Miracast on Windows 10

You should be able to activate Miracast by holding the Windows Key down, pressing "P" (for "project"), and then clicking "Connect to a wireless display" in the sidebar that appears.  If that's not working, then where exactly is the laptop claiming that it does not support Miracast?  And what WiFi card do you have?  Miracast is a notoriously finicky and ill-supported protocol, but if your system claims it doesn't support it at all, then that's probably your answer, and it's probably related to the WiFi card.  If you wanted to upgrade that, the Intel 7260HMW would fit into that system and probably be a significant upgrade from whatever came with an E6430.  They're about $30 on Amazon, but make sure you get the Wireless-AC 7260, not the Wireless-N 7260, since the latter only supports 802.11n.  I have no idea why Intel used the same model code for two different cards that have vastly different capabilities, but they did.  It's also important to get the HMW, not the NGW in your case.

Hi JP

Well that is a comprehensive answer! Thank you.

FYI I have gone through set up with chromecast one more time today - settings, add a device, clicked choice of wireless display. The black box that appears and scans cannot find. Ran a diag in LAN card utility all ok but discovered the card is a Dell 1504 802.  There appears to be a WLAN 802.11 adapter.

So from this I gather the way forward is your proposed Intel  AC 7260 HMW?

I am handy with tools but is this a user friendly swap out?

The reason for all these shinanigans is my eyesight plus its handy to watch on-line tv on our bigger screen.

My guess is that the issue is that the Dell 1504 doesn't support the Wi-Fi Direct standard, which essentially allows a wireless adapter to establish a point-to-point WiFi connection for things like Miracast while also remaining connected to a router for Internet access.  In terms of performing the swap, yes it's very easy and if you go to support.dell.com, you can find your Owner's Manual, which contains step-by-step guides complete with diagram drawings for how to remove and reinstall every component of the system -- or here is a direct link.  If eyesight is a concern though, the tiny antenna connectors can be tricky to deal with, and it's important to get them firmly connected, since a loose antenna connection can drastically reduce WiFi performance.  I typically recommend connecting the antennas before inserting the new WiFi card into the slot, since that way you can pinch the antennas down onto the card's connectors by placing your thumb over the antenna and your index finger on the underside of the WiFi card directly under its antenna connector.  Then as the directions indicate, the WiFi card needs to be inserted at a 45-degree angle relative to the motherboard and then pressed down along the top edge to lie flush before being fastened with the screw.  But it should still only take maybe 5 minutes to do the swap.

Windows 10 has native support for the Intel 7260, so it should be detected automatically, although you'll need to rejoin your WiFi network(s) since stored WiFi passwords don't carry over to new WiFi adapters.  And you may still want to update to the latest drivers for that card, available here.  Good luck!

Chromecast is not the same as Miracast. Use the chromecast directions instead==

https://support.google.com/chromecast/answer/6006232?hl=en

Please listen to Mary above Chromecast does not use Miracast...

If you want to miracast you need a tv that includes it (most new ones do) or buy an adapter for it.

If that's true, then I agree that you shouldn't be looking at a WiFi card replacement, at least not for this reason.  However, that then leads me to wonder what directions you were following, since in your original post you mentioned you "followed directions" and had the "correct" Miracast opening screen up on the TV.

Ok, so Doofus of the Week award goes to?.........

What I meant to buy was a Chromecast as my brother recommended. Numpty here clicked before reading the ad properly so it seems I've bought a cheap knock-off version. My LG flat tv is around 5yrs old now. 

It is odd that the first time I hooked this thing up, it appeared in the 'other devices' section with my HTC phone. It was only when having bother connecting, I tried removing and reloading it. From then it disappeared permanently.

By directions I meant that I had plugged it all in as per manual and got their opening blue screen up and was able to switch from apple to android OS. 

So I take it that I ought to send back this offending item and get the Chromecast version? Do we know if that will work with my current wifi card?

I am happy to replace it with the card you mention as it seems an easy swap, but what are the added benefits aside from the above? 

Thank you all for the detailed help!

---

@Foxbasswrote:

Ok, so Doofus of the Week award goes to?.........

What I meant to buy was a Chromecast as my brother recommended. Numpty here clicked before reading the ad properly so it seems I've bought a cheap knock-off version. My LG flat tv is around 5yrs old now. 

It is odd that the first time I hooked this thing up, it appeared in the 'other devices' section with my HTC phone. It was only when having bother connecting, I tried removing and reloading it. From then it disappeared permanently.

By directions I meant that I had plugged it all in as per manual and got their opening blue screen up and was able to switch from apple to android OS. 

So I take it that I ought to send back this offending item and get the Chromecast version? Do we know if that will work with my current wifi card?

I am happy to replace it with the card you mention as it seems an easy swap, but what are the added benefits aside from the above? 

Thank you all for the detailed help!

---

Well at least you've figured out where the confusion was!  I don't know whether your current card will work with Chromecast, but since its requirements don't seem to mention specific Wi-Fi chipsets or capabilities like Wi-Fi Direct, there's a good chance it will.  But since you asked what an upgraded WiFi card would offer, your current Dell Wireless 1504 only supports 802.11n and although it has 2 antennas, it only supports 1x1 transmission, which means only one antenna will only ever be used for transmit or receive.  I also can't find any clear information as to whether that WiFi card supports 5 GHz networks.  By comparison, the Intel card I mentioned supports the newer and much faster 802.11ac standard, definitely supports 5 GHz, and supports 2x2 transmission, which means that both of its antennas can be used for transmit or receive when conditions permit.  The net result is that if your router also supports 802.11ac, you'll have much higher maximum throughput, probably better range, and even if your WiFi needs mean that you won't need the higher maximum throughput, you'll have better throughput at longer ranges.  As a frame of reference, I have a 300 Mbps Internet connection.  When I had an 802.11ac WiFi card but only an 802.11n router (although a very good one, namely the ASUS RT-N66U), I could get 300 Mbps when near the router but only 60 Mbps a couple of rooms away.  Now that I've upgraded to an 802.11ac router, namely the ASUS RT-AC88U, I can get my full 300 Mbps from a few rooms away.  It's possible that I can actually get even more throughput, but 300 Mbps is my full Internet connection and I don't do a lot of local LAN file transfers and such.

Thanks again.

It makes perfect sense now to at least start with the Chromecast and see what happens with the current wifi card.

I currently have no discernible problems with speed or range at home, I think due to router siting which is central to house and near ground floor ceiling so we are never much more than 1 room away from it.

Ok, update on this problem!

Firstly, I bought a Mirascreen NOT a Chromecast thanks to deceptive and inaccurate advertising! That is going back.

Soooo.... eventually bought a real Chromecast unit. Connects up just the same, costs 3x the price so should work beautifully.

Er, no.

The picture quality can best be described as like an old CRT tv, slightly furry focus and low res. Tv is an LG that shows HD channels and films really well for a 5yr old unit. Lappy is the Latt 6430 running windows 10 at 64bit. Again I have no criticism of play-back quality.

Before also I send this thing back, is there something I may have missed? My bro thinks the res should be fine. (He is in IT but not much help beyond that).

I mean, connecting it all up is simplicity itself, I even plugged the usb into supplied adaptor to mains outlet not the tv's usb slot with no difference.

We discussed the poss weakness of the wifi card in another post, could this still be the crux of the problem? I would not have thought so as I am watching films quite happily on the 6430 via wifi link to my router (sited one floor below) which itself is a very recent  model from Virign.

An HDMI cable of course produces a brilliant result so I thought the Chromecast would be at least nearly as good. With the tv HDMI linked, I am getting an equally good pic from router on screen as on 6430 simultaneously.

Waddaya think chaps?

I have no experience with the Chromecast, so I will preface this by saying that this is speculation on my part.  First, is your laptop physically close to the TV?  If not, see what happens when it is, because if the Chromecast works by using a Wi-Fi Direct connection or some equivalent that has the laptop talking directly to the TV rather than going through your router, then the distance between those devices will be important; it won't be enough for each device to simply have a solid connection to a router.  On the other hand, if the Chromecast works by having your PC send its display data to the Chromecast over the regular network, i.e. through the router, there are two reasons I can think why the Chromecast quality would be worse than just watching movies on your lapwatching movies on your laptop" scenario, there's only one data stream occupying the Wi-Fi airwaves, namely the movie coming in from the Internet and being sent over Wi-Fi to your laptop.  In the Chromecast scenario, there are two data streams that have to occupy the Wi-Fi airwaves simultaneously: the one that sends display data from your PC to the router, and the one that relays that from the router back to the TV.

2. It's possible that the movies simply use better compression than Chromecast.  Movies benefit from being "pre-rendered", so they can be compressed beforehand.  If you're using Chromecast to send live display data to a TV, then the compression has to be fast enough to be real-time, which usually limits the efficiency of the compression.

All that said, one of the specific perks of Chromecast is that when you're using certain apps like YouTube or Netflix, the "cast" option specifically AVOIDS the need to send the video data from your laptop to the Chromecast.  Instead, what happens is that your PC just says, "Play the YouTube/Netflix video at this link" and then the Chromecast itself goes out to YouTube/Netflix to start playing it.  The benefit is that you retain the ability to easily control playback from your PC, without the battery life drain and network bandwidth requirements of having your PC constantly sending a video signal to your TV.  However, not all applications support this mode, so if you're just using regular Chromecast mirroring, then this wouldn't apply.

As to whether upgrading your Wi-Fi card could still be beneficial, without knowing more about how Chromecast works, I'm afraid I can't answer that.  I can't imagine it would HURT if you want to investigate it and possibly just return the Wi-Fi card if nothing improves, but that's all I can offer.  Additionally, if Chromecast data is in fact relayed through your router and not sent directly to the TV, that then raises the concern over how good your router's Wi-Fi performance is, especially given that it is apparently one floor below.  As a frame of reference, where I live our cable provider offers speeds up to 300 Mbps, but the Wi-Fi routers they offer, despite supporting both 802.11ac and 5 GHz on paper, can't manage more than about 60 Mbps over Wi-Fi even when a device is right next to it.  A high-end 802.11ac router should be able to push 600-900 Mbps to Wi-Fi clients in those conditions.  As a result, I've astonished a few of my neighbors when I convinced them to replace their inferior ISP-provided router with another model and they've seen their usable speeds skyrocket.  I would have thought that it would be in the ISP's interest to provide better routers to avoid the calls from customers saying, "I pay for 300 Mbps Internet and I only ever get 60", but maybe they're content to just say, "We can't guarantee those speeds over Wi-Fi" and move on, having saved a few bucks on hardware.  It's just too bad so many people will probably never know they COULD get their full Internet connection's performance over Wi-Fi.

In my experience, when you use any device--be it smartphone, tablet, or PC--to send a video stream from the device directly to the Chromecast,  the video quality is pretty fuzzy.

In other words, it's just like jphuhan said: when the Chromecast can connect directly to a stream from a video provider, those streams look great because the feed is pre compressed for stream ing, but when you stream a feed of what's on your laptop's screen (or phone or tablet), your laptop has to compress the stream and send it to the Chromecast, and that stream is lower quality than a pre compressed stream from a provider. 

For what it's worth, I have several $1,000 ClickShare devices at my office that share what's on a laptop screen, but even then--on a thousand dollar device--when what you're sharing from the laptop is video, the resulting quality is nowhere near direct-HDMI-connection quality. The only time you get direct-connection quality is when you do a PowerPoint one slide at a time.

In conclusion, Chromecasts are good for stream ing video from a video provider, but are not good for stream ing what's on your laptop screen, and for sharing video-type content from a laptop to a big screen, nothing is a good as a direct connection.

Hope that helps!

Dell Latitude e6430 does not support Miracast technology. Go to Command Prompt and type this "nets wlan show drivers" and press enter.

Look out for Wireless Display Supported:.. if it is yes, it out to work, otherwise your PC Hardware does not support Miracast.

If your PC does not support Miracast a d you've got a Smart TV try casting directly via Chrome browser... but you'd need to connect to the same network so a router may be of help.

One major problem is Chromecast it doesn't work well especially if you have a newer Vizio TV. I fought with Vizio for the better part of a year. Replace tv's parts tech service techs in home etc. never worked right. Went throught 4 TVs before Vizio gave me my money back. Don't get me wrong before this I was a major fan of Vizio. I had a Vizio tv for 10 years no problems. That being said I then went a purchased a Samsung have had 0 problems. Samsung doesn't use crapsast. just click on connect in windows 10 1 time give permission on tv to allow it to connect and done. Not a problem after that. Plus given age of your computer your hardware drivers may not support this feature.