>People said exactly the same thing about Miracast in 2013 and 2012. We still aren't anywhere with it. It is more broken than it is working, it is a giant mess.

I'm glad your time-machine is working and you've experienced the 2015 ecosystem.

>You're strangely contradicting yourself. First you acknowledge that tab casting is a thing,then you pretend that tab casting isn't something it does and use that as justification for Miracast's superiority? Very confusing.

I'm not pretending tab casting isn't a thing. What I mean by "sink" is a device that receives the stream. Chromecast can do this because it controls both ends, the software you install on Chrome and the Chromecast device (the sink). Your surface area for testing and coverage is much smaller, vs a standard that is in hundreds of devices. Even then the feature is still not on mobile devices officially and is experimental.

>PS - Chromecast works with other devices. It isn't just desktops. People already made apps that could send a full Android "desktop" to the Chromecast back in the early days before Google killed it with an update. I'm sure it will return with the release of this SDK.

Yes, I've used Koush's Allcast app and it is nice. I'm not saying it won't happen (Android to Chromecast) - it will. But still you aren't getting what I'm saying here - there is only one target device you have to build for (Chromecast) not hundreds of TVs, BluRay players, and dongles.

>It is an identical surface area between the two.

I mean test and interop surface area. It is surely not identical. Your test matrix for Chromecast is n. For Miracast it is n^2. That is the real problem. Not your straw man about "DRM"