That's a very limited view of an automobile. Why do you think an automobile that drives well is mutually exclusive to an automobile that is auto comfortable for the user? How does having a radio, GPS, handsfree, climate control, etc. make the other incompatible with a durable driver?
if you go looking for a car and your decision making process is based on how good of a lounge it is and how well it distracts you from the drive then I think you are shopping for the wrong thing and should probably potato up in the couch at home since that is the objective.
careening along with the stereo blaring while yabbering on the phone and putting myself to sleep with artificial air and spending more time looking at a screen than the road is not safe or responsible driving. to me.
perhaps if the temperature outside is such that it would kill you to be exposed to it then a safe climate inside the car makes sense and those places exist. I do not live there.
if I were to buy a monitor the quality of its speakers or its capacity to make cool drinks are not the determinants of purchase.
like I said I am odd. if the car I bought had those things whatever, I wouldn't pay to include them and I wouldn't make a purchasing decision based on them. I may not actually even use them and normally don't if I am in a car with them.
even when I cycle each day I don't listen to music on my bike, I want to hear my own thoughts and be aware of the environment around me. same goes when I am running trail, I want to hear each foot hit the ground because it gives me important feedback to maintain safe traction.
the amount of idiots who have no idea you are coming until they startle when you suddenly appear beside them in all modes of transport is ridiculous.
This feels like a response from the car manufacturers - Toyota, vw - to last week's ? car rumours?
Possibly, and it's certainly not unheard of, but any automobile company that will shun another company because of an unsubstantiated rumour is being foolish. I'm hoping it's just a coincidence.
Or perhaps Toyota got offended by the comments Jony Ive made in the New Yorker interview?
I may be in the minority, but my car choice will be based mostly on degree of CarPlay integration. BMW is not providing support for SMS messages. I am thinking of looking at another car or getting an aftermarket system. I spend over an hour commuting, iPhone integration is almost a necessary safety feature for me
... putting myself to sleep with artificial air...
1) Really? You look down on people who want to have a heater and/or air-conditioner in their car? :no:
2) Every now and then Top Gear will test some expensive piece-of-shit that was designed like an Android phone. IOW, they focus on some key HW stats that look great on a spec sheet but otherwise make for a shitty driving experience. These are cars that have no radio, no climate control, can't clear a 1" change in ground elevation, and often don't have a driver's seat that can move. They are made to be as light as possible while still barely being legal. This also means they are also flimsy, prone to break done or catch fire, and will likely try to kill the driver at every turn. These are not fun cars. These are cars that make the owner look like a complete pratt (and not the good kind from GotG). These cars that may do well off the line, and may have all the numbers that say they should be great for cornering, but they are not even in the same league as the well-built, enjoyable cars that beat them around their track without having to sacrifice things that make the drive enjoyable and safe.
like I said I am odd.
It's one thing to say "I prefer to never listen to a radio no matter how long the road trip is" or "I always have my windows open, even if it's 35°C outside," and something very different to denigrate others for wanting these common and useful features in a vehicle. Yes, it is odd that you prefer to not use these features, and quite another to say that anyone that has the radio or A/C on is irresponsible.
1) Really? You look down on people who want to have a heater and/or air-conditioner in their car?
I don't look down, I do think people who are unaware of their surroundings even when walking are being irresponsible and unsafe though. for that is what they are.
and I could look down on people who pick car a over car b because a has better knobs for changing music and selecting the temperature but really they have so degraded themselves there is little room for me to help them down further.
you seem to need a fight this evening and have picked me, perhaps you are bored.
2) I drive a 25year old Toyota land cruiser I doubt your top gear profile applies to me.
3) refer to 1
but simply, my initial response stands, people claiming to refuse to buy a car based on its entertainment system not having ios icons are your point 2 people. missing the point completely and being twats in the process.
good on Toyota for not worrying about making a car having to be a phone even if it is short lived.
My next car will have to have full functionality with my iPhone. Currently BMW, which I have been leasing or buying for 2 decades, is offering limited integration and I looking at other cars. I spend an hour commuting and being in healthcare business cannot elect to be 'incommunicado'. Texting is replacing voice communication and BMW not offering SMS support may be a deal killer at least for me.
you seem to need a fight this evening and have picked me, perhaps you are bored.
Not at all. In fact, I have too much to do right now, but your comments struck me as both ridiculous and out of character, hence my interest in them.
I just don't get how you look down on someone because they also (not instead of) look at how the vehicle handles their user input whilst driving when making a purchase. If I have two automobiles before me that are identical in every way from safety to size to performance to price, except that one doesn't have A/C, satellite radio, hands-free calling with dashboard controls, remote lock, etc., and the other does have these items I'm going to go for the one that does every time.
I buy Apple products because they tend to put that little extra effort in making the user-experience better. That better precision with their touchscreen element. That better feel of the notebook keyboard. And I don't feel I'm a worse user because of it.
I drive a 25year old Toyota land cruiser I doubt your top gear profile applies to me.
OK, then how about people that prefer to keep their classic car stock. That could mean an AM radio. Personally, I prefer the classic car look but with modern features, but I am fine with others who wish not to change anything in the original car.
This is a financial decision. Short term, but there it is. Someone decides to buy a Toyota, the dealer probably squeezed margins to get a deal, hoping to up sell with an expensive infotainment system, at very high margins during the sign up process. Then there is the annual up dates to the sat nav etc.
Newbie here, please excuse me if you see multiple posts. After being with BMW for 20 years I may not stay with them because they are not offering full integration with iPhone, specifically no support for SMS. My younger colleagues prefer to text and being in the healthcare business I cannot elect to remain incommunicado for my hour of commute. I think AAPL entering the car business may slow acceptance of Car Play, however, the smartphone is becoming the communication and control center of our lives, and car manufacturers who try to diminish this experience do so at their peril.
Unless Apple stops making the iPhone, it will be the only phone I'll have. So, I won't be buying a Toyota because of the kind of phone I have. Which negates Toyota reasoning for not implementing CarPlay. Have they forgotten that we live in a consumer based economy?
This is a financial decision. Short term, but there it is. Someone decides to buy a Toyota, the dealer probably squeezed margins to get a deal, hoping to up sell with an expensive infotainment system, at very high margins during the sign up process. Then there is the annual up dates to the sat nav etc.
Toyota would get none of that with CarPlay.
That's exactly why I would expect automotive companies to support CarPlay. CarPlay can only work with systems that have a large color display, which are only found in automobiles with a modern infotainment system. A buyer wanting CarPlay (or Android Auto) has to be willing to get the technology package, which is usually at the upper end of the most common automobiles. These companies already package that system with the Sirius/XM, GPS navigation, and other features that the buyer may not be interested in by themselves, but know they have to accept if they want that large color display with CarPlay (or Android Auto) support.
Not at all. In fact, I have too much to do right now, but your comments struck me as both ridiculous and out of character, hence my interest in them.
I just don't get how you look down on someone because they also (not instead of) look at how the vehicle handles their user input whilst driving when making a purchase. If I have two automobiles before me that are identical in every way from safety to size to performance to price, except that one doesn't have A/C, satellite radio, hands-free calling with dashboard controls, remote lock, etc., and the other does have these items I'm going to go for the one that does every time.
I buy Apple products because they tend to put that little extra effort in making the user-experience better. That better precision with their touchscreen element. That better feel of the notebook keyboard. And I don't feel I'm a worse user because of it.
OK, then how about people that prefer to keep their classic car stock. That could mean an AM radio. Personally, I prefer the classic car look but with modern features, but I am fine with others who wish not to change anything in the original car.
I totally agree with you in the first point, given two cars with same engineering, ease of repair and endurance of components. but for the same price one has a bunch of point in time useful accessories then I too would make that choice. I might not use them frequently but when I did I would be glad they were there.
if on the other hand, the hand I was describing a person chose an inferior car simply because it had a great stezza and 4 zone air con then I think my point has merit. these people are very common. I sadly do look down at them.
and I feel given 2 $19,990 cars but one is selling up its iPhone integration versus the competitor which lacks that but actually has good components in the steering assembly and is pitching handling and braking. then design trade offs have been made and it is really evident when you drive both as cars, not as mobile lounge rooms.
not sure if I am really into classic cars, I know what I am willing to spend on a car and that is the absolute best of class I can get. I have done all the maths I can stomach with all the car purchasing and on going cost scenarios and none work out better at this time.
I am waiting for a full electric 4wd that can structurally deal with being actually used as one. in the meantime it is more cost effective for the limited amount of time I spend in a vehicle to sustain the 60 series or maybe get a more modern version of a 70 series, anything in 100 series range is an oversized bubble car too flimsy and expensive to repair to dare take into serious environs.
I buy apple for the same sorts of reasons. I really like that new oscars ad, the iPads are covered in paint and used in rough real ways. my MBP gets coated in all sorts of crap and made to endure harsh conditions while I work it hard ( when I do), I live in a place which hits 45c plus and I don't want my phone packing it in. I don't put cases on because they alter the cooling profile of the device and usability and I dint them and wet them and they keep working. they don't have a billion shitty features and I don't install app after mod after app.
That's a very limited view of an automobile. Why do you think an automobile that drives well is mutually exclusive to an automobile that is auto comfortable for the user? How does having a radio, GPS, handsfree, climate control, etc. make the other incompatible with a durable driver?
if you go looking for a car and your decision making process is based on how good of a lounge it is and how well it distracts you from the drive then I think you are shopping for the wrong thing and should probably potato up in the couch at home since that is the objective.
careening along with the stereo blaring while yabbering on the phone and putting myself to sleep with artificial air and spending more time looking at a screen than the road is not safe or responsible driving. to me.
perhaps if the temperature outside is such that it would kill you to be exposed to it then a safe climate inside the car makes sense and those places exist. I do not live there.
if I were to buy a monitor the quality of its speakers or its capacity to make cool drinks are not the determinants of purchase.
like I said I am odd. if the car I bought had those things whatever, I wouldn't pay to include them and I wouldn't make a purchasing decision based on them. I may not actually even use them and normally don't if I am in a car with them.
even when I cycle each day I don't listen to music on my bike, I want to hear my own thoughts and be aware of the environment around me. same goes when I am running trail, I want to hear each foot hit the ground because it gives me important feedback to maintain safe traction.
the amount of idiots who have no idea you are coming until they startle when you suddenly appear beside them in all modes of transport is ridiculous.
Precisely.
I also prefer to drive or travel with no music. It's a distraction, and I prefer being aware of the environment and to take the sounds and sights of everything in.
I don't see why all car manufacturers can't simply offer either CarPlay or Android as optional extras. Maybe it's too much bother for them. At any rate, it goes against the grain for Apple to be offering a software solution with no hardware. If you're serious about software, you need to make the hardware.
CarPlay strikes me as a nice to have, but nothing more. People basically use their phones in cars for calls, music and sat nav. You get all of that without CarPlay anyhow.
This is a financial decision. Short term, but there it is. Someone decides to buy a Toyota, the dealer probably squeezed margins to get a deal, hoping to up sell with an expensive infotainment system, at very high margins during the sign up process. Then there is the annual up dates to the sat nav etc.
Toyota would get none of that with CarPlay.
Which do you think Toyota cares about more... losing $200 from the yearly map upgrades... or losing $30,000 from not selling a car?
If Toyota won't offer CarPlay or Android Auto... someone else will.
Not offering those features might end up hurting Toyota as other car makers start including them in their cars.
Someone may buy a Hyundai Sonata instead of a Toyota Camry because of those features.
And like Solip said above... car makers could actually charge more for an infotainment system that included CarPlay and Android Auto. They already charge more for "premium" sound systems... but they are usually terrible.
CarPlay and Android Auto actually look pretty cool:
This is a financial decision. Short term, but there it is. Someone decides to buy a Toyota, the dealer probably squeezed margins to get a deal, hoping to up sell with an expensive infotainment system, at very high margins during the sign up process. Then there is the annual up dates to the sat nav etc.
Toyota would get none of that with CarPlay.
Which do you think Toyota cares about more... losing $200 from the yearly map upgrades... or losing $30,000 from not selling a car?
If Toyota won't offer CarPlay or Android Auto... someone else will.
Not offering those features might end up hurting Toyota as other car makers start including them in their cars.
Someone may buy a Hyundai Sonata instead of a Toyota Camry because of those features.
And like Solip said above... car makers could actually charge more for an infotainment system that included CarPlay and Android Auto. They already charge more for "premium" sound systems... but they are usually terrible.
CarPlay and Android Auto actually look pretty cool:
Well... best of luck Toyota.
Seriously?
Anyone who bases their buying decision on the availability of CarPlay is a fool.
Anyone who bases their buying decision on the availability of CarPlay is a fool.
The infotainment system is one of many things to consider when purchasing a car. But it's something you interact with every single day.
You don't want to be stuck with a bad system for 5+ years.
I didn't say Toyota will never sell another car because they don't offer CarPlay. But for a customer... it could be the deciding factor between a Toyota and some other car brand.
The infotainment system is one of many things to consider when purchasing a car. But it's something you interact with every single day.
You don't want to be stuck with a bad system for 5+ years.
I didn't say Toyota will never sell another car because they don't offer CarPlay. But for a customer... it could be the deciding factor between a Toyota and some other car brand.
To a consumer buying or leasing a car, if all other options are more or less equal they will choose the car that most serves their needs. It's no secret that there are many, many things people are willing to overlook or give up rather than not have access to their iPhone and they've made made this absolutely clear in survey after survey. Car companies which fail to focus on customer wants and needs will have fewer customers.
Car play is designed in such a way that it doesn't need to replace the whole infotainment system, seems silly not to support it. it does kinda make more sense why apple would be working on a car, because if driver-less cars are the future, apples software could be locked out
Comments
This feels like a response from the car manufacturers - Toyota, vw - to last week's ? car rumours?
Or perhaps Toyota got offended by the comments Jony Ive made in the New Yorker interview?
if you go looking for a car and your decision making process is based on how good of a lounge it is and how well it distracts you from the drive then I think you are shopping for the wrong thing and should probably potato up in the couch at home since that is the objective.
careening along with the stereo blaring while yabbering on the phone and putting myself to sleep with artificial air and spending more time looking at a screen than the road is not safe or responsible driving. to me.
perhaps if the temperature outside is such that it would kill you to be exposed to it then a safe climate inside the car makes sense and those places exist. I do not live there.
if I were to buy a monitor the quality of its speakers or its capacity to make cool drinks are not the determinants of purchase.
like I said I am odd. if the car I bought had those things whatever, I wouldn't pay to include them and I wouldn't make a purchasing decision based on them. I may not actually even use them and normally don't if I am in a car with them.
even when I cycle each day I don't listen to music on my bike, I want to hear my own thoughts and be aware of the environment around me. same goes when I am running trail, I want to hear each foot hit the ground because it gives me important feedback to maintain safe traction.
the amount of idiots who have no idea you are coming until they startle when you suddenly appear beside them in all modes of transport is ridiculous.
Possibly, and it's certainly not unheard of, but any automobile company that will shun another company because of an unsubstantiated rumour is being foolish. I'm hoping it's just a coincidence.
Did that story only drop a few hours ago?
1) Really? You look down on people who want to have a heater and/or air-conditioner in their car? :no:
2) Every now and then Top Gear will test some expensive piece-of-shit that was designed like an Android phone. IOW, they focus on some key HW stats that look great on a spec sheet but otherwise make for a shitty driving experience. These are cars that have no radio, no climate control, can't clear a 1" change in ground elevation, and often don't have a driver's seat that can move. They are made to be as light as possible while still barely being legal. This also means they are also flimsy, prone to break done or catch fire, and will likely try to kill the driver at every turn. These are not fun cars. These are cars that make the owner look like a complete pratt (and not the good kind from GotG). These cars that may do well off the line, and may have all the numbers that say they should be great for cornering, but they are not even in the same league as the well-built, enjoyable cars that beat them around their track without having to sacrifice things that make the drive enjoyable and safe.
It's one thing to say "I prefer to never listen to a radio no matter how long the road trip is" or "I always have my windows open, even if it's 35°C outside," and something very different to denigrate others for wanting these common and useful features in a vehicle. Yes, it is odd that you prefer to not use these features, and quite another to say that anyone that has the radio or A/C on is irresponsible.
I don't look down, I do think people who are unaware of their surroundings even when walking are being irresponsible and unsafe though. for that is what they are.
and I could look down on people who pick car a over car b because a has better knobs for changing music and selecting the temperature but really they have so degraded themselves there is little room for me to help them down further.
you seem to need a fight this evening and have picked me, perhaps you are bored.
2) I drive a 25year old Toyota land cruiser I doubt your top gear profile applies to me.
3) refer to 1
but simply, my initial response stands, people claiming to refuse to buy a car based on its entertainment system not having ios icons are your point 2 people. missing the point completely and being twats in the process.
good on Toyota for not worrying about making a car having to be a phone even if it is short lived.
Not at all. In fact, I have too much to do right now, but your comments struck me as both ridiculous and out of character, hence my interest in them.
I just don't get how you look down on someone because they also (not instead of) look at how the vehicle handles their user input whilst driving when making a purchase. If I have two automobiles before me that are identical in every way from safety to size to performance to price, except that one doesn't have A/C, satellite radio, hands-free calling with dashboard controls, remote lock, etc., and the other does have these items I'm going to go for the one that does every time.
I buy Apple products because they tend to put that little extra effort in making the user-experience better. That better precision with their touchscreen element. That better feel of the notebook keyboard. And I don't feel I'm a worse user because of it.
OK, then how about people that prefer to keep their classic car stock. That could mean an AM radio. Personally, I prefer the classic car look but with modern features, but I am fine with others who wish not to change anything in the original car.
Toyota would get none of that with CarPlay.
Newbie here, please excuse me if you see multiple posts. After being with BMW for 20 years I may not stay with them because they are not offering full integration with iPhone, specifically no support for SMS. My younger colleagues prefer to text and being in the healthcare business I cannot elect to remain incommunicado for my hour of commute. I think AAPL entering the car business may slow acceptance of Car Play, however, the smartphone is becoming the communication and control center of our lives, and car manufacturers who try to diminish this experience do so at their peril.
That's exactly why I would expect automotive companies to support CarPlay. CarPlay can only work with systems that have a large color display, which are only found in automobiles with a modern infotainment system. A buyer wanting CarPlay (or Android Auto) has to be willing to get the technology package, which is usually at the upper end of the most common automobiles. These companies already package that system with the Sirius/XM, GPS navigation, and other features that the buyer may not be interested in by themselves, but know they have to accept if they want that large color display with CarPlay (or Android Auto) support.
I totally agree with you in the first point, given two cars with same engineering, ease of repair and endurance of components. but for the same price one has a bunch of point in time useful accessories then I too would make that choice. I might not use them frequently but when I did I would be glad they were there.
if on the other hand, the hand I was describing a person chose an inferior car simply because it had a great stezza and 4 zone air con then I think my point has merit. these people are very common. I sadly do look down at them.
and I feel given 2 $19,990 cars but one is selling up its iPhone integration versus the competitor which lacks that but actually has good components in the steering assembly and is pitching handling and braking. then design trade offs have been made and it is really evident when you drive both as cars, not as mobile lounge rooms.
not sure if I am really into classic cars, I know what I am willing to spend on a car and that is the absolute best of class I can get. I have done all the maths I can stomach with all the car purchasing and on going cost scenarios and none work out better at this time.
I am waiting for a full electric 4wd that can structurally deal with being actually used as one. in the meantime it is more cost effective for the limited amount of time I spend in a vehicle to sustain the 60 series or maybe get a more modern version of a 70 series, anything in 100 series range is an oversized bubble car too flimsy and expensive to repair to dare take into serious environs.
I buy apple for the same sorts of reasons. I really like that new oscars ad, the iPads are covered in paint and used in rough real ways. my MBP gets coated in all sorts of crap and made to endure harsh conditions while I work it hard ( when I do), I live in a place which hits 45c plus and I don't want my phone packing it in. I don't put cases on because they alter the cooling profile of the device and usability and I dint them and wet them and they keep working. they don't have a billion shitty features and I don't install app after mod after app.
Precisely.
I also prefer to drive or travel with no music. It's a distraction, and I prefer being aware of the environment and to take the sounds and sights of everything in.
I don't see why all car manufacturers can't simply offer either CarPlay or Android as optional extras. Maybe it's too much bother for them. At any rate, it goes against the grain for Apple to be offering a software solution with no hardware. If you're serious about software, you need to make the hardware.
CarPlay strikes me as a nice to have, but nothing more. People basically use their phones in cars for calls, music and sat nav. You get all of that without CarPlay anyhow.
Which do you think Toyota cares about more... losing $200 from the yearly map upgrades... or losing $30,000 from not selling a car?
If Toyota won't offer CarPlay or Android Auto... someone else will.
Not offering those features might end up hurting Toyota as other car makers start including them in their cars.
Someone may buy a Hyundai Sonata instead of a Toyota Camry because of those features.
And like Solip said above... car makers could actually charge more for an infotainment system that included CarPlay and Android Auto. They already charge more for "premium" sound systems... but they are usually terrible.
CarPlay and Android Auto actually look pretty cool:
Well... best of luck Toyota.
Seriously?
Anyone who bases their buying decision on the availability of CarPlay is a fool.
The infotainment system is one of many things to consider when purchasing a car. But it's something you interact with every single day.
You don't want to be stuck with a bad system for 5+ years.
I didn't say Toyota will never sell another car because they don't offer CarPlay. But for a customer... it could be the deciding factor between a Toyota and some other car brand.
Pretty foolish not to see a extra feature as a good thing, within certain reasonable bounds.
To a consumer buying or leasing a car, if all other options are more or less equal they will choose the car that most serves their needs. It's no secret that there are many, many things people are willing to overlook or give up rather than not have access to their iPhone and they've made made this absolutely clear in survey after survey. Car companies which fail to focus on customer wants and needs will have fewer customers.
Car play is designed in such a way that it doesn't need to replace the whole infotainment system, seems silly not to support it. it does kinda make more sense why apple would be working on a car, because if driver-less cars are the future, apples software could be locked out