Ford CEO Says It Will Keep Apple CarPlay, Android Auto: 'We Lost That Battle 10 Years Ago' (thedrive.com) 168
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Drive: While General Motors has announced that it plans to phase out CarPlay in its EVs starting in 2024, Ford has just doubled down on long-term CarPlay compatibility. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Ford CEO Jim Farley laid it bare: "In terms of content, we kind of lost that battle 10 years ago," Farley said. "So like get real with it, because you're not going to make a ton of money on content inside the vehicle."
Farley's argument is extremely sound. He is contending that since most people bring their smartphones into their cars with them, that people want the infotainment to be an extension of their phones and not another thing to deal with. On another level, embracing CarPlay and Android Auto cost automakers money to license but that cost is amortized over a large production run. The possibility of having a CarPlay-only infotainment is distant and highly unlikely, as automakers do need their own interface for the high-tech gadgets of today's cars.
And let's be real: CarPlay is one of the best things to happen to modern cars. It simplifies driving, keeps people less distracted by vastly reducing the learning curve, and is just more convenient. Ford is embracing it.
Farley's argument is extremely sound. He is contending that since most people bring their smartphones into their cars with them, that people want the infotainment to be an extension of their phones and not another thing to deal with. On another level, embracing CarPlay and Android Auto cost automakers money to license but that cost is amortized over a large production run. The possibility of having a CarPlay-only infotainment is distant and highly unlikely, as automakers do need their own interface for the high-tech gadgets of today's cars.
And let's be real: CarPlay is one of the best things to happen to modern cars. It simplifies driving, keeps people less distracted by vastly reducing the learning curve, and is just more convenient. Ford is embracing it.
Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:5, Interesting)
GM has handed every competitor an easy win by declaring their disinterest in phone based infotainment.
It's just such an obviously bad call.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
If GM can offer a better UI, one that uses physical buttons (remember those?), to provide access to the same features, it could easily be not only better than CarPlay but safer as well.
You know what else is both better and safer than CarPlay? Android Auto.
If GM can offer a better UI, one that uses physical buttons (remember those?), to provide access to the same features, it could easily be not only better than CarPlay but safer as well.
Every automaker is trying to minimize those controls because they cost money. I hope they will eventually at least settle on having physical controls for stereo volume, climate control vent temp, and seat temp. Those are things you want to adjust right away, you should not have to fumble for them, let alone look for them.
Re: (Score:2)
You know what else is both better and safer than CarPlay? Android Auto.
That would require people to replace their iPhone with an Android phone.
Unless the car uses Android Automotive, where essentially Android Auto is built into the car itself, which is exactly what GM is doing.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
If you aren't an iPhone user, then *maybe* GM has a remote shot at coming *close* to android auto, but still has challenges:
-The phone in your pocket *already* has a monthly plan, and the car having to maintain a separate data connection isn't appealing particularly as GM wants you to pay extra and you stare at the exact same services on your handheld every day
-The hardware used in your car is expected to stay the same longer. I have an 8 year old car. Even Apple, known for providing updates for longer, left 2015 phones behind in 2019. It might be one thing if they announced a pluggable upgradable control unit for the system, but manufacturers have only gotten worse at that, rather than better (e.g. once upon a time 'DIN' and 'Double DIN' had some relevance, nowadays almost no vehicles support standard form factor electronics, let alone standardized wiring interfaces).
-Car manufacturers don't have a stellar track record for updates. In theory my car was update-able. It didn't receive a single update (none were published)
-Rental portability - Phone as the center of the universe means a rental is pretty much ready to go immediately
So we have to ponder what is it that the car can offer that the phone can't? Seems to be a pretty short list, if I ignore things already shared with phone. Car has better GPS antenna, but it gives that data to the handset already. Car has more awareness of state of charge and range, but that seems like easy data to convey. The car is better able to ascertain how many lanes, and which lane the car is currently in, and that may be trickier to convey, but on the other hand it should still be doable if it mattered. This last example is the one scenario where my built-in nav tells me something my phone doesn't (you need to get over N lanes to get to exit, or your lane is already good enough).
Re: (Score:3)
That is not how it will work. They will have you install an app on your phone and use your phone's internet connection... just like Apple or Android.
GM is betting that recent supply side changes have swung the balance of power to the manufacturers (from the consumer) comprehensively and for the foreseeable future. In their vision, customers would not have the luxury to pick other brands just based on cosmetic stuff, especially since very single manufacturer is experimenting with some version of `pay as you
Re: (Score:2)
They will have you install an app on your phone and use your phone's internet connection... just like Apple or Android.
BMW tried this with Mini Connected, and it was much, much worse than CarPlay.
But we'll see what they come up with.
Re: (Score:2)
I would like to see a source on that. Today all these cars roll out with cellular service baked in. The cars have eSIMs/SIMS.
They can't offer the functionality they advertise otherwise. For example, you can start your A/C from a block away. This is only possible because the car itself has a connection independent of the phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Ugh...I do NOT want a car that is in any shape, form or fashion "connected".
I don't need it....and hope it is an option to have that shit not be installed.
Waste of fucking money,
Re: (Score:3)
The companies that won't deal with Android Auto or Carplay are trying to make their own UI. Follow the money trail:
Apple and Google at least want their stuff to be usable, updatable and something people actually want to use. In general, they will have a fairly long update life.
Car makers, on the other hand, are not going to bother with updates after that model year. Mainly because they get zero ROI for that. Once the car is off the lot, providing any updates, other than maybe security updates (so the pr
Re: (Score:3)
The lack of application specific settings within the application is one of the most braindead design decisions I've ever seen. "No, it's easy, instead of hitting a hamburger menu and changing the setting there, you just need to get out of the application, go to the settings app, dig through six menus, then change it there, then go back to your app. Simple, right? And look, we got 40 pixels worth of screen real estate back that way."
or is it just Mini's integration is crap? IDK (Score:2)
CarPlay is one of the best things to happen to modern cars.
"counter point : NO ."
But it looks like the flood of like sentiment has made that redundant.
Re: (Score:3)
I've found that Android has gotten progressively less discoverable too. My first Android phone was in the 2.x days which still had the four physical buttons. Sometimes the "Menu" button was a little vague on what it did, and the back button was sometimes a little too context sensitive (a problem that continues to this day. Does it go back a step in the app? Exit it entirely? Close a popup prompt? Could be any of them) but in general it was consistent and had discrete controls. There were buttons and knobs a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Every single time I have to figure out how to do something on someone's iOS device, it's less obvious and takes more steps than on Android.
That's just familiarity. I've used nothing but Apple, and can find/do everything just fine. When my parents hand me their Android phone for help doing something, it takes forever for me to figure out where basic things are, or even how to navigate.
Re: (Score:2)
I have carried a personal iPhone and an employer provided Android phone simultaneously for over ten years. I have also had multiple iPads and multiple Android tablets. I disagree with you entirely. I have upgraded iPhones and Android phones multiple times over that time and every time I have to make a decision on whether to pay for a new iPhone I consider whether it's worth it. It is, every single time.
Perhaps you dislike iOS because you're unfamiliar with it and you don't like being asked to help someone
Re: (Score:2)
That would require people to replace their iPhone with an Android phone.
That would be the rational response to finding out that Carplay is shit, if using your phone in the car is important to you. iOS is shit in general, the UI is terrible, it's far less discoverable than Android's. Every single time I have to figure out how to do something on someone's iOS device, it's less obvious and takes more steps than on Android.
Clearly you are on Team Android. Not surprising you'd find using iOS difficult. I find Android's UI to be a confusing mess anytime I have to try and help someone with theirs. It's all about what you're familiar with. Doing anything on Android is far less obvious and takes more steps than iOS for me, but that's because I'm used to iOS and not Android. Doesn't mean Android sucks or iOS is superior, just my frame of reference - as is yours.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know that GM is going to do any better. I will also say I use android auto rather than car play.
When I use android auto, I actually do get to use the same physical controls I would use if it weren't phone based. The media controls (volume, next track, previous track) work fine, in my steering wheel and the physical buttons on the center stack. I generally don't touch the screen, I use the clicky knob/joystick thing to navigate, with enough physical feedback to know the common paths I take, and my
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
When I use android auto, I actually do get to use the same physical controls I would use if it weren't phone based. The media controls (volume, next track, previous track) work fine, in my steering wheel and the physical buttons on the center stack. I generally don't touch the screen, I use the clicky knob/joystick thing to navigate, with enough physical feedback to know the common paths I take, and my phone supports that navigation just fine.
Exactly the same with CarPlay.
Re: (Score:3)
People arguing against phone infotainment in cars always seem to ignore the two core points: > Unless I can get magically free data for my car I don't want to pay for an additional connection (and magic doesn't exist) > I don't want to have to setup everything separately on my car as well, even if all the functionality I want was available. My pho
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, I am always baffled by peoples reaction to any article that mentions CarPlay. I honestly think it's a holdover from Apple-haters and iPhone-haters. When else would Slashdotters DEFEND GM and the legacy automative manufactuer's software engineering practices and history?? The data plan is another good point.
Carplay compatibility is a dealbreaker for me. I cancelled my Rivian order after I tried one of their infotainment systems. So clunkly comparatively.
Re: Wow (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"According to Apple, the company does not charge car makers any licensing fee to use CarPlay"
It sounds like there is no 'Apple Tax'. If the car can do wifi and bluetooth, then it has the stuff needed to support either AA or CarPlay, so long as the manufacturer wants to.
Note that GM does't want to 'build the cost into the car', they want to milk owners for subscription fees, at some markup. They are hoping that most car buyers will 'whoops' their way into buying a GM car and then realizing that the only pa
BMW's fault or Apple's? (Score:2)
Because in our Mini at least it makes a lot of incorrect assumptions about how I want it to work.
It is intrusive and stupid. It jumps in and overrides the built in entertainment and navigation system instead of seamlessly feeding information to the built in system. It wastes 40% of the screen to inform me that I am using carplay. And there's no immediately obvious way to switch back to the car's native system without taking my eyes off
Re: (Score:3)
Apparently. In my subaru carplay takes over the main screen but I can switch away from that with steering wheel controls. The smaller display on top of the dash shows that it's using carplay but it also still shows what song is playing and what the temperature settings are.
That said, I hardly ever switch away because I don't like the built in entertainment (I'm not paying for SiriusXM and I'm not into the local radio stations) or the built in navigation as much as Spotify and Waze.
Re: (Score:3)
The biggest bonus in
Re: (Score:2)
I use CarPlay regularly. The worst thing about it is having to occasionally use Siri... if Siri worked properly, CarPlay would be pretty awesome.
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
I just turn Siri off on all my apple devices.
I can't stand trying to talk to a device.
It's much he same feeling I have of sheer hatred when I call a business and the fucking operator software wants me to talk to it, rather than just hit a number button or two....or take me directly to a human when I want it to by hitting "0"......
I don't want to talk to a fucking machine.
Re: Wow (Score:2)
They also support Android Auto if you prefer it over CarPlay.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you seriously defending the car industry's track record with radio/entertainment integration? GM has absolutely no chance of building something better than carplay. Maybe they can dust off all the old Delphi guys to help.
Re: (Score:2)
GM has absolutely no chance of building something better than carplay. Maybe they can dust off all the old Delphi guys to help.
They're literally just sticking with Android. They don't have to build anything, except any custom UI, and I bet they can get Google to do that too as part of this anticompetitive deal. (I think iOS is lousy from stem to stern, but I still think this is terrible for the consumer.)
Re: (Score:2)
except any custom UI
And there we will go....
Even to the extent they bank on Google, since when has Google ever been a reliable party for supporting their initiatives long term?
When my current car was made, Pixel wasn't even a thing. Pixel came out in 2016 and was left behind for software updates in 2019. By phone standards, a long time. Really sucky short time in automotive terms though. The average vehicle on the road is over 12 years old. So imagine Google supporting a Moto Droid 3 in this day and age...
Re: (Score:2)
Even to the extent they bank on Google, since when has Google ever been a reliable party for supporting their initiatives long term?
Mostly? Never. For Search and Android, including TV and Auto? The whole time. They know that being embedded means longevity. They saw how it worked for Microsoft. The longer you do a thing, and the more time and money you spend on it, the more of both it costs you to change to another thing. This is especially true for big automakers, if only because they are long-lived and entrenched bureaucracies.
Re: (Score:2)
I fail to see evidence they have ever supported a particular incarnation of a hardware device for very long, at least not the timescales of automotive.
Android Auto has only existed for 8 years. As an initiative, that's long by Google standards. However, the key is whether they are updating 2015 phones with new features, they are not.
Android Automotive (Google sucks at naming things, since this is distinct from Android Auto) has only been available for 3 years. So no room to presume much of anything at thi
Re: (Score:2)
GM building software, huh? Ok, you go that way and I'll stick with Apple. Are you seriously defending the car industry's track record with radio/entertainment integration? GM has absolutely no chance of building something better than carplay. Maybe they can dust off all the old Delphi guys to help.
Nah, but GM really has subscription based services down to a science. Get the new CrapPlay interface for only $12 a month.
Re: (Score:3)
The main issue I've run into with car software/hardware is it's often great... for consumer electronics that were popular years/a decade ago. I've been in cars/rental cars (my main exposure to new cars) that touted iPod integration front and center well into the iPhone/Android era and while it technically worked with iPhones, it was limited and not great and Android was useless with it. Or a map/nav interface that was technically fine, it's just it was still being sold in 2015 with the same interface from 2
Re: Wow (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, I only rarely pull up the map app on my phone anytime at all...only when traveling to some new address I've never been to before.
That's pretty rare actually...I'd say 99.999% of my trips on the road are to places I'm familiar with and have been to before, many times.
Are there that many people going somewhere different every time they get in the damned car?
Why else would you need to have the
Re: (Score:2)
Is it? CarPlay is absolute garbage. Have you ever tried to use it?
I have, although as a retrofit to a vehicle that did not have it as an option. The interface connects to the radio and non-touch display, and gets sound via an AUX adaptor. All I do is plug my iPhone to it with a lightening cable and CarPlay starts. WiFi is available but a bit wonky so I stick with wired. Since it is not touch screen cable, the vehicle's rotary dial for controlling the existing radio system (not the volume knob) controls CarPlay and I turn it to scroll, press to select. I find that contr
Re: (Score:2)
1. CarPlay didn't invent distracted driving. It didn't even invent distracted driving with your phone. I'm not convinced that any in-car infotainment system currently does a better job of it.
2. Phones get better every year, car infotainment systems are fixed in time when you get them. If you have a car that used to connect to services via 3G, you are currently, in technical terms, turbo-fucked. Those towers have been shut down, you cannot upgrade. Even if you're paying a subscription fee.
3. I trust Apple an
Re: (Score:2)
Here's the thing: there is nothing stopping a carmaker from making their own better system. The reality is first party infotainment is almost always terribly half-baked and under-supported mess. If you think Apple is bad with Siri, try using Uconnect for 5 minutes.
Carplay/AA offer a consistent UX, and while not perfect, is far more elegant than what car companies have come up with.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it? CarPlay is absolute garbage. Have you ever tried to use it?
It involves going through multiple steps on the touch screen to do literally anything, or remembering very specific voice prompts (that can change at Apple's whim, since they're parsed server-side) to get it to do anything.
I use Carplay every single time that I drive, and I don't agree with a single thing you wrote here. The interface is very streamlined compared to any car UX I have ever used, including Tesla. Directions to home is either Tap maps...tap home...done...or "Hey siri, directions home." Carplay apps actually have requirements about interactivity and number of taps. This is such a strange take.
If GM can offer a better UI, one that uses physical buttons (remember those?), to provide access to the same features, it could easily be not only better than CarPlay but safer as well.
While I am incredibly annoyed by the disappearance of buttons, that long preceded carplay/android auto, AND they're totall
Re: (Score:2)
Legacy auto is stuck with inferior solutions since they are clueless about "software" and the third party apps are lacking.
They are going out of business. ICE sales have been dropping for the past three years and their EV offerings are pathetic compliance cars. Their software efforts are SNAFU. VW just canned its entire software effort (thousands of people). Toyota isn't even trying. GM is in la-la land. Ford is trying but failing and has completely given up on Europe and China markets.
The shift to EVs is l
Re:Wow (Score:5, Informative)
The neat thing about other car makers is that they can offer CarPlay, Android Auto and their native solutions all at once. Then drivers could chose which solution they want to use, or even switch from driver to driver in the same vehicle if they have different preferences. Just like I can run lots of different applications on my computer at different times.
Ultimately, the screen in your car is just another general purpose tablet. I remember when the ethos on /. was "customers should be able to run whatever you want on there" not "I think this is garbage therefore it shouldn't even be an option".
If you think it's garbage, avail yourself of another option, don't piss on everyone else's preferences.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it? CarPlay is absolute garbage. Have you ever tried to use it?
No but I have a friend who has an older Ford which used a system made by Microsoft. It was so slow and buggy that Ford went with CarPlay and Android later. An example of terrible design, for some insane reason on his Ford, certain controls were voice activated only. For example, the USB connection would drop randomly and switch to radio while playing music from a phone. The only way to switch back was to say "USB" at the car.
But imagine why the scenario sucks and why someone at MS did not think this design
Re: (Score:2)
CarPlay is indeed Garbage, but Android Auto (esp. Wireless) is amazingly better than any in-car infotainment I have seen, including Tesla. Too bad they get lumped in together.
Re: (Score:2)
What do I need to do on a phone while driving...other than play some driving music...or occasionally take a phone call through the car speaker system?
The phone call is pretty rare.....so, 99% of the time I just play music...and physical controls are great for that.
Would never buy a car without it (Score:3, Insightful)
I bought a car 2 years ago for my oldest - Considered several models, but if they did not have carplay it was a showstopper. Not sure how this will work for GM in the long run, but certainly I won't be a potential buyer for their vehicles.
CarPlay vs Tesla (Score:5, Informative)
My car has the standard CarPlay on a respectable/appropriate sized screen.
My wife has a model 3 (no car play).
Although the Tesla native alternatives are pretty good, I still find it annoying sometimes in her car not to have CarPlay. I want integration. I want Waze. I want a few other things Tesla doesn't provide. And oh yeah, I gotta pay Tesla $100/year or $10/month to get the premium service with music, nav, etc. on the Tesla but my phone is just my phone. With or without my car, I'd still have the phone so that's a sunk cost either way.
Not having CarPlay is a bad call. Will it hurt sales? Probably a little bit but the bean counters have decided to kill it at GM and risk the losses.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have to pay Tesla $10 per month. Tether your phone to your car and Spotify etc will work without paying Tesla. You'll lose live traffic, but pretty much everything else will work.
Re: (Score:3)
You'll lose live traffic, but pretty much everything else will work.
You say that as if live traffic in a driven vehicle isn't one of the main features we'd want integrated into our navigation system. Just below mapping out your route for you as the primary function, I'd say live traffic is the next top priority for most!
And Tesla, of course, knows this. It's the only reason I (grudgingly) pay that $100 / yr...to get live traffic updates integrated in the same LARGE map that automatically tracks my battery usage and helps plan my stops to charge.
Yes, I have my phone snappe
Re: (Score:3)
Live Traffic costs real money, Google doesn't provide it for free. Do you expect Tesla to pay for it out of their own pockets?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah but then I get things displaying on my phone. I like having the waze map and traffic info on the big screen. It's easier to see and safer than looking at my phone. The lack of interoperability isn't a standalone reason not to buy a car but it is a negative and all else being equal I'd always go for the car play vehicle.
Re: CarPlay vs Tesla (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes I absolutely agree on the defaults but you can turn off various alerts on waze. Where I live there is -always- a bunch of cars abandoned on the side of the road. I have no idea what's up with that, they don't look like beaters but there it is. Once I turned that kind of noise off I only hear from it about cops and bad traffic and other things I find useful.
Dig around through the settings, it's in there somewhere. I changed mine about 2 months ago and there's been no updates since so it should be in
Re: (Score:2)
Likely the case, yes. I don't think this will cause GM to get crushed in the car market or anything but hopefully there will be enough post-purchase customer noise they change plans for future vehicles.
When I first got a car play car I was like yeah whatever who cares just more tech junk but then I tried using it. It has real world value.
Very good decision (Score:2)
I am also pretty sure Apple doesnâ(TM)t charge a license fee for CarPlay.
Re: (Score:3)
On another level, embracing CarPlay and Android Auto cost automakers money to license but that cost is amortized over a large production run.
Yes, there is a licensing fee, but it's a one time deal that they can then amoritize across all the vehicles they produce. From my understanding the fee is not per vehicle but rather a one time up front licensing fee.
Re: (Score:3)
"Posted from my â(TM)phone"
Re: (Score:2)
The GP said "I am also pretty sure..." as in, the article's little throwaway line about licensing fees is wrong.
He is correct. There's no fee for CarPlay. I don't think there's one for Android Auto either.
https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/... [cnet.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I know people don't always read the article but did you even read the summary?
The point is, the summary and article are wrong, at least about Carplay. EVerything I have previously read, and everything I can find now, agrees that there is no licensing fee to manufactuers.
https://turbogadgetreviews.com/apple-carplay-price/ [turbogadgetreviews.com]
According to Apple, the company does not charge car makers any licensing fee to use CarPlay.
https://www.macworld.com/article/233855/carplay-faq.html [macworld.com]
While Apple doesn’t charge automakers a fee for the necessary software to integrate CarPlay, there are some cos
Re: Very good decision (Score:2)
True, but underwhelming ... (Score:2)
Farley's argument is extremely sound. He is contending that since most people bring their smartphones into their cars with them, that people want the infotainment to be an extension of their phones and not another thing to deal with. On another level, embracing CarPlay and Android Auto cost automakers money to license but that cost is amortized over a large production run. The possibility of having a CarPlay-only infotainment is distant and highly unlikely, as automakers do need their own interface for the high-tech gadgets of today's cars.
True, but underwhelming and it took them long enought to figure that one out. I really don't care about an elaborate 'infotainment' system in my car. At minimum I need a bluetooth connection to stream audio to the on-board speakers and a place to attach a device holder. Seamless Bluetooth based car integration using the onboard LCD display (basically CarPlay and Android Auto) is a bonus. Other than that, if they are really worried about driver distraction, what I'd want next from car manufacturers is that t
Re: (Score:2)
It *should* be underwhelming, and it's only a story because GM went the other direction to say they were going to back away from Android Auto and Apple Carplay.
Other than that, if they are really worried about driver distraction, what I'd want next from car manufacturers is that they project basic driving and navigation data onto suitable locations on the windscreen, sort of like a HUD on a fighter plane.
Some cars do that. In fact, in my car the android auto turn by turn gets put on the HUD, my instrument panel, and the center display (the center display being the typical main android auto output).
Re: (Score:2)
It *should* be underwhelming, and it's only a story because GM went the other direction to say they were going to back away from Android Auto and Apple Carplay.
Other than that, if they are really worried about driver distraction, what I'd want next from car manufacturers is that they project basic driving and navigation data onto suitable locations on the windscreen, sort of like a HUD on a fighter plane.
Some cars do that. In fact, in my car the android auto turn by turn gets put on the HUD, my instrument panel, and the center display (the center display being the typical main android auto output).
Sounds nice. A HUD should be a required piece of standard equipment in every car.
Re: (Score:2)
Bluetooth? I connect the iPod with a USB cable. That keeps the iPod charged too. Otherwise I could use the aux input to the stereo.
It doesn't take much. The truck already has navigation even it is prone to thinking I'm driving through a wheat field when I am on a paved road. GPS knows where I am, mapping software doesn't know about the road.
Re: (Score:2)
Bluetooth? I connect the iPod with a USB cable. That keeps the iPod charged too. Otherwise I could use the aux input to the stereo.
It doesn't take much. The truck already has navigation even it is prone to thinking I'm driving through a wheat field when I am on a paved road. GPS knows where I am, mapping software doesn't know about the road.
Then our mileage varies. After I fried the charging circuit of an iPod and a very expensive Garmin device by connecting them to the in-car USB sockets I went directly to wireless charging of all expensive mobile devices and haven't looked back. That also brings me to another thing that I think should be standard equipment in every car, a wireless charging pad in the centre console between the front seats.
Re: (Score:2)
That also brings me to another thing that I think should be standard equipment in every car, a wireless charging pad in the centre console between the front seats.
Which phone should fit into that console area? There are several sizes...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My '22 Lincoln already displays navigation in a HUD on the windscreen, along with other pertinent information. The NAV can be from the built-in navigation or from Android Auto/Apple Carplay (whichever you might be using). It even displays the song title/artist info.
Sir, I now envy you so much my face went green :-).
Reminder why GM is doing this (Score:5, Insightful)
GM would benefit from focusing engineers and investment on one approach to more tightly connecting in-vehicle infotainment and navigation with features such as assisted driving, Edward Kummer, GM's chief digital officer, and Mike Hichme, executive director of digital cockpit experience, said in an interview.
...
"We do believe there are subscription revenue opportunities for us," Kummer said. GM Chief Executive Mary Barra is aiming for $20 billion to $25 billion in annual revenue from subscriptions by 2030.
Re: Reminder why GM is doing this (Score:2)
this sure as heck seems like a career ending decision for Mary Barra... will take 2-3 years for the disaster to play out... sad really
Re: (Score:3)
this sure as heck seems like a career ending decision for Mary Barra... will take 2-3 years for the disaster to play out... sad really
For which shell get a huge golden parachute and land a gig elsewhere. Agile development by CEOs is as old as teh hills - Fail Big Early and move to teh next sprint, err job...
Re: (Score:2)
Same reason why Apple is doing everything it does. I see no winning move for GM though, Apple is simply in a much better position to skim off every transaction and subscription in the consumer economy than GM ... but there is no fundamental difference.
Best to just support Carplay and make some money now, accepting your market share will plummet once Apple car launches. Can't fight Apple, unless you want to spend a couple 100 Billion to launch your own consumer electronic ecosystem.
Re: (Score:2)
Can't fight Apple, unless you want to spend a couple 100 Billion to launch your own consumer electronic ecosystem.
They're not doing that, they're going all in with google instead.
If the current guy stays in office this might be a big backfire for Google, if not GM, because this administration has been relatively active when it comes to antitrust — and everybody is always gunning for Apple because taking them down a peg will make them look powerful. (Whether they deserve it or not is outside the scope of this comment.) Convincing GM to drop Carplay is definitely anticompetitive. Google is always looking for ways t
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with Google is it wants to double dip. Get you at the store AND get you through datamining ... that's why Apple wins in the end. Advertising is just a scummy business which will drag them down.
Google could compete with Apple, if they split off advertising completely and just went with OS licensing, hardware, Google services and store as revenue sources. A new Don't be Evil Google, without advertising because advertising is inherently evil.
Unfortunately they still make way too much money for that
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with Google is it wants to double dip. Get you at the store AND get you through datamining ... that's why Apple wins in the end. Advertising is just a scummy business which will drag them down.
You know that doesn't actually differentiate them from Apple in any way, right? Not even slightly. Apple collects data about you by default, and uses it to sell you ads [wired.com], exactly the same thing you're complaining about Google doing. In both cases you can limit the information your phone admits it is sending home. However, both Google and Apple are part of PRISM, so you can't actually trust either of them. There is no practical difference in privacy between Apple and Google, they are both shit. Interestingly
Re: (Score:2)
GM's approach is shortsighted. The industry is moving away from this model. When my girlfriend was looking at buying an EV not long ago, she looked at the Chevy Bolt and Tesla Model 3 base model. One major turnoff for the Bolt was that GM was trying to nickel and dime buyers on small things that were included with the Tesla. This included a basic data connectivity package. There are other differences and sure the price is different as well, but generally speaking, people are going to move away from mon
Develop Once - Capitalize Massively (Score:2)
Sadly, the automotive industry will go the way of the dinosaurs - slowly to die off as they cannot change fast enough. Just like every large corporation, they are loathe to walk away from the dross and keep doubling down on what made bank ten years ago while the startups take the limelight. We see this in internet companies - what has happened to Yahoo? Google survives because they have an ad market dominance and they regularly kill off projects before they have a chance to require a double down investment.
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, the automotive industry will go the way of the dinosaurs - slowly to die off as they cannot change fast enough.
Since the vast majority of us need a car to get places, no, the automotive industry won't die off. Change, sure, but not die. Not having a car only works if you live in an extremely densely populated place with amazing public transportation ... which does NOT describe most of the US.
"One of the best things..." (Score:2)
Cell phones was one of the worst things to happen to modern cars. CarPlay and Android Auto merely mitigated some of the damage.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:2)
I have a car that support Android Auto and CarPlay. I have a Google Pixel device. I never use AA and just stick with BT because the built-in nav system is superior to Google Maps and because I don't want to have to connect my device via USB cable. If AA was wireless, I might actually use it sometimes, but BT is perfectly usable.
Android Auto is great (Score:5, Insightful)
I have a Mustang Mach E and I use Android Auto every day. It's great, especially on the giant screen. Ford is making the right call on this one. Further, it's great for rentals too, just to be able to plug my phone in the USB port and have *my* Android Auto ready to go.
Honestly, if I was car shopping today a car *not* having Android Auto would be a serious negative. It might seriously be enough for me to choose a different vehicle.
Software is hard, GUI is harder (Score:3)
Given how many makes and model Ford has multipled by the years and languages that need to be supported, offloading it to Apple and Google isnâ(TM)t a bad choice. People get a choice and more frequent updates.
Re: (Score:2)
On one hand, I agree. On the other, there's no reason why Ford needs to have so many completely different systems. They could definitely have come up with one system, mandated one connection between the system and the display, and so on, and been able to redeploy the same hardware in every model, or one of a couple of different pieces of hardware running the same software anyway. Instead they went with the option that would save them money up front, at the cost of having to pay to redesign both display and
Imagine (Score:2, Insightful)
Imagine, thinking its a good idea to make a 30,000+ car you might keep for 10 years depend on a $800 mobile phone working a certain way you might keep for two.
Until there is a really solid standard around display sharing etc for navigation, they way there is around bluetooth audio, and phone (as in making calls) integration, I don't want my infotainment system in the car being tightly coupled to the phone.
Chrysler's UConnect is far and away the best in this space; nice big screen, easy to find and press on.
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine, thinking its a good idea to make a 30,000+ car you might keep for 10 years depend on a $800 mobile phone working a certain way you might keep for two.
My guess, is the phone will be integrated into the infotainment system which is just one part of the whole digital dash designed by Apple. The service could work much like Apple Watch - separate eSIM but answers your phone number, or connect to a phone via Bluetooth. Of course, the automaker will sell you the service for a small(/s) monthly fee. The challenge is when will 5G sunset, leaving vintage cars without infotainment potentially.
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine, thinking its a good idea to make a 30,000+ car you might keep for 10 years depend on a $800 mobile phone working a certain way you might keep for two.
What an odd take. No car infortainment system is "dependent" on cell phone connectivity. What you get is a superior integration and UI.
"Imagine, thinking its a good idea to make a 30,000+ car you might keep for 10 years depend on a shitty legacy car manufacturer, almost all of which have proven to be inept at software engineering and maintenance, for updates and bug fixes."
Honda and Subaru systems are pretty good but cumbersome to navigate, to many layers and sub screens. Honda's displays are way to little.
Wow, I would rather eat glass than use any Honda UI I have ever seen. I have literally never heard this take before.
The Ford and GM rentals I have been in with higher end configurations - utter garbage.
You should try this
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine relying on an auto maker to maintain security updates on a built-in glorified smart phone in the car, instead of just plugging you own phone in and having the car system just be the control, display, and audio out for the phone (which you updated whenever). in 3-5 years GM will completely abandon updates on their integrated infotainment system, but if a vehicle supports android auto then everything will continue to just work with my up to date phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. I have a 2018 Jeep and I find the native nav system to be far superior to Google Maps. The Bluetooth connection to my phone is all that is ever needed and it works well.
Coming soon to GM (Score:3)
Watch this 30 second commercial while GM EV optimizes your battery.
Them a year later, Watch the 2 30 second commercials while your GM optimizes your battery.
Beeeeeeeeeeeeep your eyes are off the screen, optimizing restarting.
Something happened error #1* restart the car.
*Error 1 = you looked away from the commercials a second time.
Sharing an idiot moment. (Score:2)
I went on a long hunt to figure out if I could get Google Maps to work with CarPlay, rather than using Apple's offering. Gave up. Then one day I was playing around with it, and... turns out that it was already there and always had been. Worked perfectly, although insisting on physical tethering is annoying.
My main complaint about CarPlay is that it truncates things like available music when in motion. This is apparently a safety feature to prevent distracted driving. However, I am on the highway a lot in th
AND GOOGLE IS SABOTAGING IT (Score:2, Informative)
Waze is INTENTIONALLY not supporting one of the most important stereo tie-in protocols around.
From the WAZE support team:
Hi David,
Thanks for contacting us.
We received your report that Waze no longer works with Ford Sync 3.
As of July 2021, Waze no longer supports SmartDeviceLink.
If you encounter issues with this system, please reach out to your device manufacturer or car dealership for assistance.
Feel free to visit our Help Center for future reference.
Best,
Danea
Waze Support Team
So who actually uses SmartDeviceLink? Is it cars nobody uses?
I would say Ford and Toyota count as important. [smartdevicelink.com] The rest of them are certainly worth paying attention to.
If I had the time I would start up Waze, find who was advertising through them and write every one of their advertisers asking why they pay to advertise on a platform that intentionally excludes are large portion of their p
Re: (Score:2)
Here we go - the Cheerful early announcement:
https://www.caranddriver.com/n... [caranddriver.com]
But here's what happens when you actually search their support forum:
https://support.google.com/waz... [google.com]
Pretend like the email they sent me doesn't exist....
Lame Headline (Score:2)
Re: Lame Headline (Score:2)
Good for Ford, bad for GM (Score:3)
Ford MS-Sync failed (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is 100% already a thing. I assume it's a thing even in Carplay, and it certainly is in Android Auto. For example, the documentation makes reference to the physical back button [android.com], but note they are just talking about how the button is just sending the standard key event. But therein lies the rub, there are no input button codes [elementalx.org] for automotive functions. There's no "seat 1 heater +" or whatever. There are some dedicated navigation buttons, and a whole bunch of functions defined for Google TVs (like switchi
Re: (Score:2)
I have buttons. In fact, when the car is in motion the touchscreen is disabled, so buttons and a rotary encoder or voice command are the only way to interact with CarPlay.