They would also spend way less money building an iOS app over a custom system.
Not so fast. The manufacturers will always need to provide some non-CarPlay interface. So manufacturers will have to maintain 1: the native interface 2: CarPlay and 3: Android Auto (I know we don’t acknowledge it here, but it is just as popular as CarPlay based on my recent car buying experience)
i think it’s great that the manufacturers will do this, but I’m under no illusions of it being easier or cheaper.
These are good points and while it technically would be another layer to maintain, the CarPlay interface is meant to be parred back with only the vital controls here (such as radio and basic climate controls). None of that would be (theoretically) changing going forward so it wouldn’t be a hassle to maintain. Plus, they rarely do software updates as-is so it isn’t like they spend a ton of time in there changing it.
I dont think it will be cheaper for them, but I dont think it will be too significant an expense. Take devs off their own platforms like Sync and Entune for a bit. They need so much help that they aren’t getting fixed any time soon.
I disagree. It will be a significant expense. There needs to be some basic non-mobile-integrated infotainment capability, so Entune or Sync will still need to be integrated into cars for the foreseeable future and each car will need a custom integration setup that someone has to build & test. Maybe they will stop adding features to the built-in software (it could be argued that innovation on these software systems ended years ago) but all cars need to be fully functional without a mobile device to run the screen, so as long as next year's car is different than this year's car, there will be work to maintain the OEM system.
Is it trivial for someone to program all the functions of a car into Siri & Assistant's voice control system? THat's just one example. There is a lot of custom work for each vehicle. Passing through the various birds-eye camera systems, radar collision avoidance messages, secondary screens, motorized doors...the list goes on.
"These interfaces are still subpar. I've used the Ford Sync3 system, which is generally considered one of the better automaker interfaces..."
"Generally considered one of the better"? Where did you get that idea? Sync3 is generally derided by al of humanity.
I'm for the general theme of this editorial, but with a couple of caveats - one, we really need wireless CarPlay to become the standard, because plugging/unplugging my phone every time I get into the car is a non-starter for me. Right now it exists, but barely - BMW is the only automaker offering it, plus an aftermarket unit or two. And BMW charges for CarPlay, which is a slap in the face, given what their cars already cost and how expensive everything on the option sheet is.
Second, the CarPlay interface itself has become quite dated and desperately needs a cosmetic refresh. The music interface in particular is ghastly to look at, and doesn't even offer album art. And the entire experience is still too buggy IMHO. The SiriusXM app gives me all kinds of trouble constantly, for instance. Which is a shame because you can stream at a much higher bitrate than the crappy satellite stream provides.
we really need wireless CarPlay to become the standard, because plugging/unplugging my phone every time I get into the car is a non-starter for me.
The typical problem with millennials. Too lazy to do anything in life. People do not want to arrive at a destination with a dead phone battery. Plugging in keeps your phone charged.
I disagree. It will be a significant expense. There needs to be some basic non-mobile-integrated infotainment capability, so Entune or Sync will still need to be integrated into cars for the foreseeable future and each car will need a custom integration setup that someone has to build & test. Maybe they will stop adding features to the built-in software (it could be argued that innovation on these software systems ended years ago) but all cars need to be fully functional without a mobile device to run the screen, so as long as next year's car is different than this year's car, there will be work to maintain the OEM system.
Is it trivial for someone to program all the functions of a car into Siri & Assistant's voice control system? THat's just one example. There is a lot of custom work for each vehicle. Passing through the various birds-eye camera systems, radar collision avoidance messages, secondary screens, motorized doors...the list goes on.
I wouldn’t say it is trivial, but it isn’t all that much work. These automaker apps aren’t even distributed on the App Store, they actually show up when you connect. As Apple has spelled out in their dev documentation, only th essentials should show up here in CarPlay. They don’t need to entirely replicate their existing interface. Adding Siri support is actually an easier task because it just connects the phrase with functions that already exist for the buttons on the screen.
Plus, they are really just tying those buttons to code they’ve already written for the built-in interface. So none of that has to be re-done. It is actually quite a bit less work than it appears, and even having just basic controls like radio and climate would be so much easier than what they have now.
I would love to see APPLEINSIDER follow up with a story that ranks carmakers and models by how well they deliver the best integration with Apple CarPlay.
I’d also welcome an updated review on third party systems, such as Alpine, ranked the same way.
Since carmakers are so slow to accomodate tens of millions of iPhone users, I wish Apple would bypass them altogether by bundling an iPad Mini with a portable dashboard or console mount. I’d rather pay $1000 to Apple for such a product than roll the dice on an expensive third party system (plus installation!)
The key issue is car manufacturers don’t do UI — they do lousy jobs on all fronts. They can’t compete.
Manufacturers for the most part are assemblers, like FoxConn, who get their components from other companies. They need to bite the bullet, and do the same with their UI.
There really are just two options: Apple and Android. Since both are just software, do both and allow the user/owner to choose.
There’s a lot of truth in your assertions about what automakers are primarily focused on. In earlier times automakers like GM had subdivisions like Delphi that had the domain expertise and technical chops to deliver what we’re talking about. That’s no longer the case as most automakers have outsourced and spun off internal suppliers in favor of whoever can deliver the sub assemblies and components at the lowest possible cost.
However, in today’s environment subassembly OEMs, third party suppliers, system integrators, and accessory makers can and often do fill in the gaps for the automakers. If you’re talking German or Japanese automakers the story is somewhat different.
Most newer cars built in the last 20 years have a great deal of computational capacity, lots of diagnostic data, and high speed serial communication busses. With systems like OnStar and onboard cellular connections getting telemetry from the vehicle in real time is relatively easy and straightforward.
The biggest impediment I see with getting more Apple integration in automobiles is the way automakers control their supply channels. They don’t want to lock in to any single supplier because they want to assert their own leverage on supplier costs.
i think the complaints about car infotainment systems are overblown. How often are people really fiddling with the dash other than to maybe change the radio station?
Except it's more than just changing a radio station with these infotainment systems. It's going from Sirius/XM to FM, or going from that to the HVAC controls and using that, then to the NAV and using that, etc. Some are a very painful experience. Some aren't very intuitive at all and have not so easy to use controls and are sllooowwww to interact with your inputs. There are some that aren't even touchscreens and require you to use a different input, such as a stick/knob which is IMO, not a great experience. I don't really want to be fucking with a knob when I can just press what I want.
Basically, some are just doing infotainment very half-ass and don't put a lot of thought into it.
They would also spend way less money building an iOS app over a custom system.
Not so fast. The manufacturers will always need to provide some non-CarPlay interface. So manufacturers will have to maintain 1: the native interface 2: CarPlay and 3: Android Auto (I know we don’t acknowledge it here, but it is just as popular as CarPlay based on my recent car buying experience)
i think it’s great that the manufacturers will do this, but I’m under no illusions of it being easier or cheaper.
People buying cars, most likely don’t use Android.
That's a funny joke on AI, but lots of people sporting Android phones own cars. Maybe they don't have taste
Any manufacturer who is going to do one mobile OS integration pretty much has to do the other.
Are there any that only support one platform? I can't really think of any that don't support both. There's no reason why a manufacturer shouldn't support both platforms. They're both huge platforms.
What I don't understand is why informed Car buyer go buys new car without CarPlay(and AA) in that car. If you ask sales person, he/she would downplay CarPlay and tell you no one is asking for but that is out right lie and misguiding.,
It can't be "expensive" to build a CarPlay app because failure to do that would cause a loss of 10%+ of their automobile business as soon as some competitor decides to do it. I would switch car brands in a second if some brand decided to give me what I want. But I suppose there are no car companies who actually want an increase of 10%+ sales because nobody is giving us what we want. I guess the problem is the consumer is dumb and doesn't know what they want. And auto manufacturers know it.
It can't be "expensive" to build a CarPlay app because failure to do that would cause a loss of 10%+ of their automobile business as soon as some competitor decides to do it. I would switch car brands in a second if some brand decided to give me what I want. But I suppose there are no car companies who actually want an increase of 10%+ sales because nobody is giving us what we want. I guess the problem is the consumer is dumb and doesn't know what they want. And auto manufacturers know it.
I don’t know if consumers are dumb. Perhaps you’d prefer they espouse your preferences. Doesn’t make them dumb if they don’t.
I must be in the minority. I have been using BMW’s iDrive in all its variations for over 14 years and I think it’s become perfect over the years. The voice recognition is better than Siri too. I regularly drive long distances and the in-car workflow with iDrive is great and looks beautiful.
I’ve never bought the CarPlay option because the interface looks too plain, the level of integration with my iPhone is already good, and specific iPhone things can be accessed with Siri EyesFree with a longer push of the voice button on the steering wheel.
I think BMW bundle it with wireless charging so my next car will possibly have it but I don’t expect that I will use it.
I’ve seen the nasty interfaces in some other cars and if I didn’t drive a BMW I’d probably be wanting to use CarPlay.
I guess the problem is the consumer is dumb and doesn't know what they want. And auto manufacturers know it.
I don’t know if consumers are dumb. Perhaps you’d prefer they espouse your preferences. Doesn’t make them dumb if they don’t.
I hear ya, but I defined dumb as "doesn't know what they want." I reassert that people don't know what they want when it comes to auto automation. So it's not a matter of sharing my preferences, it's a matter of being unable to assert any preferences.
Not only Detroit but Japan as well. Toyota charges $200-$300 for a SIM card to update Toyota navigation maps - a major rip off.
This discussion will become really important with the phase out of Internal combustion cars (ICE) in the next several decades. In Not too many years New cars will have self driving capabilities to some degree or another and that will require constantly updated maps and traffic info. Apple and Google are investing in development of self driving capability to enhance Car Play and the Android equivalent to seamlessly provide all of this and further manage the entire transportation experience - and your entire day. No wonder legacy auto manufacturers are wary of Apple Car Play. They can’t develop an iPhone equivalent - but Apple can reduce a car to being more like a commodity with 4 tires, seating, heating and A/C - with Apple providing entertainment, navigation, all kinds of information AND self-driving software for any car that is suitably equiped with the necessary sensors, etc.
It is an exciting future. So much for Toyota and other car companies ripping us off with charges for the tiny map SIM cards.
They would also spend way less money building an iOS app over a custom system.
Not so fast. The manufacturers will always need to provide some non-CarPlay interface. So manufacturers will have to maintain 1: the native interface 2: CarPlay and 3: Android Auto (I know we don’t acknowledge it here, but it is just as popular as CarPlay based on my recent car buying experience)
i think it’s great that the manufacturers will do this, but I’m under no illusions of it being easier or cheaper.
People buying cars, most likely don’t use Android.
That's a funny joke on AI, but lots of people sporting Android phones own cars. Maybe they don't have taste
Any manufacturer who is going to do one mobile OS integration pretty much has to do the other.
They don’t actually.
More than one car manufacturer has balked at how privacy invading Android Auto is.
I guess the problem is the consumer is dumb and doesn't know what they want. And auto manufacturers know it.
I don’t know if consumers are dumb. Perhaps you’d prefer they espouse your preferences. Doesn’t make them dumb if they don’t.
I hear ya, but I defined dumb as "doesn't know what they want." I reassert that people don't know what they want when it comes to auto automation. So it's not a matter of sharing my preferences, it's a matter of being unable to assert any preferences.
Not being interested in a mobile device integration is a valid preference. I just bought a RAV4 (with Toyota's shitty Entune) for my gal who didn't give two shits about it having the worst iPhone integration of the 3 vehicles we test drove. I was really bummed out. One of the vehicles we were considering had CarPlay and I pushed hard...but she knew exactly what she wanted. She loves the RAV4. And even though I would have made a different choice, she was well-informed, and chose based on a different set of requirements than you or I would.
They would also spend way less money building an iOS app over a custom system.
Not so fast. The manufacturers will always need to provide some non-CarPlay interface. So manufacturers will have to maintain 1: the native interface 2: CarPlay and 3: Android Auto (I know we don’t acknowledge it here, but it is just as popular as CarPlay based on my recent car buying experience)
i think it’s great that the manufacturers will do this, but I’m under no illusions of it being easier or cheaper.
People buying cars, most likely don’t use Android.
That's a funny joke on AI, but lots of people sporting Android phones own cars. Maybe they don't have taste
Any manufacturer who is going to do one mobile OS integration pretty much has to do the other.
They don’t actually.
More than one car manufacturer has balked at how privacy invading Android Auto is.
Is it more privacy invasive than using an Android phone to get you driving directions via Google Maps and listening to Google Music? I'm not entirely clear what makes the AA integration worse than just using an Android device for navigation and music playback (which I understand perfectly well is a privacy concern).
If the problem is really the Android device & apps, the AA integration its neither here nor there, right?
They would also spend way less money building an iOS app over a custom system.
Not so fast. The manufacturers will always need to provide some non-CarPlay interface. So manufacturers will have to maintain 1: the native interface 2: CarPlay and 3: Android Auto (I know we don’t acknowledge it here, but it is just as popular as CarPlay based on my recent car buying experience)
i think it’s great that the manufacturers will do this, but I’m under no illusions of it being easier or cheaper.
People buying cars, most likely don’t use Android.
That's a funny joke on AI, but lots of people sporting Android phones own cars. Maybe they don't have taste
Any manufacturer who is going to do one mobile OS integration pretty much has to do the other.
They don’t actually.
More than one car manufacturer has balked at how privacy invading Android Auto is.
Is it more privacy invasive than using an Android phone to get you driving directions via Google Maps and listening to Google Music? I'm not entirely clear what makes the AA integration worse than just using an Android device for navigation and music playback (which I understand perfectly well is a privacy concern).
If the problem is really the Android device & apps, the AA integration its neither here nor there, right?
I'm not convinced it's "privacy" that's the issue. There's lots of private user and vehicle usage data being collected and shared when using Toyota's own Entune infotainment system. Heck, just considering it uses Alexa voice services and data collected by it stipulated to be governed by Amazon's privacy policies and not Toyota's should be the big red flag that "privacy" isn't the problem.
Comments
Is it trivial for someone to program all the functions of a car into Siri & Assistant's voice control system? THat's just one example. There is a lot of custom work for each vehicle. Passing through the various birds-eye camera systems, radar collision avoidance messages, secondary screens, motorized doors...the list goes on.
Plus, they are really just tying those buttons to code they’ve already written for the built-in interface. So none of that has to be re-done. It is actually quite a bit less work than it appears, and even having just basic controls like radio and climate would be so much easier than what they have now.
Since carmakers are so slow to accomodate tens of millions of iPhone users, I wish Apple would bypass them altogether by bundling an iPad Mini with a portable dashboard or console mount. I’d rather pay $1000 to Apple for such a product than roll the dice on an expensive third party system (plus installation!)
However, in today’s environment subassembly OEMs, third party suppliers, system integrators, and accessory makers can and often do fill in the gaps for the automakers. If you’re talking German or Japanese automakers the story is somewhat different.
Most newer cars built in the last 20 years have a great deal of computational capacity, lots of diagnostic data, and high speed serial communication busses. With systems like OnStar and onboard cellular connections getting telemetry from the vehicle in real time is relatively easy and straightforward.
The biggest impediment I see with getting more Apple integration in automobiles is the way automakers control their supply channels. They don’t want to lock in to any single supplier because they want to assert their own leverage on supplier costs.
Basically, some are just doing infotainment very half-ass and don't put a lot of thought into it.
Are there any that only support one platform? I can't really think of any that don't support both. There's no reason why a manufacturer shouldn't support both platforms. They're both huge platforms.
I’ve never bought the CarPlay option because the interface looks too plain, the level of integration with my iPhone is already good, and specific iPhone things can be accessed with Siri EyesFree with a longer push of the voice button on the steering wheel.
I think BMW bundle it with wireless charging so my next car will possibly have it but I don’t expect that I will use it.
I’ve seen the nasty interfaces in some other cars and if I didn’t drive a BMW I’d probably be wanting to use CarPlay.
This discussion will become really important with the phase out of Internal combustion cars (ICE) in the next several decades. In Not too many years New cars will have self driving capabilities to some degree or another and that will require constantly updated maps and traffic info. Apple and Google are investing in development of self driving capability to enhance Car Play and the Android equivalent to seamlessly provide all of this and further manage the entire transportation experience - and your entire day. No wonder legacy auto manufacturers are wary of Apple Car Play. They can’t develop an iPhone equivalent - but Apple can reduce a car to being more like a commodity with 4 tires, seating, heating and A/C - with Apple providing entertainment, navigation, all kinds of information AND self-driving software for any car that is suitably equiped with the necessary sensors, etc.
It is an exciting future. So much for Toyota and other car companies ripping us off with charges for the tiny map SIM cards.
More than one car manufacturer has balked at how privacy invading Android Auto is.
If the problem is really the Android device & apps, the AA integration its neither here nor there, right?