I want to go the other way...
I'd much prefer a quick and easy way to stream my TV feed to my tab so I can make dinner / wash up / shop online without pausing The Shield.
Less than six months ago, there were just a handful of Miracast-certified products listed in the Wi-Fi Alliance’s kit database. Now there are nearly 150. A spectacular improvement for a little known technology. So what is it? Miracast was formally launched in September 2012, but it was Google’s announcement a month and a half …
My TV is already wired to my router via Ethernet cable, so surely doing it via DLNA would be a more efficient solution in such a case? Does a DLNA equivalent for screen mirroring exist?
Also, will Miracast let you concurrently access your infrastructure-based Wi-Fi network at the same time as the peer-to-peer miracast connection?
Miracast is based on a Wi-Fi Direct connection (it can be TDLA but no one is using it) so provide your Wi-Fi device supports concurrent mode Wi-Fi Direct you can simultaniously connect to your Access Point. The throughput might be an issue and if the video is using 5GHz and the AP is 2.4GHz yet another gotta is introduced.
Just tried googling to see if I could plug something into a spare HDMI on my (rather old now) tele.
Two products come up, one a dongle from China and the other a Panasonic box.
I can't find a single av receiver that has it built in (which would be the ideal situation) although a forum mentioned that the Sony strdn1030 did (I don't believe it, the sony website and/or manual only mention airplay for music).
I like the idea, but it certainly seems to have very little traction in the market place at the moment.
I agree, though I would've thought that XBMC implementing Mircast would be a better proposition.
It already supports Airplay, and so RaspBMC accepts pretty much* all streams from my iphone perfectly.
*it's just videos from itunes that fail to play, though it may just be me :-|
Audio from itunes, as well as all of my other audio & video sourced elsewhere plays fine.
It’s a great idea but I have a nasty feeling that like most interoperability technologies it will take years for devices to seamlessly talk to each others as manufacturers dither and squabble.
I think the focus on mobile devices is wrong too. It would be better to be able to send my PC content to a screen over powerline/homeplug/WiFi as that's where I have my music, video and the most pixel-pushing grunt.
What if my TV wants to make an adhoc connection on one channel and my internet is on another wifi channel? How do I get my wifi-only tablet to play YouTube videos or stuff off my NAS drive onto my TV? I like the XBMC implementation better - connect it to your home network. Screencasting is handy, but sometimes I want to "fling" a network-based video at my TV then carry-on doing ofter things with my tablet
The rest of us outside the Apple world who are interested in streaming content from one device to another will continute to use UPnP and/or DLNA, which already works perfectly well. Doesn't mean you're restricted to streaming from your phone to TV either; for example, I could use my phone to tell my NAS box to stream something to my HTPC (not that I'd want to, since the point of having an HTPC and a NAS on the same network is to move the storage away from the HTPC, but still allow the HTPC to access it... I'm just trying to illustrate my point here...)
Softare developers also don't have to shell out $200 for a copy of the Miracast spec just to be able to do this either...
For what it's worth, Sony also tried that "shared/mutliple screen gaming" thing with the PS3 and the PSP/Vita, and they're going to carry on pushing it with the PS4 + Vita... Hasn't really worked out too well for them so far...
Home use: Naa
My TV has a network connection and can access all the stuff on the NAS anyway.. Not much need for adding another computer to the mix.
Business use: Yeah
Been using WIDI for some time for presentations. Miracast is basically WIDI++ with a wider platform support. Main problem is getting a HDMI to VGA adapter so the receiver box can be attached to elder beamers. After that you get a lot more flexibility where to place the presenting box, can move around with the tablet pc etc.
My guess is business notebooks/ultrabooks/penables will be the first to make use of this (Quite a few can do WIDI) and that will put some force on the market to be compatible. Since quite a few beamer producers are on the boat they will push as well so their beamer can work with all notebooks.
This all sounds great, but what about wireless video streaming that already works with perfect quality and no transmission lag, WiHD. WiHD is the right choice for getting video from something (phone, tablet, PC, AVR) to the display (projector, TV, monitor). Why would anyone want to settle for mediocre picture quality or lag on your mobile screen versus what you see on the big screen. WiHD is the only solution.
You are correct, most customers wouldn't want to change projectors mostly on a $$ basis. At this point, I would again go with WiHD, the DVDO-Air receiver can plug into any projector and will save $$. I have a DVDO-Air at home, I use it at my office, and when it comes to line of sight, it just has to be in the same room. The transmitter and receiver will bounce off anything to find each other. At CES, people tried to walk in front of it, block it with their hands, and even tried moving it around, and the connection never failed or lost touch and the game-play continued at Full HD. It was pretty unbelieveable. http://www.dvdo.com/air.aspx
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019