[rab] It's a web streamer you control with an Android device or (to some extent) a chromebook or the chrome browser. Essentially most things you can do on your Android device you can 'cast' to your TV. It's a bit like a dumber Apple TV, one that doesn't have its own onboard apps but just plays what some other device sends it (or tells it to play -- the distinction is blurred).

Depending on whether the app's media type and location is supported by Chromecast, the 'source' device may actually be doing the work of fetching and rendering the material and 'casting' the A/V output to Chromecast, but commonly it's just sending the URL and various tokens and chromecast is doing the actual fetching/decoding.

It's similar to having an Airplay-only device on your TV; bearing in mind that they are similar protocols but not the same nor interchangeable. Its main disadvantage is that it can't play content that's local to your network, so if you have your own movies and things you have to play them on your device and screencast it to chromecast. Which may or may not be well supported and look decent. For several good reasons I'd rather tell the TV-attached gizmo "play this file, which you can find over on that computer", than tie up some other device playing it and throwing the video to the TV. You can do the latter with Apple TV as well, but the thing is you don't have to, at least for any content that's supported by iTunes.

There's a metric shedload of other ways to do this sort of thing, with various amounts of overlap and wheel reinvention. The Apple TV approach is one I recommend for someone who's already pretty invested in the Apple ecosystem. It's probably the quickest route to maximum versatility without going to a lot of expense or trouble. If you don't have least one iDevice and/or don't want to use iTunes for your local media, getting as complete a solution can be a little more complicated, though not necessarily more expensive and there are a few reasons why it might be worth the trouble.

[Raak] Sorry, I could have sworn I read your post as saying you intended to connect a disc player. Ignore HDMI cabling entirely.

[Stevie] I thought TVs all ran over HDMI these days? I do have a DVD player (other than my computers), but it and the TV are both so old they use SCART.

[Raak] You said you were going with a network-to-TV model. A smart TV will hunt for your network, ask for a password and then present you with whatever app-based interface it uses so you can start consuming content. No wires other than the power cable. You want to push a signal in over a wire, HDMI is the best way (but not usually the only way on a decent TV). You want to take the sound to somewhere it sounds decent (thin tellies mean small speakers, no resonant cavity and crappy sound) use an optical link (over a cable) to a soundbar for the most compact solution. You can buy a receiver later if you decide you need better sound.

I use wired ethernet for my smugsmart TV; no point in saturating the wireless network on a fixed device if you already have an ethernet drop nearby. It came with a separate WiFi USB dongle, which I repurposed on another machine after discovering it was a rather nice dual-band device based on the Atheros chipset. Netflix is all I use the TV's 'smart'ness for; I have played round with using it as a DLNA client but it's not nearly as nice as using the XBMC box.

I ended up buying a matched soundbar from the same vendor (Panasonic Viera), one that uses HDMI and connects to the ARC-enabled port on the TV, which means basically all three gizmos (HTPC+CEC running XBMC, TV and soundbar) can be controlled with just the TV remote. It also means if I turn off the TV and just use the HTPC/XBMC + soundbar for music, the xbmc mobile app can control the speaker volume.

It's all basically as straightforward and usable as it can get. If I were going to buy a Smart TV again I might get a Samsung or Vizio, as there's a Plex app available for both. Which is a whole nother topic. (I don't use Plex myself but it's what I'd recommend to pretty much anyone I didn't recommend Apple TV to, i.e. someone who doesn't have a houseful of predominantly Apple goodies already.)

[Dan] Yeah, but you are clever.

I avoided the price-attractive Vizio after reading a large number of reviews of later models that suffer from persistent random reboot issues. No point in a smart TV that can't be a TV reliably IMO. The picture on my Father-in-Law's Samsung (dumb) TV is outstanding.

I went Sony only because I have a good experience with Sony products, their tech support was rated higher than everyone else's and they offer four HDMI inputs to everyone else's two. It seemed to me that I'd be bunging wires into it from all over the place and better to find I had too many sockets than too few. I'm also familiar with the Sony video family "quirks" and it seemed likely I would have a better time getting the clown out of the picture.

[Stevie] FWIW I think the Plex client is available for Sony TVs as well. What I'm thinking there is that if a chap wanted to get by with just his smart tv plus whatever PC or file server somewhere in the house had all his own perfectly legal, honest media, putting the Plex server software on that PC or NAS would spackle over the crevices. Notably by providing a transcoding DLNA server, because smart TVs usually only handle certain formats and packages.

I think it's better to go with the direct-connected HTPC because transcode-network-decode-display is a lot more bother than just decode-display; but not having a HTPC would be attractive if your Smart TV was actually smart enough to do everything you want, and playing local media in whatever format is a major sticking point.

I've been binge-watching the US version of House of Cards and although I loved the original I can't for the life of me understand the vitriolic hate for this one I've heard and read. It is gripping, reasonably faithful in it's plot elements while moving the story believably into the quite different American political model. Kevin Stacy is a very worthy Francis Underwood. Sorry non-lovers, I think the show is well written, well cast and gripping even though I've seen the story once (or thrice) before.

I started a game. If it doesn't seem like a winner, please kill it with my blessing.

I just did a Google search for 'do not feed', and got '...hallucinogens to the alligators' as the third result. Now I naturally want to know, why not?

(SM) 'Cos they'll snap your hand off as they go for it. They'll pop anything, those buggers. Helps them alligate, I'm told.

I'm not a big fan of alligation while under the influence of mind-altering drugs.

John Cleese is currently pushing his memoir here and, being the darling of everyone in the media, is popping up all over the place.

Yesterday he was being interviewed on NPR as I was driving home and the interviewer asked about the difference between what people, upon recognizing him, were likely to shout to him in America as opposed to the UK.

His answer was interesting but too long to go into here. It did, however, include a snippet that might allow for much japing should one of us encounter the great man in the future.

He said that often, people would make reference to sketches that he couldn't remember participating in, and he would just smile and nod and say something neutrally agreeable to fake it.

So the next time you see John Cleese, get close, make yourself known (this may involve acting as I know none of you would never slip into nudge-nudge, wink-wink territory normally, being too cool for that nonsense, but the payoff for doing so will, er, pay off) and say something like: "What about that time you were the astronaut lost among the vikings, who all turned out to be women? Talk about funny! I only saw it on DVD, and they blanked the punchline. What was it you said right at the end there, when "Mrs" Eric the Viking Idle showed you "her" buttocks and demanded an autograph?"

I forgot to mention that Cleese claims that the central theme to his work, his personal vision of what makes things funny, is the exasperated lack of understanding of the person trapped in a farcical situation. The parrot shop sketch was his illustration of the point. This is your chance to bring this home.

The hour by hour BBC weather forecast today shows the temperature due to rise from 8º at 11am steadily upwards to 12º at 5am tomorrow. Similar trend for Cambridge and London. How does the temperature keep on rising overnight?

The sun catches fire sometime in the early hours of the morning and rises in the sky, heating the earth. This was explained over at MCiOS I think, a few years ago. At around noon the sun goes "off the boil", the cooling air around it ceases to support its weight and it slowly crashes into the sea for the night. Can't remember who originally explained this. Might have been CdM or Breadmaster. Whoever it was clarified in one paragraph something that so-called "scientists" have failed to explain clearly during my entire life.