No, they didn't want to simply get their names into these cars. They realised the car manufactures wouldn't give them full control, but wanted to give iPhone owners at least some kind of solution to benefiting from owning an iPhone and using it in their car.
I realize they didn't go into it with that intent, but look at the result. The intent doesn't matter if the end result is subpar. This reminds me of the original Apple-Motorola ROKR venture, and we know how that turned out.
What Apple is showing off is already way ahead of what most automakers have implemented on their own. The Ford Sync system on my 2010 Escape is so inconsistent with voice activated features working that I seldom try to use them. Even using my iPhone for music via bluetooth streaming is sometimes automatic; other times, the phone isn't detected and you need to scroll through menus via knobs to get streaming initiated. And don't bother trying to select music via voice controls. Too frustrating. Checked the Ford website recently to see if there ever was an update to the software (Microsoft designed) on my vehicle and nothing in the last 3.5 years. Ford owners with touch screens and navigation and a more complex software installation are doing a lot of complaining online and more updates have been issued to deal with their problems, but customer feedback still looks fairly negative. I'm looking forward to seeing Apple or third party solutions to retrofit existing vehicles to get CarPlay features.
Yeah touch screen and all are nice but not in a car while you are driving.
Certain car controls need to stay as manual knobs and buttons. I drive my car and never take my eyes off the road to change the heat or the volume on the radio and the list goes on. I can reach over and feel for the right control knob and button and I am done. You can not do that with a touch screen, you have to look at the screen to know where to press, this is when accident happen.
Lastly these systems cost $3000 extra and why would you pay that much extra for a toy in a car, You suppose to be driving not entertaining yourself. It bad enough we have to dodge drivers using the cell phone, imagine what it is going to be like when these systems get out there.
Apple was most successful when they walked away from things that didn't give them full control, as the user experience was usually terrible (Motorola iTunes phone...). One can only hope that they will do the same here (soon).
What Apple SHOULD have done is take over the control panel completely, and manage the UI for the entire car system, including heating, radio, on-board computer, etc. That would have been an Apple product. But most car manufacturers probably believe that their UI is a key branding aspect and so would not have given them control. Apple should then have walked away.
I really did not think Steve was so important (especially as he made a lot of mistakes), but in his final 5-7 years, he knew when to walk away. He would have walked away from CarPlay the way it is now (the same way he never made a big hoopla about Apple TV).
This looks like a big dud to me. Every mistake Apple used to make fun of, they did with this: rushing to market because a competitor is getting into this space (Android agreements with Audi etc), letting hardware manufacturers have too much say (seriously, the implementation on the Ferrari is awful, and not much better on the Merc and the Volvo), and not thinking through the user experience when designing the UI.
I really really hate to say this, but Steve would have put a small screen in the middle of the dashboard in front of the driver, and one button or a lever on the steering wheel. The UI has to be contextual to the situation: a touchscreen works if you are walking on the street or sitting on a bus, but for drivers, the UI has to be adapted. Apple! A terrible UI! Unbelievable! (I am upset because I own AAPL, such a shame.)
I for one will continue to use my iPhone by hooking it up to Bluetooth in my car. I get almost all the functionality of CarPlay, without having to deal with a weird and incomplete user interface. iOS in the car should have been about getting rid of the screen in the car, not making it bigger and messier.
Apple was most successful when they walked away from things that didn't give them full control, as the user experience was usually terrible (Motorola iTunes phone...). One can only hope that they will do the same here (soon).
What Apple SHOULD have done is take over the control panel completely, and manage the UI for the entire car system, including heating, radio, on-board computer, etc. That would have been an Apple product. But most car manufacturers probably believe that their UI is a key branding aspect and so would not have given them control. Apple should then have walked away.
And then basically secede the market to Google or Microsoft or whoever. How is that smart?
This looks like a big dud to me. Every mistake Apple used to make fun of, they did with this: rushing to market because a competitor is getting into this space (Android agreements with Audi etc), letting hardware manufacturers have too much say (seriously, the implementation on the Ferrari is awful, and not much better on the Merc and the Volvo), and not thinking through the user experience when designing the UI.
I really really hate to say this, but Steve would have put a small screen in the middle of the dashboard in front of the driver, and one button or a lever on the steering wheel. The UI has to be contextual to the situation: a touchscreen works if you are walking on the street or sitting on a bus, but for drivers, the UI has to be adapted. Apple! A terrible UI! Unbelievable! (I am upset because I own AAPL, such a shame.)
I for one will continue to use my iPhone by hooking it up to Bluetooth in my car. I get almost all the functionality of CarPlay, without having to deal with a weird and incomplete user interface. iOS in the car should have been about getting rid of the screen in the car, not making it bigger and messier.
How did Apple rush this to market when they announced it last June? And quit with the stupid "Steve would have nonsense". He wasn't some god that that all the answers and always did everything perfectly. Plus auto companies probably weren't willing to give Apple total control. I'd rather see Apple get a foothold in this market than scede it to Google or Microsoft because they stubbornly insist on controlling the whole widget.
Not sure why Volvo is referred to as the Swedish car maker, when it is owned by a Chinese company.
Do we still refer to Chrysler as an American car maker, even though it is owned by an Italian company? Are Rolls Royce and Bentley considered British car makers, even though they are owned by German companies? Is Nissan a Japanese car maker, even though a French company holds a controlling interest? Was Mazda a Japanese car maker when an American company held a controlling interest?
Apple was most successful when they walked away from things that didn't give them full control, as the user experience was usually terrible (Motorola iTunes phone...). One can only hope that they will do the same here (soon).
What Apple SHOULD have done is take over the control panel completely, and manage the UI for the entire car system, including heating, radio, on-board computer, etc. That would have been an Apple product. But most car manufacturers probably believe that their UI is a key branding aspect and so would not have given them control. Apple should then have walked away.
Yes, this I agree with. Maybe this is what they did with Tesla, or maybe not.
The Mercedes video in German is very cool... Siri speaks very smoothly...
I'd like to hear a demo in French or Spanish.
I got to wondering about voice commands with CarPlay. In my BMW I already have rudimentary voice commands. So will the user be able to switch between Siri voice commands and built-in voice commands? Will there be two voice buttons on the steering wheel? I imagine there will be other overlapping functionality between CarPlay and the built-in system.
By coming back and offering the better product later. They were late with an MP3 player, phone, tablet, and TV dongle. They don't have a watch, and they never had a netbook. They were successful when they did things in their own time. This is a rubbish product and may really hurry their brand. Like the Motorola iTunes phone.
How did Apple rush this to market when they announced it last June? And quit with the stupid "Steve would have nonsense". He wasn't some god that that all the answers and always did everything perfectly. Plus auto companies probably weren't willing to give Apple total control. I'd rather see Apple get a foothold in this market than scede it to Google or Microsoft because they stubbornly insist on controlling the whole widget.
How did Apple rush this to market when they announced it last June? And quit with the stupid "Steve would have nonsense". He wasn't some god that that all the answers and always did everything perfectly. Plus auto companies probably weren't willing to give Apple total control. I'd rather see Apple get a foothold in this market than scede it to Google or Microsoft because they stubbornly insist on controlling the whole widget.
I apologise for the "Steve would have", but this is half baked, badly implemented, and ineffectual "solution". Current systems are really bad, they could have used a "revolution" like the iPod and the iPhone. CarPlay is not better. I would have preferred the leave the market to Android and let them fail (like CarPlay will fail, there is just no reason to get it) and then come out with a proper solution. Or not. But this will be a major dud and brand dilutive.
How did Apple rush this to market when they announced it last June? And quit with the stupid "Steve would have nonsense". He wasn't some god that that all the answers and always did everything perfectly. Plus auto companies probably weren't willing to give Apple total control. I'd rather see Apple get a foothold in this market than scede it to Google or Microsoft because they stubbornly insist on controlling the whole widget.
The other issue lies with how the in-dash systems would operate without any Apple devices attached. This is where every car maker has their own approach. Mercedes and BMW have the low mounted toggle knobs, while VW and Hyundai use hard buttons flanking the touchscreen, and Ford goes with an all-touch approach. And some car makers will assign other functions such as climate control to the on-screen touch controls, while other makers choose to keep those functions separate from the infotainment unit. This is not a situation where Apple can control the entire widget, since car makers can have huge functional differences between their own models (and even trim levels on the same model).
If anything, the announcement is probably sooner than Apple's normal rollout schedule. But, March is the latter part of the car show season where auto makers announce and display their models for the upcoming year. Summer would be a lousy time to make this kind of announcement, since much of the auto industry is in retooling and clearance mode by that time. And Apple cannot keep something like CarPlay under wraps with things as conspicuous as a Siri button on the steering wheel or a CarPlay button on the in-dash system already appearing in the display models.
And if anyone's going to play the "Steve would have done this" game, would Jobs have approved basically licensing iOS to the auto makers and letting them handle the implementation independently without any integration with Apple hardware? Considering the long model cycles for cars, Apple would have to jump deep into the car design process early on. And if they wanted to impose a uniform standard that would be consistent from one auto maker to another, they would have to have buy-in very early and from a lot of different car companies. This would be a lot harder with cars than with smartphones, given the lack of uniform standards with in-dash systems and the level of integration between the infotainment system and other functions.
With CarPlay, the OS is integrated into an iOS device. As an overlay, it's much easier to integrate into an existing in-dash system, than to require that the entire system run on iOS. As it is, CarPlay will drive iOS device sales and/or strengthen tie-ins with existing iOS owners, and Apple will maintain control over the UI and the feature updates. To me, that's more in line with Jobs' vision.
With CarPlay, the OS is integrated into an iOS device. As an overlay, it's much easier to integrate into an existing in-dash system, than to require that the entire system run on iOS. As it is, CarPlay will drive iOS device sales and/or strengthen tie-ins with existing iOS owners, and Apple will maintain control over the UI and the feature updates. To me, that's more in line with Jobs' vision.
Besides being the only viable method to make this work and allowing Apple to tailor changes to the UI as they see fit it also allows after-market vendors to create compatible solutions. I know Pioneer has AppRadio which seems to work with the same sort of Lightning to HDMI connector that these will likely need to function.
Comments
I realize they didn't go into it with that intent, but look at the result. The intent doesn't matter if the end result is subpar. This reminds me of the original Apple-Motorola ROKR venture, and we know how that turned out.
Yeah touch screen and all are nice but not in a car while you are driving.
Certain car controls need to stay as manual knobs and buttons. I drive my car and never take my eyes off the road to change the heat or the volume on the radio and the list goes on. I can reach over and feel for the right control knob and button and I am done. You can not do that with a touch screen, you have to look at the screen to know where to press, this is when accident happen.
Lastly these systems cost $3000 extra and why would you pay that much extra for a toy in a car, You suppose to be driving not entertaining yourself. It bad enough we have to dodge drivers using the cell phone, imagine what it is going to be like when these systems get out there.
Apple was most successful when they walked away from things that didn't give them full control, as the user experience was usually terrible (Motorola iTunes phone...). One can only hope that they will do the same here (soon).
What Apple SHOULD have done is take over the control panel completely, and manage the UI for the entire car system, including heating, radio, on-board computer, etc. That would have been an Apple product. But most car manufacturers probably believe that their UI is a key branding aspect and so would not have given them control. Apple should then have walked away.
I really did not think Steve was so important (especially as he made a lot of mistakes), but in his final 5-7 years, he knew when to walk away. He would have walked away from CarPlay the way it is now (the same way he never made a big hoopla about Apple TV).
This looks like a big dud to me. Every mistake Apple used to make fun of, they did with this: rushing to market because a competitor is getting into this space (Android agreements with Audi etc), letting hardware manufacturers have too much say (seriously, the implementation on the Ferrari is awful, and not much better on the Merc and the Volvo), and not thinking through the user experience when designing the UI.
I really really hate to say this, but Steve would have put a small screen in the middle of the dashboard in front of the driver, and one button or a lever on the steering wheel. The UI has to be contextual to the situation: a touchscreen works if you are walking on the street or sitting on a bus, but for drivers, the UI has to be adapted. Apple! A terrible UI! Unbelievable! (I am upset because I own AAPL, such a shame.)
I for one will continue to use my iPhone by hooking it up to Bluetooth in my car. I get almost all the functionality of CarPlay, without having to deal with a weird and incomplete user interface. iOS in the car should have been about getting rid of the screen in the car, not making it bigger and messier.
The Mercedes video in German is very cool... Siri speaks very smoothly...
I'd like to hear a demo in French or Spanish.
After your comment i made test to see how Siri sounds in Spanish (i understand and speak very well spanish) what i can tell you she sounds great
I guess that it's because that is were it started(?)
I really don't understand the resistive touch on the ferrari.
What would be the benefits of it?
Cheaper, maybe? Ferrari's motto: 'Every little helps'
Not sure why Volvo is referred to as the Swedish car maker, when it is owned by a Chinese company.
Do we still refer to Chrysler as an American car maker, even though it is owned by an Italian company? Are Rolls Royce and Bentley considered British car makers, even though they are owned by German companies? Is Nissan a Japanese car maker, even though a French company holds a controlling interest? Was Mazda a Japanese car maker when an American company held a controlling interest?
Apple was most successful when they walked away from things that didn't give them full control, as the user experience was usually terrible (Motorola iTunes phone...). One can only hope that they will do the same here (soon).
What Apple SHOULD have done is take over the control panel completely, and manage the UI for the entire car system, including heating, radio, on-board computer, etc. That would have been an Apple product. But most car manufacturers probably believe that their UI is a key branding aspect and so would not have given them control. Apple should then have walked away.
Yes, this I agree with. Maybe this is what they did with Tesla, or maybe not.
The Mercedes video in German is very cool... Siri speaks very smoothly...
I'd like to hear a demo in French or Spanish.
I got to wondering about voice commands with CarPlay. In my BMW I already have rudimentary voice commands. So will the user be able to switch between Siri voice commands and built-in voice commands? Will there be two voice buttons on the steering wheel? I imagine there will be other overlapping functionality between CarPlay and the built-in system.
I apologise for the "Steve would have", but this is half baked, badly implemented, and ineffectual "solution". Current systems are really bad, they could have used a "revolution" like the iPod and the iPhone. CarPlay is not better. I would have preferred the leave the market to Android and let them fail (like CarPlay will fail, there is just no reason to get it) and then come out with a proper solution. Or not. But this will be a major dud and brand dilutive.
How did Apple rush this to market when they announced it last June? And quit with the stupid "Steve would have nonsense". He wasn't some god that that all the answers and always did everything perfectly. Plus auto companies probably weren't willing to give Apple total control. I'd rather see Apple get a foothold in this market than scede it to Google or Microsoft because they stubbornly insist on controlling the whole widget.
The other issue lies with how the in-dash systems would operate without any Apple devices attached. This is where every car maker has their own approach. Mercedes and BMW have the low mounted toggle knobs, while VW and Hyundai use hard buttons flanking the touchscreen, and Ford goes with an all-touch approach. And some car makers will assign other functions such as climate control to the on-screen touch controls, while other makers choose to keep those functions separate from the infotainment unit. This is not a situation where Apple can control the entire widget, since car makers can have huge functional differences between their own models (and even trim levels on the same model).
If anything, the announcement is probably sooner than Apple's normal rollout schedule. But, March is the latter part of the car show season where auto makers announce and display their models for the upcoming year. Summer would be a lousy time to make this kind of announcement, since much of the auto industry is in retooling and clearance mode by that time. And Apple cannot keep something like CarPlay under wraps with things as conspicuous as a Siri button on the steering wheel or a CarPlay button on the in-dash system already appearing in the display models.
And if anyone's going to play the "Steve would have done this" game, would Jobs have approved basically licensing iOS to the auto makers and letting them handle the implementation independently without any integration with Apple hardware? Considering the long model cycles for cars, Apple would have to jump deep into the car design process early on. And if they wanted to impose a uniform standard that would be consistent from one auto maker to another, they would have to have buy-in very early and from a lot of different car companies. This would be a lot harder with cars than with smartphones, given the lack of uniform standards with in-dash systems and the level of integration between the infotainment system and other functions.
With CarPlay, the OS is integrated into an iOS device. As an overlay, it's much easier to integrate into an existing in-dash system, than to require that the entire system run on iOS. As it is, CarPlay will drive iOS device sales and/or strengthen tie-ins with existing iOS owners, and Apple will maintain control over the UI and the feature updates. To me, that's more in line with Jobs' vision.
Besides being the only viable method to make this work and allowing Apple to tailor changes to the UI as they see fit it also allows after-market vendors to create compatible solutions. I know Pioneer has AppRadio which seems to work with the same sort of Lightning to HDMI connector that these will likely need to function.
That Mercedes video was one of the creepiest things ive ever seen. That guy looks like a sociopath rapist.
Guy? Dude looks like a lady?
Maybe he was watching the video on one of Apple's more glossy displays.
The Mercedes video I saw has a woman in it too.