An update to Chromecast?

Google Chromecast has been around for over a decade. Of course, at first, it was simple for casting from a mobile device to a TV with the first release in 2013. It wasn't until seven years later that it really became a general purpose streaming device.

Chromecast with Google TV added a remote and a Google TV interface to Android TV and suddenly Chromecast was the real deal. Well, mostly. It was a little under-powered and wasn't as efficient in how it handled apps.

In 2022, a new Chromecast was released, but it wasn't an upgrade. It was an expansion of the line, adding a cheaper HD (1080) device to go along with the 4K/UHD device that was the 2020 version.

Now, word is a new Chromecast is coming.

In recent updates to the Google Home app, the company has introduced a handful of previously unseen models to the internal list of Google Cast-compatible devices. Three new listings are explicitly labeled as being last year’s line of JBL Authentics speakers.

However, a new mystery device, “YTD,” appears side-by-side the HD and 4K models of Chromecast with Google TV. Further, we can confirm that Google Home treats YTD just like the existing Chromecast models, while Google TV devices from OEMs get treated differently. All of that is to say that we’re fairly confident that this is a sign of Google preparing to launch a new TV dongle.

This is the second new Chromecast-likely device discovered in the past year. No new release happened, and it's not known with any certainty if two new Chromecast devices are coming, or if the one found last year is replaced by the one recently discovered.

I would like to see a more powerful Chromecast device released. The current device is okay. Well, better than okay, but not as good as it could be.

My Streaming Life has used Chromecast and other Google TV devices more recently, and I'm happy with it. A better device would be a great thing.

So, when am I getting my new Google TV home screen?

A week ago, Google posted that the Google TV screen was getting a makeover. Not a huge makover, but still an improved look.

I've seen screenshots and do agree it looks fine.

But that last sentence tells about the problem. I've seen it in screenshots, not on my TV. Not on any of my TVs.

I have three different types of Google TV interfaces at home: Chromecast, Onn Streaming Stick, Sony TV. My NVIDIA Shield actually runs Android TV but not the Google TV interface. I'm not seeing the updated home screen on any of those Google TV devices.

Yes, it does say "over the next few months" in regards to rolling out.

Starting today, and rolling out to all devices over the next few months, we’re introducing some new updates to the “Your apps” row, giving you a sleeker, more streamlined look, making it easier to access your favorite apps.

So, I just need to be patient. And this really isn't unusual for my streaming devices. Roku has spread rollouts over months ever since I got my first Roku in 2010. I really am used to it. But, I'm not used to it with Chromecast. The device hasn't been on the market nearly as long as Roku devices, and the interface hasn't changed much in that time. This is the biggest change I've noticed, and it's taking a while, it seem. Just like Roku.

My Streaming Life works just fine with things as they are. If improvements come, great. I'm looking forward to this one, but I'll just have to wait. And if waiting on an update to Google TV was my biggest problem, I'd be in pretty good shape.

Roku's new Terms of Service

Roku updated their terms of service recently. And they did it in a way that has really upset some people (link to Cord Cutters News story). And I'm not too happy about it either.

Oh, I understand that all companies update Terms of Service from time to time. I realize that Google, Apple, Samsung, Motorola, and other cell phone device and software companies do this. I just don't like the way Roku went about it.

What Roku should have done was presented a screen, with the options to:

• Read the terms (which they did)
• Accept the terms (which they did)
• Reject the terms (not doing this is the problem)

It would have been simple enough for a "Reject" action to take the user to a screen saying that the Terms would go into effect on a pre-determined date (30, 60, 90, etc. days out), and there be a link to a Website that did whatever their actual "write a letter" process would do.

They don't want to make it easy to opt out. And if I didn't like using a Roku device so much, I would do the whole "write a letter" thing. Heck, I might anyway.

Who am I kidding. I won't. I just haven't accepted the terms yet, and I'm not sure when I will. For now, I'm not using my Roku. Of course, I've used Google TV devices more lately, so it really isn't an inconvenience. Just an annoyance. And I'm very annoyed by this.

My Streaming Life has included Roku from the start. It will continue to include Roku. I don't have a problem with the actual terms of service, just they way they deployed this update. That's not how I like things done. Roku is now just like every other company, and not in a good way.

Is Netflix going to raise prices again?

Good news, everyone!

Netflix is going to raise prices again this year!

Oh, did I say "good news?" I didn't mean that. I meant "here we go again."

Actually, Netflix has not announced a price increase. But a report in Variety says analysts expect a price increase. They base it on hints from Netflix in last quarter's earnings call.

Last October, Netflix increased the price of the Basic plan from $9.99 to $11.99 per month in the U.S., and also hiked prices of the tier in the U.K. and France. Netflix hasn't announced specific plans to hike subscription prices in 2024, but execs have said rate increases are on the table.

On the company's Q4 2023 earnings call, Netflix co-CEO Greg Peters noted that last year the streamer had "largely put price increases on hold" while it was rolling out the paid-sharing program — "because we saw that as a form of substitute price increase. Now that we're through that, we're able to resume our sort of standard approach toward price increases. And price increases, you've seen us do that in the U.S., U.K. and France. Those changes went well better than we forecasted."

Peters continued, "We will continue to monitor other countries and try and assess… when we've delivered enough additional entertainment value" to "ask [customers] to pay a bit more to keep that positive flywheel going and we can invest in more great films, series and games for those members. So, you know, the summary statement might be, 'Back to business as usual.'"

And, it is expected that "business as usual" means regular price increases.

My Streaming Life does not alway incorporate Netflix. It is again in my regular rotation of services. I'll subscribe to a service for 30 days, then cancel, and then when I find something I want on another service, I'll subscribe there for 30 days. Lots of content from a wide selection of services, but not a lot of subscription fees. I think Netflix is on target for April. Let's see if the price increase beats me.

MIcrosoft is bricking laptops

Microsoft updates can brick some laptops. Not intentionally, but it happens.

Britec has the details:

[YouTube]

My Streaming Life doesn't involve Windows much. My current Plex server is running on Windows, but apart from that, I'm not using Windows. And I don't use Windows in general. But most people do use Windows, and these problems can be very serious.

YouTube Kids app shutting down

It was reported that the YouTube Kids app was shutting down. Now, before parents (and grandparents) get upset by this, it's just the app that is shutting down, not the service (or feature).

Currently, there is a YouTube Kids app that presents an interface for kids, and filters content to make it suitable for children. The app is going away. The functionality is part of the YouTube app, and Google is focusing on that going forward.

The message from Google provides the basic information:

YouTube Kids is moving: In July, the YouTube Kids app icon on your TV will be going away. But, you can still use YouTube Kids on your TV by going to your child’s profile in the YouTube app.

To get started using this new experience, download the YouTube app on your smart TV, streaming device, or game console. Learn more about entering YouTube Kids through the YouTube app.

I understand why Google (who owns YouTube) is making the decision, but I really don't like it. To me, it seem easier for parents (and grandparents) to make an app available to a child, rather than trying to teach a child about profiles. This is particularly true for younger children.

Now, there will be children that previously didn't use the YouTube app (because they used the YouTube Kids app) that will be looking for kids content, and be on Mommy's profile or on Daddy's profile searching for stuff that will start showing up in Mommy or Daddy's suggestions.

Of course, maybe that's Google's idea. However, the whole idea of profiles to begin with is to keep the content and preferences separate. Children who don't understand that will just screw it up. Not on purpose, but because something they are used to will no longer work like it did.

This can all go horribly wrong. Well, not for the long haul, but for the short term, this will be a problem.

My Streaming Life doesn't involve young children much, as my youngest has children of his own. And, when they visit, I'll be watching TV with them. But at home, this could cause problems.

MLB and VPNs

TV Answer Man Phillip Swann recently answered a question about VPNs and Major League Baseball. I understand why he answered the question. Someone asked, and he gave an honest answer. No problem.

What I didn't like about it was that he couched the headline in a way that seemed to advocate using a VPN.

If you haven't realized it, I'm against using VPNs for the purpose of circumventing geo-location restrictions. I don't like those restrictions, but I also feel the content owner can set whatever restrictions it wants. I think content owners have the right to be total jackasses. I have the right to call them total jackasses and not do business with them.

The title of TV Answer Man's post was "A VPN Could Be Your Ticket to Blackout-Free Baseball" and covered the question asked of him:

... we live in Iowa and we want to watch the Cardinals but the games are blacked out on MLB TV even though we live hours away from the Cardinals stadium. Can you explain how a VPN works and whether it could eliminate the blackouts?

The answer was straightforward and provided information that many might not realize:

The Virtual Private Network, or VPN, can beat the blackouts, but there are a number of questions regarding its legality. Let me try here to put those questions to bed now before the regular season begins with the Dodgers and Padres in Korea on March 20-21.

Saying "there are a number of questions regarding its legality" is absolutely on point. But, he also pointed out that MLB has not been actively pursuing people that violate the blackout policy by using a VPN:

For the first time, MLB acknowledged it had never tried to sue or prosecute anyone for VPN use and the league didn't even have a position on whether it opposes the use of VPNs. Since that interview, there is no indication that the league's position has changed nor prosecuted or sued someone who has used a VPN while watching MLB TV.

This runs counter to the public perception that MLB is trying to crack down on VPN use and is prepared to use the courts when necessary. This is not to suggest that MLB is saying you should use a VPN. (The pay TV services that pay handsomely to carry regional sports channels wouldn't appreciate that. If everyone used a VPN for MLB TV, they wouldn't need to subscribe to the pay TV services.) But the league certainly isn't telling you not to use a VPN.

In the past when addressing this topic, I've noted there's also an ethical question here. By using a VPN, you are clearly attempting to "circumvent" a blackout restriction, which is against the MLB TV rules. But the league's current neutral stance on VPN use would seem to soften that concern.

Don't misunderstand me; I do not like blackouts. If there were no blackouts, I would have subscribed to MLB TV for many years now. But, they have their rules in place. Although I don't agree with the rules, it's there right, and I respect the rights of others, even when they abuse those rights.

My Streaming Life doesn't involve as much baseball as I would like, because of the blackouts. I won't violate ethics juse because I don't like what they are doing. But they are missing my subscription money, and my eyes on their advertisers. And the subscription money and advertising eyes of those who don't subscribe because of blackouts.