![Operating Systems Operating Systems](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/os_64.png)
![Transportation Transportation](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/transportation_64.png)
![Apple Apple](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/apple_64.png)
Rivian CEO Says CarPlay Isn't Going To Happen (theverge.com) 143
In an interview with The Verge's Nilay Patel, Rivian founder and CEO RJ Scaringe said the automaker has no plans to adopt Apple CarPlay in its vehicles. "We have a great relationship with Apple," he said. "As much as I love their products, there's a reason that ironically is very consistent with Apple ethos for us to want to control the ecosystem." CarPlay isn't "consistent with how we think about really creating a pure product experience," Scaringe said. From the report: One example given by Scaringe includes CarPlay's inability to "leverage other parts of the vehicle experience," which would require Rivian customers to leave the app in order to do things like open the vehicle's front trunk. "We've taken the view of the digital experience in the vehicle wants to feel consistent and holistically harmonious across every touchpoint," said Scaringe. Instead, the Rivian CEO says the company will eventually add CarPlay's most desirable features "but on an a la carte basis."
Scaringe says that excluding CarPlay will allow the company to be more selective about features like routing and mapping charging points, noting that Rivian had acquired route planning app maker Iternio last year to facilitate that. "We recognize that it'll take us time to fully capture every feature that's in CarPlay, and hopefully, customers are seeing that. I think it often gets more noise than it deserves," Scaringe said in the interview. "The other thing beyond mapping that's coming is better integration with texting. We know that needs to come, and it's something that teams are actively working on."
Scaringe says that excluding CarPlay will allow the company to be more selective about features like routing and mapping charging points, noting that Rivian had acquired route planning app maker Iternio last year to facilitate that. "We recognize that it'll take us time to fully capture every feature that's in CarPlay, and hopefully, customers are seeing that. I think it often gets more noise than it deserves," Scaringe said in the interview. "The other thing beyond mapping that's coming is better integration with texting. We know that needs to come, and it's something that teams are actively working on."
The real reason (Score:5, Insightful)
"We can't charge you a monthly premium and an annual map refresh fee for features you already have on your phone for free."
Re: The real reason (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Why can't you have both? If you're sitting in the car and want the trunk open, push the button. If you're sending your kid out to the car to get a package from the trunk, use the app. If you're sitting in your car and need to check the odometer, read the screen. If you're sitting at your computer and need to enter the mileage for your insurance company, check the app.
If I'm sitting in the car I want all the features available with as little interaction as possible, but that doesn't mean the apps are use
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
how is its integration with google search? If I look for "burger places near me" can I tap a button on one of the listings and have that show up in the build in nav?
See thats the killer app for me, a friend can drop a pin and text it to me or I can look something up or pull an address out of just about any app and quickly start navigating to it, I dont want to have to re-enter it in a built in nav system no matter how slick that is. Never mind the fact that I have yet to see one where the text entry is mo
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
I have CarPlay.
It's really cool- if it's the only thing you're using.
In order to do *anything fucking else*, you have to close it down. That makes it fucking stupid.
Want to listen to the radio, and use CarPlay's navigation? Nope.
Want to listen to CarPlay and adjust environmental settings? Nope.
It's so fucking close to not sucking. All it needs to be able to do is integrate with the car's other systems.
Re: (Score:2)
It's so fucking close to not sucking. All it needs to be able to do is integrate with the car's other systems.
Agreed. I don't have CarPlay in my car. I drive a Tesla. But I've dealt with it on various rental cars to avoid paying extra for use of the crappy built-in GPS, and that's pretty much my opinion, too. CarPlay needs to require that manufacturers either wrap the UI in such a way that you can toggle easily between that and the native UI and back or make the entire native UI be a module inside CarPlay. The latter would be better, assuming they do it well.
Re: (Score:3)
The first thing you describe is absolutely standard, no?
My cars have always had a CarPlay implementation that continually shows a Home button to take you to the car's native UI and a CarPlay button to take you to CarPlay. On my EQA, those are on screen buttons. On my previous cars (all Renault Zoes), these were a physical Home button and an onscreen CarPlay button.
It's pretty trivial to toggle!
(Plus Hey Mercedes voice commands can be invoked from within CarPlay)
Re: (Score:2)
So you need to leave the display? On my car I can activate controls over the display without needing a home button. That's kind of what is being discussed.
Plus CarPlay and Android Auto also restrict the ability to display using their set UIs. That limits integration. To be clear that's not a reason *not* to support the features, Rivian's CEO is just spouting marketing bullshit. But CarPlay and Android Auto does have some very serious limitations for integration into the vehicle.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know what you mean by "leave the display"?
I can say that it works conceptually the same way that clicking a Maps link in an email on a phone will jump you to the Maps app and show you the location you're looking at, but with a back button in the top left to get back to the email when you're ready. It's a smooth and pretty hassle-free experience. See 1m15 to 1m25s in this video, but NB this an old version of MBUX. The newer version has the Apple CarPlay back button appear as soon as you click the hom
Re: (Score:2)
The first thing you describe is absolutely standard, no?
My cars have always had a CarPlay implementation that continually shows a Home button to take you to the car's native UI and a CarPlay button to take you to CarPlay. On my EQA, those are on screen buttons. On my previous cars (all Renault Zoes), these were a physical Home button and an onscreen CarPlay button.
It's pretty trivial to toggle!
(Plus Hey Mercedes voice commands can be invoked from within CarPlay)
On my Fords' Sync3 systems with CarPlay enable, I can't access most of the of the native Sync apps (wanna find out gas prices via Sirius TravelLink? Tough luck, buddy) without unplugging the phone. Unfortunately, GasBuddy doesn't have a CarPlay app, and Waze's CarPlay app doesn't have gas prices unlike the native iOS app. I totally get what Rivian is saying.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn’t that down to Ford’s shitty implementation, though? It doesn’t sound like something that’s inherent to CarPlay
Re: (Score:3)
Want to listen to the radio, and use CarPlay's navigation? Nope.
I'm assuming you mean the UI getting in the way of playing the game of switching between presets every time a commercial comes on, rather an actual issue with not being able to actually listen to the radio while CarPlay is active? Otherwise there's just something weird about your vehicle's CarPlay implementation, because in my Chevy Bolt I absolutely can still play audio from another source while using CarPlay for navigation.
Want to listen to CarPlay and adjust environmental settings? Nope.
My Bolt has physical controls for the HVAC settings. It's a shame so many manufac
Re: (Score:3)
I'm assuming you mean the UI getting in the way of playing the game of switching between presets every time a commercial comes on, rather an actual issue with not being able to actually listen to the radio while CarPlay is active?
Nope.
If you peruse reddit, you'll see I'm far from alone.
Unsure why it doesn't work right, but basically, if you're using CarPlay, it steals the audio from anything else, including the native UI.
If you're not actively in the CarPlay app, anything it was doing ceases (this includes playing audio)
Again, far from alone here.
My Bolt has physical controls for the HVAC settings. It's a shame so many manufacturers have gone away from that.
I couldn't agree more. I hate the on-screen interface.
Re: (Score:2)
I would think that this is an issue with the car manufacturer, rather than CarPlay or Android Auto.
My car allows me to use CarPlay/Android Auto and listen to the radio at the same time, including switching between station presets or even scanning for radio stations, all from the physical buttons on the steering wheel (for presets) or physical buttons underneath the screen (for scanning). I can also see the temperature preset on a different screen, and all climate controls are physical dials and buttons as w
Re: (Score:2)
It's so fucking close to not sucking. All it needs to be able to do is integrate with the car's other systems.
Its on it way https://www.apple.com/au/ios/c... [apple.com]. Next Version.
1st part is making sure the interface can be used while driving I've noticed since moving to touch screens may cars suck in this respect some manufacturers are wisely keeping knobs and buttons as secondary controls the new version of carplay will allow the knobs and buttons to work as well.
Next part of the problem is the number of items that don't have a standard control interface however the parts are getting standardised by the actual parts
Re: (Score:2)
There's a fucking buttload of money in this.
But as it is right now, I don't blame manufacturers from not picking it. It's too fucking janky on both cars I've used it on (mine and my wife's).
Re: (Score:2)
The US is so *different* to everywhere else. For a decade, I've listened to the radio via my phone instead of using an actual radio. There's an app called BBC Sounds which works with CarPlay and which I use all the time. I've never bothered using my car's radio, and never will. I want to be able to do things like pause and resume play, listen on catch up to shows I missed, etc.
As for environmental controls, I've never seen a car where the primary controls are through the same touchscreen real estate as disp
Re: (Score:2)
The US is so *different* to everywhere else. For a decade, I've listened to the radio via my phone instead of using an actual radio. There's an app called BBC Sounds which works with CarPlay and which I use all the time.
Almost every radio station in the US has an internet audio stream that can be accessed either directly or through an aggregation service like TuneIn or ShoutCast.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the difference in the US is the large percentage of people who still use radio compared to other countries.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like a problem with how it is implemented in your vehicle. I can use CarPlay for nav and still listen to the radio and change my environmental settings just fine. Maybe you should direct your ire at your car manufacturer for their poor system design rather than at CarPlay...
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's down to shitty car UX design and underspecced hardware for the infotainment system that can't handle more than one thing at once.
On my car if I want to adjust the environment, I use the physical controls for most things. If I need to change detailed settings, I push the environment button. Car play does not shut down, it just gets hidden and continues to function in the background while I adjust the environment. When I want to display car play again, I hit another physical button and car pla
Re: (Score:2)
My ioniq 5 has split screen for CarPlay. Lets me see the radio info (I can play the radio and control it from my steering wheel with CarPlay in the front in full screen mode as well). I can also see nearby chargers and power consumption info and plenty of other useful stuff.
Ive been able to do pretty similar things in the aftermarket head unit of my partners old car.
It does look like CarPlay 2.0 is going to be much more comprehensive for what that is worth.
Re: The real reason (Score:2)
Google for example the CarPlay functionality of the VW ID7. CarPlay stays in itâ(TM)s own frame within the display, surrounded by the carâ(TM)s own functions.
Nothing wrong with CarPlay, just how some manufacturers implement it alongside their stuff.
Re: (Score:3)
Something to check when buying a new car. IIRC Hyundai and Kia offer at least 8 years of free map updates with new vehicles, and both Android Auto and Carplay.
Re: (Score:2)
features you already have on your phone for free
They are not free. You just already paid them in some other way.
Re:The real reason (Score:5, Insightful)
Such a predictable repeat of a cheap troll. Of course they can charge a monthly premium, CarPlay or no. It's about value add, and the UX of a remote phone interface is both unpredictable and inferior. Not to mention all the functional problems people have with CarPlay.
Get a better troll, loser, this one is tired.
Which automaker pays your salary?
I've seen a lot of automaker-provided UIs, and they all tend to suck in various ways. Apple and Google do a much better job.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
> I've seen a lot of automaker-provided UIs, and they all tend to suck in various ways
Preach it! When I replaced my 2009 with a 2018 from another manufacturer one of the UI features such as nav were dramatically worse in the newer car. wtf? But the 2018 does support CarPlay so I use Waze on my phone to display on the car's screen. Way better than the weird shit that came with the car designed by retarded monkeys.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Which automaker pays your salary?
None. And I hate my fucking CarPlay.
As I mentioned elsewhere- it could be cool... if I didn't have to shut down that podcast in order to change my environmental settings, or stop using Waze if I want to listen to the radio.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Environmental settings should be with real knobs, buttons, and sliders than some touch screen. I remember some really bad user interfaces on vehicles from long before it was fashionable to plug iProducts into our dashboards, and long before iProducts existed. I recall a simple slider for hot-to-cold being replaced with up/down buttons which meant I could no longer get feedback on where this was set by touch, I had to take my eyes off the road to get a read and then have to keep looking at the HVAC display
Re: (Score:2)
Environmental settings should be with real knobs, buttons, and sliders than some touch screen. I remember some really bad user interfaces on vehicles from long before it was fashionable to plug iProducts into our dashboards, and long before iProducts existed. I recall a simple slider for hot-to-cold being replaced with up/down buttons which meant I could no longer get feedback on where this was set by touch, I had to take my eyes off the road to get a read and then have to keep looking at the HVAC display to see how it was set as I adjusted the HVAC. There was nothing wrong with the "old school" sliders for temperature control, and I believe them to be far superior because it means not needing to take eyes off the road to adjust.
I agree with this.
If you have to leave CarPlay to adjust the HVAC then that's just terrible user interface design from the vehicle than any problem with CarPlay.
I completely disagree with this logic.
If the vehicle chooses to make the interface accessible via the screen, and the "entertainment platform" you're using doesn't cohabitate with the various vehicle management functionality that is also present there, that's 100% on CarPlay, or the manufacturer for choosing to put it there.
I don't care for screen controls, but many people do.
One thing I hated with early Bluetooth was that I could listen to the radio or listen to my iPhone, not both. Newer versions of Bluetooth allow for the mixing of audio so I can hear traffic directions on top of the music or whatever I'm getting from the in-dash entertainment. I can certainly have my iPhone pick up many radio stations' internet streams and have that come through with the navigation but that means I'm using up data and/or power for the phone.
Bluetooth has no such support, that'd be 100% in the entertainment unit's software. Mixing is not a feature I've
Re: (Score:2)
Bluetooth has no such support, that'd be 100% in the entertainment unit's software. Mixing is not a feature I've ever seen. My Nav will interrupt a playing BT stream, but I can't, for example, use Nav on the phone, while playing the radio on the car.
The way this works is nav software sends audio announcements through the hands free profile. The radio acts as if it is receiving an incoming call and switches radio source to play the announcement and then switches back to radio. The nav software on the phone has to be specifically coded to do this. Sygic et el have this feature.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's weird, because I was just in a brand new Honda that has CarPlay. We used the maps (started from the phone before we got to the car) transferred to the car, the on-screen environment controls (we were in FL), and the radio just fine (maps lowered, not interrupted, radio volume to hear driving instructions). So, your experience is either outdated and irrelevant, or your vehicle manufacturer was a PoS that doesn't know the first thing about infotainment systems - which leads back to
If you have to leave CarPlay to adjust the HVAC then that's just terrible user interface design from the vehicle
And I don't even lik
Re:The real reason (Score:4, Interesting)
Tesla's UI is good and works very well.
Incidentally, Tesla also doesn't have CarPlay.
I don't miss any of the Apps I have on my iPhone on the Tesla UI.
I tried to listen to one of the technical podcasts I subscribe to (after it got access to that app after and update), but it's too distracting while driving, so I quit that.
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla's UI is good and works very well.
I test drove a Tesla Model D. The UI did indeed seem okay (other than the lack of tactile feedback); however, I fail to see the need of any of it.
When I drive, I drive. What will the screen/s offer me? I might need to alter audio, but I am just fine driving for hours at a time with no audio at all. Typically, I just plug my phone into the AUX jack and listen to a playlist that will last longer than any drive ever could...
So what do I need the UI for? Passengers can muck about with their own devices, they h
Re: (Score:3)
I've seen a lot of automaker-provided UIs, and they all tend to suck in various ways. Apple and Google do a much better job.
You liking a navigation UI doesn't mean someone else is on the take. The Google / Apple UI is great (personally I drive a car with Google Built-In) but that doesn't mean there aren't actual problems with the integration. I used to be super happy to get in a car with in built navigation system and away from the practice of sitting down in my car, starting the engine, and then sitting there fucking around with my phone for a minute to get it to connect with the car. Quite frequently despite having Android Aut
Re: (Score:3)
I've seen a lot of automaker-provided UIs
When? Given that automaker-provided UIs vary not only between region and models, but also between years within the same model I would bet a kidney that your "a lot" actually means "a tiny minority of".
There are plenty of bad auto UIs. There are plenty of good ones, some of them far better to use than CarPlay or Android Auto.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's see which one has more "value" to me... with Carplay I can:
- Notice a map issue in Waze, go home, log in to the map editor, fix it, and have it correct on my car's display within a couple days.
- Ditto with UI issues in the Waze app, I just have to log into a different site to file a bug report for the devs.
- Have dedicated on-screen buttons to separate my music player, podcast app, and audiobooks.
- View my phone cont
Re: (Score:2)
I plug in my iPhone and it just works on my Toyota. The interface and mapping is far superior to Toyota's offering. Car makers have a very poor reputation when it comes to infotainment systems, and it's well earned. Even Ford's Sync, which was rather innovative when it came out, quickly became outdated and has fallen out of favor. My phone on the other hand, works just fine with any make/model that supports CarPlay, and on top of that works with a huge number of aftermarket head units as well. My phone
Monthly charges (Score:5, Insightful)
Shorter Rivian CEO: we can't monetize your wallet with monthly beak dipping if Apple is giving you a mapping app for free.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. Paying Rivian a fee for their mapping app and also giving them your privacy and data is much better.
Re: (Score:3)
Can you highlight the section in the Apple Maps EULA where Apple's lawyers put the "we sell your usage data" clause? Here is the EULA, either I can't read or you're making it up because I can't find it:
https://www.apple.com/legal/in... [apple.com]
https://www.apple.com/privacy/ [apple.com]
Re: (Score:3)
I think it's even worse than that. Not only do they want the revenue, they don't have enough buttons for critical features that you can control the car without the touchscreen.
Add them to the do-not-buy list of manufacturers with craptacular touch UIs and no Android Auto/Carplay:
Tesla
GM
Rivian
Re: (Score:2)
You can buy a carplay/android auto add-on dashes for $100 or so.
Bringing back the phone mounts (Score:2)
What these companies putting their own proprietary systems in are doing is just encouraging people to add phone mounts in the car. It's not a new technology. There are even 3rd party screens you can add that support wireless connection to your phones.
When buying a car, you can inquire about it and consider the head unit upgrade an extra cost when weighing alternatives
Re: (Score:3)
Apple CarPlay is a proprietary system.
"... consider the head unit upgrade an extra cost when weighing alternatives..."
LOL a head unit upgrade. Wrong century.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple CarPlay is a proprietary system.
Yes, but CarPlay and AndroidAuto are much more open since they both give users the freedom to use their own devices regardless of model or service.
In 2024, it's very common to buy an additional head unit screen that can go in the car either over the car's included one or on the dash if essential functions are in the car's. These units support carplay for apple and android auto for android. With the way car makers are going for locked down systems I would expect to see it even more this century.
Re: (Score:2)
In 2024, it's very common
No it's not. I live in 2024 and I have literally *never* seen what you talk about in any country. In fact the only time I've ever heard of any device being added to supplement a car's features has been on a Slashdot article about Spotify where they announced the product was being dropped due to poor sales.
Now if you said 2004 I would have been right there with you. Replacing the radio with a fancy infotainment system was super popular back then.
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen quite a few in the wild, here are some examples: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=and... [amazon.com]
It's not taking out the existing radio like you would in an older car, it's mounting a new screen in the car that pairs to the phone
Leave the app to open trunk (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Correct, and not that long ago Apple presented plans for allowing these kinds of features in CarPlay anyway.
It's funny how manufacturers complain about the crappiness of a UX that replaces the crappy UX they came up with to replace decades of evolution of good UX. A car doesn't need to be designed to offer features in a way that CarPlay cannot do well, the failure has already occurred.
That said, it really isn't a big challenge to do a good job without CarPlay and car companies are right to not want to sup
Re: (Score:2)
Erm. See mine and Powercntrl's comments above. Plenty of people, like us, don't get a Tesla because it lacks CarPlay (and Android Auto), and quite a few complain about it on the internet, too!
Re: Leave the app to open trunk (Score:2)
Besides, I have a car with Android auto and it has extra touchscreen. So phone only gets done if the screen and the automaker can have plenty of leftover to play with if they need.
Have fun controlling your ecosystem... (Score:5, Insightful)
... while other manufacturers sell me a car.
Re: (Score:2)
Tonka? Fisher Price?
Re: (Score:2)
Matchbox. Old school, baby!
Re: (Score:2)
Sigh, the Internet just hasn't been the same since the guy who ran the troll farms took a swing at his boss and missed. Now we have all these low-rent ronin running around, shilling for car companies.
Smart leadership (Score:3)
Rivian are making “right moves” understanding their customer, product experience is the holy grail destiny move.
Re: (Score:2)
Gotta say, when I test drove a Tesla, I found it pretty difficult to find out how to make the car do the things I wanted it to do. Everything was buried in multiple menus, which I had to learn my way around. I'm sure it's pretty learnable and then it's faster, but the first impression was not great.
Hmm... Never mind then (Score:4, Informative)
Reinvent the wheel (Score:3)
Re:Reinvent the wheel (Score:4, Insightful)
We here at Rivian love wasting resources on reinventing the wheel and providing inferior and incomplete features that are necessary and available for basic cars. :) Imho
CarPlay is an inferior and incomplete feature. It's a question of whether to implement the UI yourself, where you only have yourself to blame if it stinks, or use Apple's UI, where you're at their mercy, both in terms of how well it works and whether it supports the features you need.
For example, things like self-driving navigation in an EV will likely never be as capable with CarPlay as with a native solution. There's no way Tesla would have been able to get Apple to, for example, put turn-by-turn on the dashboard screen, automatically feed direction data and location into the FSD computer, provide quick access for Supercharging stops, and give them all the other customization that they do without Tesla having to write their own iOS app with MapKit or the Google Maps SDK, and then they would have been forced to provide a second custom navigation app for Android Auto. And even if they did that, they would still have needed to provide most of a third implementation of everything but the UI running on the car so that your car wouldn't miss exits because of Bluetooth interference. It just isn't even remotely feasible to support anything like what Tesla does unless the car company is in near-complete control of the entire end-to-end experience.
Also, nonsense like being unable to connect CarPlay to the car without enabling Siri voice recognition makes it a nonstarter for me. I do not want my phone listening in an always-on fashion. No thank you. Not even with Apple doing it. So I want plain old Bluetooth, and won't seriously consider a car that pushes you to use CarPlay.
That said, I very much would like every vehicle to support CarPlay, as long as it is entirely optional and can be switched on and off easily. That way, people who want to control their phone from their car can do so, people who want the benefits of a more native in-dash experience can go that route, and people who find that different approaches work better for them depending on the situation can switch back and forth. CarPlay should be one screen of many in the native UI, with the ability to switch to other parts of the native UI without the phone knowing or caring that it is no longer in the foreground.
Re: (Score:2)
Car Play is just another app my car supports to do navigation and media playback. I don't see what the big deal is to support it as an option for the user who wants it. It's just an A/V interface.
If the native apps are better the user will use them.
I also think it would be nice if Apple/Google and car manufacturers could get together to create APIs for the phone to exchange things like charge/fuel status, road conditions, vehicle health alerts, traffic updates, navigation destination, etc.
In particular, I
Re: (Score:2)
There is no waste of resources here. 90% of the work needs to be done anyway in order to support CarPlay in the first place. It doesn't replace your entire infotainment system, you need the underlying system before you can attach the phone.
That said. I spoke before about the insanity of not supporting car play as a red line. You know my red line? Not being able to use 100% of my car's features without a phone. That is far more important than supporting a feature on a device I change every 2 years.
I am a bit surprised (Score:3)
Especially from a company that charges a premium like Rivian - you'd expect them to be more customer-centric rather than "bend over, take it, and LIKE IT".
So if you want a pickup truck and CarPlay / Android Auto, it seems you're getting a Ford.
Re: (Score:2)
Especially from a company that charges a premium like Rivian - you'd expect them to be more customer-centric rather than "bend over, take it, and LIKE IT".
I dunno, lately it seems like taking away choice is something you pay a premium for. Like those haute cuisine restaurants that don't let you make any changes to the dishes and tell you "if you want it your way, you should've gone to Burger King."
Rich people problems, I guess.
Control (Score:3)
It's about control.
Rivian is rightly afraid of losing control of the car software.
Apple has stated that they want to do "everything" for automobiles. Apple gets paid and Apple gets the data.
Same reason Tesla won't "partner" with Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple has stated that they want to do "everything" for automobiles.
Apple play lipservice to that fact. If you want to see a company who do "everything" for automobiles, look to Google. Google Built-In is a completely integrated infotainment system with far more capability than Android Auto or Carplay which (as the CEO says) is quite limited. That said that's not a reason not to include it. Even Google Built-In supports CarPlay.
I'm surprised Apple wouldn't work with Rivian (Score:3)
It seems reasonable to allow CarPlay apps to call APIs from the car's own OS. How hard would it be to call an api like /opentrunk ?
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't a technical issue. This is a societal issue. Technical fixes don't work on those.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you elaborate? What societal issue?
Re: (Score:2)
Can you elaborate? What societal issue?
Well, the symptom here is that Rivian isn't enabling Carplay, in a vehicle that costs twice as much as vehicles which do. This strongly implies that the reason for the absence of the functionality is not due to technological limitations.
The stated reason is because there are car functions within the car's interface that would require users to flip between the Rivian interface, and Apple's.
There are a number of technological solutions that are possible. Rivian could, as the GP said, provide API access to tho
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the context. You explained a number of reasons why you don't believe the problem is technical, and I accept your logic. But what specific societal problem are you pointing to instead? Conspiracies, political polarization, racism, poverty, these are all societal problems, but none of these are likely to have anything to do with Rivian's choice not to use CarPlay. What is the societal problem you feel is relevant here?
Re: (Score:2)
What is the societal problem you feel is relevant here?
The underlying societal forces that lead the CEO of Rivian to refuse to either implement one of several technical solutions to a requested function or enable customers to do so, despite those solutions being found in vehicles that cost half as much as the one he's in charge of selling.
I'm not saying that this is the sort of offense that should cost him his job in isolation, but if there are no technical barriers to giving customers the option to use Carplay, and Apple is willing to license Carplay to Rivian
Re: (Score:2)
The societal problem is this disconnect between consumers and C-suite execs. The societal problem is the shift away from a business being successful due to having the most satisfied customers, to a business's success being determined by whether or not the business can make their customers dependent on them to the point where the price of leaving is only slightly higher than the price of staying.
THIS is what I was looking for. And I basically agree.
Re: (Score:2)
Greed. And to a slightly lesser extent, control (Which derives from greed); the underlying factors in several of the problems you mentioned.
Like most car manufacturers, Rivian wants to maintain control so they get to set terms and everyone has to go through them. There's no technical reason they couldn't expose their in-car API to Android Auto or CarPlay. Hell, if this were 30 years ago, there may even been a regulatory push to require interoperability. Not now, though.
Rivian sells the R1T for $70-100k each
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks, I don't disagree. Greed is a problem as old as mankind. And it's certainly at play here.
Is Android Auto different? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
That is precisely how CarPlay works. The Rivian CEO is just using this as a red herring to find some justification for not including what is increasingly a customer-required feature.
The notion that they're going to be able to do messaging better than my primary messaging device is seriously misguided. How could they possibly keep up with the pace of software updates to the various messaging platforms? And I don't see how they could possibly integrate with iMessage – which walls them off from a very la
Re: (Score:2)
You said what the Rivian CEO said. You have to leave and return. The fact that the session is still there wasn't up for debate. Compare that with overlay based control systems which don't remove the map display or the ability to integrate you system in the overall instrument cluster instead of limiting it to the infotainment system (something which you can only do if you are 100% in control of the UI) - Also something that Google Built-In (as apposed to Android Auto) does.
Re: (Score:2)
Addendum: That said that's not an excuse for not integrating CarPlay if people want that. But it is worth pointing out there are shortcomings to CarPlay and Android Auto vs an integrated infotainment system.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, I gotta ask, what features do you use and why do you use them?
To me, when I get into a vehicle, I either have a destination in mind or I am going out for a casual drive... neither activity takes second place to anything else, such as listening to music or podcast, looking at maps, etc. I do not need nor even want any such electronics in my vehicles. Maybe, maybe, I could tolerate an amplifier with an AUX (auxiliary) jack and some speakers. Everything else, such as windshield wipers, air conditioning,
Tell me you are going to go bankrupt⦠(Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would they go bankrupt? The inability to support some phone interface is about as relevant outside of a bunch of Slashdot users as the year of Linux on desktop. My parents just bought a new car and don't even know what CarPlay is (they asked me about it).
No thanks (Score:2)
That might have been an acceptable answer in 2018, but it's 2024 now. I still remember the time my wife and I test drove a Tesla in 2019 to replace my 2013 Nissan Leaf. The passenger experience adjusting the air conditioning was so bad for my wife, among other unfamiliar user expectations with the car, that we ended up buying a Chevy Bolt EV instead. Many rides in Uber green with Tesla cars hasn't changed my opinion of it. She drives a Ford Escape PHEV these days, and you better believe that it has CarPlay
"can't access the trunk" (from an app) (Score:2)
Sorry but this is BS (Score:2)
Rivian and Tesla want to own the ecosystem. That's all there is to it. They want to be able to charge $$$ for a "premium" service, or skim a % from apps built into the firmware. And fuck those people who have apps on their phones. Excuses like this will be made, none of them at all convincing.
Re: (Score:2)
That isn't 100% true.
I can control 35-40 functions in my Model 3 from my iPhone using shortcuts, such as open trunk / AC / alarm / windows / start-stop-limit charging etc etc
So I can have Siri(shudder) control it, use it with my Apple home automation like start defrosting the car when I get up in the morning if the temperature is below freezing.
Re: (Score:2)
But the car is a phone or tablet with a golf cart attached to it...so they are competing with phone companies.
Re: (Score:3)
GM's replacement is new but not having CarPlay in Tesla was weird at first but got used to it.
The problem with it being "weird at first" is that it makes an absolute shit first impression when test driving the vehicle. My partner and I test drove a M3 prior to getting a Bolt and while I'm sure some people really do learn to love the UI, to us it just seemed incredibly unintuitive. Also, this was before Tesla decided to remove the turn signal stalk, which I'm sure would've made us nope right out of the test drive.
I'm totally baffled at GM's decision to axe CarPlay from their newer vehicles. It was
Re: (Score:2)
There were four things that made me decide against an M3, and you've named two of them: lack of CarPlay, no turning stalk (a complete pain in the arse in the UK and frankly dangerous, given how many roundabouts we have), the width and length (I wanted a smaller footprint to make driving in the city easier) and Musk himself. Any one of them would have been a showstopper, and I've been more than happy with my Mercedes EQA since we got it. I've had it about six months and have yet to use a public charger.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that's a snarky way of talking about this. Obviously, no-one buys a car with CarPlay being the *only* factor they consider. But it may well be one of a list of non-negotiables they have alongside, say, a minimum range for an EV or a sunroof that opens to the air or a minimum / maximum size or a specific price point or a gazillion other things. It was definitely on my list of non-negotiables, along with a bunch of other items.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, that's one down, now let's hear from the other 19 Slashdotters. Snark aside that was my point. This crowd here in this forum has very different requirements than the millions upon millions of people who buy a car every year.
Just like if you did a survey here you'll get a very skewed result about Linux's desktop market share.
Re: (Score:2)
And my point is that you're wrong on the broader point, too. There's tons of research showing CarPlay and AA are significant in affecting purchase decisions. Can Rivian sell without CarPlay? Sure. Can they sell *enough* to build a sustainable business? Jury is out on that.
https://www.mckinsey.com/indus... [mckinsey.com]
https://www.thedrive.com/featu... [thedrive.com]
https://www.theverge.com/2023/... [theverge.com]
Etc
Re: (Score:2)
Hardly. Firstly this "research" is little more than speak from consultants and tech sites (the former infamously wrong, such as how Vision Pro will change the world in the case of Mckinsey), and they latter having the same tech bend as Slashdot users (they don't represent normal users).
And even if they did, I remind you that only one ecosystem is unsupported here. That's half of the USA, and a fraction of the global market share which could even possibly use this feature.
Yeah a bunch of people will weigh th
Re: (Score:2)
It's dead easy to hand-wave away research you don't like by saying words to the effect of "consultants are always wrong" but it'd be a lot more convincing if you had some other sources for your counter-belief beyond POOMA.
May I remind you, Rivian does not support Android Auto either. It's not just a CarPlay thing.
And your reworking of the question does not change it functionally from mine: the question is, "is this decision in Rivian's financial interests?" As I said, the jury is out on that.
Yes, of course