Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Operating Systems Transportation Apple

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."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Rivian CEO Says CarPlay Isn't Going To Happen

Comments Filter:
  • The real reason (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Scutter ( 18425 ) on Monday July 22, 2024 @05:17PM (#64647502) Journal

    "We can't charge you a monthly premium and an annual map refresh fee for features you already have on your phone for free."

    • by insolent_gnome ( 10392635 ) on Monday July 22, 2024 @06:37PM (#64647752)
      Absolutely correct, and the thought that a car company is going to create better software than a software company, or make a better phone integration than, say, the company that makes the phone is ridiculous. Also, I DONâ(TM)T WANT AN APP TO OPEN MY TRUNK. I just want a button. A damn button.
      • 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

        • You say, "... enter the mileage for your insurance company." Is that really a thing? I have had car insurance for like 47 years now and in no instance have I had to enter my mileage MORE THAN ONCE for my car insurance. They usually ask me, how many miles I drive a year, occasionally asking if my yearly mileage has changed, but in no instance do they care whether it was 19,000 this year or 22,000 this year. I know, those are two numbers that are pretty average for me.
    • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

      Na.
      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.
      • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

        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.

        • by shilly ( 142940 )

          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)

          • 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.

            • by shilly ( 142940 )

              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

          • 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.

            • by shilly ( 142940 )

              Isn’t that down to Ford’s shitty implementation, though? It doesn’t sound like something that’s inherent to CarPlay

      • 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

        • 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.

          • 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

      • by vlad30 ( 44644 )

        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

        • I know it'll get there.
          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).
      • by shilly ( 142940 )

        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

        • by flink ( 18449 )

          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.

          • by shilly ( 142940 )

            Yes, the difference in the US is the large percentage of people who still use radio compared to other countries.

      • 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...

      • by flink ( 18449 )

        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

      • by Altus ( 1034 )

        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.

      • 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.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      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.

    • features you already have on your phone for free

      They are not free. You just already paid them in some other way.

  • Monthly charges (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sphealey ( 2855 ) on Monday July 22, 2024 @05:19PM (#64647510)

    Shorter Rivian CEO: we can't monetize your wallet with monthly beak dipping if Apple is giving you a mapping app for free.

    • by sinij ( 911942 )
      Apple and Google are not giving you a mapping app for free, you pay with your privacy/data.
    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      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

    • by m00sh ( 2538182 )

      You can buy a carplay/android auto add-on dashes for $100 or so.

  • 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

    • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

      Apple CarPlay is a proprietary system.

      "... consider the head unit upgrade an extra cost when weighing alternatives..."

      LOL a head unit upgrade. Wrong century.

      • by Ksevio ( 865461 )

        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.

        • 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.

  • I shouldn't need to leave the app to open the trunk....yeah, We solved that years ago, it's called a physical button.
    • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

      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

      • by shilly ( 142940 )

        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!

    • 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.

  • by Linux Torvalds ( 647197 ) on Monday July 22, 2024 @05:33PM (#64647558)

    ... while other manufacturers sell me a car.

  • by ElitistWhiner ( 79961 ) on Monday July 22, 2024 @05:36PM (#64647562) Journal

    Rivian are making “right moves” understanding their customer, product experience is the holy grail destiny move.

  • by cygnusvis ( 6168614 ) on Monday July 22, 2024 @05:39PM (#64647580)
    My decision when buying my last vehicle was that it worked with wireless CarPlay. I paid extra for the model which had that (among other features that I wasn't that interested it, but do like now that I have them).
  • by dotslashdot ( 694478 ) on Monday July 22, 2024 @05:47PM (#64647600)
    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
    • by dgatwood ( 11270 ) on Monday July 22, 2024 @08:03PM (#64647934) Homepage Journal

      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.

      • by flink ( 18449 )

        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

    • 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.

  • by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Monday July 22, 2024 @05:48PM (#64647608)

    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.

    • 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.

  • by mspohr ( 589790 ) on Monday July 22, 2024 @05:56PM (#64647638)

    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.

    • 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.

  • 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 ?

    • by kwalker ( 1383 )

      This isn't a technical issue. This is a societal issue. Technical fixes don't work on those.

      • Can you elaborate? What societal issue?

        • 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

          • 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?

            • 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

              • 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.

            • by kwalker ( 1383 )

              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

  • by Fuzi719 ( 1107665 ) on Monday July 22, 2024 @06:30PM (#64647726)
    I've never used anything Apple so I don't know how Carplay behaves. But on my car that has Sync 3.4, I do use Android Auto (it has Carplay available, as well). In Android Auto you can still access car features as they are displayed under the car logo, then you just hit return to go back to the Android Auto app list, and you can also have apps on your phone that can be accessed through Android Auto (like Spotify, Youtube Music, etc. It's very easy to use and seamless. Can't Carplay do likewise?
    • by Nebulo ( 29412 )

      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

    • 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.

      • 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.

    • Or just reserve part of the screen for the controls, or a separate screen, or use knobs like a sane person.
    • 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,

  • â¦without saying youâ(TM)re going to go bankrupt.
    • 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).

  • 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

  • Well clearly your car fucking sucks, is too goddamned complicated, and you should have just put a mechanical handle, asshat
  • 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.

    • by ruddk ( 5153113 )

      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.

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (10) Sorry, but that's too useful.

Working...