Google Chromecast vs. Roku Streaming Stick: Which Device Wins?
Tags:
-
TV
- Streaming
-
Google
- Roku
Last response: in Home Theatre
seancaptain
March 7, 2014 1:24:07 PM
They might look the same, but the Chromecast and the new Roku HDMI stick are very different devices, with very different capabilities.
Google Chromecast vs. Roku Streaming Stick: Which Device Wins? : Read more
Google Chromecast vs. Roku Streaming Stick: Which Device Wins? : Read more
More about : google chromecast roku streaming stick device wins
zman53us
March 7, 2014 2:23:27 PM
"Furthermore, the Roku Streaming Stick doesn't require that your mobile device be out of action whenever you are watching or listening."have you ever cast something to chrome cast? i loaded up netflix on my phone, found what to watch, and then cast it to my TV. I then closed netflix on my phone, killed it from the task manager, and started using my phone for something else....
Score
0
burnley14
March 7, 2014 3:33:51 PM
Coming from someone with two Chromecasts, I have to wonder if the author has ever used one. The single greatest functionality of the Chromecast is the ability to cast tabs, which is a full-featured screen share with a Chrome browser tab. How this is classified as "limited" escapes me. On top of this, as the comment above addresses, streaming to Chromecast does nothing to prevent your device from performing other tasks. It requires a single tab to be open, meanwhile you can browse freely on others. Or to have an app running in the background. I've never used the Roku device but the summary of Chromecast in this article is pretty inaccurate.
Score
1
robert in vancouver
March 7, 2014 6:57:25 PM
Another difference is that Roku works almost everywhere in the world, including Canada, Japan, and the UK.But Chromecast works only in the good old USA. I guess Google's brass (like many other Americans) forgot there are people living outside of the USA, and they have computers, and they even have flush toilets!
Score
1
zman53us
March 7, 2014 7:25:31 PM
Quote:
Another difference is that Roku works almost everywhere in the world, including Canada, Japan, and the UK.But Chromecast works only in the good old USA. I guess Google's brass (like many other Americans) forgot there are people living outside of the USA, and they have computers, and they even have flush toilets!Score
0
XGrabMyY
March 7, 2014 10:15:47 PM
XGrabMyY
March 7, 2014 10:15:48 PM
Quickcomment45682
March 8, 2014 12:41:37 AM
kingofhearts84
March 8, 2014 5:42:51 AM
Like every author before him, this author is stupid, and it's a limited thinker. Again, rating the product based purely on content, which if you understood the Chromecast at all, you'd know it's up to the content provider not Google. My 5 and 2 year olds can use the Chromecast. They would never be able to figure out a Roku. Enough said. Crystal adams ya say? Kids are smarter than this stupid author.
Score
0
kingofhearts84
March 8, 2014 5:46:15 AM
Like every author before him, this author is stupid, and it's a limited thinker. Again, rating the product based purely on content, which if you understood the Chromecast at all, you'd know it's up to the content provider not Google. My 5 and 2 year olds can use the Chromecast. They would never be able to figure out a Roku. Enough said. Kids are smarter than this stupid author.
Score
0
maddad
March 8, 2014 8:48:52 AM
If you have used a Roku at all, you know it is far better than Chromecast, and yes I have both and use both. The Roku uses a remote control. If your kids can change channels on the tv, they can use the Roku. Calling the author stupid, if you have not used a Roku yourself, is well; you figure it out! I bought the Chromecast for youtube casting. It works great for that, and also for Netflix. I was using a Bluray player but the Chromecast loads much faster and takes up no space. Google will not let just anyone write programs for the Chromecast and that is why there are so few apps for it. The content providers would love to write for Chromecast! The problem is Google. Don't take my word for it, check it out for yourself. Getting on here with an anonymous comment calling anyone stupid is; well dumb. I took a look at the "14" official apps for Chromecast recently, and I am sure there was one available for viewing photos. Not sure why you would need to cast music. If I had the choice to make today, I would certainly get the Roku stick even though it costs nearly twice as much. Though it's officially listed at $35.00, I have often seen the Chromecast for $25 on sale. I paid $27 for mine on sale. If you don't need all the features you get with the Roku, just wait for the Chromecast to go on sale again. If what the Chromecast does is all you need, you will be happy with your purchase and save $25.00.
Score
0
SK-Mtnview
March 8, 2014 12:08:48 PM
Gkap27
March 9, 2014 7:41:31 PM
I don't know, I think there are more options available than just these two. Sure, these are the most popular and best funded, but I would have liked to see a comparison to some of the generic Android sticks. I found an article that highlights some of the details on the MK808B, one of the most popular android sticks.http://totalgeek.co/technologyarticles/97-the-mk808b-a-... looks promising
Score
1
Gkap27
March 9, 2014 7:41:59 PM
I don't know, I think there are more options available than just these two. Sure, these are the most popular and best funded, but I would have liked to see a comparison to some of the generic Android sticks. I found an article that highlights some of the details on the MK808B, one of the most popular android sticks.http://totalgeek.co/technologyarticles/97-the-mk808b-a-... looks promising
Score
1
Gkap27
March 9, 2014 7:42:51 PM
I don't know, I think there are more options available than just these two. Sure, these are the most popular and best funded, but I would have liked to see a comparison to some of the generic Android sticks. I found an article that highlights some of the details on the MK808B, one of the most popular android sticks.http://totalgeek.co/technologyarticles/97-the-mk808b-a-... looks promising
Score
0
MichelinF
March 11, 2014 12:40:45 PM
Jason Cardiff
April 2, 2014 4:31:17 AM
Quote:
To the comment: "The biggest drawback of Roku is the unavailability of YouTube and Spotify."Actually the Roku 3 has YouTube now, as well as this new HDMI Streaming Stick. YT is coming to other Roku player models soon. Roku also has Spotify, among many other music apps. Quote:
The single greatest functionality of the Chromecast is the ability to cast tabs, which is a full-featured screen share with a Chrome browser tab. How this is classified as "limited" escapes me. Quote:
On top of this, as the comment above addresses, streaming to Chromecast does nothing to prevent your device from performing other tasks. It requires a single tab to be open, meanwhile you can browse freely on others. Or to have an app running in the background.Score
0
oatmeal25
April 2, 2014 8:18:20 AM
whippetgirl
April 2, 2014 2:49:22 PM
MichaelStrauss
April 3, 2014 11:48:14 AM
TDMS
April 9, 2014 10:16:12 AM
For me, what it comes down to might be the roku remote control. My kids don't have smart phones (or tablets or laptops... you get my drift), so would they need my cell phone for chromecast? I don't think I would want them borrowing my phone every time they wanted to switch shows on Netflix.
Thanks for your help!
Thanks for your help!
Score
0
RobExtra
April 30, 2014 5:49:18 PM
Robert Barnes
June 6, 2014 2:39:41 PM
Without a doubt the Roku is better. But it was Google's of Chromecast that forced Roku to release a cheaper device. Its Googles business model to make it affordable for people to use the internet. Google doesn't make money if you're watching your TV but if you're watching YouTube they really don't care what device you use.
Score
0
Megaben74
September 2, 2014 3:12:04 AM
Megaben74
September 2, 2014 3:13:52 AM
Megaben74
September 2, 2014 3:16:31 AM
Read discussions in other Home Theatre categories
!