Talk:Miracast

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology

Computing: Networking Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Telecommunications Mid‑importance

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Need help to build this page

Help need to build this page. It's been a long time since I created/edited a wikipedia page. Tool and process looks unfamiliar.

Some recent stories to cite:

Certification "required"

Both devices (the sender and the receiver) need to be Miracast certified for the technology to work -- this seems like a weird thing to say: A Miracast compatible device will work just as well with or without a certification stamp. 192.198.151.36 (talk) 08:01, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Name?

Is name Miracast some kind of tribute to ill-fated Microsoft Mira from 2002.? http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Microsoft_Mira ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calimero (talk • contribs) 09:58, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wii U

The Wii U uses Miracast to stream video to the GamePad controller. http://www.slashgear.com/wii-u-teardown-reveals-dedicated-miracast-for-smooth-gamepad-action-19257509/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.153.200 (talk) 13:53, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Technical architecture

The following whitepaper describes NVIDIA's implementation of Miracast: http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/tegra_white_papers/tegra-miracast-whitepaper-final.pdf. As the only known working example of Miracast, I could analyse the architecture of NVIDIA Tegra-optimised Miracast in a section on this page, though I may have to brush up on Wikipedia language/layout and I'm not sure what we can offer by analysing this implementation. Thoughts? By the way, don't forget to sign your writing on the talk page with four tildes. Nitwon (talk) 10:30, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV Flagged

Towards the bottom of the article there is a part that is questionable, it says something about mirroring being a killer app. That is not encyclopaedic content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.167.152 (talk) 01:42, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, this is one of the most shamelessly biased and promotional articles I've ever read. I've flagged it as a POV violator—which is pretty obvious. It's full of ridiculous quotes about how it "solves all the nerdy problems." Even the criticism section ends with an unsourced sentence claiming, in effect "these problems will all go away." It actually cites the press release from the industry group that is promoting it. Someone should find some time to do a 100% rewrite of this article. Gerweck (talk) 19:09, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV and Copyright violation

The article reads too much like a press release. A more neutral point-of-view is needed overall and especially in the Advantages section. The opening paragraph in that section is a direct copy-paste from the Wi-Fi Alliance's Miracast page (which, oddly enough, is not cited). This needs to be changed to summarize the advantages, not copy-paste the Wi-Fi Alliance's content. 76.8.215.209 (talk) 22:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Miracast do require Wi-Fi network!

Miracast does not require access to a Wi-Fi network, as connections are formed via Wi-Fi Direct

This is bad phrasing. In fact any Wi-Fi device needs access to the network. The thing is that the networks may be different. In case of Miracast one of the station become Group Owner which manages infrastructure network type. See Wi-Fi Direct specification:

P2P Group Operation resembles infrastructure BSS operation as defined 4 in IEEE Std 802.11-2007 [1], and provides additions for a P2P Group 5 operation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.219.66.215 (talk) 12:26, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The phrasing "requires access to a network" is ambiguous. The true statement is that Miracast operates on a peer-to-peer Wi-Fi connection (Wi-Fi Direct), independently of the local infrastructure. For example, a visitor to a conference center who does not have credentials to access the local Wi-Fi network will still be able to project slides on a Miracast enabled display.

OS Support

The use of phrases like "next few months" is deprecated for obvious reasons! 51kwad (talk) 15:08, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Miracast failure

I added the section titled 'miracast failure'. Perhaps this title is too provocative, but this was certainly my impression even before c't magazine (highly respected German IT magazine) gave it weight with their investigation of miracast - the results of which seem to show pretty clearly that consumers should be warned before buying a miracast device. And that is my purpose in giving the information its own section. It appears that the only safe course for consumers is to buy a set of products from the same manufacturer, but consumers who do that (e.g. buy the HTC One and HTC's media link) are not the ones who will look at the wikipedia miracast article before purchasing.

Returning to the title 'miracast failure'. I think the conclusions of the article (and the experience of users) really are a failure of miracast: miracast certification does not guarantee interoperability and that is what the miracast certification is supposed to mean.Qwavel (talk) 18:31, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm changing the section title to "Criticism", which is the standard title for such a section. "Miracast Failure" is too provocative and moreover won't stand up well if the standard takes off. Microsoft has been working with Miracast vendors on compatibility to relieve the issues with first generation products, since Windows 8.1 supports streaming to Miracast. I'm a dev on Miracast at Microsoft. Zhuman (talk) 20:14, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Zhuman

Thanks for the changes and the explanation - that does make more sense. And I'm glad to hear that you guys are going to make it better. My only issue is the line "Firmware updates have solved many of these issues since then...". That is not my understanding and there is no reference for that, so I would propose to remove that, but leave the 2nd half of that line: "and support for the standard has been picking up". Or it could be "support is expected to improve as the standard matures".Qwavel (talk)

Ok, I've removed that bit, at least until I can find confirmation from the press (hopefully it will arrive, haha). I can say from personal experience that the latest firmware updates for most Miracast adapters greatly improve on most of the issues, but you're right that I can't reference myself. Zhuman (talk) 21:30, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is Miracast delivered over TCP/IP?

There's some ambiguity in the opening description of this article, and also in the Disadvantages section, that would be cleared up by documenting where in the network stack Miracast sits. In other words, does it go:

Wi-Fi Direct -> Miracast -> H.264

OR

Wi-Fi Direct -> TCP/IP (or UDP/IP?) -> Miracast -> H.264

In the former case, the Disadvantages section is disingenuous as it implies that Miracast is delivered over TCP/IP. --Mr. Bene (talk) 19:29, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From reading the spec, the stack is actually:

Wi-Fi Direct -> IP -> TCP -> RTSP (negotiation of media, etc)

                ... -> UDP -> RTP (transmission of audio and video)
                ... -> TCP -> UIBC (UI back control, e.g. mouse or keyboard data)

The "Miracast" spec specifies how WFD channel is set up, and how RTSP, RTP, UIBC are used.

Sender or Receiver?

I haven't seen anything explaining whether all Miracast-certified devices are both senders and receivers or one but not the other, and if so which one. I don't see an option in Windows 10 to receive, and even to get the information that you have to press Win+P to get sending options was a hard slog. Hackwrench (talk) 02:18, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Miracast. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:35, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Subjective opinion on Google's alternative

In the Issues subsection, there is a sentence mentioning: "Although trumpeted as a major feature of Android Kit Kat, support in Android was dropped in 2015, because Google advocates its own inferior proprietary alternative."

I don't think this is the style wanted in Wikipedia. Overall, the article seems a little weirdly written, it doesn't sound like other Wikipedia pages, but I can't pinpoint a problem.

Aeiouyaeiouy (talk) 14:34, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What is needed in order to use Miracast protocol on Wired ip device?

I mean is there app, or possibility to display in Windows Miracasting screen of phone plugged to WiFi router to which Linux device is plugged via RJ45 Ehternet cable?

Is there possibility for wired desktop Linux device to WiFi router through RJ45 cable to miracasting to wireless receiver ?

What would need to be written in order for mentioned things to be possible?

Does it need to be written only on Linux wired device, or does it need to be added to WiFi router through the means of Open WRT firmware plugins or even more extensive firmware software upgrades of different names. 46.187.207.145 (talk) 00:36, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]