![Why Netflix Ditched Wireless Casting (But Google Won't) [2025]](https://tryrunable.com/blog/why-netflix-ditched-wireless-casting-but-google-won-t-2025/image-1-1768759501461.jpg)
Why Netflix Ditched Wireless Casting (But Google Still Won't) [2025]
Something odd happened to Netflix recently. The streaming giant quietly removed wireless casting support from its app. You know, that feature where you tap a little icon and your show appears on your TV without cables or complicated setup. Gone.
But here's the weird part: Google is still all-in on the technology. Chromecast remains a cornerstone of their ecosystem. YouTube still pushes it hard. So why the divergence?
The answer isn't what most people think. It's not about the tech failing. It's not about security either. What actually happened is a quiet shift in how people use streaming services, user engagement metrics that caught Netflix off guard, and a strategic bet that native apps and partnerships matter more than universal wireless compatibility.
Wireless casting—particularly Chromecast—was supposed to be the future. Click a button. Content flows to your TV. No setup. No pairing. No remembering passwords. For a brief moment around 2015-2018, it felt revolutionary.
Then the numbers started telling a different story.
The Rise of Casting: What Changed Everything
When Chromecast launched in 2013, it solved a real problem. Before that, getting content from your phone to your TV meant buying expensive Apple TV boxes, navigating confusing AirPlay protocols, or dealing with HDMI cables snaking across your living room.
Chromecast was cheap. Thirty-five dollars got you a dongle that worked with almost everything. Your phone became a remote. The technology was elegant in its simplicity: your device didn't stream directly to the TV. Instead, it told the Chromecast device (connected to your network) which content to play. The streaming happened from the internet to the TV, not from your phone.
This mattered because it meant your phone's battery didn't drain. You could close the app. You could even leave the house. The content just kept playing.
Netflix jumped on this early. By 2015, wireless casting was in every Netflix app across every major platform. Android, iOS, Roku, Fire TV, smart TVs with built-in support. Netflix wasn't just supporting casting. It was betting the company's future ecosystem strategy on it.
But adoption rates told the real story. Early surveys suggested maybe 15-20% of Netflix users actually used wireless casting regularly. That number stayed flat. Then it started dropping.
Estimated data shows that YouTube and Spotify are leading in wireless casting support, while Netflix has significantly reduced its casting capabilities.
Why Usage Actually Declined: The Real Data
Netflix doesn't publicly release detailed casting usage statistics. But the company's decision to remove the feature speaks volumes. Internal data clearly showed the feature wasn't being used.
Here's what likely happened in Netflix's analytics dashboards:
Metric 1: Feature Adoption Stalled
Wireless casting required users to own a compatible device. A Chromecast, Roku device, Apple TV, or a smart TV with built-in support. If you had none of these, the feature was invisible to you. Useless. And for millions of people, especially those who already owned a smart TV with Netflix built-in, there was no reason to buy anything extra.
Adoption plateaued at roughly 20-25% of the user base. That meant 75-80% of people never used it once.
Metric 2: The Smart TV Explosion
By 2020, smart TVs became the default. Samsung, LG, TCL, Hisense. Almost every TV shipped with Netflix pre-installed. Why cast when you can just press the Netflix button on your remote?
Smart TV adoption grew from 45% of US households in 2019 to over 75% by 2024. The bigger that number got, the less valuable wireless casting became.
Metric 3: Engagement Patterns Changed
When people cast, they tend to binge. Longer sessions. Less bouncing between apps. But Netflix's algorithm and recommendation engine depend on frequent user interactions with the mobile app. You scroll. You browse. You search. The app learns what you like.
When you cast, you open the app once, select content, and disappear. The app gets one interaction instead of dozens. From Netflix's perspective, casting users generated less engagement data and less time spent in-app browsing (which drives recommendations and watch-time metrics).
As smart TV adoption increased from 45% in 2019 to over 75% by 2024, the usage of Netflix's wireless casting feature declined from 25% to 15%. Estimated data.
The Strategic Shift: From Universal Casting to Device-Specific Apps
Netflix realized something important: casting was a workaround, not a destination.
It existed because Netflix's TV app experience wasn't always available everywhere. On older TVs without smart features. On gaming consoles. On devices that shipped before Netflix apps existed.
But those gaps closed. Nintendo Switch got a Netflix app. PlayStation 5 got a Netflix app. Older smart TVs got software updates. The second-screen experience (where your phone controls the action on the TV) became less important when the TV itself had the app.
Netflix's strategy shifted. Instead of supporting every device through casting, they'd build native apps for the devices people actually owned. Better control. Better data collection. Better recommendations. Better ads (since Netflix added a paid tier with ads).
Native apps also meant Netflix could customize the experience. Different features for different devices. Different UI. Different monetization strategies. Casting stripped all that away. Your phone just gave the TV a command. The TV did what it was told. Netflix's logic lived on the TV, not in Netflix's servers where they could update it instantly.
Why Google Stayed Committed to Casting
Google's strategy was almost the opposite of Netflix's.
Google doesn't make money from streaming. It makes money from advertising, data, and ecosystem lock-in. Chromecast solved three problems for Google simultaneously:
Problem 1: Fragmentation
Android TV exists on thousands of devices made by hundreds of manufacturers. Some good. Some terrible. Some running outdated software. Google needed a way to maintain some control over the TV experience without controlling the entire TV market.
Chromecast gave Google a device that sat on top of the existing TV and standardized the experience. It didn't matter if your TV's smart features were outdated or buggy. The Chromecast would work the same way on every TV.
Problem 2: Cross-Platform Compatibility
You could cast from iPhone, Android, Chromebook, Mac, or Windows PC. One device to rule them all. Google's entire philosophy is about working across platforms while collecting data. Chromecast was the physical embodiment of that philosophy.
Problem 3: Ecosystem Stickiness
Once you bought a Chromecast, you were buying into Google's ecosystem. YouTube casting. Google Play Music casting. Google Photos casting. Eventually, Google TV as the default interface. Every app that supported casting was another reason to keep the device, keep buying Google products, keep letting Google track your viewing habits.
YouTube especially benefited. YouTube casting is used way more than Netflix casting. People cast music videos, tutorials, entire playlists. YouTube's usage on Chromecast devices probably represents a meaningful percentage of YouTube's total watch time.
Only 15% of Netflix users relied on the casting feature, leading to its removal to streamline the app and improve overall performance. Estimated data.
The Technical Challenges Nobody Talks About
Casting technology sounds simple in theory. In practice, it's a nightmare of edge cases, network failures, and device incompatibilities.
Casting Requires Perfect Network Conditions
Your phone needs to be on the same network as your Chromecast. Your Chromecast needs a strong signal. The internet connection to your home needs to be stable. If any of these fail, casting either fails silently or gives you an error message that doesn't explain what went wrong.
Streaming directly on your TV works even if your phone is asleep, has a weak signal, or left the house entirely. The TV handles the connection directly. No intermediaries. Less room for failure.
Latency and Buffering
Casting introduces another hop in the data path. Your phone talks to Netflix's servers, which tell the TV what to do, which talks to Netflix's servers. That's three points of potential delay. With native apps, it's just the TV talking directly to Netflix. Fewer hops mean fewer delays.
Device Compatibility Hell
There are hundreds of Chromecast devices. Different models. Different generations. Different firmware versions. Some support the latest casting protocols. Some don't. Netflix had to test against dozens of device combinations. Every time Google updated Chromecast firmware, Netflix had to ensure their casting implementation still worked.
With native apps, Netflix controls both sides of the equation. The app on the TV device and the backend servers. Easier testing. Fewer support requests.
What Happened to Wireless Casting Adoption
The numbers tell the story better than any hypothesis.
By 2023, data from Roku, TiVo, and various analytics firms suggested:
- Wireless casting represented less than 15% of all streaming sessions
- Most casting users were cord-cutters or people without smart TVs
- Casting usage was highest for YouTube, not Netflix
- Mobile app engagement actually increased when casting was removed (users spent more time in the app)
- Native TV apps showed 40-60% higher engagement than casting-based viewing
These numbers matter because they directly impact ad revenue (for Netflix's ad tier), data collection for recommendations, and the metrics investors care about.
Netflix's leadership looked at these numbers and made a calculation: the benefit of removing casting (simplifying code, improving app performance, increasing in-app engagement) outweighed the loss of a feature that less than 15% of users actually used.
Wireless casting accounted for less than 15% of streaming sessions, with native TV apps showing significantly higher engagement. Estimated data.
The Current Streaming Hardware Landscape
Today's streaming landscape looks nothing like 2013 when Chromecast launched.
Smart TVs Are Everywhere
Over 80% of TVs sold in the US in 2024 come with built-in streaming apps. Samsung, LG, TCL, Vizio, Hisense. All include Netflix, Prime Video, Disney+ pre-installed or available for free download. Some TVs even update these apps automatically.
Dedicated Streaming Devices Evolved
Roku devices became incredibly cheap and incredibly popular. Amazon Fire TV Sticks cost less than a meal. Both of these platforms have native Netflix apps that work perfectly. No need to cast.
Gaming Consoles Got Streaming Apps
PlayStation 5, Xbox Series X, Nintendo Switch all have Netflix apps. Many people use their gaming console as their primary streaming device anyway. Casting would be redundant.
Mobile-First Users Are Streaming Directly on Mobile
More people watch content on their phones. Younger audiences especially. Casting doesn't apply here. Your phone is the device.
Why This Matters for the Future of Streaming
Netflix removing casting isn't just a feature removal. It's a signal about where streaming is heading.
Signal 1: Device Consolidation
Wireless casting was useful when devices were fragmented. One company with a Roku, one with a Chromecast, one with an Apple TV, one with an older smart TV. Casting bridged those gaps.
But devices are consolidating. Everything is becoming a smart device. Your TV streams. Your phone streams. Tablets stream. Even your car might stream. The need for a casting layer diminishes as native apps become the standard.
Signal 2: Data Collection Matters More Than Convenience
Netflix (and every streaming service) cares deeply about knowing what you watch, when you watch it, and how long you watch. This data feeds the recommendation algorithm, the ad targeting system, and the investor metrics.
Casting stripped away that data. With a native app, Netflix sees every pause, every rewind, every "skip intro" click. That information is gold.
Signal 3: The Platform Wars Are Over
For years, there was genuine uncertainty about which platforms would dominate streaming. Would smart TVs win? Would dedicated devices like Roku dominate? Would gaming consoles become the center of entertainment?
The answer turned out to be "all of them, but smart TVs more than anything else." The uncertainty resolved. So the technologies that existed to bridge that uncertainty (like casting) became less relevant.
Google's commitment to Chromecast is driven by solving fragmentation, ensuring cross-platform compatibility, and enhancing ecosystem stickiness. Estimated data suggests these factors are equally important.
Chromecast and Google's Long Game
Google's different bet isn't irrational. It actually makes sense for their business model.
Google doesn't sell streaming services. They sell access to users and data. Chromecast works for Google because:
- It keeps users in the Google ecosystem while they watch third-party content
- It generates data about viewing habits that Google can theoretically use for ads
- YouTube benefits enormously from casting support
- It's cheap to support relative to the strategic value
- Removing it would alienate partners who rely on casting
YouTube, in particular, depends on Chromecast. Users cast music, playlists, tutorials, entire YouTube videos constantly. YouTube's parent company has no reason to kill the feature. It works too well.
The Bigger Picture: What Consumers Should Actually Care About
Here's the thing people often miss in this discussion: Netflix removing casting doesn't really affect most users.
If you have a smart TV (which you probably do), Netflix is already built-in. No casting needed.
If you have a Roku, Fire TV, or other streaming device, it has a native Netflix app. No casting needed.
If you're watching on your phone or tablet, you're already watching directly in the Netflix app. No casting needed.
The only people affected are folks with:
- Older non-smart TVs without streaming device
- Specific circumstances where casting was their only option
- Users who specifically preferred the casting workflow
For everyone else, nothing changed. The feature you weren't using was removed. Your experience stayed identical.
What This Tells Us About Product Strategy
Netflix's move illustrates an important principle in software: features that sound useful aren't always worth the maintenance cost.
Casting was elegant. It was cool. It represented the future of wireless tech. But maintaining it required:
- Testing across dozens of device combinations
- Handling edge cases and network failures
- Supporting legacy protocols
- Dealing with complaints when casting broke
- Code complexity in the app
- Coordination with device manufacturers
All of that for a feature less than 15% of users actually relied on.
Compare that to the benefit: Netflix could remove code, reduce app size, improve performance, increase in-app engagement (which drives ad revenue and recommendation data), and simplify support.
From a pure business perspective, it was an obvious move. Sometimes the best decision is to simplify by cutting features.
The Ongoing Evolution of Streaming Hardware
The next evolution is already here.
Wi-Fi 7 Changing Everything
Wi-Fi 7 offers dramatically faster and more reliable connections. This could theoretically revive interest in casting by making it more reliable. But by the time Wi-Fi 7 devices become common (probably 2025-2026), most people will already have smart TVs with native apps. The moment for casting may have simply passed.
AI and Recommendations
Netflix and other services are investing heavily in AI-driven recommendations and content suggestions. These systems work better with rich data from native apps. Another reason to prefer native apps over casting.
Ad-Supported Tiers Changing the Game
Netflix's ad tier needs to show ads. That's easier with native apps where Netflix controls the entire experience. Casting makes ad insertion more complicated. It's yet another reason Netflix moved away from it.
The Real Lesson
Netflix didn't remove casting because the technology failed. They removed it because the market evolved.
When Chromecast launched, wireless casting was an elegant solution to real fragmentation. Devices were scattered. Apps weren't everywhere. Casting bridged the gap.
Fast forward a decade. Smart TVs are ubiquitous. Apps are everywhere. Casting became a legacy feature that served a shrinking group of users.
Google stayed committed to casting because their business model values ecosystem lock-in and cross-platform support differently than Netflix values engagement data and ad revenue.
Neither company is wrong. They're just optimizing for different metrics.
TL; DR
- Casting usage dropped below 15%: Smart TVs and native apps made wireless casting redundant for most users
- Netflix prioritized engagement data: Native apps let Netflix collect richer user behavior data for recommendations and ads
- Google took the opposite bet: YouTube benefits enormously from Chromecast, so Google maintains casting support across its ecosystem
- Smart TVs won the streaming wars: Over 80% of modern TVs have apps built-in, eliminating the main use case for casting
- It's a feature nobody really misses: Most users already had native apps; removing casting simplified the code with no real impact on experience
FAQ
What is wireless casting and how does it work?
Wireless casting is a technology that lets you send content from your phone or computer to a TV or speaker over Wi-Fi. When you cast something, your device tells the receiver (like a Chromecast or Roku) which content to play, and the receiver streams it directly from the internet rather than pulling it from your phone. This preserves your phone's battery and lets you close the app while content keeps playing.
Why did Netflix remove wireless casting support?
Netflix removed casting because usage had dropped to less than 15% of all streaming sessions as smart TVs with built-in Netflix apps became standard. The feature required significant maintenance across dozens of device combinations, created code complexity, and didn't justify its cost. Additionally, native TV apps provided Netflix with better engagement data for recommendations and ad delivery than casting allowed.
Can I still cast Netflix if I really need to?
Casting support varies by device. Some older Chromecast devices and third-party smart TVs may still support casting for Netflix, though this functionality is no longer actively maintained by Netflix. Your best option is to use a native Netflix app on your TV, streaming device, or gaming console, which provides better performance and reliability anyway.
Is wireless casting completely dead?
No, wireless casting remains popular for other services, particularly YouTube. Google maintains strong casting support across Chromecast devices, and services like Spotify, Google Photos, and YouTube still support it. It's specifically Netflix's streaming service that moved away from it.
What should I use instead of casting to watch Netflix?
The best options are: using a native Netflix app on your smart TV (which most modern TVs have built-in), using a streaming device like Roku or Amazon Fire TV, connecting a gaming console with a Netflix app, or watching directly on your phone or tablet. All of these provide better performance and more features than casting did.
Why does Google still support casting while Netflix doesn't?
Google benefits from casting because it keeps users engaged with Google's ecosystem while watching third-party content, provides data about viewing habits, and YouTube generates significant watch time through casting. Netflix, by contrast, prefers native apps that give them full control over the user experience, better data collection for recommendations, and simpler ad insertion for their ad-supported tier.
What's the future of wireless streaming technology?
Future developments will likely center around Wi-Fi 7 for improved reliability, AI-driven recommendations that require rich engagement data (favoring native apps), and increasingly integrated smart TVs that eliminate the need for separate casting devices. The trend is toward consolidation rather than fragmentation.
Does this affect casting for other apps like YouTube?
No, Netflix removing casting doesn't affect other services. YouTube, Spotify, Google Photos, and other apps continue to support casting on Chromecast, Roku, and compatible devices. This was specifically Netflix's decision for their streaming service.
Will my old Chromecast device still work?
Yes, your Chromecast will continue to work for YouTube, music, photos, and other services that still support casting. However, Netflix casting functionality is no longer available or supported on these devices. If casting Netflix was your primary use case, you'd benefit from switching to a native app on your TV or using an inexpensive streaming device like a Roku or Fire TV Stick.
Is there a technical reason Netflix had to remove casting?
Not a hard technical requirement—rather, a business and maintenance decision. Casting introduces complexity because Netflix has to test against hundreds of device combinations and handle network edge cases. Native apps give Netflix direct control over the experience, simpler debugging, better performance, and richer user data. For a feature used by less than 15% of users, removing it wasn't forced by technology but chosen for operational simplicity and business benefit.
Key Takeaways
- Chromecast remains a cornerstone of their ecosystem
- By 2015, wireless casting was in every Netflix app across every major platform
- Estimated data shows that YouTube and Spotify are leading in wireless casting support, while Netflix has significantly reduced its casting capabilities
- But Netflix's algorithm and recommendation engine depend on frequent user interactions with the mobile app
- From Netflix's perspective, casting users generated less engagement data and less time spent in-app browsing (which drives recommendations and watch-time metrics)
Related Articles
- Quordle Hints & Answers: Daily Game Guide & Strategy [2025]
- Sony A7 IV Dethroned Nikon in 2025: Why It's the Best Mirrorless Camera [2025]
- Tottenham vs West Ham Live Streams: How to watch Premier League 2025-26 | TechRadar
- Hardware Shortage Crisis Spreads to GPUs and SSDs [2025]
- The Daily Reality of Vibe Coded Apps at Scale [2025]
- Claude Code MCP Tool Search: How Lazy Loading Changed AI Agents [2025]
