Google’s video streaming hardware strategy has backfired

Google hasn’t offered a streaming device for under $50 since it discontinued the Chromecast with Google TV in 2024. That’s turning out to be a problem.

For the past couple years, Google has effectively left Walmart in charge of churning out low-cost Google TV streamers under its in-house Onn brand. Now Walmart is struggling to keep those devices in stock and is raising prices on new ones.

This leaves Google without a clear answer to Roku’s Streaming Sticks and Amazon’s Fire TV Sticks. It’s a shame because Google TV’s interface is pretty good, and because it’s the rare streaming platform that gives you a fair amount of control. All it needs is more affordable hardware on which to run.

Walmart’s Onn issues

Walmart’s Onn streamers have always flown a bit under the radar. New models usually arrive with no fanfare from Walmart or Google, instead trickling gradually into physical stores before making their way online.

But even by those standards, the latest Onn refresh has been a mess.

Pricing for Walmart’s latest Google TV dongle, the Onn 4K Streaming Device, has been all over the place, fluctuating between $20 and $40 at different physical stores according to AFTVNews. (Online, it sells for $40, double the price of the HD version with less RAM.)

Meanwhile, Walmart’s Onn 4K Plus, a streaming box I’ve highly recommended, got a price hike from $30 to $40 earlier this year. It’d still be a great value at that price, with faster performance and more storage than the new dongle, except Walmart can’t keep it in stock.

Jared Newman / Foundry

Walmart is also releasing a successor to its higher-end Onn 4K Pro, which I rated highly as well. Unlike the cheaper models, it has a backlit remote, a remote finder function, hands-free Gemini voice controls, and a generous 32GB of storage. Unfortunately, the new version is $10 pricier than its predecessor at $60, and that’s assuming you can even buy it. Both the new and old Onn 4K Pro remain out of stock as of this writing.

While Walmart hasn’t responded to a request for comment on these issues, the company may be dealing with the same RAM shortages affecting other electronics vendors. It also may not see Google TV streamers as a priority now that it owns Vizio, which has its own connected TV platform.

Whatever the explanation, the result is limited options for low-cost Google TV streamers and difficulty with buying them in the first place.

Abandoning the Chromecast

Google did used to have its own cheap streaming dongles under the Chromecast brand.

Initially just $35, they’d plug into your TV and let you use your phone as the remote, launching video through apps like Netflix and Hulu. The $50 Chromecast with Google TV followed in 2020, adding a remote and TV-based menu system to better compete with Roku and Amazon. (A $30 HD model arrived a couple years later.)

Jared Newman / Foundry

The real competition, though, was coming from Walmart, which came out of nowhere in 2021 with its own line of Android TV-based streamers starting at just $25. Future versions used the same Google TV software as the Chromecast, with prices as low as $15 for HD streaming, so there was really no reason to pick Google’s hardware instead.

So when Google decided to offer a more premium streaming device with the $100 Google TV Streamer a couple years ago, it discontinued the Chromecast line and got out of the sub-$50 streaming business entirely. Shalini Govil-Pai, VP and GM for Google TV, pointed to Walmart’s devices in response to a question about whether it had any plans to make cheaper alternatives.

“We work very closely with Walmart as well, and so Walmart now has their own devices,” she said. “They’re very good, and they’re able to discount them to everyday low prices.”

As Walmart struggles to stock its latest Onn players, I wonder if Google’s starting to regret that strategy. (Google has not responded to a request for comment.)

What should Google do?

Jared Newman / Foundry

External streaming boxes and sticks are still important, even as more folks just use the software that’s built into their smart TVs. If you have an older TV whose software has become outdated, plugging in a cheap streaming device is a great way to extend its lifespan instead of replacing the entire TV. You may also get better performance and a better remote from an external player, along with features that your smart TV may not offer.

I like Google TV because its home screen excels at surfacing recommendations from the services you actually pay for, while letting you filter out the ones you don’t. I also appreciate the platform’s integration with other Google services, such as Google Home and Google Photos. And as Amazon’s Fire TV platform becomes more locked-down, it’s nice to have a more open platform for apps. (You can even replace the entire home screen on a Google TV device, something no other streaming platform allows.)

All of which is to say that Google should have kept investing in its own affordable Google TV players instead of ceding the entire job to a retailer that may not have the platform’s best interests in mind. Now Google’s in the process of learning this the hard way.

Sign up for Jared’s Cord Cutter Weekly newsletter for more streaming TV advice.