Everyone is sh on GM which I don’t understand. Think a little further. Apple will come with a car, so you want a competitor running your car? As it stated, you can still play your music via Bluetooth so what’s the deal? Will Apple allow GM to run its phone? They don’t even allow a 2nd App store. GM and others are clever enough you can receive a call or let you listen to your music. Stop the drama. Thank you.
Playing music via Bluetooth sucks. It can drop or be very quiet. Try running Maps on a phone in a mount vs CarPlay on a large screen. Worlds apart in terms of visuals and audio (I won’t wear AirPods in the car for safety).
I’m amazed at how important the phone interface with a vehicle is to many of you. It’s laughable to me that it is a deciding factor to buying a vehicle or not. Perhaps many of us have become too dependent and even addicted to our phones.
Wow this seems insanely stupid by GM and I hope they fail miserably at this.
So let’s do some simple math, GM claims they will generate $20B+ in yearly subscription revenue by 2030 from their EV owners. Wow how many people is that, certainly less than 10M which means a $2,000 per year subscription price or $167 per month per vehicle! Yikes that is one expensive vehicle (BTW my gasoline bill for 2 cars is less than this per month). Even if I am off by a factor of 2 or 3 that is an insane price to expect your customers to pay for something Apple and Google currently offer for free.
GM must be/is out of their minds with this move, who could have convinced them this was a good idea. Not having CarPlay rules out just about every iPhone user. Not having Android Auto rules out just about every iPhone user. Knowing that GM (no matter what they tell us) will track our personal data rules out anyone concerned about privacy. I am not sure how many customers they will have left. I'm all Toyota/Lexus and have been since the 90's with one exception for Honda Prelude purchase in the mid-90's. I held off purchasing a new Toyota/Lexus until CarPlay was built-in and will be purchasing within the next year or so.
Thinking about and having to revise my post...this reminds me the New Coke debacle. Add to that I will choose the apps I want to use in my car and not the one's that GM offers or worse yet extorts from App Developers for the right to work on their infotainment system. GM is living the pipe dream they can compete with Tesla when they cannot. They do not have the nerds necessary to catch up to Tesla as Tesla will not stop moving forward. Furthermore Tesla has the distinct advantage of being able to arbitrarily lower their vehicle prices, still make money, and pummel the competition.
Fully understand GM. Never wanted a device dependent on another device. That’s why I never liked the Apple watch. However, I also don’t want a subscription based car entertainment system. I think I stick to my 2002 Lexus LX470 for the foreseeable future…:)
You don’t like devices that are dependent on other devices, but you are okay with devices that are wholly dependent on other services … such as your phone’s relationship to cellular & wi-fi, your home’s dependence on electricity and water, or your Lexus model’s addiction to gasoline and mechanics …
But even putting that aside … car manufacturers have for decades now had their own infotainment systems in cars, and some of them had subscriptions before, like Sirius or OnStar. The difference was that if you plugged in an iPhone or Android phone, you could CHOOSE to override the generally-poor built-in system with a vastly superior system from Apple or Google. Both are fine, one collects and sells a lot of data on you and the other doesn’t, but they are both designed with users in mind and are highly functional.
That’s not what is happening here: GM is planning to remove the option for your phone’s apps and services to override the built-in infotainment system, and they don’t give a flying crap if you like it or not. Not only will data be collected and sold by both GM and Google, but you’ll pay extra for the privilege, and even more later if you hold onto the car for more than eight years.
If that sounds good to you … you must be a GM executive who’s going to get a big bonus for thinking up such a consumer-hostile idea.
The best thing about CarPlay and Android Auto is your infotainment system is always current. Manufacturer infotainment systems are out of date before you drive off the lot and obsolete within a few years. They do not want any reason for you to keep your car or let someone keep it current.
I have owned 4 GM cars. They have all had Apple CarPlay. Before purchasing my current car, I looked at a Lexus SUV. When I discovered it did not offer Apple CarPlay, I left the dealership. For me, it is a required option. If GM does not offer it, my current GM will be my last.
I get the impression that a lot of people are basing their comments on the headline and not the content of the article.
Thankfully, there are also enough reasoned comments in all the noise to balance things out.
People shouldn't have problems with the decision of GM.
It's a GM car with Carplay as things stand. It's not Carplay with a GM car.
People need to remember that. No one wants the tail to wag the dog. Much less GM.
It's worth remembering that this is being touted as a new software platform. GM probably has far bigger plans for the cockpit experience and that is how it should be.
Both CarPlay and Android Auto are basically infotainment systems. They are not cockpit systems in a modern sense and as high resolution HUDs and more services become part of the software experience, it is increasingly likely that manufacturers will look to more integrated systems.
That aspect will grow exponentially with autonomous driving capacities becoming more commonplace.
We know this be these kinds of cockpit solutions are already shipping on some cars and those cars are basically datacentres on wheels that live and breathe ICT.
That means the core computational funcionality is virtualised. That is right up Google's street. I can see why GM has partnered with them.
The business model is just one of many. It may well be ill-fated but that will be for the market to decide but I'm sure that any future Apple car would also eventually carry subscription services.
As for infotainment from external providers, there is nothing in the article that says that will go away.
Fully understand GM. Never wanted a device dependent on another device. That’s why I never liked the Apple watch. However, I also don’t want a subscription based car entertainment system. I think I stick to my 2002 Lexus LX470 for the foreseeable future…:)
You don’t like devices that are dependent on other devices, but you are okay with devices that are wholly dependent on other services … such as your phone’s relationship to cellular & wi-fi, your home’s dependence on electricity and water, or your Lexus model’s addiction to gasoline and mechanics …
But even putting that aside … car manufacturers have for decades now had their own infotainment systems in cars, and some of them had subscriptions before, like Sirius or OnStar. The difference was that if you plugged in an iPhone or Android phone, you could CHOOSE to override the generally-poor built-in system with a vastly superior system from Apple or Google. Both are fine, one collects and sells a lot of data on you and the other doesn’t, but they are both designed with users in mind and are highly functional.
That’s not what is happening here: GM is planning to remove the option for your phone’s apps and services to override the built-in infotainment system, and they don’t give a flying crap if you like it or not. Not only will data be collected and sold by both GM and Google, but you’ll pay extra for the privilege, and even more later if you hold onto the car for more than eight years.
If that sounds good to you … you must be a GM executive who’s going to get a big bonus for thinking up such a consumer-hostile idea.
The best thing about CarPlay and Android Auto is your infotainment system is always current. Manufacturer infotainment systems are out of date before you drive off the lot and obsolete within a few years. They do not want any reason for you to keep your car or let someone keep it current.
You know I agree with this. A small digression from GM. I actually have a new Toyota Corolla (Australia). Q. How can I spend $AU45K on a new Toyota Corolla and have to use a navigation system that must have been designed by drunk martians and spend $AU1K on a new iPhone and the Maps navigation just works 99.5% of the time???
I have driven a Buick since 2007 - one new, then a used one. I would love to have CarPlay in my vehicle. I absolutely abhor the subscription model. I dropped both OnStar and Serius XM radio because they used subscriptions. I will never subscribe to Apple Music because of the monthly payment. I know, you probably think I am an old curmudgeon. I am older but I do have the dollars to buy a new vehicle and GM just lost all chance of me buying a new Buick. I won't even comment on the gathering of personal data other that to say I will never permit it when I have a choice. Incredibly bad move GM!
I agree with most of your post.
but if you like music like I do, Apple Music is worth it
I wonder what GM will include to get people to pay for something that has been free?
what value will they be offering? It sounds like they will be adding a barrier to gaining EV market share? A skeptical customer base is not going to transition easily. I find most car companies have dreadful user interfaces. I am not expecting a great improvement.
When GM says they want to generate $25B/year from subscription fees, that's probably a typo. I think GM makes about $8B/year from selling vehicles. The idea that a subscription service that works inside those vehicles can result in triple the profit of making all those cars and trucks seems ludicrous. It was probably a typo, and should have said "GM wants to generate $25 million/year from subscription fees."
Yikes. So GM is already making 25% of its profit from subscriptions, and expects that profit from subscriptions will be triple the profit from manufacturing by the end of the decade? If they make 75% of their income from subscriptions, wouldn't that make GM "a software company" rather than an automobile manufacturer?
So I was mostly wrong, but I will point out that in the article you cite, 25% of the fees that they earn comes"from insurance" not "from subscriptions". I don't think it's accurate to tally up insurance in the same column as subscription fees. But insurance is a "service."
I’m amazed at how important the phone interface with a vehicle is to many of you. It’s laughable to me that it is a deciding factor to buying a vehicle or not. Perhaps many of us have become too dependent and even addicted to our phones.
It's laughable that you think this is just about a "phone inerface".
Many years ago I was interested in a GM car. But they came with OnStar, a pay every month forever subscription service. When I told the salesman that I didn’t want it, and didn’t want a monthly fee he said that was just how they came. So I bought a Honda.
Of course nowadays I wouldn’t touch GM with a ten foot pole.
You know you don't have to subscribe if you don't want the service right? My family has had many GM vehicles and never once paid for OnStar.
I've not seen an article on here in some time that triggered such emotions. I'm also not sure most of the commenters actually understand what the article is about, and especially what the actual plan of GM is. I know I don't.
The very first sentence: "General Motors plans to gradually replace Carplay AND Android Auto in its vehicles."
Well OK then. Does that mean that some day in the future I'll no longer be able use iPhones or Pixels as I do now if I buy GM? Not according to Reuters. It says we'll still be able to stream from our phones and place and take calls using our personal handsets via Bluetooth, but subscriptions to third party services will come via a GM appstore with some selection of automotive specific apps.
I don't think that would be totally unfair if true. It is their ecosystem after all, really no different than an iPhone requiring you deal with Apple, or a Pixel phone strongly pushing you to use Google Play. If GM were to push you to use apps from a GM store for your GM vehicle how is that different? So what's the plan?
What does GM factually say they'll be doing? GM didn't say anything, which the article also clearly states: "The (Reuters) report stops short of directly quoting a GM executive saying that they were cutting out CarPlay in its entirety. AppleInsider has reached out to Apple and GM for comment on the report."
So much hand-wringing over a story lacking facts, and totally without any official statements from GM that Carply will be gone. If they're cutting our Carplay then they're also cutting out Android Auto according to whatever source Reuters is depending on for the story. Is this no more than GM wanting more control over subscriptions to services in GM vehicles? It that's what it is I could totally understand the business rationale. They don't want to leave money on the table. Seems fair, it's their playpen.
Comments
Thinking about and having to revise my post...this reminds me the New Coke debacle. Add to that I will choose the apps I want to use in my car and not the one's that GM offers or worse yet extorts from App Developers for the right to work on their infotainment system. GM is living the pipe dream they can compete with Tesla when they cannot. They do not have the nerds necessary to catch up to Tesla as Tesla will not stop moving forward. Furthermore Tesla has the distinct advantage of being able to arbitrarily lower their vehicle prices, still make money, and pummel the competition.
Thankfully, there are also enough reasoned comments in all the noise to balance things out.
People shouldn't have problems with the decision of GM.
It's a GM car with Carplay as things stand. It's not Carplay with a GM car.
People need to remember that. No one wants the tail to wag the dog. Much less GM.
It's worth remembering that this is being touted as a new software platform. GM probably has far bigger plans for the cockpit experience and that is how it should be.
Both CarPlay and Android Auto are basically infotainment systems. They are not cockpit systems in a modern sense and as high resolution HUDs and more services become part of the software experience, it is increasingly likely that manufacturers will look to more integrated systems.
That aspect will grow exponentially with autonomous driving capacities becoming more commonplace.
We know this be these kinds of cockpit solutions are already shipping on some cars and those cars are basically datacentres on wheels that live and breathe ICT.
That means the core computational funcionality is virtualised. That is right up Google's street. I can see why GM has partnered with them.
The business model is just one of many. It may well be ill-fated but that will be for the market to decide but I'm sure that any future Apple car would also eventually carry subscription services.
As for infotainment from external providers, there is nothing in the article that says that will go away.
but if you like music like I do, Apple Music is worth it
what value will they be offering? It sounds like they will be adding a barrier to gaining EV market share? A skeptical customer base is not going to transition easily. I find most car companies have dreadful user interfaces. I am not expecting a great improvement.
And only a person who wants to sell stock in the future would tell people to buy stock.
So I was mostly wrong, but I will point out that in the article you cite, 25% of the fees that they earn comes"from insurance" not "from subscriptions". I don't think it's accurate to tally up insurance in the same column as subscription fees. But insurance is a "service."
The very first sentence:
"General Motors plans to gradually replace Carplay AND Android Auto in its vehicles."
Well OK then. Does that mean that some day in the future I'll no longer be able use iPhones or Pixels as I do now if I buy GM? Not according to Reuters. It says we'll still be able to stream from our phones and place and take calls using our personal handsets via Bluetooth, but subscriptions to third party services will come via a GM appstore with some selection of automotive specific apps.
I don't think that would be totally unfair if true. It is their ecosystem after all, really no different than an iPhone requiring you deal with Apple, or a Pixel phone strongly pushing you to use Google Play. If GM were to push you to use apps from a GM store for your GM vehicle how is that different? So what's the plan?
What does GM factually say they'll be doing?
GM didn't say anything, which the article also clearly states: "The (Reuters) report stops short of directly quoting a GM executive saying that they were cutting out CarPlay in its entirety. AppleInsider has reached out to Apple and GM for comment on the report."
So much hand-wringing over a story lacking facts, and totally without any official statements from GM that Carply will be gone. If they're cutting our Carplay then they're also cutting out Android Auto according to whatever source Reuters is depending on for the story.
Is this no more than GM wanting more control over subscriptions to services in GM vehicles?
It that's what it is I could totally understand the business rationale. They don't want to leave money on the table. Seems fair, it's their playpen.