Chromecast Client

[lewispm]

It seems possible to create a chromecast "client" that could play the videos streamed on the LAN rather easily, as that's what chromecast does, and the stream is already linked in the web client.

It looks like the two just need to be tied together somehow. Is there something keeping this from happening easily?

This would not be a full client, but could handle a large portion of the client needs for me anyway.

[stuckless]

Originally Posted by lewispm

It seems possible to create a chromecast "client" that could play the videos streamed on the LAN rather easily, as that's what chromecast does, and the stream is already linked in the web client.

It looks like the two just need to be tied together somehow. Is there something keeping this from happening easily?

This would not be a full client, but could handle a large portion of the client needs for me anyway.

There might already be a Chromecast thread... not sure... but either way this question feels like Deja Vu

The Android Client and a Chromecast Client are very similar. Once the Android Client is finished, then enabling it to be a Chromecast Client would not be that difficult. The hard parts of the Chromecast client is getting video playback working... Its the same streaming media protocol whether it's on AndroidTV, Phone or Chromecast. So once all those pieces are working well, adding a "Cast" support is not that hard.

[Monedeath]

Originally Posted by stuckless

There might already be a Chromecast thread... not sure... but either way this question feels like Deja Vu

Oh, you mean this one?

"SageTV Media Extender"

Originally Posted by ianb

I am a long established user of SageTV with several Medai Extenders. Since the acquisition by Google, Media Extenders have not been sold, so the question is, now that SageTV has become open source, will that open the door to SageTV running on other devices (obvious choice is Google Chromecast)? And will there be new SageTV dedicated media extenders available?

[mikejaner]

Originally Posted by lewispm

It seems possible to create a chromecast "client" that could play the videos streamed on the LAN rather easily, as that's what chromecast does, and the stream is already linked in the web client.

It looks like the two just need to be tied together somehow. Is there something keeping this from happening easily?

This would not be a full client, but could handle a large portion of the client needs for me anyway.

I think most people record their TV in MPEG2 based formats. Chromecast does not support MPEG2 formats, so you would have to convert every recording before playing back in that case.

[stuckless]

Originally Posted by mikejaner

I think most people record their TV in MPEG2 based formats. Chromecast does not support MPEG2 formats, so you would have to convert every recording before playing back in that case.

Keep in mind that with SageTV, when you connect a client, you tell it what video formats you accept.. if you can't play the file natively, then sagetv should transcode it.

[mikejaner]

Originally Posted by stuckless

Keep in mind that with SageTV, when you connect a client, you tell it what video formats you accept.. if you can't play the file natively, then sagetv should transcode it.

Ahh, the Android client does that? Cool. Plex is an option in that case too. Not ideal for us low powered Sage Server users though.....

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by mikejaner

Ahh, the Android client does that? Cool. Plex is an option in that case too. Not ideal for us low powered Sage Server users though.....

It's not really a function of the client - it's a function of the server. The 'current' android client does not do this, because it pretty much tells the server that it can play back anything, so the streams are sent to the client unaltered. Changing those reported capabilities should cause the server to transcode those files that it doesn't support.

[Monedeath]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

It's not really a function of the client - it's a function of the server. The 'current' android client does not do this, because it pretty much tells the server that it can play back anything, so the streams are sent to the client unaltered. Changing those reported capabilities should cause the server to transcode those files that it doesn't support.

That wasn't quite the comment he was making, some(many) people have built minimalist servers which have enough memory and processor power to run a very basic media server. Transcoding content, particularly trying to do so in anything resembling real-time, is not within the realm of capabilities that those systems are going to be able to handle gracefully.

For that matter, even for some of the beefier systems out there, there will be a point of diminishing returns for them as the number of simultaneous clients(that require "live" transcoding of content being viewed) which can be handled may be much lower than they'd like. (Recordings made as mpg, and having three people at home trying to watch different things on Android devices, for example. Now transcoding the recording upon completion is an option, but then that may consume resources on the server that may be needed by someone trying to view something else...)

Someone is ultimately going to have to generate a FAQ page that addresses this to some degree eventually. Much along the lines of this one for Plex as an example:

https://support.plex.tv/hc/en-us/art...rver-computer-

[wayner]

Originally Posted by Monedeath

That wasn't quite the comment he was making, some(many) people have built minimalist servers which have enough memory and processor power to run a very basic media server. Transcoding content, particularly trying to do so in anything resembling real-time, is not within the realm of capabilities that those systems are going to be able to handle gracefully.

For that matter, even for some of the beefier systems out there, there will be a point of diminishing returns for them as the number of simultaneous clients(that require "live" transcoding of content being viewed) which can be handled may be much lower than they'd like. (Recordings made as mpg, and having three people at home trying to watch different things on Android devices, for example. Now transcoding the recording upon completion is an option, but then that may consume resources on the server that may be needed by someone trying to view something else...)

I never understood trying to get away with a Sage server with minimal specs. Certainly I always wanted something that could run Comskip on h.264 files which requires a bit of CPU.

When you are building a Sage server that you will be using for 5+ years and using it pretty much every day I think spending an extra $200 or so to get better and faster hardware is money well spent. I will be building a new server shortly to migrate to V9 and I am planning on getting a system with an i7-6700 CPU. It may be a bit of overkill but better slightly overpowered than underpowered.

[mikejaner]

Originally Posted by wayner

I never understood trying to get away with a Sage server with minimal specs. Certainly I always wanted something that could run Comskip on h.264 files which requires a bit of CPU.

When you are building a Sage server that you will be using for 5+ years and using it pretty much every day I think spending an extra $200 or so to get better and faster hardware is money well spent. I will be building a new server shortly to migrate to V9 and I am planning on getting a system with an i7-6700 CPU. It may be a bit of overkill but better slightly overpowered than underpowered.

Some of us use the mindset of retiring an older machine we used as a desktop system years ago, to a secondary function, like SageTV. Mine is an AMD X4 based system which is perfectly capable as a SageTV system, and in the sense of things it cost me nothing.