Hacker News Reader

Comment by zepearl | Hacker News Reader

Could be related to what mentioned here (Volkswagen explaining why it's developing its own SW): https://arstechnica.com/cars/2019/09/volkswagen-audi-porsche...

But really be careful how much Android you're talking about. There are some brands really using Google's automotive services; this is not our strategy. When you do this, you get a great package of function and services, no doubt. But you also have to open up all the car's sensor data [to Google], and when I say all, it really is all sensor data," Senger told me.

(statement from Christian Senger, mentioned by Ars as being VW Group's Digital Car and Services division)

View on HN

I think you may be confusing Android Auto with Android for Cars. The former is the mobile app and headunit-only integration (audio controls) via video stream, which requires minimal integration with the vehicle. The other is Android repurposed for headunits, with full car integration, such as Volvo's integration.

Car manufacturers of luxury cars shy away from Android Auto partially because they believe it turns one of their main selling points and silos (advanced technology) into yet another commodity.

Thx for the definitions - useful/interesting (but I did not doublecheck them, hehe) :)

> which requires minimal integration with the vehicle

My guess: maybe VW is scared of a potential "which CURRENTLY requires minimal integration with the vehicle" (I imagine that the push for more and more integration will increase in the future) and therefore decided to give it a try now and not to become passively dependent on Google.

The real answer: VW wants to get a cut of the datamining pie.

The branding is confusing. It gets worse, the deeper you get into car technology.

Then why do current Audis have perfectly fine Android Auto integration?

Because Audi views themselves as a performance brand over a luxury brand. They're also hungrier and thus more responsive to consumer demand.

BMW allows carplay with a monthly subscription to the rest of their services, largely because they believe that as long as you're getting the full benefit of a connected car, you'll be attached to the value - strategically, it makes no sense for them to give it away from free.

The other thing? These companies are starting to change their mind as consumers demand it as a feature.

I always knew there were good reasons I prefer Audi.

Although to be honest, if not for the unconscionable amount of money they (or Navteq, I guess) asks for map updates, I'd be even happier just using the built-in navigation all the time.

Thanks for explaining the distinction. Somewhat reminiscent of the People's Front of Judea vs the Judean People's Front.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com