Organizational strife said to bedevil Apple's iOS in the Car intiative

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 83
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,388member
    patsu wrote: »
    Astroturfing ? There are guerrilla marketing companies or so called reputation management companies you can pay for writing up bad news and reviews (or vice versa). It's rather popular in the gaming industry.
    http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/01/stealth-marketing-microsoft-paying-youtubers-for-xbox-one-mentions/
  • Reply 42 of 83
    bigpicsbigpics Posts: 1,397member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bennettvista View Post

     

    Right.  So the answer is to buy Tesla.  Re-design it so that it is truly great and Apple opens up a huge new front.


    I like the way you don't think....



    (and if I'm wrong about how far-fetched this is, I'll eat the pixels in this bit of snark)

     

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

    Here’s your problem: You’re playing golf, Apple is playing football.


    And here's Apple's problem: Lately it seems like they're playing touch rules while GOOG's playing tackle... 

     

    ...Also even granting the time between the iMac and the iPod, and then the iPhone and then the iPad, THIS team has to give the world a sense they still have more magical golden eggs to lay even with the chief goose gone. 



    It's been a good while now. 



    Iteration and refinement will only take an enterprise so far. The original laser took a humungous amount of vision, engineering, work and cash to be brought to market.  Yesterday at the Dollar Store I bought a laser pointer/flashlight keychain fob for a buck. Works fine for purpose.



    And the Moto X I finally bought when Apple stubbornly refused to give the screen size I could live with (when they could have) has been a perfectly lovely piece of machinery for $350 complete.



    "Good enough" commoditization and "production experience" lives....

  • Reply 43 of 83
    Purely personal opinion, doesn't worth for me to even rub two pennies. Should find a job at Google
  • Reply 44 of 83
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 2,729member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Arlor View Post

     

     

    I think Apple's doing just fine without a car product. Maybe what they're learning is that the problem is harder than they thought, or that they can't do it with the quality they'd like. Not every internal Apple initiative has been a success, and that's fine. Microsoft and Google may put something out only to have it be a dud, after all. If Apple doesn't do it, I'm sure they have good reason.

     

    iOS and Mac OS have been so successful in part because Apple controls all the hardware -- that is to say, there are no driver issues. That's always been a weak point for Windows and other operating systems. In the car market, Apple is just not going to be in a position to tell all the car producers what hardware they have to install for safety sensors, etc. If Apple didn't want to play the discrete device single manufacturer thermostat market, why would they want to play in the hundreds-of-different-kinds-of-sensors-from-dozens-of-manufacturers car market? 

     

    I could see Apple forming a partnership with a single car manufacturer. I doubt that it will be Tesla, because I don't think Apple will want to tie themselves to a niche brand. It'll be BMW or Mercedes or somebody like that if they want the historical quality factor. Toyota if they want the mass market. 


     

    "I think Apple's doing just fine without a car product."

     

    I disagree.  Losing the automotive integration battle could potentially go a long way to losing the platform war.  Don't underestimate the importance of in-vehicle integration.

  • Reply 45 of 83
    gwmacgwmac Posts: 1,807member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bigpics View Post

    And here's Apple's problem: Lately it seems like they're playing touch rules while GOOG's playing tackle... 

     

    ...Also even granting the time between the iMac and the iPod, and then the iPhone and then the iPad, THIS team has to give the world a sense they still have more magical golden eggs to lay even with the chief goose gone. 



    It's been a good while now. 


     

    I agree. We are all waiting on the next big thing. I understand if it is going to be an entire new product or category it will take years of tweaking, refining, and testing before it gets released. But I hope they have some big new launches coming this year or next. I think home automation and car entertainment/navi systems are areas Apple does now want to let Google dominate. I suppose at least with Google and their open alliance that they would let iPhones work in cars with their system. They seem to be picking up steam though so if Apple wants to find a partner they better hurry. http://www.openautoalliance.net/#members

  • Reply 46 of 83
    desuserigndesuserign Posts: 1,316member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by itpromike View Post

     

    The sleepy time that anyone . . .

    [a sea of gray text]

    . . . like even though you partner with them, you really are just working FOR them and that they know best, always, at all times, even when they don't.


     

    Apple isn't going to bring what the car companies want. The car companies could hire anyone to do that.

    Apple will bring what they do best — what users don't know they want yet — something that can evolve.

    I don't think the problem is Apple's arrogance, it may well be the auto industry's yearning for built in differentiation. The car and the personal device don't have to merge (as auto designers seem to think.) They just need to work well together. You are right openness is the answer. Open basic standards that is, not "Android and Windows openness." Apple embraces open standards and then build unique UX on them. What you describe is more like ActiveX, et. al.

     

    I suppose a good place to start would be to bring some kind of lower level standard data interface to the game. Automotive companies are good at cooperating, to some extent, on basic industry standards, but I imagine they'll be dragging their feet on creating a useful standard for interfacing with external devicesAuto companies have an f-ed up mental model for this type of thing. They have to please dealers, and trick customers into paying more for "luxury" features. They make all their $ on high end models and almost nothing on entry models. A GPS worth @ $100 is an $800 option! etc. This is just plain stupid. They should work with Apple and others to make some data standards that are neutral, low level, secure, and robust—a sort of a unix interface for car data. This would give everyone a place to start from without stepping on anyone's toes. Everyone could then do as they please, and the customers could decide who did the best job. Apple would be able to concentrate on providing a great UX and others could do a CLI, Amazon Crime, or Googifukation as they please.

     

    Best of all, the vehicle/customer/auto manufacturer isn't chained to a crappy choice. If you don't' like just hook up the device of your choice with the app of your choice and viola!, personal auto nirvana! (or hell, as the case may be.)

  • Reply 47 of 83
    desuserigndesuserign Posts: 1,316member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    I don't think Apple is a very good fit for this project anyway. In car systems need to be highly integrated with all the onboard sensors and vehicle safety features most of which has nothing to do with iOS. It is no surprise that they are having a difficult time because Apple historically doesn't work well with others. Unless they control a product from top to bottom, hardware and software they are out of their element.


    Apple works well with the internet, ethernet, Wifi, the web, servers, etc. etc. They don't control those products from top to bottom. They want to control their part of the overall  widget. Far from the "if cars worked like computers" meme, the auto industry is the control freak. Hell, it was like pulling teeth to get access to trouble codes! (and it's still less than ideal.) When they advance into the 21st century and agree on an open standard interface with auto system, innovation can occur. 

  • Reply 48 of 83
    patsupatsu Posts: 430member
    desuserign wrote: »
    Apple works well with the internet, ethernet, Wifi, the web, servers, etc. etc. They don't control those products from top to bottom. They want to control their part of the overall  widget. Far from the "if cars worked like computers" meme, the auto industry is the control freak. Hell, it was like pulling teeth to get access to trouble codes! (and it's still less than ideal.) When they advance into the 21st century and agree on an open standard interface with auto system, innovation can occur. 

    Yes, my sentiment so far, but I am usually more mellow.

    The automakers may also complain about paying or subsidising Apple, and losing control over the UX. Then again, may be Apple need to carve out some room so that it can innovate without restrictions.

    Read an article earlier that the car industry takes up to 10 years to plan a platform for safety reason. Apple probably don't have that kind of patience. We will likely see incremental effort as the relationship deepens.
  • Reply 49 of 83
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bigpics View Post

     

    I like the way you don't think....



    (and if I'm wrong about how far-fetched this is, I'll eat the pixels in this bit of snark)


    You won't be eating pixels thats for sure.  But the idea is not far fetched, it will most likely be Google who eventually partners with Musk.

  • Reply 50 of 83
    focherfocher Posts: 688member
    No one in this thread even mentioned OBD2 or the CANNBUS. That pretty much says it all about what people know about this space.
  • Reply 51 of 83
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by focher View Post



    No one in this thread even mentioned OBD2 or the CANNBUS. That pretty much says it all about what people know about this space.

     

    Actually I was referring to OBD2  and CAN here:

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

     

    . . . . the auto industry is the control freak. Hell, it was like pulling teeth to get access to trouble codes! (and it's still less than ideal.) . . . 


     

    The auto industry didn't implement OBD2 because they wanted to, it was pretty much mandated for EPA compliance consumer rights. The CAN bus was a handy means to that end, but it doesn't cover all the bases and it isn't a free and open standard (although the terms may be reasonable.) Something along this line is where they should go, but I doubt they have been designed with the kind of features Apple et al might want or need. I'm sure Apple would be happy to use existing standards (or extend them) if they are adiquately robust, and reasonable in terms and use. 

  • Reply 52 of 83
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by patsu View Post





    Yes, my sentiment so far, but I am usually more mellow.



    The automakers may also complain about paying or subsidising Apple, and losing control over the UX. Then again, may be Apple need to carve out some room so that it can innovate without restrictions.



    Read an article earlier that the car industry takes up to 10 years to plan a platform for safety reason. Apple probably don't have that kind of patience. We will likely see incremental effort as the relationship deepens.

     

    It's funny. In many ways the auto industry are the original UX-centered companies that Apple emulated to become who they are. On the other hand, the auto industry is the ultimate moribund, big, dumb, incumbent entity that can't evolve or change with the times. There's no real reason a feed of data and some control over minor systems (radio, mirrors, seat position, a display, etc.) need to be coupled to the longer term development. But I'm sure the car companies can't see that.

  • Reply 53 of 83
    v5vv5v Posts: 1,357member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

     

    There's no real reason a feed of data and some control over minor systems (radio, mirrors, seat position, a display, etc.) need to be coupled to the longer term development. But I'm sure the car companies can't see that.


     

    I don't really understand why the infotainment device even needs to be involved in any of the CANbus kind of stuff. Leave instruments, vehicle hardware and climate control proprietary. All the Android or iOS device has to do is navigate, play music and manage phone calls.

  • Reply 54 of 83
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member

    Apple's great gift is simplifying things so anyone can use them, which then greatly increases the uptake of said thing, making them money. In-car systems are definitely something that could do with simplifying, but they have the same problem they have with the TV: namely, they don't control the whole widget. There are so many overcomplicated tech things in this world, surely there is more low hanging fruit than this.

  • Reply 55 of 83
    They need a leader not a manager! Development needs leadership skills, drive and vision.
  • Reply 56 of 83
    blitz1blitz1 Posts: 444member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

    And tens of millions of cars suddenly won’t drive faster than 25 or let you make a right turn without viewing an ad first.

     


     

    Tens of millions without seeing an ad first

    Millions without first having approval from Apple (within 28 days)

  • Reply 57 of 83
    thedbathedba Posts: 771member
    If anyone had said "The disconnect is attributed primarily to overarching organizational issues that are said to place pressure on non-hardware products that do not fit within existing teams." to Steve Jobs back in the day, they would still be extracting SJ's boot from that person's posterior cavity. I miss SJ. Yes he was a tyrant but he never put up with this kind of nonsense and knew how to push people and products to extremes. I definitely do not like hearing things like this come out of Apple.
    I never heard that coming from Apple. It is only one blogger's opinion. Last I heard, opinion =/= fact.
  • Reply 58 of 83
    [quote name="itpromike" url="/t/161805/organizational-strife-said-to-bedevil-apples-ios-in-the-car-intiative#post_2464391"]The sleepy time that anyone can see a mile away if they pay attention and their loyalties aren't so far ingrained in one company that they overlook obvious missteps. The sleepy time of not realizing that you can't control each and every aspect of every single product and that control has a point or curve where once reached experiences diminishing returns. If Apple would stop trying to control every single minute thing and worry about the only control that truly matters which is overall quality control they would be in a better place. Here is what's going to happen... iOS in the car WILL indeed be launched, it will then be received with lukewarm fan fair... it will be 'neat' for a bit and then because of the way Apple thinks and their corporate culture it won't go far because essentially carmakers are going to need to concede to add the functionality into their already functioning in-dash products which essentially perform all the functions that iOS in the car does but with an interface that's as pretty. THEN Google will start it's onslaught and through their partnerships with these same manufacturers will get Android as the actual operating on the in-dash units themselves. Rather than just essentially a plugin which beams or streams iOS data from the iPhone onto in-dash unit, Googles partnership will see Android actually installed directly on those units. This coupled with Googles approach to be less open and less controlling will give way to a LOT of developer support for the in-dash unit to customize the interface and make it as pretty and/or informative as said developer imagines and the users/customers of these in-dash units will have true choice over the look of their dash, the functionality, and the information they are presented. Apple all the while will be Apple and they will control their little app plugin and give the users no options for how it looks, no options for the information displayed, and real options for developers to tap into it's potential (just like with Apple TV). At the end of the day this will play out just like iOS vs. Android. iOS in the car will have a sizable following but Googles initiative will dominate the industry because they work WITH people instead of arrogantly always presuming on people and making an environment that feels like even though you partner with them, you really are just working FOR them and that they know best, always, at all times, even when they don't.
    [/quote

    You are wrong and you know. You found an opportunity to spew crap and took it.

    The car companies will not allow developers to have free reign to design and develop whatever they want.

    How stupid do you think car companies are?

    First and last, car companies are responsible for everything that goes right and wrong in their cars. Opening up the car to let sloppy developers put apps in the car would be suicide for the car companies. Just one rogue app could kill a family and the lawsuits would pour in.

    Google's car initiative has a lot of flash just like its TV initiative. Android will be a plug-in just as iOS.

    And, if. Google does not enforce full control of its Android efforts it will not be in the car at all
  • Reply 59 of 83
    itpromike wrote: »
    The sleepy time that anyone can see a mile away if they pay attention and their loyalties aren't so far ingrained in one company that they overlook obvious missteps. The sleepy time of not realizing that you can't control each and every aspect of every single product and that control has a point or curve where once reached experiences diminishing returns. If Apple would stop trying to control every single minute thing and worry about the only control that truly matters which is overall quality control they would be in a better place. Here is what's going to happen... iOS in the car WILL indeed be launched, it will then be received with lukewarm fan fair... it will be 'neat' for a bit and then because of the way Apple thinks and their corporate culture it won't go far because essentially carmakers are going to need to concede to add the functionality into their already functioning in-dash products which essentially perform all the functions that iOS in the car does but with an interface that's as pretty. THEN Google will start it's onslaught and through their partnerships with these same manufacturers will get Android as the actual operating on the in-dash units themselves. Rather than just essentially a plugin which beams or streams iOS data from the iPhone onto in-dash unit, Googles partnership will see Android actually installed directly on those units. This coupled with Googles approach to be less open and less controlling will give way to a LOT of developer support for the in-dash unit to customize the interface and make it as pretty and/or informative as said developer imagines and the users/customers of these in-dash units will have true choice over the look of their dash, the functionality, and the information they are presented. Apple all the while will be Apple and they will control their little app plugin and give the users no options for how it looks, no options for the information displayed, and real options for developers to tap into it's potential (just like with Apple TV). At the end of the day this will play out just like iOS vs. Android. iOS in the car will have a sizable following but Googles initiative will dominate the industry because they work WITH people instead of arrogantly always presuming on people and making an environment that feels like even though you partner with them, you really are just working FOR them and that they know best, always, at all times, even when they don't.
    Your argument has one glaring fault. You say google/android's lack of control will lead to more developer support but this is not the case. It's a phalisy that android supporters cling to. More developers want to create for android because it's more open....sorry but this isn't true. In reality more developers want to design for iOS, that's why apple is so successfull, why the App Store is do successfull. Live in reality. Who knows how successfull iOS or android will be in the car. Everyone just assumes it will be hugely successfull but maybe it won't be for either android or iOS??
  • Reply 60 of 83

    mstone - I fully agree.

    Furthermore, whichever car manufacture integrating any software from Google into its car control system is stupid. I for one would never trust it. However, a Tesla and Apple marriage would be highly beneficial for both companies. 

Sign In or Register to comment.