Database Develop

miracast and xbmc

was thinking about this possibly being a sweet setup hopefully miracast will be implemented into the device or possible being implemented into xbmc having that along the airplay option on xbmc enabled would make this a pretty sweet device
i purchased(preordered one) but I was hoping it would be more so like a media center device kinda like google tv but no hdmi out so no google tv overlay. But if I could use this to do miracast with my 4.2 sgs3 and whenever friends come over can use xbmc to allow them to do airplay that would be really cool
reason i bring up miracast support is because supposedly is supported in tegra 3
i've been trying to figure/find out how you go about setting up a miracast server but the documentation doesn't seem to exist not saying that i have the ability to implement but i wouldn't mind taking a look into it
thoughts?

This is more of a question for xbmc team. I suggest you provide that feedback on their forum. There was a talk of xbmc supporting miracast but no eta.
Sent from my GT-I9305 using xda premium

As long as it supports PLEX, I am sold!

Keland44 said:
was thinking about this possibly being a sweet setup hopefully miracast will be implemented into the device or possible being implemented into xbmc having that along the airplay option on xbmc enabled would make this a pretty sweet device
i purchased(preordered one) but I was hoping it would be more so like a media center device kinda like google tv but no hdmi out so no google tv overlay. But if I could use this to do miracast with my 4.2 sgs3 and whenever friends come over can use xbmc to allow them to do airplay that would be really cool
reason i bring up miracast support is because supposedly is supported in tegra 3
i've been trying to figure/find out how you go about setting up a miracast server but the documentation doesn't seem to exist not saying that i have the ability to implement but i wouldn't mind taking a look into it
thoughts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've heard the documentation costs around $200 and that might not even be all of it. Or I might be pulling that number out of air, don't remember where I saw that, but did find this:
http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid=147320
I am more interested in seeing the Android Transporter Player ported to Ouya, except that they haven't released their source code on the sending side yet...
https://github.com/esrlabs/AndroidTransporterPlayer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyoZoNA8U24
~Troop

I'm not from familiar with Miracast. All I know is what the Wiki page said. It really reads like DNLA. And from my experience, this has been something that can be app dependent. Since I have no experience with Miracast, I don't know if it's full mirroring or just certain apps.
That said, Miracast may just be work versus just installing individual apps. Unless there is something in the application code for specific devices, if you side load an APK, it should run on the Ouya. Doesn't mean it will run well or look correct. Thus, you may be able to just side load XBMC. I know I'll try it with Plex, Netflix, Hulu, various sports--MLB, NHL, NBA, etc--and so on.
I couldn't figure out what the end result you were suggesting about friends coming over and their mobile devices.

lovekeiiy said:
I'm not from familiar with Miracast. All I know is what the Wiki page said. It really reads like DNLA. And from my experience, this has been something that can be app dependent. Since I have no experience with Miracast, I don't know if it's full mirroring or just certain apps.
That said, Miracast may just be work versus just installing individual apps. Unless there is something in the application code for specific devices, if you side load an APK, it should run on the Ouya. Doesn't mean it will run well or look correct. Thus, you may be able to just side load XBMC. I know I'll try it with Plex, Netflix, Hulu, various sports--MLB, NHL, NBA, etc--and so on.
I couldn't figure out what the end result you were suggesting about friends coming over and their mobile devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe Miracast is primarily for screencasting - ie it just mirrors what is on the device's screen onto the TV or whatever is receiving. And I believe the previous poster was saying that it would be nice if it is easy to screencast from your phone to the TV and allow visiting friends to be able to easily screencast their content as well - so if one person has a video they want to show everyone, it's not a hassle to pull it up on the big screen. I think this is what a lot of us want.
~Troop

Trooper_Max said:
I believe Miracast is primarily for screencasting - ie it just mirrors what is on the device's screen onto the TV or whatever is receiving. And I believe the previous poster was saying that it would be nice if it is easy to screencast from your phone to the TV and allow visiting friends to be able to easily screencast their content as well - so if one person has a video they want to show everyone, it's not a hassle to pull it up on the big screen. I think this is what a lot of us want.
~Troop
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea this is exactly what i'm lookin for been keeping an eye on it have google alerts set up for pretty much anytime miracast is being searched on the net to possibly find any tidbit of info that might be helpful with this. thanks Troop

video streaming
Hi all. Bit late to the party but my ouya comes tomorrow
Assuming no problems on sideloading why not just use
twonky. Been using for ages bouncing files between my
nas drive, xperia s, xoom2 and Xbox. Even adhoc with
android.......jus puttin it out there..... It's spot on even with
playlists and web streams.

[REVIEW] My experience with Google Chromecast

I was fortunate to get my hands on a Chromecast at my local BestBuy the other day, and after a full day of use it is one of the best $25 (had a $10 reward cert) I have spent since my last trip to Outback Steakhouse .
Getting the dongle up and running in my entertainment center was a bit awkward with the mini USB required for powering the device, but all went smoothly. First time set up was simple, requiring installation of the Chromecast app on my HTC One which was able to pair with the dongle and hook it up to my home WiFi network. Once connected to WiFi, it's ready to use, displaying the "Ready to Cast" home screen.
Google Play Music was the first app I tried out, and I was immediately disappointed to get the error message "Unable to Cast sideloaded content". Hopefully an update for local content will be added to phones and tablets in the near future, since it is only possible within the Chrome browser on your Mac/PC. Music playback through their Unlimited music service worked as advertise though, however the Now Playing interface displayed on the TV could use a bit more polish. It doesn't look awful, but it doesn't look very good either. Every now and then I would get an error when selecting songs saying "Could not stream your selection at this time," where I would have to kill the app from the multitask screen and restart.
Where this device thrives is video playback. Netflix, Youtube, and Google Play Videos are the only content supported so far but they deliver. Watching AMC's The Killing and The Avengers in 1080p by simply "casting" to my TV with my new Nexus 7 is a real treat. And the best part is I can use my tablet while watching for anything I want. Be it games, web browsing, reading, or music; it doesn't effect playback at all since it is being streamed by the dongle, not your phone/tablet/computer. Even better, ChromeCast has minimal effect on battery life of your device. I started an episode of The Killing with 55% battery, after the episode was over about an hour later my battery held at 54%.
I have not been able to try out screen mirroring yet, but will update once I play around with it. Overall I am satisfied with my purchase. The lack of local media support on phones/tablets are preventing it from being a serious threat to AirPlay and the Apple TV, but at the same time being 65% cheaper make it a more than reasonable trade off. The way I see this device: it makes watching Netflix on my TV simpler. Before it was turning on my PS3, navigating to the Netflix app, waiting for it to load, choosing between regular content or kids, and then finally getting to pick what I would like to watch. Now I just switch to the input my Chromecast is hooked up to, fire up the Netflix app on my phone/tablet (whichever is closer), make my selection, and then "cast" to my TV.
If you are looking for a fast simple way to watch Netflix, YouTube, and movie rentals through Google Play this device is for you. If you are expecting an Airplay/Apple TV killer, well this device isn't for you...yet. With its open API for future dev support, it is just a matter of time for local files and more streaming sites such as HBO GO and Hulu to be supported.
The oneinfour score: 7.5/10 - lack of local content playback and wacky music playback issues hold back an otherwise solid streamer.

interesting read.
I think we may be waiting a bit for Hulu to get on board. They're a bit quirky regarding the various contract and licensing agreements. To me, they should just view this as HDMI out on the Hulu app, but who knows. Sometimes they're just obtuse because one can just hook up a PC to the TV and have all content available.
It's early, so to some degree, we're going to see a lot of growing pains as the product matures. I look forward to trying it out myself when I eventually get one.

Chromecasting a chrome tab on your desktop allows HBO go (and others I presume) to work with your chromecast. I was even able to drag and drop a local mkv file into the active chrome tab and it played on my TV just fine. Some pixelation and artifacting, but mostly negligible. Audio synced up fine too. Here's a video of it in action
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT2XUI-yZxE&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

Chromecast messes with AdBlocker

You can't expect it to be compatible with every third party app. Adblocker needs to fix on their end.
As far as Chromecast.. I went to buy one and it is sold out every where.
What would be amazing would be a device that would allow us to send screen to TV for gaming, etc.. With the higher res this would be awesome on my 1080 Bravia!
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app

oneinfour said:
The way I see this device: it makes watching Netflix on my TV simpler. Before it was turning on my PS3, navigating to the Netflix app, waiting for it to load, choosing between regular content or kids, and then finally getting to pick what I would like to watch. Now I just switch to the input my Chromecast is hooked up to, fire up the Netflix app on my phone/tablet (whichever is closer), make my selection, and then "cast" to my TV.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is what makes it a potentially killer app. I own a roku, a wdtv, an htpc (out of commission because of fan noise), and I have had multiple cable boxes. In terms of interfaces, nothing has gotten it right. Interfaces are either time consuming to get working, slow, unpolished, or difficult to navigate. Worse, sometimes they rely on unstable hacks that are destroyed by API changes. The difference with chromecast is that most of the apps on your tablet and phone are fairly polished, speedy, and easy to navigate. Most importantly, the video is separated from the UI, meaning you don't stop what you're doing to look at something else. There are a lot of great ways that this can be used: Playing a movie automatically brings up more information about that movie on the tablet; it could tell you the names of the actors on the screen (I think amazon has something like this). Song lyrics could be displayed on the tablet. Sky is the limit in that respect.
Yes, screen mirroring would be nice, but I doubt it will ever work as well as we want it to on this device. Google has not released an API for windows or mac os so speed may never be something we see on the desktop. We will see though.

It would depend on the screen it was being mirrored too and would not be perfect but it would be awesome.
Ideally instead of having to stay media info chrome I would just like to my screen on the TV. That would be a huge selling point for Google.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app

Why do you think direct local streaming was not included? Just seems like no brainer to me... Anyway I think ill probably go pick one up once Skype gets on board with suppprt.

Great review, I agree with everything you wrote. I am loving mine so far too. If Amazon wakes up and adds support, this will be a killer little dongle. Though, if they don't, then I will just starting buying my TV shows and Movies from Google's store instead =)
I too would like to see the ability to stream local content soon, and also from the cloud services like Dropbox/Box/Drive/etc. The developers have already proven it to be possible, with great results ... it is really up to Google now to allow it to happen. The fact that they released the Chromecast without local file support has me a little worried. But I am hoping this was more a scheduling decision to get it out the door to beat the competition to the punch and get people talking.
This cheap little gadget has the potential to shake up the media industry in a big way.

Do you think Chromecast will eventually be able to...

This might sound crazy but what if we can eventually hack the Chromecast to cast the actual phone/tablet screen (such as you can currently with the desktop of a computer) and play Android games on an HDTV. Yes, we can just get the Ouya but this would be awesome. Now I have no idea if hacking something like this will make it possible, but this would be pretty cool down the road.
Edit: Something like this actually would be perfect. Had no idea this existed:
Miracast:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYx9YNoD014

tanw42 said:
This might sound crazy but what if we can eventually hack the Chromecast to cast the actual phone/tablet screen (such as you can currently with the desktop of a computer) and play Android games on an HDTV. Yes, we can just get the Ouya but this would be awesome. Now I have no idea if hacking something like this will make it possible, but this would be pretty cool down the road.
Edit: Something like this actually would be perfect. Had no idea this existed:
Miracast:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYx9YNoD014
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that the accessibility of this device and it's price are 2 things what will greatly help the community develop on this. Just like Samsung's All-Share Dongle, i do think it's only a matter of time before we can mirror our screen

I don't think you will be able to play local games from your table or phone in the near future for the simple reason that everything is being streamed from the cloud. Even Chromecasting the current tab or the full desktop, what happens is google sends your full desktop or tab to their cloud and then streams it back up. That adds the 1 second delay between what you see on your screen and what appears on your TV. Trying to play a real time game with a 1 sec delay will be nearly impossible. Maybe in the future when everyone will have a fiberoptic connections, if they can cut that delay down to 10ms, then I would say yes/maybe. But that much fast bandwidth is still out in the future.
The thing though about Chromecast is that Google has the right idea on where things are headed. This is by far the best innovation out there for your TV.

larryvand said:
I don't think you will be able to play local games from your table or phone in the near future for the simple reason that everything is being streamed from the cloud. Even Chromecasting the current tab or the full desktop, what happens is google sends your full desktop or tab to their cloud and then streams it back up. That adds the 1 second delay between what you see on your screen and what appears on your TV. Trying to play a real time game with a 1 sec delay will be nearly impossible. Maybe in the future when everyone will have a fiberoptic connections, if they can cut that delay down to 10ms, then I would say yes/maybe. But that much fast bandwidth is still out in the future.
The thing though about Chromecast is that Google has the right idea on where things are headed. This is by far the best innovation out there for your TV.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the most likely avenue for this would be to write an app that turns the phone (or laptop) into a "local cloud" that is streaming just like Netflix or Play Music. It would obviously take some development but I don't think it's too outlandish.

The problem with screen mirroring is lag. From what I have seen 250ms lag is the norm with Miracast. There is just no way around it with current tech. I think that is part of the reason for chromecast. It partially eliminates the need for screen mirroring. Chromecast gives the same ability of using your phone/tablet to browse and select content as does Miracast, but you get a full-screen experience with the best possible resolution depending on internet bandwidth. It is also not depending on your device to be the streamer as is the case with Miracast.
I expect to see another Google TV type device with the new Jellybean update and Chromecast that will be more geared towards gaming on the big screen. I predict we will see it in Q4 or Q1 of next year.

Lag might be there on some level, but it definitely doesnt have any impact the probability of chromecast and screen mirroring. Its not about how well it does it, it's about if i can. Its a 35$ gadget, lets not overthink this. If it's at all possible, 250ms lag would still be more than acceptable. Of course, thins would never be a gaming device where real time information in crucial

larryvand said:
I don't think you will be able to play local games from your table or phone in the near future for the simple reason that everything is being streamed from the cloud. Even Chromecasting the current tab or the full desktop, what happens is google sends your full desktop or tab to their cloud and then streams it back up. That adds the 1 second delay between what you see on your screen and what appears on your TV. Trying to play a real time game with a 1 sec delay will be nearly impossible. Maybe in the future when everyone will have a fiberoptic connections, if they can cut that delay down to 10ms, then I would say yes/maybe. But that much fast bandwidth is still out in the future.
The thing though about Chromecast is that Google has the right idea on where things are headed. This is by far the best innovation out there for your TV.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I'm unsure of how it exactly works, I don't think everything is necessarily streamed through the cloud. Using your phone or tablet to play netflix or youtube videos from the cloud - yes...
...but I was able to stream a local mkv video in a chrome tab on my desktop to the chromecast. I doubt it makes the round trip through google since I know my upload speeds are pretty bad. My guess is that google just executes the handshake and the video streams through your intranet directly.

pjsnyc said:
While I'm unsure of how it exactly works, I don't think everything is necessarily streamed through the cloud. Using your phone or tablet to play netflix or youtube videos from the cloud - yes...
...but I was able to stream a local mkv video in a chrome tab on my desktop to the chromecast. I doubt it makes the round trip through google since I know my upload speeds are pretty bad. My guess is that google just executes the handshake and the video streams through your intranet directly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are correct about chrome tab mirroring. It goes straight over your local network, but the native codec support of the current Chromecast device is lacking which may be improved by savvy developers found right here. However, since tab mirroring only works from PCs, I think it is a step backwards.

007shark said:
You are correct about chrome tab mirroring. It goes straight over your local network, but the native codec support of the current Chromecast device is lacking which may be improved by savvy developers found right here. However, since tab mirroring only works from PCs, I think it is a step backwards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My understanding is that if you have the correct codecs installed on your desktop/laptop with chrome, you should theoretically be able to play any file type. I saw a video of it working with plex or simply navigating your local drives with chrome. Whether or not native codec support is lacking on the chromecast is moot imho. Tab mirroring on a phone or tablet should eventually come, I just think the devices need more horsepower so to speak.

polish_pat said:
Lag might be there on some level, but it definitely doesnt have any impact the probability of chromecast and screen mirroring. Its not about how well it does it, it's about if i can. Its a 35$ gadget, lets not overthink this. If it's at all possible, 250ms lag would still be more than acceptable. Of course, thins would never be a gaming device where real time information in crucial
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am with you. I think this little device will be one of the more popular developer projects on xda.
---------- Post added at 01:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:36 PM ----------
pjsnyc said:
My understanding is that if you have the correct codecs installed on your desktop/laptop with chrome, you should theoretically be able to play any file type. I saw a video of it working with plex or simply navigating your local drives with chrome. Whether or not native codec support is lacking on the chromecast is moot imho. Tab mirroring on a phone or tablet should eventually come, I just think the devices need more horsepower so to speak.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, so it is transcoding on the fly. I agree with you on not yet on the phones because of lack of processing power. Miracast is still the better option with portable devices even with the minor lag.
I guess I am dreaming for, because Google surprised me with this gadget and I was unable to get one before they were all sold out, an all encompassing gadget that has DLNA, Miracast, and Chromecast in the same form factor. I think the DLNA might be able to be added to this. I doubt Miracast would be able to, though.

007shark said:
...
I guess I am dreaming for, because Google surprised me with this gadget and I was unable to get one before they were all sold out, an all encompassing gadget that has DLNA, Miracast, and Chromecast in the same form factor. I think the DLNA might be able to be added to this. I doubt Miracast would be able to, though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I kinda like it the way it is. While DLNA has been around for a while, I honestly havent seen a simple implementation of it yet (unless you lock yourself into one brand/ecosystem). I am excited that the hacking community is already tearing this thing apart, but the simplicity of setting it up and just getting it to work for the masses is ridiculous at this price.
I lucked out in getting mine - my coworker was able to arrange a pickup at bestbuy and sold it to me at price when he realized he couldn't mirror a mobile chrome tab.

pjsnyc said:
I kinda like it the way it is. While DLNA has been around for a while, I honestly havent seen a simple implementation of it yet (unless you lock yourself into one brand/ecosystem). I am excited that the hacking community is already tearing this thing apart, but the simplicity of setting it up and just getting it to work for the masses is ridiculous at this price.
I lucked out in getting mine - my coworker was able to arrange a pickup at bestbuy and sold it to me at price when he realized he couldn't mirror a mobile chrome tab.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I like the DLNA for getting photos, videos, and music from my device to the TV. Samsung's AllCast from their phones/tablets work great this way even with non-Samsung DLNA devices. If Google implemented DLNA with Chromecast then a phone/tablet's native gallery and video apps could seamlessly work as the Netflix and YouTube apps do without a normal consumer understanding how it works. And also without having to sync everything to the cloud.

007shark said:
I like the DLNA for getting photos, videos, and music from my device to the TV. Samsung's AllCast from their phones/tablets work great this way even with non-Samsung DLNA devices. If Google implemented DLNA with Chromecast then a phone/tablet's native gallery and video apps could seamlessly work as the Netflix and YouTube apps do without a normal consumer understanding how it works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess this is where you and I disagree. The 'understanding how it works' part. For example - once you get chromecast set up with your laptop on your couch, sharing photos and videos with other people in your livingroom from facebook is easy to understand for anyone. 'Native' for the masses is what is currently showing in the browser tab.

pjsnyc said:
I guess this is where you and I disagree. The 'understanding how it works' part. For example - once you get chromecast set up with your laptop on your couch, sharing photos and videos with other people in your livingroom from facebook is easy to understand for anyone. 'Native' for the masses is what is currently showing in the browser tab.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is exactly the difference. I don't use a laptop in my living room. I use my tablet and/or phone. I think that is also the growing trend at least from my circle of friends and family.
EDIT: I use to watch TV with a laptop in my lap, but haven't done that in a couple years since I got a tablet.

For games we could see some games go to cloud based solution. This could work by your phone/controller sending information to the server that in turn sends back appropriate results to the Chromecast. So games aren't played on the phone but on the server the phone just sends commands.

Yeah miracast is sick
Sent from my SPH-L720 using xda premium

pjsnyc said:
I kinda like it the way it is. While DLNA has been around for a while, I honestly havent seen a simple implementation of it yet (unless you lock yourself into one brand/ecosystem). I am excited that the hacking community is already tearing this thing apart, but the simplicity of setting it up and just getting it to work for the masses is ridiculous at this price.
I lucked out in getting mine - my coworker was able to arrange a pickup at bestbuy and sold it to me at price when he realized he couldn't mirror a mobile chrome tab.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://elinux.org/DLNA_Open_Source_Projects ?
007shark said:
I am with you. I think this little device will be one of the more popular developer projects on xda.
---------- Post added at 01:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:36 PM ----------
Okay, so it is transcoding on the fly. I agree with you on not yet on the phones because of lack of processing power. Miracast is still the better option with portable devices even with the minor lag.
I guess I am dreaming for, because Google surprised me with this gadget and I was unable to get one before they were all sold out, an all encompassing gadget that has DLNA, Miracast, and Chromecast in the same form factor. I think the DLNA might be able to be added to this. I doubt Miracast would be able to, though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't see any hardware limitations for Mircacast at this moment, still digging through the tech specs and kernel though

4 tv's as one? Cast monitor sectors for video billboard

Can this be achieved rather simply? Trying to make 4 TV's view as one with some chromecasts..(I have hardly a clue about how that would work,)
Is there a way to broadcast a certain sector to a respective monitor to view 4 hdmi TV's as 1 with chromecast's in them?

I don't think we currently have that flexibility. Maybe some more options will show up after the SDK is released...
I'd look into something like the raspberry pi or some other small solution...

vizionforever said:
Can this be achieved rather simply? Trying to make 4 TV's view as one with some chromecasts..(I have hardly a clue about how that would work,)
Is there a way to broadcast a certain sector to a respective monitor to view 4 hdmi TV's as 1 with chromecast's in them?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While it's possible to split a larger image into 4 quadrants and have 4 separate Chromecasts pull those quadrants, I don't think Chromecast would be a good solution for this.
The problem isn't much tiling the video, but rather keeping the tiles in sync. Because Chromecasts work autonomously (once given a request, they go off and pull the video on their own), it would take significant development effort to keep them in sync.
In professional video situations, there is usually a reference sync generator involved, or it's a single device with multiple outputs (that keeps its own internal sync).
Raspberry Pi or a more-accessible less-appliance-y solution as @Apk07 suggested would be much easier to accomplish, IMO.

Apk07 said:
I don't think we currently have that flexibility. Maybe some more options will show up after the SDK is released...
I'd look into something like the raspberry pi or some other small solution...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
bhiga said:
While it's possible to split a larger image into 4 quadrants and have 4 separate Chromecasts pull those quadrants, I don't think Chromecast would be a good solution for this.
The problem isn't much tiling the video, but rather keeping the tiles in sync. Because Chromecasts work autonomously (once given a request, they go off and pull the video on their own), it would take significant development effort to keep them in sync.
In professional video situations, there is usually a reference sync generator involved, or it's a single device with multiple outputs (that keeps its own internal sync).
Raspberry Pi or a more-accessible less-appliance-y solution as @Apk07 suggested would be much easier to accomplish, IMO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No wonder I usually see static images on video billboards, I notice synch is often awful on them too, has kind of a scrolling effect...But since I want to have static images anyway, Would a software like cam studio running in 4 instances dividing up the screen streaming to 4 hacked chromecasts take a significant development effort? Thanks!

One up on ras pi
Sent from my LT30a using xda premium

vizionforever said:
No wonder I usually see static images on video billboards, I notice synch is often awful on them too, has kind of a scrolling effect...But since I want to have static images anyway, Would a software like cam studio running in 4 instances dividing up the screen streaming to 4 hacked chromecasts take a significant development effort? Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm usually not the discouraging type, but I've seen this type of setup tried - and failed. In fact, I once tried it myself - not with Chromecast specifically, but with multiple un-synced players.
Unless this is something just to play around with at home and you don't mind rebooting it every hour or two to get things back into sync, you really need to look at getting something that can sync to other units.
If you're already putting a PC into the mix, why not just get a quad-head video card and run DVI or HDMI directly to the monitors? Worst case you could get wireless HDMI adapters. You'd get much better reliability there because it's a single source providing the 4 outputs, so the source syncs to itself.
The problem with the Chromecast method is the recompression and network-based wireless streaming. Packets get lost and delayed on the network, and can cause pauses or skips. Compound those pauses or skips over a number of loops and things quickly fall out of sync.
All of the above said, it's not impossible that some kind of Chromecast-based solution could be possible but I think it's not probable someone would put a lot of development effort into it, especially since the potential market is very limited (there are only a fixed number of rootable Chromecasts out there).
Not to mention, it would be much easier to implement with something less closed and more readily available - like Raspberry Pi again...
In the end, for anything that isn't just a hobby project, it comes down to how much your time is worth. You pay either way - time or money. Hobby projects, well, time is a given, hobbies will expand to eat all available time.

Thanks for your help, I already own the chromecasts and four old Samsung epic 4g, hmm.. Maybe I can sell chromecast's since they are out of stock? My not so elegant solution was to use youtube for this scenario after uploading the separate video quadrands to youtube and play them on the separate devices(d700's) broadcasting to the chromecasts. Prolly be way out of synch but led to some interesting transitions Thanks again!

vizionforever said:
Thanks for your help, I already own the chromecasts and four old Samsung epic 4g, hmm.. Maybe I can sell chromecast's since they are out of stock? My not so elegant solution was to use youtube for this scenario after uploading the separate video quadrands to youtube and play them on the separate devices(d700's) broadcasting to the chromecasts. Prolly be way out of synch but led to some interesting transitions Thanks again!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At home I'm all for fun experimentation (well, back before parenthood), but when I'm at work the thought "Hey, this is something I'd try at home" always raises a flag.
If they're already rooted I'm sure you could probably sell them (not here, as it's against forum rules) fairly easily - there are folks here that have purchased rooted and rootable units on Craigslist and eBay.
If all else fails, they make great gifts.

Why not just this simple open Chromecast alternative?

Hello folks,
I got my Chromecast, it works, I like it.
But I find it unnerving that the system is so closed.
Some guy has, months ago, released something he called "PiCast" as an open alternative on the Raspberry Pi.
I wonder: Why aren't there more devs bringing an open, extensible alternative, installable on a Raspberry Pi or other small computer, to life? I really don't understand it, since. like I see it, it doesn't seem particularly complicated! The following features would at least have to be implemented:
***********************************************
- media player software which can play a broad palette of formats and stream from different sources (VLC, Mplayer etc. come to mind an can surely be used as a part of the project)
- web interface which accepts URLs (web or LAN) of files that are to be played and passes them to the media player; and which accepts control commands for the now playing file like pause, forward etc.
Most convenient would be if these URLs could not only be http ones, but also SMB, streaming protocols etc.
Don't we all want a device where we NOT are confined to certain formats?
- apps for computers and mobile devices which let the user choose files he wants to watch / listen to and pass the URL to the web interface and which pass control commands like pause, forward to the web interface
- a customized, lean OS with a Chromecast-like, very simple UI
*************************************************
Any thoughts?
Best wishes,
Hasenbein

The entire reason for the CCast (which essentially replaced the GoogleTV fiasco) was to keep the system closed enough to get Content providers to support it due to the ability to use DRM and control the players being used.
Why do you think other projects like XBMC still to this day do NOT (and will NEVER) have access to Netflix for any sustainable time because Netflix will change their encryption and break any player app they do not have complete control over.
GoogleTV was actually blacklisted by the network websites to prevent it from playing content. All because it was just a little too open for their liking.

What @Asphyx said, plus Android TV sticks have been around for quite some time and already do similar. The key difference is market share. History is littered with proposed "standards" that never won. In the end it's not what is better, sometimes not even what's cheaper, but what picks up.
Iomega's Zip drive was inferior to SyQuest EZ drive, but Iomega won by marketing and hence adoption. Developers had more incentive to support Zip drives (not that much was specifically required but still) because there was a wider audience and market for them.
Adobe's changing the design market the same way. I still have CS6, but more and more I'm getting files from people on CC. And it's annoying. Essentially I'm being forced into CC if I want to work with anybody outside of my four walls.
Even though it's only available in select retail channels, Google is pushing Chromecast with TV ads. The fact that they've sold (or at least shipped) millions is a strong testament to its adoption rate. Even at my local stores, I can say just by the serial numbers they've cycled through, at least 500 have left the shelf since August 2013.
The market share attracts content providers, and the closed nature gives their lawyers ease regarding theft. Sure, there will always be people supporting TV sticks with clever solutions that are free or near-free, though they sometimes require jumping through numerous hoops (even moreso than Chromecast of today), and if something doesn't work as required, it involved researching. It's not like you can put in a support ticket or call support. Granted, Chromecast support isn't outstanding... but many of my non-techy friends have adopted Chromecast, even without hearing from me, and these are not people who visit XDA, nor are they people who would ever have run across or even considered an Android TV stick, nor are they people who have any idea of what an Arduino or Raspberry Pi is.
The draw is the consumer, and the consumer needs content to consume. Which means longevity of the product/concept/standard depends on support from the content providers.

At the price point of Chromecast it seems to be designed to draw in not just first timers, but also customers who may already have a media to TV solution but it's lacking in simplicity or quality. E.g. maybe you have a powerful HTPC that suits all your needs but Netflix is in low-def for DRM reasons. And YouTube stutters on 1080p because Windows keeps trying to do other things in the background while you play it. OK then you put $35 down on a Chromecast and now your Netflix & YouTube videos look better.
And similarly, it's cheap enough that if Chromecast alone does not suit your needs, you can say, well hey, all I spent on the Chromecast was $35, so I don't see why that should stop me from also buying that other media box that does more things.

cmstlist said:
At the price point of Chromecast it seems to be designed to draw in not just first timers, but also customers who may already have a media to TV solution but it's lacking in simplicity or quality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm definitely in this boat.
I have a semi-Smart TV that supports YouTube, Amazon, and a about 12 other "channels" - but its interface is slow and clunky. It also doesn't support DLNA video (sadly, one model year too early).
I have a HTPC that I use to play DVDs and Blu-rays from my media server, and even though I have a BT keyboard remote for it, navigating between Windows Media Center and browser-sourced video is fiddly.
Chromecast didn't replace my HTPC, it's just giving me a much easier way to view those browser-sourced videos.
However, if/when Chromecast gets DVD and BD playback, it very well might replace my HTPC...

http://blog.vudu.com/?p=10711
https://forum.vudu.com/showthread.php?112941-UltraViolet-FAQ-s
Vudu ultraviolet on Chromecast will displace the need for a disc player or home video server for a number of people. Not sure yet but I'll probably be one of them.

cmstlist said:
At the price point of Chromecast it seems to be designed to draw in not just first timers, but also customers who may already have a media to TV solution but it's lacking in simplicity or quality. E.g. maybe you have a powerful HTPC that suits all your needs but Netflix is in low-def for DRM reasons. And YouTube stutters on 1080p because Windows keeps trying to do other things in the background while you play it. OK then you put $35 down on a Chromecast and now your Netflix & YouTube videos look better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup. I really care about picture quality, so Chromecast offers the cheapest way to get SuperHD Netflix on my TV. If I wasn't bothered about the quality, I'd just connect my tablet with a cable whenever I wanted to watch something.

EarlyMon said:
http://blog.vudu.com/?p=10711
https://forum.vudu.com/showthread.php?112941-UltraViolet-FAQ-s
Vudu ultraviolet on Chromecast will displace the need for a disc player or home video server for a number of people. Not sure yet but I'll probably be one of them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting service and a good idea....
Unfortunately $2 per SD conversion of DVD or $5 to HD is a bit too pricey considering how I have the equipment to rip my own DVD (I have more than 3000 titles in my collection), do the Upconvert and even rip the subtitles to put into an MKV.
But this service will do well because of the sheer number of people who do not have the capability to do that and the ease of use.
I wonder are they actually converting your DVDs or are they doing the much smarter thing and letting you insert the disk, check it for validity and then just giving you access to the already encoded content they have stored?

Asphyx said:
I wonder are they actually converting your DVDs or are they doing the much smarter thing and letting you insert the disk, check it for validity and then just giving you access to the already encoded content they have stored?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The second one, so far as I know.
And if you just enter your digital copy information that works too.
My son-in-law does that but I haven't asked him about the details - he's very happy with the service though.

It's a great Idea....
I have a similar validation system I use....
If I own it already on disc then I feel I have the right to download it if I choose...I paid them their cut so no Guilt involved.
LOL
Similar but I don't pay the conversion fee!

I have a small collection.
I got tired years ago of format changes, player upkeep and having more plastic in the house, so I've been satisfied with rentals. I keep a few favorites on my shelves just in case.
And I had one of my media servers die of old age a few months ago. I'm tired of maintaining my own cloud. Been there, done that. Still do my music and just a few movies now.
I like the ultraviolet model, it sounds simple to me.
And to the OP -
LocalCast does direct entry of http and smb addresses.

EarlyMon said:
I have a small collection.
I got tired years ago of format changes, player upkeep and having more plastic in the house, so I've been satisfied with rentals. I keep a few favorites on my shelves just in case.
And I had one of my media servers die of old age a few months ago. I'm tired of maintaining my own cloud. Been there, done that. Still do my music and just a few movies now.
I like the ultraviolet model, it sounds simple to me.
And to the OP -
LocalCast does direct entry of http and smb addresses.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah unfortunately I live in a very rural area and Cable and Internet outages are common (all the damn trees!)
So when that happens I really have no other recourse than to use whatever is on my Media server to entertain myself...
I went out and invested in a good NAS with Raid that holds 16Tb worth of drives (don't get full16Tbs with Raid though...I may even need to double that soon as I'm running out of space).
My Media Server is my HTPC so I can simply replace that unit if it craps out and just re-install the server software and map the drives.
Been checking out that Chromecast store app...a Lot of stuff in there I didn't know about...