GM’s decision to ditch Apple CarPlay, Android Auto sparks backlash
freep.com
freep.com
The system in my car that integrates with the phone is a piece of junk. Not only is the microphone system completely useless and the connection procedure so badly implemented it'll fail regularly, but I've recently learned that the system in my car tends to break after a few years. Which has happened in my car. Which makes one of the car's ECUs confused so my dashboard now has a flashing indicator that isn't going to go away until I've spent a pile of cash to either replace the system or rip it out in a manner that isn't documented or supported.
The only thing I want in a car is the simplest for of integration possible, preferably using components I can rip out and replace with something better and a system for mounting my phone without having to buy all manner of silly dodads.
Remember when that was TRUE for about 15 years in the 90s/2000s?
I'm old-enough-to-have-stopped-believing-tech-progress-goes-only-one-way years old.
Reason being, I worked in infotainment testing at the time, and I didn't want my car to remind me of work.
It's been fantastic. Nothing about it feels outdated. My kitchen appliances are from around the same era and likewise, they just work like they always have. There's no maps to expire, no subscriptions to renew, nothing of the sort.
Equally importantly, it doesn't spy on me. There's no EULA to accept when I start the car, no continuous feed of my location being sent to advertisers (unless I take my phone with me, which is my choice each trip).
And no chance of perverts spying on me with the car's cameras. It doesn't have any.
CarPlay can't really get out of date any more than iOS can get out of date. It's just a software push. The main problem with the stereo in my car is that not everything is in CarPlay, so you have this sort of absurd situation where CarPlay is supposedly just one function of many, when obviously FM radio should just be an app icon in CarPlay, and the audio settings should be an app in CarPlay, and so on.
CarPlay is the OS and the stereo unit also has its own OS, so CarPlay is basically like running an emulated OS on another computer. That's obviously very silly.
For instance, some 4x4’s have 2D inclinometers. Modern trucks have all sorts of crazy optimizations for towing.
Requiring CarPlay to understand and adopt new car-specific features gets crazy.
Making CarPlay a system that runs apps provided by the car is also crazy complex.
I have no doubt we’re heading that direction, but it is such a more complicated system for marginal benefit that it’s not surprising we’re stuck at a plateau where it works for 80% of scenarios.
Any car with a feature that is not part of the carplay2 spec will need to find a way to expose UI to the user outside of carplay.
You just need car specific app icons to appear inside of the Apple and Google UIs. Since Cars reach EOL you don't want infotainment system to have to depend on iOS or Android SDKs/APIs since those will change and the cars will stop getting updates. You want a very loose coupling between the car and the mobile device.
To me that means progressive web apps (PWA). All it needs is some type of registry/discovery mechanism (that isn't Cloud based). You make the connection between your car and mobile device, the local app registry is scanned and the PWAs are installed.
Just plug into the ODB-II socket and then have the user poke at the knobs/dials :D Then you know what messages correspond to what actions.
Of course nobody would EVER sign up for that because it's awful clunky hahah
Third: they are distracting while you should be focussing on the road.
One of the things that it has done (that your post reminded me of) is that it eliminated the onboard stereo. There is a dock for a phone (I think in this prototype iteration it only supports a single model of iPhone, but I assume that will change?) and there is a dashboard where a dashboard is expected that will integrate with the phone, and there are optional bluetooth speakers and corresponding mount points in the car (so you can take them with you or not have them at all if you like)
This is the closest I've seen to your vision, and it makes sense. Dodge/Jeep do a good job of providing infotainment systems, but no matter how good they are, unless they're outsourced to Apple or Google (who will always be looking for a way to steer customers to their platforms) there's just not really any way for a car company to keep up with the feature velocity of either.
It looks like a pretty bare bones car, and I like that it doesn't have a screen at all. I suppose if it needs a UI for configuring vehicle settings, I guess this could be done using a phone over bluetooth or wifi. That's about the only thing I use the screen in my vehicle for, everything else is from my phone.
In 20 years it is going to be impossible to find replacements for those bluetooth speakers that fit in the proprietary holders they've designed. If they want to go minimalist and simple, go with analog speakers, that have a simple amp and a simple analog input that I can plug any analog source into (including a bluetooth receiver if I really need a wireless input).
Good luck, though.
I had an old GMC Canyon through college, and the only thing it had was Aux. After college i bought a model 3 when they first came out and I absolutely love the infotainment system. I love that I can play witcher 3 on my Tesla. My bluetooth always connects. I can unlock my car with my app and it never fails me.
I'll update the firmware with a usb stick and use an Apple TV. Apple TVs are more expensive, but I feel less like I'm the product and they're popular enough and with few enough models that any major problems will be widely known.
We are paying a lot extra for this tech that has a very limited shelf life. Simpler is becoming much better than new at the fastest rate ever. I really don't need my car to be cutting edge any more, because that requires too many damn monthly subscription payments.
A car is a high-margin item, so the impact of even a handful of consumers choosing not to buy must be huge, right? Whereas, they would need to "monetize" (ugh) many many more units to turn back that lost profit.
And as the shakeup due to EVs begins, even loyal consumers will be considering other makes. My girlfriend bought a car recently. CarPlay was not negotiable for her, very high up on the list.
What are they putting in the water over there GM?
If it actually works good people might not care in the medium term. Generally the problem people have with the automaker systems is that they sucked, not that they weren't CarPlay.
I think that's part of it, but definitely not the entire story. People have a lot of their life on their phone, so the tighter the integration between their phone and other products, the more appealing the experience with that product is. No matter how good the automaker system is, if it's not basically your phone with a different screen, it's going to feel like an awkward disconnect, especially when there are plenty of alternative cars that do offer that seamless experience.
I’m with vineyardmike. The problem was they sucked before CarPlay.
Now that I’ve had a taste of controlling everything my way with my apps based on my preferences in a way I’m used to, I’m not going back.
The best you could offer is perfect integration with my phone and the apps I use. But that will never happen, and at that point I might as well use CarPlay anyway.
Cars need their own system for fallback but it’s a cost center. Don’t try to make it your primary selling point, you can’t win.
The last thing I want is for my car to be another device with its own subscription, accounts, applications, configuration, etc.
I guess a good thing about carplay is that when traveling with someone else, they can use their phone to update things like maps, and we're not completely locked out of it until we come to a stop.
Maybe not needed for newer cars?
I start the car and wait for the dashcam to chime. I start driving once it chimes. I have an older Aukey, not hard wired, so it takes about half a minute for it to chime which I thought was perfect timing.
You can’t quite do that with any car I’ve been in. CarPlay is close; it would be great if that became an open standard with standard connectors.
The only downside to CarPlay is that the battery stays at 100% charge. I wish I could limit that to 80%. Especially if we take long drives this degrades the battery unnecessarily.
Therefore I would like to limit the SoC on my phone to not excessively degrade the battery. I very rarely, if ever, need more than 80% of the design capacity of my iPhone anyway. So I prefer it to last longer.
I do wish phones would provide more control here. I would also take 80% charge many (but not all) days in exchange for my battery life after a year staying higher.
And it is a pity manufacturers don't support you in doing stop-charging-at-x if you wanted, e.g. a simple thing for software to do, but impossible without rooting on Android.
I can't recall for certain if my old S7 had that option but I don't think it did.
Most Androids today have that charge limit function natively without the need to root or tinker with your phone.
But then when I get in my car it will just stay charged at 100% all the time.
I think that fast charging is just as bad, if not worse.
And since the device it initially chooses to connect to sometimes takes 30 seconds or so to be fully connected (during which time you can't make any selections in this menu), you have to sit and wait until it connects the device you don't want to be connected before you can switch to the one you do want. And then you wait about 30 seconds for the correct device to connect.
It's inconceivable how the pairings are so bad and there isn't just a button for each phone connected that just works. Even when switching does work, all it takes is one blip and it hops over the other phone.
Again, this is on multiple cars on long road trips where we have at least two people to work on it and literally hours to figure it out. We generally settle on a single phone per car now, because it just isn't worth it.
Also, I find google maps navigation to drain quite a bit. Don’t you wanna charge?
On a longer trip I’ll pull my phone out of my pocket and put it on the Qi charger, but around town I’ve never seen much drain
First CarPlay just takes a fair amount of power so you’re going to notice it’s effect on battery life.
Second is the audio playback lag. I can’t stand it. It feels like seconds (though maybe it’s not that bad). The interface is ok but hitting pause or play or next track takes noticeable time to happen.
I’ve only ever tried it in my car. Maybe it’s fine in other vehicles. But it’s useless to me. It’s extremely responsive when connected by cable, so I just ended up going back to plugging in.
Also, when I wanted to turn it off temporarily, there's no easy way to do so on either the phone or car. Gotta turn the car off or dive deep into infotainment settings. It looks like neither the auto manufacturers nor Google have thought this through.
I mean, I get the spirit, but the experience was terrible.
I unplugged the phone for two seconds, picked the HOV route, and then plugged it back in, but I was infuriated by it.
This is not a knock on CarPlay, but rather Waze's UX decisions. It requires GPS access to function, it can tell if I'm stopped or not.
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/general-mot...
Someone over there has fond memories of OnStar, and is desperate to relive their glory days.
Why would anyone buy an expensive car which is designed to last a decade while it has essential pre-installed features locked behind a subscription? If they want recurring revenue that badly, they should just lease it out.
No more $3k package to add heated seats, just upgrade OnStar to OnStarPrime+ for $49.95/mo!
Of course, all American auto makers have wildly unrealistic plans for electric vehicle adoption in the next 5 years, too -- i think one of them is predicting $600B of revenue from EVs before 2030, when they currently only make a few million a year. Their finance departments must have some good drugs in the water coolers.
Correct on "wild profit margin", but your numbers are wrong according to FY22 10-K filing[1]:
Services Revenue = $78.129B
Services Cost of Sales = $22.075B
Services Gross Margin = 71.7% ($56.054B)
Every feature on the car will be a subscription... Heated Seats, Fast Charging, Nav, everything
Of course they will be "free" for the first 3-5 years of ownership, the free is non-transferable to a new owner... and you will be able to get the GM+ All Access Plan to "unlock your car's full potential for only $500 a year".....
This is not a GM thing, this is the dream of all Auto Makers..
You may "buy" the car, but you are not "buying" the software that runs the car...
This is why I'm really skeptical of mandating EVs without consumer protection because this seems to be the point where automakers are seeing dollar signs and can force buyers into higher price brackets.
There should be no EV mandate, then there would not need to be consumer protections as the market would do what is does best and allow manufacturers to compete on the merits of the vehicles not by the government choosing what we should be allowed to drive.
I think there are already too many regulations on the manufacture of cars.
At the state level I think the only regulations should be those around direct safety concerns (like air bags, lights, etc). Efficiency or other non-safety related regulations should be disallowed. Further safety regulations should be limited safe operations for other drivers sharing the road, not passenger protection (outside of regulations on truth in advertising, product defect)... passenger protection should be a market dynamic, coupled with greater tort reform to be able to hold liable manufacturers for their marketing claims.
We'll see how that pans out.
GM previously attempted to force an additional upfront 3 year OnStar purchase on top of the vehicle purchase on some Buick/GMC/Cadillacs. They walked it mostly back, but they still rolled that stupid-ass idea out.
https://www.thedrive.com/news/gm-makes-1500-onstar-subscript...
Consumers aren’t stupid enough to think they should be paying subscription fees to GM for infotainment features when they have other, often free, options.
Their spokesperson says all their cars come with 8 years of free service!
Unless they’re lying to their customers revenue won’t stop ramping until 2032 or so.
Presumably the SEC filings and investor facing statements they are making are in error instead.
/s
GM has a history of stupid decisions trying to get service revenue from cars. I remember on Star and it was so dumb that they wanted me to lay $40/month for concierge service or something.
All the buttons in the UI just initiated phone calls with someone (something?), so I hung up and switched to carplay.
It is a shame that the onboard nav is busted. My old BMW EV has extremely good range predictions, etc., and my phone does not even attempt such things.
I’m not switching to Google’s ecosystem, so I guess I’ll just never buy a GM moving forward.
Some higher trim models have a decent margin, but many lower trims are sold at a loss, resulting in essentially no profit from manufacturing.
Moreover, EVs are shaping up to be a financial disaster for carmakers. Tesla is essentially the only company to turn a profit on EVs, with the likes of Ford etc. hemorrhaging billions every year, with no end in sight. EVs simply aren’t shaping up to be a viable business without supplemental revenue streams.
Toyota and others actually bother with QA which eats some of their margins.
Also, the evidence for Tesla having much worse quality (the reports) shows that they are only marginally worse then everybody else. Nowwhere near far enough to make a 30% margin difference.
It’s been crazy nice. (As the family wrench-turner, even my wife’s CR-V, which is generally low maintenance, has felt like an inconvenient pig for maintenance demands by comparison.)
Wheel bearings on modern cars are incredibly long-lived. I don't think I've changed one in over 30 years on our family cars.
Depends on the car. I had a POS Chevy uplander and had to replace them 3 times. Angry because my Mazda was the same age, same milage and on its original set so i asked the GM mechanic why..
He told me the design. I'm going to guess the Uplander has the cheapest ones available?
But like you, I thought the same thing.. is "bearings" really a thing these days and apparently it is??
I'm never going to buy another "domestic" car again, and this whole "infotainment" mess we see here reinforces my decision.
These actions cause the brakes to last a LOT longer. I've never driven an EV but the manual transmission cars i have had needed far fewer brake jobs.
Rotating them around the halfway mark (at ~5 years in my case) accomplishes that. Anything else seems like more work than benefit to me.
Even if some people won't buy the car if it doesn't have Carplay, it's worth it because of how profitable selling services is, because people don't do the mental math on the cost.
This marks a return to the days of massively overpriced AM radios. The problem now is the way these systems are physically molded into the car. Back in the day you could put a good radio in. Good luck with that now.
All we really needed for the last 15 years was a recess in every dashboard in which to put our already-giant phones, with a power and audio dock. I can't deny that CarPlay works relatively decently in my experience, but it's not really necessary.
Even worse is the removal of auxiliary jacks from car stereos, another huge regression. So people can't even get a Bluetooth adapter that plugs into it and supplant this GM nonsense.
There is no end to the mania for screwing the consumer. Subscription car features... WTF. Keep your old cars, people.
If your car has space for a head unit, and a fascia is available, and a steering wheel controls adapter is available, and a backup camera adapter (sometimes eight needed for the cars with "birdseye" view systems), and a climate control adapter, and sometimes a navigation system adapter, you might be able to seamlessly install a headunit. It just might cost a lot.
For most modern cars, it's a pipe dream.
Now don't get me wrong, I want my Apple Carplay too. I wouldn't want to buy a car without it.
But the argument that "as the shakeup due to EVs begins, even loyal consumers will be considering other makes" I just don't see happen in real life today. Most EV buyers chose a Tesla. No CarPlay or Android Auto in that one.
4.8% of the overall vehicle market.
Comparing their decision to remove it from their future EVs and buyer decisions with Tesla is a better comparison than comparing it with 95.2% of the other market which will still retain it.
At least Android Auto is a shitshow. Does not do screen sharing and you can only use apps approved by Google. I don't listen to music on my phone and i use a different navigation SW. And on top of that, Android Auto requires permissions to everything, refusing to start if permissions are not granted.
I really see no useful case for Android Auto and investing money in it during car development is a waste of money and developer time IMHO.
Even older cars are careful, like my last car that would not even allow you to pair your phone to radio over Bluetooth while the car was not in park.
Profit.
Probably their own app store, inline with Google Play. And also forcing you to login on their gear, so your paid apps are available, and thus they can better track you / monetize you.
How does it make sense to keep making cars bigger and bigger? It doesn't for us, but sure as shit does for them.
Tesla got away with not supporting CarPlay because they were one of the very few options available if you wanted an electric car. Rivian got away with it (for now, at least) because they were your only option if you wanted a high-end electric truck. Their customers were willing to sacrifice CarPlay because they had no real choice. Yes, Tesla's UI is nice-ish. That doesn't mean Tesla drivers don't want CarPlay support. Tons of them do, and it comes up regularly on online forums.
If you look at infotainment systems like BMW's latest iDrive iterations and Mercedes-Benz's MBUX, it's quite clear that they've improved a great deal in the past few years, lack of physical buttons aside. I'd hope that GM manages to do the same. Things have gotten better and the alternative to using CarPlay is no longer living with a nightmarish hellscape of a UI put together by sadistic designers --or maybe just traumatized ones, tormented by someone who forced them to ship terrible infotainment systems for years.
Despite that, consumers still love CarPlay and/or Android Auto and expect it to be available on their cars, with limited exceptions. Most people get in their cars, connect directly to CarPlay/Android Auto, and get on with their drive. When they have to use the native infotainment system, they do so with less frustration. But how many people do you think are just using a Bluetooth connection for their phone instead of CarPlay when it's right there? The answer is likely very, very few.
GM is betting that they'll get its customers to accept not having it like Tesla and Rivian customers have to. That's a hell of a gamble when everyone else will be shipping their own expanded line of EV models at the same time and price points as GM.
Sort of a spherical cows optimization.
GM is going to discover that cars are now phone accessories for most people, not the other way around.
They would definitely benefit from convincing people to pay for 50%+ profit margin software as a service subscriptions.
See: https://cardealermagazine.co.uk/publish/how-much-profit-do-c...
Tesla doesn't offer android or iPhone carplay. Instead they try to offer a software experience superior to those. It does Spotify, gps, etc but also manages the car itself.
Depending on what the user is doing it makes sense. If the user mostly wanted their phone for music and directions, you can build that stuff in house and have it turn out okay. If the user wants carplay for much more than that, then it's not good.
IMO, the only upside to the customer is avoiding plugging a phone in. The phone experience is otherwise generally better across the board.
(On a latter note, I consider the Tesla UI good for a car, but bad overall. Climate app also generally sucks).
But still I'd really want it to support CarPlay, because I use Apple Music and Overcast the most when I'm in my car.
I also prefer the way Apple Maps pronounces the street names over here (phjone lang set to english) compared to the utter butchering Google Maps does.
I will literally not buy a car without CarPlay. I am sure I am not alone.
From GM's latest 10-K filing[1], quickly distilling the past 3 years of consolidated income statements down to its Automotive ex. GM Financial stream:
| (US$ Millions) | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|-------------------|---------|---------|---------|
| Revenue | 143,975 | 113,590 | 108,673 |
| Cost of Sales | 126,892 | 100,544 | 97,539 |
|-------------------|---------|---------|---------|
| Adj Gross Profit | 17,083 | 13,046 | 11,134 |
| Adj Gross Margin | 11.9% | 11.5% | 10.2% |
|-------------------|---------|---------|---------|
| SG&A | 10,667 | 8,554 | 7,038 |
|-------------------|---------|---------|---------|
| Adj EBITDA | 6,416 | 4,492 | 4,096 |
| Adj EBITDA % | 7.4% | 7.5% | 6.5% |
| (US$ Millions) | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|-------------------|---------|---------|---------|
| Revenue | 148,980 | 126,150 | 115,894 |
| Cost of Sales | 134,397 | 114,651 | 112,752 |
|-------------------|---------|---------|---------|
| Adj Gross Profit | 14,583 | 11,499 | 3,142 |
| Adj Gross Margin | 9.8% | 9.1% | 2.7% |
|-------------------|---------|---------|---------|
| SG&A | 10,888 | 11,915 | 10,193 |
|-------------------|---------|---------|---------|
| Adj EBITDA | 3,695 | (416) | (7,051) |
| Adj EBITDA % | 2.5% | (3.3%) | (6.1%) |
Recent Bureau of Labor Statistics research paints a colorful picture of market dynamics from 2007-2019[3] where post-GFC increase in domestic competition and the rising cost of manufacturing forced dealers to "innovate" as a way of offsetting new car sales margin decline, which set the stage for 2019-2022[4] where manufacturers largely internalized an outsized supply chain squeeze while dealers gouged the shit out of consumers. So when you say "high-margin", I think you're looking in the wrong bucket.
Then there's GM Financial segment sitting on a $65.322B retail finance receivables portfolio[5] of which 27.2% are sub-680 FICO consumers, and carrying $96.854B of debt[6]...nevermind rising interest rates, increasing layoffs, and a looming credit crunch. Remarks like:
>> In 2021, GM Financial redeemed $1.5 billion in aggregate principal amount of 5.20% senior notes due in 2023. The redemption resulted in a $105 million loss on the early extinguishment of debt.
...buried in page 76 of the fine print suggests internal bleeding damage control.
> How does this business decision make sense?
It doesn't make sense because you're thinking about it from the perspective of consumer optionality based on today's trend, not as a publicly traded business balls deep in competition looking forward.
Considering GM's top 2 selling vehicles are trucks[7] (Silverado = 33.8% of 2022 Chevy units sold; Sierra = 46.7% of 2022 GMC units sold)---and speculating on the retention quality of consumers who would readily classify CarPlay integration as "not negotiable", choosing to overweight an accessory feature that X competitors may also offer over other characteristics/intangibles salient to GM products---I begin to question both the net value prop and opportunity costs being wholesale handed over to Apple.
[1] https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1467858/000146785823...
[2] https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/37996/00000379962300...
[3] https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2022/article/automotive-dealers...
[4] https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2023/article/automotive-dealers...
[5] https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1467858/000146785823...
[6] https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1467858/000146785823...
[7] https://www.caranddriver.com/news/g39628015/best-selling-car...
Could this just be a bluff/negotiation tactic or something?
It seems so perplexing to remove these features, rather than giving the option for Android auto and car play along with their own android platform. If their own system has better native functionality, people will see this as a selling point. If not, they're free to ignore it.
Cars are not TVs. It's a major purchase that somebody will be using for years, so people will pay attention to this kind of detail. Surely they know this?
This implicitly assumes that the manufacturer's direct cost of integrating/supporting such features, and indirect opportunity costs of not deploying an alternative replacement, are both effectively $0.
> "GM is looking to monetize more software and services within its vehicles and is taking a page out of Tesla’s playbook,"
Since they're only doing this because they want to take even more of your money after you've already spent a small fortune buying their vehicle, consumers pushing back against this is a good idea even if you don't have strong feelings about what software your car uses.
CarPlay and AndroidAuto protocols basically treat car’s display as a remote framebuffer.
> As part of the agreement an automaker would have to enter with Google, Porsche said certain pieces of data must be collected and transmitted back to Mountain View, California. Stuff like vehicle speed, throttle position, coolant and oil temp, engine revs—basically Google wants a complete OBD2 dump whenever someone activates Android Auto.
> Google, for its part, disputes some of our source's assertions. Liz Markman, a Google spokesperson for Android Auto, said in a statement that Google does not collect some of the data listed by Porsche, such as throttle position and coolant temp. She declined to provide a full list of what data is collected, but emphasized that Android Auto users must opt in to share any information upon their first connection of their phone to a car. She said some of that data is used for safety (restricting typing and allowing only voice input when the car is not in "park," for example) and some is to used to optimize the app's user experience.
So seems like Android Auto requires at least some data from the car, as of 2015. Porsche ended up adding it in 2022, though, so maybe they stopped fighting that battle.
I'm not sure which I want less - the phone company getting data from my car, or the car company getting data from the phone.
If Google (or Apple) thinks that having it onboard is gonna be worth some data sharing, or whatever else they want, to the manufacturer they're gonna push for that even if they have different terms for aftermarket equipment. "Just buy an aftermarket radio" isn't really a good marketing campaign for an auto manufacturer to make up for a lack of the integration, after all.
Pushback = "Fine, we won't do a deal"
Felt like watching railroads negotiate with local government.
Google has better POI support, but I now use Apple Maps for pretty much all my nav needs.
I.e. why lock down permissions if Google would get location data from every phone through Google Maps anyway.
Furthermore, it decreases the value of Google Maps by depriving them of traffic data (something that really only works at scale when the maps user base is "most people").
It’s already pulling way more information than the car telemetry.
Reclaim your privacy. Buy an iPhone.
All I hope now is, that your plain old Bluetooth connection doesn't do anything like that... If it wasn't for economic reasons (read: dreadfully bad MPG), my 40 year old Range Rover would propably be my daily driver one day, good luck getting tracking data out of that car!
Insane and creepy. but at least Google knows something of security. Most car manufacturers do not.
People already have a very well configured device hooked up to all kind of extras with them in their pocket. I don't really known what Android Auto or CarPlay offer but my weak understanding is it's mostly a dumb screen & display... Maybe a microphone? If hvac & lighting & other auxiliary systems were also controllable some really pleasant well integrated experiences could be made.
And also the people riding in the back would have a much easier time being able to DJ.
Alas any and all data integrations imply they will almost immediately be used for a the worst ends. The old EU funded Webinos IoT system had a really neat pro-user model, and they had some OK car based demoes too before they closed up. There's just so little places where trust can even start today, & comparatively webinos was such a solid trustful/trustable go.
Android Automotive sounds it is it's own infotainment. I guess I'm more interested in getting the data out to users, to consume & use in different creative ways.
I thought webinos was so cool because it was a really interesting platform for exposing capabilites to users, who could then give different apps & services access. It was both a competent IoT platform, & one that effectively through encryption basically sent all data over VPN to the user, who then figured out what to do with it.
They don't have to stop the crappy behavior because where are you going to go? Most addresses in the US have no more than one reasonable ISP available (some have zero). I'm just hoping that all the other car manufacturers don't rally around GM and announce they're all doing the same thing to try to capture/generate subscription revenue from their low-margin products.
Perhaps that's changed. There have been warnings about using AndroidAuto and CarPlay with rental cars for years. Now that cars are increasingly collecting data and sending it home themselves, any info your personal car has collected from your phone or usage can be sent back too.
https://www.wgal.com/article/connecting-your-cellphone-to-yo...
https://www.creativetechs.com/2022/06/24/how-to-safely-use-c...
https://old.reddit.com/r/AndroidAuto/comments/v1z1ru/is_it_g...
For some details see: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9571200/
> In addition, the forensic artifacts acquired in each analysis area show that the forensic artifacts obtainable in IVI systems using Android Auto and Apple CarPlay are not limited to the internal storage in a mobile device. As such, a digital forensic examination of various elements constituting the IVI system is a useful addition to vehicle forensics. An increasing number of people are using Android Auto and Apple CarPlay, and more vehicles and manufacturers are sup-porting these systems. The proposed forensic methodology and the acquired artifacts can be applied as an important basis for future vehicle crime investigations.
But every car I’ve hooked CarPlay up to wants to register it with Bluetooth at the same time so it can access my contacts. And that is a risk.
> There’s no worry about CarPlay revealing any of your information to later car renters
And the NIH study just says there has not been any research done on the issue yet.
The issue isn't with Android Auto/CarPlay, but the legacy Bluetooth features that give the car access to your phonebook and SMS logs. You need to make sure to decline those when connecting your phone.
I can now upgrade my entire entertainment system, GPS, phone, etc. by replacing a phone. They’d prefer you get another car when your system is feeling old.
I don’t even understand why my 2020 car had an optional GPS add-on for thousands of dollars.
Android Auto / CarPlay is one of my favourite evolutions in cars. It could have gone so much worse for the consumer.
I guess it's for people who don't know better.
Even a standalone GPS won't cost that much, and as a bonus, you can take it with you.
Cheaper to have everything wrapped up in one vendor sometimes than having a third party install and service gps.
My guess at least. I don't really know.
However unrelated to this computer vendors I've noticed charge a ton for more data and memory relative to buying from part stores. So perhaps maybe just taking suckers for a ride.
(it's even better than tesla's nav system - you can plan your routes, avoid specific places, etc)
15 years ago, drove a BMW 1 series that was more precise. Today, driving a Volvo XC90, it gets confused in an underground garage and doesn't reset using GPS signal fast enough.
The standalone GPS have a place but I suspect they’re a tiny minority for in-car usage compared to phones.
* Location on the map is represented far more accurately
* Knows which way I am pointed and can give accurate directions as soon as I start navigation, while sometimes with my phone I need to move a bit for it to know which way I’m oriented
* Works in tunnels
* Tends to stick to main roads while Apple and Google maps are far too aggressive sending me down side roads or crossing over 2 lanes of traffic.
* Don’t need to pause navigation or mess around with my phone when getting in and out of the car for breaks
* Has detailed information about the services/stores/restaurants available at each rest stop along the highway, and distances to each stop
* Detailed information about lane closures, temporary speed limit reductions due to weather, chain restrictions, etc
* Displays accurate representations of street signs and 3d renderings of off ramps
* Displays landmarks at intersections (e.g. turn right before the ramen shop on the right)
* Much more customizable interface. I can choose whether I want it to display gas stations, convenience stores, parking, etc. on the map. How many prompts before a turn. I can enable or disable various features like split-screen turn guidance, etc.
I have used both CarPlay and the built-in GPS, and overwhelmingly prefer the built-in GPS. So I disagree that it is just for people who “don’t know better”.
What I don't understand is why most of the replacement head units have CD/DVD players. (not that recent cars allow you to replace anything)
I'm surprised it didn't work that way. I still don't understand why.
It’s because I already have all the apps and data there. I don’t want to retype addresses into the car, I want to click them in my email or calendar. And I don’t want to set up my emails in my car’s OS, especially not one that has a lucrative contract with Google.
It’s a major benefit of CarPlay that you can get new map technology on a new phone. Would Apple Maps of today with its vector data and 3D buildings run on a phone from 2013? Is there any reason to think that whatever system is going into the 2023 Blazer EV won’t be a bad joke by 2033? The maps on my phone will probably be pulling in Apple’s lidar scans for very precise local road data.
By the time some GM phone connect system got through the pipes (several years), we might be carrying AR glasses instead of phones.
The iPhone still supports that protocol. I could navigate through my podcast player (Overcast) from the head unit of my old car
Other than the Corvette (amazing performance and value), and perhaps it’s trucks, GM is a literally asleep at the wheel.
I’ll give you the Korean competitors, but what Japanese competitor are you impressed by? The BZ4X/Solterra? MX-30? The Prologue which is a BEV3 car with a Honda sticker on it?
Unfortunately the Niro / Kona suffer from slow charging and the Ioniq 5 / EV6 are in a higher price segment.
Japan is lethargic in terms of EVs despite an obvious tech advantage ...
Ford is the only American car company that impresses me
https://9to5mac.com/2023/04/13/ford-carplay-support-commitme...
In the meantime I'm probably going to wait things out in a Corolla hatchback or something. Equinox EV might've been in the sweet spot, but to spend $30-40k on it to just be squeezed for software subscriptions that probably won't even be good, ugh.
Bigger car than I want though. It's too bad Honda didn't decide to make an Equinox clone instead, the Prologue is 100% better looking than the Blazer.
Bluetooth is meh. I would rather have an aux cord. From the days when we connected systems by physically connecting systems.
I am in the car to drive, a delightful escape from interacting with a phone.
GM plans to phase out Apple CarPlay in EVs, with Google's help - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35389021 - March 2023 (377 comments)
Here's the android auto experience: Take my phone out of my pocket (not that easy when you are already sitting...), turn on bluetooth (I often have it off because it grabs my headphones etc when I don't want it to) and connecting it to usb (where'd the damn cable go? An apple using family member swapped it out for a lightning cable, and tossed the usb c cable in the back, or on the floor...)
Every now and then it won't connect anyway - or the usb cable is defective (it lives on the car floor so it has a short life), or the usb slot in the car (especially a rental) is defective.
A passenger might have a higher priority bluetooth device and it steals the connection.
When I get to my destination I forget my phone in the car because it is in my pocket most of the time - but not if you are going to use android auto!
If GM manages to do as well or better than Tesla on their infotainment system it would be a win. Unlikely for a dinosaur company like GM, but if they are using an android product there's a fighting chance.
You may want to make sure you’re familiar with the latest incarnation of the two products before you blame them for issues that have been solved.
that said, I don't agree that it's a "really bad user experience". it meets or exceeds 95% of my expectations for an infotainment integration, and I trust google to keep it working 5-8 years down the line much more than I trust the software dev team of my car's manufacturer. the only thing that really pisses me off is how google voice assistant uses zero "common sense" when interpreting street addresses and song names. no, I don't want to navigate to a similar street name 1000 miles away. I want to navigate to my parents' house, same as the last 50 times...
Every time I rented cars since I would always make sure it had apple CarPlay so I could drive any with a familiar experience.
Now today, my car has wireless CarPlay. My experience goes like this, I get in my car, turn it on, my head unit loads apple CarPlay instantly and I have Waze running which I like for speed camera notifications on new roads and my music and playlists instantly accessible.
It’s seamless, instant and I don’t touch my phone it stays in my pocket.
I would never consider a car with out either android auto or CarPlay. It’s mandatory for me and yes I miss out of heads up display of directions, but then I don’t have to pay an additional subscription to traffic info, or pay an update fee for new maps.
I won’t buy another car without wireless CarPlay. Or maybe android auto if it’s also good; I haven’t tried it in years. But I want nothing to do with a car manufacturer’s crappy outdated infotainment systems ever again.
Edit: one fundamental problem with what GM is attempting is that the software embedded in a car is on an extremely slow development cycle and is never upgraded in any significant way. If they want to impress me, they need to keep the CarPlay/Android connection technology and then sell me a super slick GM device that connects to that and is better than my phone. I would gladly buy that, and possibly even pay for some subscription services, but it has to be separate from the vehicle that realistically gets upgraded only when I replace my car every 10 years. A 10 year upgrade cycle for the type of software we are talking about is pathetic.
I don't personally own a car but every time I rent one I know to grab a USB cable and to grab my phone out of my pocket to hook it up. That happens rare enough for it to be a habit for me, I can't imagine that being a serious issue for anyone who owns a car.
Any "hassle" (which I am not convinced actually exists) is outweighed by my music, my voice assistant, maps settings, etc etc etc all being reflected through CarPlay.
I get in my car, plug it in, and it's ready to roll. No need to deal with Bluetooth or the like, it just works. I'm fine with plugging a phone in when I get in, rather than having it in my pocket and possibly falling out without me knowing about it.
My only gripe is there should be an option to turn off Wi-Fi when you plug into the car. Every time I get in the car, start a song, drive away, 30 seconds of silence while it realizes I can’t get to my Wi-Fi, song is back on. Why would they not have an option to just use cellular in CarPlay mode which is what 99.9% of people do?
With wireless, no one is stopping you from having a charging cable.
Majority of trips are less < 10 minutes I don't have to take my phone out of my pocket.
Somehow people do / handle this situation just fine.
I ended up having to power the car off to get the dialog to go away, but in the meantime, drove in the right lane because I had no idea if I was speeding or not, and couldn't imagine trying to explain that to a cop if I were pulled over.
Show them the dashboard, and ask if they can issue a fixit ticket to the rental car company, or if they know how to report it to the automotive recall people.
I drive a car made in 2019, and it has wireless CarPlay. I get in the car, start it up, CarPlay is ready for me in like 30s and I’m ready.
Drove a similarly aged economy car that had wired CarPlay and it was the same deal just the 10 extra seconds to plug in a cable.
I refuse to get a car without CarPlay, even when renting.
Isn't it uncomfortable sitting with a phone in your pocket?
Why would you turn on bluetooth? Haven't we all been collectively griping about every iteration of bluetooth for the last couple decades?? I do leave bluetooth on on my iphone (because I've gotten rid of peripherals that don't play nicely) but have bluetooth disabled in my cars. My Honda pops up an useless modal if your phone is paired with bluetooth and then you plug in the lightning cable for CarPlay, something about "HEY I'M DISCONNECTING FROM BLUETOOTH <OK> ".
> A passenger might have a higher priority bluetooth device and it steals the connection.
This is also why I wish I could disable wireless CarPlay in my one car that supports it; I want only the phone that's plugged in to be doing CarPlay.
I have the opposite problem on Android auto.
When I connect my phone (by USB cable) and start Android auto for navigation it also wants to use my phone for music too. The problem is that my daughter doesn't like my music and I haven't found a way of using navigation from my phone together with music from hers...
I generally end up using the built in navigator rather than my phone (which isn't as good as Google maps) to let my daughter control the music over bluetooth.
* Turn on car * My music starts playing * Screen shows Google Maps, following location * If it's a longer trip, I'll pull phone out of pocket and place on magnetic mount that also charges it
This is even with a 3rd-party CarPlay screen! This device sends audio to the car via the car's Bluetooth, so my steering wheel controls still work. Only real downside is the wireless CarPlay audio lag (~2s).
Not anymore.
I don’t mind having to plug in my phone for CarPlay. It’s one of the only times I remember to charge my phone!
* Support an open protocol for rendering images/video/animations on the screen. Sorta like... you know, CarPlay.
* Have controls for what events are allowed to be sent to the connected device. Don't want your phone to know your Throttle Position? Turn that shit off. Don't want your phone to know whether it's dark/light outside? Turn that on/off too.
The new online way of doing things is mostly better for most people, but it’s not universally better.
Now you have the added bonus of gambling on whether or not the maps are actually updated. My SO wanted to update the maps in their Jeep since all the exit numbers around us had changed. Not only did the install take hours, the exit numbers were still the old ones. Hooray!
Jeep just threw up their hands because the license key had been used; total racket.
This isn't at all required for music or maps. Phones have up to a terabyte of storage now.
crap, over actual air? I am suspicious of all OS/firmware updates because they tend to move my cheese or just outright disable/nerf features.
I wonder if GM OnStar sneaks firmware updates into your car even when you don't have a subscription.
1. Bail out of infotainment and let others deal with the software, that way at least you aren't paying for this. If you go for an open source/standard, maybe you can commoditize your complement.
2. Monetize it somehow, with the (dis)advantage of owning your stack as much as possible.
OP suggests (1). GM is choosing (2). Either makes a bit more sense for car manufacturers than the current situation, if they don't worry too much about losing customers while they make the transition, and if they can do (2) without sucking too much.
Another thing to note is that when AV cars arrive, the user (former driver) will have a lot more time for infotainment. It's possible that differentiation will more strongly select for these types of features. So again you have the options of bailing out/doing it yourself. The current situation: Letting Google/Apple own much of the stack is the worst for you, since these companies may prefer their own cars (there are persistent rumors of an Apple car, Google is known for Waymo).
The joy of seeing car bro gearheads with their LS swaps get humiliated by normies in Teslas wasn't worth it. Take me back.
1) Small screen hard to read with ageing eyes from that distance, or to operate touch controls precisely. This alone is a deal breaker, anything that requires more focus or concentration is A safety hazard and a no go.
2) unsightly charging cables hanging around.
3) no backing camera support. Also a safety hazard.
4) no handsfree support i.e control volume, skip songs without looking or lifting hands from the steering wheel
You wouldn't even want the phone to show the backup camera; you said it's too small for your eyes. The car has to be able to show the backup camera in the console anyway.
> 4) no handsfree support i.e control volume, skip songs without looking or lifting hands from the steering wheel
I have disabled bluetooth in my cars because it's a worse experience than wired CarPlay, but if I had to, I could just go back to it and my cars support controlling the music from the physical car controls (including the ones on the steering wheel), just like when it's connected by CarPlay. This has worked for ~15 years at least.
I could see this being an issue for some eyes. For me though the phone's touch screen is actually far easier to operate due to its location next to the steering wheel/driver's side support column. Rather than hovering my hand in the air at full reach to interact with a central unit, I keep my hand braced against either the wheel or the handle on the column and have full support when interacting with the phone.
> unsightly charging cables hanging around.
Guilty as charged. I did wire the cable to my wireless charger behind the trim in an appealing way, but my new phone doesn't even support wireless charging so I have a dangling wire now.
> no backing camera support.
My vehicle doesn't have a camera, but I've never really needed it. It comes from the time when the rear windows were large enough to clearly see everything going on out the back. This is before regulations shifted to make the rear columns massive, block all your visibility, and force you to use the camera rather than your own sense and intuition. If I had a tiny child I might reconsider.
> no handsfree support i.e control volume, skip songs without looking or lifting hands from the steering wheel
I installed a device (USA Spec BT45-TOY) that allows my phone's bluetooth to connect to the stock head unit with full support for steering wheel controls. All the magic of bluetooth with 0 LCD screens shining at me (so long as my phone screen is off).
It just makes no sense anymore for cars to have entertainment and navigation systems at all. Our phones do everything.
The only smart features I need in the can are vehicle instrumentation displays.
We have a Palisade. Hyundai has done so much right on their recent cars. I’m sure they’ve made even better EV’s
It seems to me that what they want to do is create an android-powered internal system that requires a subscription to their cellular service to use.
They were not greedy Big IT. Instead the defined Bluetooth as standard. The Result? My iPhone can talk with me in my Audi A4 (B8,2008). And even music because refit Bluetooth. And? Because the screen is set back in the center console (luckily no touch) I can place my phone there and use it for navigation.
Need for CarPlay? 0
Need for Android Auto? 0
:)
Carmakers should tell Apple and Google that they should come again with a free of charge standard remote protocol. SPICE or something similar. And carmakers with repeating fees? Don’t buy.
That’s what make the decision more galling: free wasn’t good enough, we demand recurring revenue!
Phones in cradles / perched on bits of the dash car sometimes be a bit awkward to interact with or set up (depends on the car though).
Would I turn down AA/Car play? No. But it's not a need for me. And I'm not even sure how they'd scale to the giant center console and lovely dashboard display.
As noted in other comments, the standard infotainment systems in cars are so poor. Why would I opt for them in place of CarPlay / Android Auto? This is just greed. Plain and simple.
I mentioned this before in an a previous post in April[2]. Car Dashboard designers are not good at software innovation. But they are good at positioning buttons into the right places. or move stuff around here and there. It's what they do. Like moving radio controls onto the steering wheel. In the case of Mercedes, they move the maps feature right into the driver's view. And they offer it in different formats, like text view, Augmented reality camera view, or map view. The same goes for radio content.
Hate to say it, but the flexibility the Mercedes dashboard offers makes it a more superior option compared to the built-in CarPlay and Android Auto that is also. I rarely use this superior option (or whenever I don't feel like connecting my phone by wire) because I am satisfied with CarPlay, and less satisfied with Android Auto (it crashes satellite view map).
Dashboard designers want more of the OS apps to be configurable and stretchable across the interface they install.
[1] http://canadianautoreview.ca/images/car_photos/2017-mercedes...
Unless CarPlay includes a new interface for these kind of things, I would not be able to consider using CarPlay on a EV I am afraid.
Will definitely hurt GM sales, big time, and probably take several years to undo the damage. The innovation and speed to launch new services on carplay dwarfs whatever GM can do on its own, even with google, given the slowness of OEM software development and testing.
This statement would still be true if just one person per week makes a reservation.
"GM said it will gradually shift to built-in infotainment systems that use Google's Android Automotive platform."
I'm driving a new Volvo that has exactly this, and it allows CarPlay. In fact, the next software update looks like it will support CarPlay2.
https://www.xc40forum.com/threads/carplay-access-to-driver%E...
I wish at least Android Automotive would be developed with an AOSP-like model.
A UI that is an extension of the phone makes the most sense.
PS I have two data points. My wife's car is slightly newer and a different brand but equally horrendous in different ways.
Meet the new boss…
(Which leaves me somewhat wondering how much Google is paying GM to eliminate Apple CarPlay from the picture? Apple seems the only company inconvenienced here. Most of the inconvenience is born by the users of a loss of key user-facing features.)
CarPlay (I’m not familiar with Android Auto) doesn’t require that GM cede any control over their software stack. As Wikipedia puts it, it just “enables a car radio or head unit to be a display and a controller for an iOS device”.
What GM wants is to charge you $30/month for services, since phones have mostly killed their OnStar cash cow. What they’re going to learn is the extent to which “doesn’t work with my phone” is going to be a deciding factor for vehicle purchases.
Except, from what I understand they'll use Android Automotive (not to be confused with Android Auto).
Then why does it demand that Siri be enabled in order to complete the connection?
Seems like there’ll be lots of plays for folks like Alpine to cater to all the frustrated folks whose factory unit is trash.
No way that I'll buy another car without it.
Since when has a car company ever created workable software?
The screens still lag, and the in-car integration systems are so garbage that they found it worthwhile to farm them out to tech companies.
And CarPlay/Android Auto aren't much better; Google employees are specifically hired based on their expertise of data structures and algorithms so they have zero excuse for the abysmal quality of the software they turn out.
If this is what tens of millions in salaries buys I'm suddenly a lot less disappointed in the fact that AI can do a better job.
It really isn't whether CarPlay or Android is better. The fact that it is a choice that the auto manufacturer would make at all and b) it wouldn't listen to their customer base.
If I was on the GM board or a major shareholder, I would have huge questions about leadership.
Everyone on here works for or owns or manages or is planning a startup that wants MRR.
Don't like it, walk out. Let investors know enough is enough.
They are all working towards the inevitable future when you sign up for personal EV transportation using a monthly subscription just like your phones...
Is it me, or does this tinfoil make me look fat?