Hacker News Reader

Comment by sankoz | Hacker News Reader

When I bought my TV supporting Miracast protocol, I thought I would not need to buy a Chromecast. And it (the TV) worked beautifully with my Nexus 5 for some days. But soon, the phone stopped casting the screen on the TV. Another phone (Moto X Play) still works fine though, so pretty sure it is a phone problem.

A conspiracy theorist would suggest Google intentionally breaking Miracast support to boost sales of Chromecast ;)

View on HN

I've never had good luck with miracast.

It is supposed to have latency in the 10s of milliseconds, I have yet to see it under 100 or even 200ms. (and I am pretty sure I have seen it a lot higher!)

This is despite having a nice fast Intel chipset and what is supposed to be a well reviewed Miracast receiver.

It is a great idea, but it works so poorly.

Next up for standards failure, DLNA!

I am saddened that there are standards body tech to do what I want, and that none of them really work that well.

If I want to stream from multiple platforms to my sound system, I am best off investing in a proprietary solution from either Google or Apple. :(

Miracast turns out to be a terrible protocol in many ways. The way it uses Wifi networks is clunky, and requiring from-device streaming is fine for local content or screen mirroring, but terrible for streaming services (where you end up with Netflix streaming to your phone, then your phone transcoding and streaming to the TV via Miracast, which means two video streams on your Wifi and a lot of drain on your phone; by contrast, with Chromecast, Netflix streams from the internet to your TV with no intervening step).

Good thing you're not a conspiracy theorist and wouldn't dare suggest such a thing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com