Google Pixels are great phones, but why force Chromecast for screencasting?

If you’ve ever scrolled through the Google Pixel subreddit, you’ve probably seen the heated debates around what makes these phones stand out — and what drives people up the wall. One comment on a recent thread nailed a pain point that many Pixel users share:

I just wish Google would let me screencast to any compatible device instead of locking it behind Chromecast… It’s literally a software handicap to make you buy their useless product and waste a HDMI port.

Let’s talk about it.

Screencasting is a staple feature that should feel as natural as connecting to Wi-Fi. But if you own a Pixel phone, you’re stuck in Google’s tightly controlled ecosystem. Unlike other brands that embrace cross-compatibility, Google forces Pixel users to use its Chromecast devices for screencasting.

The Pixel’s screencasting restriction is, at best, a nuisance, and at worst, a deliberate anti-consumer move. It feels like Google is crippling an essential feature to sell you a $30 dongle — a dongle that might be redundant if your smart TV already supports standards like Miracast or AirPlay. As of this writing, no Samsung smart TV has built-in Chromecast support despite the company holding a 29% global market share as of Q3 2024.

What stings even more is seeing how rival brands handle screencasting:

• Samsung: With its Smart View feature, Samsung devices let you cast to a wide range of smart TVs without requiring proprietary hardware. Whether it’s a Samsung TV or another brand that supports Miracast, it works seamlessly. You don’t need a Samsung-exclusive dongle; you just need a compatible screen.
• Apple: While Apple is known for its walled garden, its AirPlay protocol has expanded support to third-party smart TVs from brands like LG, Sony, Vizio, TCL, Xiaomi and Philips. It’s not perfect, but it’s a step toward making screencasting a smoother experience.
• Huawei and Xiaomi: These brands have integrated wireless display casting into their devices without restricting users to proprietary dongles. They utilize Miracast for quick and effortless casting, which means more compatibility with off-the-shelf smart TVs and projectors.

Even brands like OnePlus and Oppo have embraced broader casting standards beyond Android’s built-in Chromecast, ensuring that their users can screencast without being tethered to specific hardware.

For a company that champions open ecosystems, Google’s decision to lock screencasting behind Chromecast feels like a betrayal of Android’s core philosophy. Pixels are marketed as premium devices — tools that should empower users, not shackle them to additional purchases.

The kicker? Many users don’t need or want a Chromecast. Modern smart TVs often come with built-in screencasting capabilities that support standards like Miracast, and it’s good that LG is also joining the Google Cast party. Still, forcing users to plug in an extra device just to make Pixel casting work feels like an unnecessary complication — and a waste of a valuable HDMI port.

Imagine the possibilities if Google lifted this restriction. Pixels could become the most user-friendly devices for screencasting, tapping into the vast ecosystem of compatible TVs, monitors, and projectors already out there. It wouldn’t just make life easier; it would reinforce Google’s image as a brand that values user choice.

Instead, Google’s decision to prioritize Chromecast sales over convenience risks alienating even its most loyal users. And in an increasingly competitive smartphone market, that’s a gamble the company can’t afford to make.

The effects of this lock-in aren’t just limited to Pixel users — it’s shaping the entire smart TV market. By forcing TV manufacturers to adopt Google Cast, Google is creating an ecosystem where features like screencasting become less about user convenience and more about corporate control. This perhaps explains Amazon’s move to launch their version of Google Chromecast earlier this year.

LG’s recent embrace of Google Cast, for instance, wasn’t out of necessity — it was to cater to a growing base of Pixel users who are otherwise unable to screencast to their TVs. Even Samsung, known for its robust Smart View ecosystem, may be bowing to this pressure. This trend benefits Google but restricts consumer choice and forces manufacturers to prioritize compatibility with Google’s ecosystem over open standards.

Google needs to do better. Let Pixel users screencast to any compatible device, no strings attached. Follow Samsung’s lead and embrace universal casting standards like Miracast. Heck, Samsung has even made it possible to screencast from a Galaxy phone to a Google Cast-capable device through its Smart View feature. Google needs to prove that the Pixel is a true flagship phone worth the $1,000+ price tag– not just another cog in the Google hardware machine.

Until then, the screencasting lock-in will remain a glaring flaw in an otherwise impressive lineup of devices. And for many potential Pixel buyers, that might just be the dealbreaker, at least for now.