre-recorded content that's available from other internet sources within 24 hours of initial broadcast, including the network's own web site. Is it worth a hefty monthly fee to avoid a 24-hour delay in seeing something that was recorded a month ago?
Plex does have channels to stream web-site content from many of the broadcast networks, but that's one feature that is not supported in all Plex clients, and it has not been mentioned as part of the Chromecast support announcement even as a future capability. I suspect Google does not want it and Plex will therefore not support it on Chromecast ever.
Why would it have to be over the internet? It's a local file
The hdhr dumps the file to a URI (not URL) to play.
Sent from my XT926 using Tapatalk
DJames1 said:
...
However you might want to consider what is "live" broadcast TV these days? Virtually everything being broadcast is pre-recorded content that's available from other internet sources within 24 hours of initial broadcast, including the network's own web site. Is it worth a hefty monthly fee to avoid a 24-hour delay in seeing something that was recorded a month ago?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. I am aware that I can go to the network's site 24 hours later. I'm not going to pay to watch "Revolution" or "The Blacklist" if I can just go to the website the next day. I was thinking something more like a large sporting event that occurs in February.
Plex does have channels to stream web-site content from many of the broadcast networks, but that's one feature that is not supported in all Plex clients, and it has not been mentioned as part of the Chromecast support announcement even as a future capability. I suspect Google does not want it and Plex will therefore not support it on Chromecast ever.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's more of what I am looking for.
NealJ777 said:
Yes. I am aware that I can go to the network's site 24 hours later. I'm not going to pay to watch "Revolution" or "The Blacklist" if I can just go to the website the next day. I was thinking something more like a large sporting event that occurs in February.
That's more of what I am looking for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Keep an eye on XBMC developments....Some users have toyed with the idea of getting some Chromecast support and XBMC support PVR servers.
Plex does not support PVR as it is not meant as a Frontend just as a Backend Server. a PVR is a Server itself.
If Live TV is what you want your better off getting a Slingbox but that won't really help you as far as Chromecast is concerned and doubtful they will ever support it in their clients.
But if your looking to cut the chord then I find it highly doubtful that Chromecast will ever get the support it needs unless the networks who offer delayed full episodes bake CC support into their official apps.
I doubt you will ever see live content on a Chromecast that didn't start in a Chrome Browser and sent to chromecast via the Cast a Tab feature.
And Sports will be even harder to find because most Sports content has it's own PPV system that doesn't allow the networks that show those events to stream those games over the Net. They only have broadcast rights not streaming rights.
I beg to differ. I've already started on this quest and will not finish till I see it complete. I will get my cablecard to stream on ChromeCast.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
abuttino said:
I beg to differ. I've already started on this quest and will not finish till I see it complete. I will get my cablecard to stream on ChromeCast.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I figured the simple of method of trying with BubleUPNP and AllCast did not work with my HDHomerunPrime.... Though I am certain someone will figure something better out.
It will definitely work once the new tuners from SiliconDust that have built in transcoding.
Roku just got SlingPlayer... maybe Android/iOS SlingPlayer will get Chromecast support? I wouldn't hold my breath though...
bhiga said:
Roku just got SlingPlayer... maybe Android/iOS SlingPlayer will get Chromecast support? I wouldn't hold my breath though...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Whitelisting will be the key issue with that I believe...
I'm sure Sling folks could make it happen in a day...But will Google accept it as an acceptable use.
I sure hope most things that go out of their way to support Chromecast will get Whitelist approval until it goes away entirely (which may never happen)
bhiga said:
Roku just got SlingPlayer... maybe Android/iOS SlingPlayer will get Chromecast support? I wouldn't hold my breath though...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can already use sling player and dish anywhere on Android STBs and Sticks. That would be the equivalent of Roku...
or you could just watch tv on this website. and i think its live tv. http://wwitv.com/
Aereo is committed to Chromecast so hopefully they get there case to go to the supreme court and win (they should) so they can move forward. Only thing holding them back is the stupid broadcasters trying to sue them but they have a very strong case because of the way their system works.
:Rolls eyes at supreme ct: we all know how they've been ruling lately.
Sent from my XT926 using Tapatalk
rkirmeier said:
Aereo is committed to Chromecast so hopefully they get there case to go to the supreme court and win (they should) so they can move forward. Only thing holding them back is the stupid broadcasters trying to sue them but they have a very strong case because of the way their system works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not exactly sure what it means (IANAL) but yesterday they released a press release regarding the ongoing litigation:
http://blog.aereo.com/2013/12/statement-aereo-ceo-founder-chet-kanojia/
You can also sign up to be notified when they have Chromecast support.
mchinand said:
Not exactly sure what it means (IANAL) but yesterday they released a press release regarding the ongoing litigation:
http://blog.aereo.com/2013/12/statement-aereo-ceo-founder-chet-kanojia/
You can also sign up to be notified when they have Chromecast support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, I saw that and Aereo is basically saying. Yes, let's go to the supreme court to get a final ruling on this once and for all. If they win it's pointless for anyone to try to make another lawsuit and if they lose they close the doors. The problem right now is that they are winning these lawsuits but it's costly and time consuming so a supreme court ruling would put an end to the BS...
remote potato does live TV streaming if you want and is free
Aereo will most likely win in any court...
But that won't be the end of it...
TV Networks will be stupid as they usually are and start pulling their signal from the free airwaves (FCC would love to have their Spectrum back anyway to give to the Cell Companies)
And the Networks won't realize just how DUMB A MOVE it will be until it comes time to negotiate with the Cable Companies and realize that if they don't make a deal NO ONE will see their signal until they settle!
This is why I say the TV industry is going to eat itself right out of business because it's too damn greedy!
Makes 90% of it's revenue from Advertising which is based off how many people see their signal and they spend all that revenue on STOPPING PEOPLE from seeing their signal!
Just stupid!
The TV networks can't pull the signal off the air. They are there for people in cases of emergency like hurricane and other national disasters.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
This is the only cheap and effective method which seems to have worked for me. All you really need is VPN, in this day and age who wouldn't have a VPN service anyway, I am using the Private Internet Access's vpn service and followed this thread which works flawlessly. I mean I didn't have to root my chromecast (which it can't be, unfortunately) and also didn't have to use my flashed router for this method either.
Unlock Chromecast - Access US apps: Pandora, HBO Go, Hulu+, iPlayer & Netflix (UK/US) for FREE
i found a list full of chromecast apps if it helps here it is: http://www.reddit.com/r/Chromecast/comments/1x0cee/chromecast_supported_apps/
keep up the good work devs
All you really need is VPN,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and a device which is able to create a virtual hotspot and is able to use a VPN-tunnel.
catexecutive said:
and a device which is able to create a virtual hotspot and is able to use a VPN-tunnel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Some routers support connecting to a VPN, in which case all your Internet traffic would go through the VPN.
FWIW only the DNS redirection (iptables) method requires a hacked router. IP/port-based blocking is supported by some routers, and most routers support the static route to bogus gateway method.
catexecutive said:
and a device which is able to create a virtual hotspot and is able to use a VPN-tunnel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
do you not have a laptop?
CookieMaker said:
do you not have a laptop?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But that's exactly the point. If I want to use Chromecast, I don't want my PC or laptop to run simultaneously.
catexecutive said:
But that's exactly the point. If I want to use Chromecast, I don't want my PC or laptop to run simultaneously.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
get a router than
CookieMaker said:
get a router than
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
bhiga said:
Some routers support connecting to a VPN, in which case all your Internet traffic would go through the VPN.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
:silly:
catexecutive said:
:silly:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I must be missing your point...
bhiga said:
I must be missing your point...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you don't want your PC/laptop to be running simultaneous and you don't want to route all your traffic through a VPN (using a router), these instruction here will not work.
catexecutive said:
If you don't want your PC/laptop to be running simultaneous and you don't want to route all your traffic through a VPN (using a router), these instruction here will not work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with your point about not using a laptop.
However, Chromecast does requires another connected device to cast to it and a router to provide wireless network, so what is described does remain a valid option for those that need/want to bypass network-based regional restrictions.
bhiga said:
However, Chromecast does requires another connected device to cast to it and a router to provide wireless network, so what is described does remain a valid option for those that need/want to bypass network-based regional restrictions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you don't live in the US, why would you want to route ALL your traffic through a US-based VPN-server?
catexecutive said:
If you don't live in the US, why would you want to route ALL your traffic through a US-based VPN-server?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IMO it's not efficient or wise, but some people do, because they want US-based content (or content from somewhere other than where they are). Some folks also do it for work.
Others simply enable/disable the VPN as necessary.
Hey guys. I've cleaned the thread from some name calling - please stay respectful to each other at all times. If you think someone said something wrong, there's always a way to say it nicely. If you can't find that way, better not post.
GermainZ said:
Hey guys. I've cleaned the thread from some name calling - please stay respectful to each other at all times. If you think someone said something wrong, there's always a way to say it nicely. If you can't find that way, better not post.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thank you
CookieMaker said:
thank you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You thank him for removing your own post :laugh:
There are services that let you choose which devices use the VPN and which use the local connection. That's how I've got things set up.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using xda app-developers app
tim440 said:
There are services that let you choose which devices use the VPN and which use the local connection. That's how I've got things set up.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And which service is that if you don't mind me asking? This sounds kind of ideal.
scandalousk said:
And which service is that if you don't mind me asking? This sounds kind of ideal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I use Sabai Technology's OS. It costs 100 dollars, but the support is great.
You have to have one of the routers that they support, but it was much cheaper getting my own router and doing the installation myself than buying a pre-installed router.
It works great. My VPN supplier supports their routers, so I only have to add a supplied ovpn file to the router and then decide which things to connect through the VPN and which to leave locally.
I'm sure it's possible to do the same thing in Tomato yourself, but my knowledge isn't that good and it would take me a very long time.
tim440 said:
I use Sabai Technology's OS. It costs 100 dollars, but the support is great.
You have to have one of the routers that they support, but it was much cheaper getting my own router and doing the installation myself than buying a pre-installed router.
It works great. My VPN supplier supports their routers, so I only have to add a supplied ovpn file to the router and then decide which things to connect through the VPN and which to leave locally.
I'm sure it's possible to do the same thing in Tomato yourself, but my knowledge isn't that good and it would take me a very long time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sounds ideal but costs mountains/
keep ettig this notificatons, what to do disiable them
btw, chromecast is a great product, so cheap and netflix super hd is so cool