The new Google “Sabrina” device that showed up briefly in retailer listings a couple of weeks back, which we expect to be an Android TV unit, might have the oddest of names when it launches. The price Google attaches could help distract us from that awkwardness, though.
According to internal Target systems viewed by Artem from Android Police, the name of Google’s new Android TV device has apparently switched from “Sabrina” to “Google Chromecast with Google TV” and with a price of $49.99.
The name of “Google Chromecast with Google TV” is the most awkward of Google names, so it’s perfect. Google could be trying to continue the line of Chromecast devices that people are so familiar with, while also tacking on Android TV. Of course, this would be Google re-branding Android TV back to Google TV, a name they went away from years and years ago.
I don’t have an issue with the name change back to Google TV, I’m just concerned that Google is selling the Chromecast experience here first, but Google TV should be the sell, as it’s a real platform and not just a wireless casting technology. Whatever, it’s Google and that price sounds nice.
At $50, this is the second time we have seen a retailer list this dongle at what would be an incredible value. The original Home Depot listing for “Sabrina-Abbey” had a price of $50, but Walmart went with $60. My money would have been on $60 being the price point, yet here is Target supposedly lowering to that $50 mark. Either way, buying an Android TV dongle (hopefully with remote too) for such a low price will certainly help bring Google’s TV platform to the masses.
If you aren’t yet on Android TV, you have got to be droolin’ a little right now, right?
Might be upgrading from my OG Chromecast
Please, someone PLEASE tells me what’s wrong with simply naming it “Google Chromecast TV”? Why does it need a “with” and a second “Google”?
Google reminds me of the Microsoft before its rebirth — its marketing SUCKS. Or, did they actually hire the marketing people from Microsoft?
Hell yeah…i hate lg webos they don’t have HBOmax or DC universe….yes that is my beef with lg webos 3.0
Do you think stadia would run on this?
Do we have word on when this could come out?
Assuming this will provide native You/Tube TV support ? Casting you tube tv now thru chromecast for football is too glitchy-
I love YouTube TV via 2019 Shield with the AI upscaling. Totally different price point, but if you have a 4K TV it is the way to go. This new dongle might be good for my Bedroom TV though.
Google needs to fire who ever is in charge of naming things.
Not on Android TV. Not on a smart TV. Not droolin’ at all. I guess it’d be nice to have Xfinity stream on my non cable boxed TV, but that’s about it. I normally just use my laptop because if I turn on the big ass tv, it adds heat to my bedroom. /mixed bag.
I expected Pixel TV, or maybe Nest TV if they want to tie it as the center of a smart home, but this name is very clunky. Why not go with Chromecast TV?
Lmao at Nest tv… Considering the nest/Google migration was a complete fail… You can’t even use the nest app on android tv now… And as it looks they’re not worried about resolving the issue…
Because there’s no such thing as Chromecast TV. This is an Android TV dongle with Chromecast built in. Suggesting that they change Android TV to Chromecast TV makes ZERO sense. What’s Chromecast TV?
I’m not saying they should change the whole OS name, I’m ONLY talking about this product. If they really want to have the Chromecast name front and center then cut it down to the basics. Chromecast TV is just the product, it means Chromecast with Android TV onboard. In the same way Chromecast Ultra means Chromecast that does Ultra High Definition.
I love the name Chromecast TV. It suggests the possibility of running apps (like Netflix, Hulu, etc) directly on a Chromecast device. Of course, not much space to install apps — usually Chromecasts only have a few hundred MBs or a couple GB of storage.
If Google can solve this, it immediately makes Chromecast devices a primary player in the market, rather than an also-ran like Android TV, where no amount of re-branding can fix.
Time to go watch YouTube TV on my Google Chromecast with Google TV.
YTTV on the GCwGTV.
$50 is a “must purchase” price for me BUT how are the Android TV/Google TV apps? Has the quality of the apps improved over the years?
Why don’t they just call it Chromecast? The Android TV part is just now apart of Chromecast. If a Chromecast is sold without the Android TV option call it Chromecast lite.
I recently bought the TiVo Android TV device. I’ll be replacing it with this when it’s released.
I had one since release its. So damn buggy half the time I end up just using my roku or fire tv …I do prefer Android TV though but the TiVo thing was a fail
Chromecast was the best product Google has ever launched and at $25 it was a no brainer for people to try & fall in love with it’s ease to use and versatility. This just sounds like it will be messy. They should just have named it “Google TV”, “with built in Chromecast” as the subtitle.
But if it launches soon at $50 then it will be knocked down to $39.00 or $35 by Black Friday just like how Google does every Nest and Google speaker/device
It’s an amazing product…when it works. Half the time my phone can’t find the Chromecast on either 2.4 or 5Ghz. Forget traveling with it since it requires you to connect it to the hotel WiFi instead of doing a local network with your phones hotspot so ONLY you can access it (you can’t have hotspot on and try to cast as casting requires WiFi which turns off hotspot)…I have 4 of them and I barely use any of them.
I was waiting for this but got a Shield Pro instead. I didn’t mind using Chromecast but having a full interface is a much better experience
I have a serious question with Google/Android TV. With smart TVs being so dominant and having such decent smart hubs these days, what is the big pull of adding a dongle when I can access the same apps directly from my tv?
Not all smart TV have all the apps. And smart TVs are notorious for their lack of updates. If you’re one to keep TVs for long time good luck getting updates the last few years you own it
Exactly
If you smart tv has all the apps then you don’t need a box. But ATV has a much larger ecosystem of apps and games.
Many of the smart TVs being sold already have ATV built in anyway
Did you not read what Chris above said?
Why are you asking about about something that was just posted?
I’ve got a 2017 Sony Android TV. It’s an OLED and was not cheap. I expect to be happy with the picture quality for years to come. But it’s running Oreo and it will not receive any further upgrades. Even that one was a surprise – I expected it to be stuck on Nougat forever. The interface is incredibly janky and always has been. It was underpowered from the beginning. I would like to have the same Android TV experience, but with the latest version of it and with better performance. I’ll just factory reset the TV itself and not connect it to the internet. I’m sure other people with older smart TVs are in the same situation.
The name is understandable. As good as Android TV is, outside of a small group of enthusiasts nobody has ever heard of it. Chromecast, on the other hand, is known pretty universally, even among Apple users – it’s built into pretty much every new TV now, every phone has it, and it’s super simple to use (although not really convenient for doing much more than throwing a video you want a friend to see onto a screen). In the end, it’s easier to sell people something they know vs something new. In the end, Chromecast is among the longest lived Google hardware lines, if not the longest, and it would be short-sighted for them not to leverage that.
Yes – they’re building off the Chromecast brand and function.
I do wonder if there’s a play here where Google is enabling Apps on Chromecast? What if Google TV isn’t Android TV, but rather a phone/tablet app (like Apple TV+, or ReelGood), and you’re streaming the app to the Chromecast/TV, where you can control the apps (eg. Netflix, Hulu, Prime, etc) on the phone/tablet via remote control, rather than diddling with the phone/tablet?
If something like this worked with all or most Chromecasts on the market, as well as on Android and iPhone devices, they’d have a pretty interesting solution that works on millions of devices already on the market.
Of course, a remote control would be required – but those are cheaper and many lying around the house that could be repurposed.