Those are fairly good reasons, that, when added together, could be a valid case for holding back. Still seems rather limited though, with the first reason I wouldn't have thought the wired/wireless distinction would be a killer clause in the system development, or in Apple's dealings with the car manufacturers since Apple have so much expertise in this area (and wireless could be an option, rather than a requirement), and for the second reason BT is a handshake option, but I can't comprehend a compelling case why a wi-fi only handshake (probably with an on-screen code to validate the pairing) wouldn't be sufficient.
But you're probably right, it's all an unnecessary complication for release 1.0.
It's almost been exactly a year since iOS in the Car was first announced. This is slow going even with Pioneer, being try to their name, being the first to be releasing firmware updates to a few select systems. Even with the list of automative manufactures I have doubts most of them will be truly supporting CarPlay until 2015 and probably years before all their lines that have larger in-dash displays will have CarPlay as an option.
I think Audi and GM have announced some sort of WiFi in the car but how that's setup is probably not what Apple would need to tie that to in-dash display.
...but I can't comprehend a compelling case why a wi-fi only handshake...
I don't understand this comment. My comment assumed a BT for the handshake and WiFi for the data, just like with AirDrop on iOS.
I wish I could afford to upgrade my head unit, but I can't.
I'm mainly interested in being able to listen to music from my iPhone in the car and I found an app that is a pretty good alternative.
The developer states on the App Store page that he designed it with in-car use in mind, so you can quickly start playing an album, and easily control playback without even having to look at the screen, unlike the standard music app which has small buttons that are hard to press accurately when your phone is mounted in a dock at arm's length. It gets regular updates, and one feature I particularly like is that I can listen to podcasts and music within the one app.
I had a Pioneer AppRadio installed in my 1989 Mazda Miata last year. Superb sound, runs many of the Apps on my iPhone, including NavFree GPS, plays my music collection, and does handsfree phone calls. I was so very impressed that I recently had a Pioneer NEX installed in my 2000 Buick LeSabre. It's even better than the AppRadio, and I can't wait for the CarPlay firmware update.
Yes they are expensive, but the quality is superior. I am something of an audiophile, and getting early Joan Baez acoustic recordings, for example, to sound as natural and realistic in the car as they do on my home audio system is no mean feat. A car is the absolute worst possible listening room acoustically speaking that one could devise, but with the addition of a simple subwoofer, and some careful tweaking of the EQ, listening position and speaker levels from the head unit, truly startling results are possible. The NEX has a very sophisticated range of acoustic adjustment. The OE Buick speaker system turned out to be extremely good. The original Miata speakers were marginal, and quite deteriorated with age and exposure, but there are several good custom-engineered aftermarket systems available. I chose the Clearwater set.
One feature of the NEX I particularly like is that it does not use the car's speakers to play the sound from the incoming caller on the iPhone, but instead has its own built-in speaker. So when you are parked and taking a call, you don't have everyone in the parking lot within 50 meters listening in on your call.
One more thing about price: As I said, these units are very expensive. But if price were my only consideration, I would never have bought Macs or iOS devices. And remember that if you pay little enough for things, you can sometimes end up getting nothing at all of any value for your money.
LOL. I'm serious - walk me through this please. After I posted that I saw you mentioned terrestrial radio and routing calls through the speakers. Are you quite sure they can't add a radio chip to the iPad, and some software to route iPhone calls through iPad audio?
I love the idea of iOS in the car. I'm not clear that a 4th category of iOS device makes any sense.
LOL. I'm serious - walk me through this please. After I posted that I saw you mentioned terrestrial radio and routing calls through the speakers. Are you quite sure they can't add a radio chip to the iPad, and some software to route iPhone calls through iPad audio?
I love the idea of iOS in the car. I'm not clear that a 4th category of iOS device makes any sense.
Sure, there is no technical reason Apple can't make an iPad have all the components of or a 3rd-party make a system that has all the parts of a double DIN in-dash system but that still means it's inherently different than the current iPad and would cost much more than what an iPad costs. Even then you're probably still not going to get a CD player in there.
But all that is beside the point because CarPlay is NOT the same UI as iOS on the iPad. It's a unique UI specifically designed for these systems. If the jailbreak community can copy the CarPlay UI and components from an iPhone to an iPad and then make them work on the primary display of the iPad, and if the owner wants no non-iPad options like terrestrial radio or a CD player then this custom job might be cheaper than the $680 for Pioneer's cheapest option.
If you bought a Retina iPad mini for $400 and did the JB yourself and that leaves you less than $300 for the installation which will include some sort of kit for this to tie to your car. How much is the kit? How much is the labour? How well does it tie into your car? Can you tether your phone to this iPad for hands-free calling or Siri Hands Free calling? This all sounds like a kludge that would be fine as an experiment but not as a recommended solution.
Sure, there is no technical reason Apple can't make an iPad have all the components of or a 3rd-party make a system that has all the parts of a double DIN in-dash system but that still means it's inherently different than the current iPad and would cost much more than what an iPad costs. Even then you're probably still not going to get a CD player in there.
But all that is beside the point because CarPlay is NOT the same UI as iOS on the iPad. It's a unique UI specifically designed for these systems. If the jailbreak community can copy the CarPlay UI and components from an iPhone to an iPad and then make them work on the primary display of the iPad, and if the owner wants no non-iPad options like terrestrial radio or a CD player then this custom job might be cheaper than the $680 for Pioneer's cheapest option.
If you bought a Retina iPad mini for $400 and did the JB yourself and that leaves you less than $300 for the installation which will include some sort of kit for this to tie to your car. How much is the kit? How much is the labour? How well does it tie into your car? Can you tether your phone to this iPad for hands-free calling or Siri Hands Free calling? This all sounds like a kludge that would be fine as an experiment but not as a recommended solution.
It's only $575 on amazon- further proving your point.
I don't understand this comment. My comment assumed a BT for the handshake and WiFi for the data, just like with AirDrop on iOS.
Sure, and that would also mean restricting CarPlay to the most recent hardware, as AirDrop is (I think) iPhone 5 and newer? As you said.
But if they didn't use the BT handshake element and just had a direct wi-fi connection (I said wi-fi handshake, which is probably the wrong phrasing), with the car acting as a host, then problem solved, any iOS7 device should be able to cope with that. Airplay doesn't require the Bluetooth, so there's no obvious reason why CarPlay would need it either.
So I don't understand why you assumed BT handshake and restricted device compatibility, when I don't see why it would be particularly neccessary; what functionality does CarPlay share with AirDrop that would make that so?
Sure, and that would also mean restricting CarPlay to the most recent hardware, as AirDrop is (I think) iPhone 5 and newer? As you said.
But if they didn't use the BT handshake element and just had a direct wi-fi connection (I said wi-fi handshake, which is probably the wrong phrasing), with the car acting as a host, then problem solved, any iOS7 device should be able to cope with that. Airplay doesn't require the Bluetooth, so there's no obvious reason why CarPlay would need it either.
So I don't understand why you assumed BT handshake and restricted device compatibility, when I don't see it as particularly neccessary.
From what I understand the BT handshake with WiFi for the data transfer is simply a better system which is probably why AirDrop uses it. Not that that with AirPlay the connection is going through a wireless router. Unfortunately, there is no ad-hoc connection between an iDevice or Mac and the Apple TV, although it's been one desire I've had for the Apple TV since not requiring a router in-between would allow for office and school use without having to also set up a router for the connection. This could also work for Home use by allowing someone to share to your HDTV without necessarily giving them access to your private WiFI network.
Note that AirDrop on the Mac doesn't use BT for the handshake. So why are they different? What is the benefit of this? I wonder if the shorter range, more efficient packets and lower power allows for a better all around system over simply going in all WiFi but perhaps the WiFi HW on iDevices are less advanced to allow for this sort of setup. I don't know, all I know is that iOS-based devices use BT for the handshake for an ad-hoc conniption at this time which is why I used that in my example.
Agree that the bluetooth system allows for simpler, quicker configuration, like how the current Apple TV allows you to touch a recent iOS device to it, in order to pair the bluetooth and share the wi-fi information.
Interesting trade-off, compatibility with more devices, or a slightly simpler config. You're probably right, Apple would go for the latter.
Also agree about the Apple TV, I wish they'd make it a touch thicker and stick Airport Express functionality in there too.
I support their use of beater. It was well played.
I agree 100%! I for one would rather drive a pile of crap to leave in the parking lot at work then my good car anytime. This doesnt mean I dont want good tunes and comfort!
I agree 100%! I for one would rather drive a pile of crap to leave in the parking lot at work then my good car anytime. This doesnt mean I dont want good tunes and comfort!
I have a couple old vettes in the garage, but I wouldn't call my daily driver lincoln a "beater". I'll be getting one for the lincoln which I opted for no touch screen/nav on because I didn't want MS Sync.
The word "beater" doesn't offend me. It was totally unnecessary though. :smokey:
I'm hoping Car Play will have Skype because I get Skype calls all the time while I'm driving. I don't really understand how the retrofit program is going to wouk. I'm more interested in new BMWs and Tahoes
Agree with the sync, though it seems to work "OK" the few times I get in my wifes Escape and see that Microsoft logo I want to vomit:-)
I think in going to have to change my stance and agree with the use of "beater".
I noticed that driving today my climate control, vent speed, etc and outside temp gauge is displayed on my double din sized OEM radio dash. They have individual buttons and knobs at the bottom of the console, but the displays themselves are on that. I doubt it's going to be possible to upgrade there.
Essentially only those cars whose radios are exclusively radios with nothing else on it will benefit.
Thats going to be a problem going forward for lots of applications, my issue is if you have a car with a lot of electronics (which is most newer vehicles) when these modules fail there will be no fixing them unless an aftermarket steps in to repair these modules:-(
Several reasons come to mind. For one thing, Apple has a low market share in VW/Audi primary markets. For another, Audi is already going with Google, and for a third, Audi does not want to get involved with a company like apple who will want to dictate too many details of the integration. Remember, Audi has a lot of experience and good existing partnerships that offer things that Apple is only hyping about.
Comments
It's almost been exactly a year since iOS in the Car was first announced. This is slow going even with Pioneer, being try to their name, being the first to be releasing firmware updates to a few select systems. Even with the list of automative manufactures I have doubts most of them will be truly supporting CarPlay until 2015 and probably years before all their lines that have larger in-dash displays will have CarPlay as an option.
I think Audi and GM have announced some sort of WiFi in the car but how that's setup is probably not what Apple would need to tie that to in-dash display.
I don't understand this comment. My comment assumed a BT for the handshake and WiFi for the data, just like with AirDrop on iOS.
I'm mainly interested in being able to listen to music from my iPhone in the car and I found an app that is a pretty good alternative.
The developer states on the App Store page that he designed it with in-car use in mind, so you can quickly start playing an album, and easily control playback without even having to look at the screen, unlike the standard music app which has small buttons that are hard to press accurately when your phone is mounted in a dock at arm's length. It gets regular updates, and one feature I particularly like is that I can listen to podcasts and music within the one app.
Oh, it's called Harken For iPhone. http://bit.ly/HarkenForiPhone
He's also got an iPad version.
I had a Pioneer AppRadio installed in my 1989 Mazda Miata last year. Superb sound, runs many of the Apps on my iPhone, including NavFree GPS, plays my music collection, and does handsfree phone calls. I was so very impressed that I recently had a Pioneer NEX installed in my 2000 Buick LeSabre. It's even better than the AppRadio, and I can't wait for the CarPlay firmware update.
Yes they are expensive, but the quality is superior. I am something of an audiophile, and getting early Joan Baez acoustic recordings, for example, to sound as natural and realistic in the car as they do on my home audio system is no mean feat. A car is the absolute worst possible listening room acoustically speaking that one could devise, but with the addition of a simple subwoofer, and some careful tweaking of the EQ, listening position and speaker levels from the head unit, truly startling results are possible. The NEX has a very sophisticated range of acoustic adjustment. The OE Buick speaker system turned out to be extremely good. The original Miata speakers were marginal, and quite deteriorated with age and exposure, but there are several good custom-engineered aftermarket systems available. I chose the Clearwater set.
One feature of the NEX I particularly like is that it does not use the car's speakers to play the sound from the incoming caller on the iPhone, but instead has its own built-in speaker. So when you are parked and taking a call, you don't have everyone in the parking lot within 50 meters listening in on your call.
One more thing about price: As I said, these units are very expensive. But if price were my only consideration, I would never have bought Macs or iOS devices. And remember that if you pay little enough for things, you can sometimes end up getting nothing at all of any value for your money.
Seriously. Why not just build a nice mount for my iPad? What does this do that my iPad can't?
:no:
LOL. I'm serious - walk me through this please. After I posted that I saw you mentioned terrestrial radio and routing calls through the speakers. Are you quite sure they can't add a radio chip to the iPad, and some software to route iPhone calls through iPad audio?
I love the idea of iOS in the car. I'm not clear that a 4th category of iOS device makes any sense.
Sure, there is no technical reason Apple can't make an iPad have all the components of or a 3rd-party make a system that has all the parts of a double DIN in-dash system but that still means it's inherently different than the current iPad and would cost much more than what an iPad costs. Even then you're probably still not going to get a CD player in there.
But all that is beside the point because CarPlay is NOT the same UI as iOS on the iPad. It's a unique UI specifically designed for these systems. If the jailbreak community can copy the CarPlay UI and components from an iPhone to an iPad and then make them work on the primary display of the iPad, and if the owner wants no non-iPad options like terrestrial radio or a CD player then this custom job might be cheaper than the $680 for Pioneer's cheapest option.
If you bought a Retina iPad mini for $400 and did the JB yourself and that leaves you less than $300 for the installation which will include some sort of kit for this to tie to your car. How much is the kit? How much is the labour? How well does it tie into your car? Can you tether your phone to this iPad for hands-free calling or Siri Hands Free calling? This all sounds like a kludge that would be fine as an experiment but not as a recommended solution.
It's only $575 on amazon- further proving your point.
I don't understand this comment. My comment assumed a BT for the handshake and WiFi for the data, just like with AirDrop on iOS.
Sure, and that would also mean restricting CarPlay to the most recent hardware, as AirDrop is (I think) iPhone 5 and newer? As you said.
But if they didn't use the BT handshake element and just had a direct wi-fi connection (I said wi-fi handshake, which is probably the wrong phrasing), with the car acting as a host, then problem solved, any iOS7 device should be able to cope with that. Airplay doesn't require the Bluetooth, so there's no obvious reason why CarPlay would need it either.
So I don't understand why you assumed BT handshake and restricted device compatibility, when I don't see why it would be particularly neccessary; what functionality does CarPlay share with AirDrop that would make that so?
From what I understand the BT handshake with WiFi for the data transfer is simply a better system which is probably why AirDrop uses it. Not that that with AirPlay the connection is going through a wireless router. Unfortunately, there is no ad-hoc connection between an iDevice or Mac and the Apple TV, although it's been one desire I've had for the Apple TV since not requiring a router in-between would allow for office and school use without having to also set up a router for the connection. This could also work for Home use by allowing someone to share to your HDTV without necessarily giving them access to your private WiFI network.
Note that AirDrop on the Mac doesn't use BT for the handshake. So why are they different? What is the benefit of this? I wonder if the shorter range, more efficient packets and lower power allows for a better all around system over simply going in all WiFi but perhaps the WiFi HW on iDevices are less advanced to allow for this sort of setup. I don't know, all I know is that iOS-based devices use BT for the handshake for an ad-hoc conniption at this time which is why I used that in my example.
Agree that the bluetooth system allows for simpler, quicker configuration, like how the current Apple TV allows you to touch a recent iOS device to it, in order to pair the bluetooth and share the wi-fi information.
Interesting trade-off, compatibility with more devices, or a slightly simpler config. You're probably right, Apple would go for the latter.
Also agree about the Apple TV, I wish they'd make it a touch thicker and stick Airport Express functionality in there too.
I support their use of beater. It was well played.
I agree 100%! I for one would rather drive a pile of crap to leave in the parking lot at work then my good car anytime. This doesnt mean I dont want good tunes and comfort!
way too expensive. just give me a touch screen and an amp in it for $250 and ill buy it.
Get real, were not talking Kraco crap or some other off branded junk. You have to pay for quality equipment, maybe youll figure that out someday....
I have a couple old vettes in the garage, but I wouldn't call my daily driver lincoln a "beater". I'll be getting one for the lincoln which I opted for no touch screen/nav on because I didn't want MS Sync.
The word "beater" doesn't offend me. It was totally unnecessary though. :smokey:
Agree with the sync, though it seems to work "OK" the few times I get in my wifes Escape and see that Microsoft logo I want to vomit:-)
I'm hoping Car Play will have Skype because I get Skype calls all the time while I'm driving. I don't really understand how the retrofit program is going to wouk. I'm more interested in new BMWs and Tahoes
I think in going to have to change my stance and agree with the use of "beater".
I noticed that driving today my climate control, vent speed, etc and outside temp gauge is displayed on my double din sized OEM radio dash. They have individual buttons and knobs at the bottom of the console, but the displays themselves are on that. I doubt it's going to be possible to upgrade there.
Essentially only those cars whose radios are exclusively radios with nothing else on it will benefit.
Thats going to be a problem going forward for lots of applications, my issue is if you have a car with a lot of electronics (which is most newer vehicles) when these modules fail there will be no fixing them unless an aftermarket steps in to repair these modules:-(
Audi and VW conspicuously absent.
Several reasons come to mind. For one thing, Apple has a low market share in VW/Audi primary markets. For another, Audi is already going with Google, and for a third, Audi does not want to get involved with a company like apple who will want to dictate too many details of the integration. Remember, Audi has a lot of experience and good existing partnerships that offer things that Apple is only hyping about.