With the Roku you can either use the remote or your phone with the Roku app. How is it an advantage by having only one option? You can also cast from the two most popular video apps - Netflix and YouTube. I won’t even mention that if you’re a subscriber to Amazon Prime - and there are over 100 million people who are - you can’t use Amazon Prime Video at all on the Chromecast.
Are you really going to say that a phone interface is “less fiddly” than a purpose built “10 foot interface” for watching tv with a purpose built remote for controlling the interface and having only to navigate through the compatible apps?
With private listening, you don’t need the tv to work with Bluetooth and that’s yet another “fiddly interface” you have to deal with and yet another device you have to keep charged - as opposed to using your phone you already have and either wired or wireless headphones. Depending on which Roku you have, you can plug your headphones directly into your remote.
If you really want to talk about “platform flammage”, I didn’t even mention my 4K AppleTV where you have the benefit of native apps, mirroring from Macs, Airplaying from iOS devices, and a remote app on iOS devices....
Uh, yes. Yes. I am really going to say that. Again, you either haven't tried a Chromecast, haven't ever played a Netflix[1] video on an Android phone, or both.
Again: yes, playing content on a phone is easier than a TV. And it isn't even close.
Did I mention the phone is easier? It's easier.
[1] Or Google Play, or Youtube, or Spotify, or pretty much anything except Apple or Amazon, which remain notable and regretful (if not unexplainable) holes in coverage.
Casting from my phone when I sharing a TV with other people who may not have the app installed, may not have an Android phone at all isn't more convenient than just handing over a remote - I'm not going to just hand my phone over silly nilly to let someone else control the TV while I'm out.
I'm not suggesting that most people get an AppleTV 4K - they are overpriced and I got one free with my DirecTVNow subscription - but at least with it, you can airplay Google Play and you have native apps (or Airplay) with Amazon Prime.
With Roku you have native apps for everything except Apple's stuff and you can cast to it.
With the Nvidia Shield - you have access to the entire Android ecosystem, Amazon Prime, and ChromeCast support.
The ChromeCast is the least capable alternative.
This isn't even an anti Android thing. The Nvidia Shield is Android based and just much better.
For me that is the feature which kills the Chromecast.
My mother's manual dexterity and mental state are degraded enough that working a smartphone is out of the question. The touchpad Apple TV remote is also too challenging.
Until this past Christmas, my girlfriend's children had no tablets of their own with which to control the television.
I want to watch something in living room but I left my phone charging in the kitchen.
The great thing about a Roku TV is that it works just like a regular TV but with a better UI. My mother could work it after a 30-second explainer -- here's your remote, there's DirectTV Now, there's Plex, press the Home button to get back here. The girlfriend, kids, and random houseguests just grab the remote and go.
Everything else the Roku can do via App / Casting is gravy and I could live without any of it. I do appreciate Private Listening tho because it works with whatever output device(s) are available to the device the app is running from -- no extra Bluetooth pairing steps and doing the Which BT device will my headphones end up connecting to when I turn them on? dance.
I've had a Chromecast plugged into my TV and running for probably 2 years now and for some reason it basically never gets used. Maybe it's just me, but my phone is just as likely to be charging in the kitchen as it is to be in my pocket when I want to watch something on TV. And even when I have my phone on me I've just never managed to get into the habit of using it. Also I'd rather not hand my phone to my kids or house guests every time they want to watch something.
I tried to solve this by having a dedicated Chromecast tablet, but somehow it also kept wandering off around the house.
The remote for the Playstation on the other hand is always either on the coffee table in front of the TV or lying on top of the Playstation next to the TV, so that is what gets used every time.
I'm sure the Chromecast is great for many people and I honestly thought it would be great for me when I bought it, but so far it's been a waste.
> I can't see him messing around with his phone to watch tv.
And yet you don't see that for some this is in fact a "killer feature" in favor of the Chromecast? All this tells me is that you've never actually tried the product. Just count how many times you've had to hunt for a remote in the couch vs. how many times you've genuinely misplaced your phone to see how wrong your thinking is here.
The whole point of the Chromecast idiom, which it does really well, is to eliminate the fiddly "TV" interface. You just select the content on your phone, using exactly the UI that you normally use to select the content on your phone, and hit the Chromecast button. The device will turn the TV on, select the input[1], and just play. No remote needed.
As far as "private listening", that's cute, but collides with equivalent features already provided by most TV's these days. You certainly don't need a Roku to get that. Most TV's will pair with a bluetooth headset.
[1] OK, as long as you have a TV that understands CEC at a minimal level. This is sadly not as universal as you'd hope. Most ones I've looked at recently do OK.