Hopefully they're adding physical buttons back too. I test drove an XC40 a couple years ago while car shopping and had to quickly nix it from the list after trying to adjust the fan speed. The salesperson suggested I try voice control. Not likely. All touchscreen and voice control has been proven to be more distracting than physical knobs.
Any need to look down at the console to either touch a screen, push a button, or turn a knob is distracting. I rarely use voice control at home, but couldn't live without it on the road now that it's gotten much better. Between that and steering wheel controls, I never need to look down at the console.
The only reason I didn't get a Volvo back when I was buying my car was that, in North America, they'd eliminated the V series from the lineup in favour of the XC. Assuming that everyone in North America wants "big, rugged" cars. Personally, I much prefer a nice sleek sport wagon which doesn't have an extra hundred pounds of "ruggedized" body parts and big tires which cause more fuel consumption. So I went with a VW sport wagon instead. Glad to see the V series back in the lineup now, and I like Volvo's attitude towards custom infotainment systems, so I'll certainly look at them next time around.
Yes looking down at the console is bad. But the right physical buttons don’t require you to look down. I can manipulate my Audi through muscle memory. I don’t talk to my car. Requiring me to control it through voice is a deal breaker.
I can only imagine how many console button presses it would take to do something like "Siri, give me directions to 1234 - 56th St with a stop at the nearest Starbucks". So much more efficient to just say it. Or to reply to a time-sensitive message without having to pull over (which may not be possible on the highway). I honestly can't imagine how I lived without it. That said, simple tasks like changing the volume or skipping a song are much easier done via the steering wheel controls.
I don’t think the V series ever went away. We had the last of the prior V60s (2017 MY) that had a terrible console with way too many buttons but it was replaced with the Thor’s Hammer series V60 (and also a V90). And that is still in the line up I think.
Back in 2012 when I got my VW, it wasn't in the lineup here in Canada. The XC was the replacement, as were crossovers for wagons in general in the North American market due to the influence of the SUV trend and lower fuel prices. It came back a couple years later as fuel prices rose.
My current Honda forces me to manually alternate, every day, between my Carplay ecosystem and my Honda ecosystem. That's a hard fail. I don't want that. Unless I'm reading it wrong, Volvo wants to support CarPlay/Android but have a separate "Volvo OS" ecosystem for users. I would never use it. I want one ecosystem. Two is too many. And there's only one ecosystem that I currently trust. If Volvo wants my money, they should create a Volvo app inside the CarPlay ecosystem. Then I would consider them.
Manufacturers think that they can create an ecosystem so that they remain the "interface" between the user and the car. They don't want people to "think Apple" when using their own cars, because that diminishes their brand value. The problem is, creating an ecosystem that people like (and trust) is a huge undertaking. The world is littered with failed ecosystems, and I doubt they can succeed where so many have failed. In the meantime, since most car manufacturers make some good/reliable cars nowadays, my main criteria for my next car will be how well it implements CarPlay. And if Apple builds a car, I know the CarPlay integration will be excellent.
You seem to want to have your cake and eat it.
There are some very good reasons why carmakers are reluctant to see Apple hook deep into their products and they are often the same reasons Apple uses to do the same with other companies.
As we move away from ICEs and into 'digital' cars with digital interfaces for users, they will become basically batteries on wheels.
Car manufacturers are well aware of the dangers of relying on outside influence and logically want to do their own thing.
You can vote with your wallet but if no one decides to run with Apple everything you want might be moot. At least until Apple maybe decides to release its own car and if they do, will the price make it worth it?
You can stick with CarPlay but it isn't really anywhere near competing products in terms of the access it has to the car.
Some manufacturers might decide to run with Apple if they have no way to create their own 'interfaces' to users. It is definitely an option, and is being employed successfully as I write, on many cars. A big difference though is that the providers are offering an entire platform of options that can go far beyond the software infotainment side (ICT, mini-datacenters, LiDAR, cameras, powertrains, charging technology, console units, AR-HUD...).
Carmakers can pick and choose exactly what level of integration those third parties get.
Apple is unlikely to offer that kind of flexibility.
The big problem for the vast majority of car-focused companies trying to do software is not having a fundamental understanding of HCI (human-computer interaction). Sure they know everything about wiring, hardware control and low-level communication protocols, but damn do they have zero clue about making things intuitive and easy to use. Before CarPlay/Android Auto became commonplace, I remember the infotainment systems in cars were absolutely horrendous. Layers and layers of unintuitively organized functionality. They probably would have just gone with DIP switches if they had a choice.
The Volvo CEO says Apple CarPlay is a value to customers, and its vehicles should focus on making the overall driving experience better, not on revenue generated from infotainment clusters.
I understand your frustration, with the experience when using CarPlay and native car systems. Volvos approach of developing their operating system while still supporting CarPlay is quite ambitious. It can be challenging to create an ecosystem that truly resonates with users. One possible solution could be for Volvo to incorporate its features into the CarPlay ecosystem providing an experience without compromising the brands identity. This approach would cater to user preferences for an familiar interface while also maintaining the functionalities of Volvo vehicles. The key lies in striking a balance between innovation and integration with platforms, like CarPlay.
Hiding behind a Swedish fig leaf is a 100% People’s Republic car. Hard pass for me.
Boy do I have terrible news for you about the clothes you’re wearing, the TV you watch, the computer you use, the smartphone in your pocket, the TV-connected game system you use, etc.
You’d better sit down.
Read more carefully. I used the qualifier 100% in anticipation of responses such as yours. Of course I understand too much of everything is made in China. But we can be nuanced in our purchasing choices. The profit generated by Apple’s products nearly all ends up here. With Volvo/Polestar nothing goes to Sweden, just what’s left in the bank from the sale of their business lock, stock, and barrel to China.
Hiding behind a Swedish fig leaf is a 100% People’s Republic car. Hard pass for me.
Boy do I have terrible news for you about the clothes you’re wearing, the TV you watch, the computer you use, the smartphone in your pocket, the TV-connected game system you use, etc.
You’d better sit down.
Read more carefully. I used the qualifier 100% in anticipation of your critique. Of course I understand too much of everything is made in China. But we can be nuanced in our purchasing choices. The profit generated by Apple’s products nearly all ends up here. With Volvo/Polestar nothing goes to Sweden, just what’s left in the bank from the sale of their business lock, stock, and barrel to China.
It hasn't gone to Sweden for ages, Ford owned Volvo before the current owners. And VOLV B shares are still publicly traded and issue a dividend, so it's not 100% of the profit going to China.
My current Honda forces me to manually alternate, every day, between my Carplay ecosystem and my Honda ecosystem. That's a hard fail. I don't want that. Unless I'm reading it wrong, Volvo wants to support CarPlay/Android but have a separate "Volvo OS" ecosystem for users. I would never use it. I want one ecosystem. Two is too many. And there's only one ecosystem that I currently trust. If Volvo wants my money, they should create a Volvo app inside the CarPlay ecosystem. Then I would consider them.
Manufacturers think that they can create an ecosystem so that they remain the "interface" between the user and the car. They don't want people to "think Apple" when using their own cars, because that diminishes their brand value. The problem is, creating an ecosystem that people like (and trust) is a huge undertaking. The world is littered with failed ecosystems, and I doubt they can succeed where so many have failed. In the meantime, since most car manufacturers make some good/reliable cars nowadays, my main criteria for my next car will be how well it implements CarPlay. And if Apple builds a car, I know the CarPlay integration will be excellent.
You misunderstood what was written. The internal computer system of the car (not of the smartphone) runs Volvo OS. This is needed to operate the car securely. It controls the engine, breaks, lights, radars, cameras, cruise control ... of the car. By nature, this Volvo OS is a real time operating system, reacting very fast to triggers. E.g. collision detection must be works robustly, instantly and independently of any other system like a connected smartphone.
Apps for Android Auto and Apple Car Play are running on the smartphone, where the smartphone screen is redirected to the car display and its speakers to the car audio system. They provide infotainment to the car, but they don't include any management of the car hardware.
The fact that all apps of Android Auto and Apple Car Play still run on the smartphone, makes it impossible to be the master of ceremony . The car manufacturers want to be and must be in control of the basic functions of car (the driving experience): it is their car , not Apple's or Google's. Moving such thing to an external system like a smartphone would break the robustness and the real time nature of a car operating system. And what if there is no smartphone? Making a smartphone connection a compulsary requirement to drive, is unacceaptable and even dangerous.
Since the 21th centry car manufactures have been adding infotainment to their car OS (think of the in car GPS systems). But the user experience was not that great. So Apple Car Play and Android Auto stepped in, offering a great ecosystem for infotainment. And we all love it
A recent development has been to add basic Android Auto functionality to the car OS system (Volvo OS in this case). Google has to do a lot of work to embed this Android functionality in the car OS. Google calls it GAS : Google Automation Services. It supports a limited number of Android apps (Google Maps being the most important).
It is striking to see that Apple did not react with a similar service for the car OS systems. So GAS could become quickly the de facto standard for in car infotainment systems, running on the car computer.
Volvo has stated that it would still offer support for Android Auto and Apple Car systems running from a smartphone to offer infotainment apps. It does not want to monetize apps running on VolvoOS.
GM has another point of view: it will only offer its own car OS system, with some Android apps built in.
A recent development has been to add basic Android Auto functionality to the car OS system (Volvo OS in this case). Google has to do a lot of work to embed this Android functionality in the car OS. Google calls it GAS : Google Automation Services. It supports a limited number of Android apps (Google Maps being the most important).
Interesting, I didn't know about GAS. You missed out Android Automotive though (not to be confused with Android Auto, a bizarrely confusing naming choice by Google). That's Google's attempt to move into inbuilt car software and have broader support for Android apps in the car without the need for a smartphone.
A recent development has been to add basic Android Auto functionality to the car OS system (Volvo OS in this case). Google has to do a lot of work to embed this Android functionality in the car OS. Google calls it GAS : Google Automation Services. It supports a limited number of Android apps (Google Maps being the most important).
Interesting, I didn't know about GAS. You missed out Android Automotive though (not to be confused with Android Auto, a bizarrely confusing naming choice by Google). That's Google's attempt to move into inbuilt car software and have broader support for Android apps in the car without the need for a smartphone.
Google Automation Service and Goolge Automotive are very related, because they both run on the car computer. The former is the large comprehensive app with a UI running on top of a car OS like VolvoOS, while the l;atter includes the low level routines that interfaces with the car hardware. Volvo uses GAS, while GM uses Android Automotive. see https://www.androidpolice.com/android-auto-vs-android-automotive-vs-google-automotive-services/ for a detailed explanation.
A recent development has been to add basic Android Auto functionality to the car OS system (Volvo OS in this case). Google has to do a lot of work to embed this Android functionality in the car OS. Google calls it GAS : Google Automation Services. It supports a limited number of Android apps (Google Maps being the most important).
Interesting, I didn't know about GAS. You missed out Android Automotive though (not to be confused with Android Auto, a bizarrely confusing naming choice by Google). That's Google's attempt to move into inbuilt car software and have broader support for Android apps in the car without the need for a smartphone.
Google Automation Service and Goolge Automotive are very related, because they both run on the car computer. The former is the large comprehensive app with a UI running on top of a car OS like VolvoOS, while the l;atter includes the low level routines that interfaces with the car hardware. Volvo uses GAS, while GM uses Android Automotive. see https://www.androidpolice.com/android-auto-vs-android-automotive-vs-google-automotive-services/ for a detailed explanation.
Google's approach to cars following the same roadmap as their approach to chat apps then
My current Honda forces me to manually alternate, every day, between my Carplay ecosystem and my Honda ecosystem. That's a hard fail. I don't want that. Unless I'm reading it wrong, Volvo wants to support CarPlay/Android but have a separate "Volvo OS" ecosystem for users. I would never use it. I want one ecosystem. Two is too many. And there's only one ecosystem that I currently trust. If Volvo wants my money, they should create a Volvo app inside the CarPlay ecosystem. Then I would consider them.
Manufacturers think that they can create an ecosystem so that they remain the "interface" between the user and the car. They don't want people to "think Apple" when using their own cars, because that diminishes their brand value. The problem is, creating an ecosystem that people like (and trust) is a huge undertaking. The world is littered with failed ecosystems, and I doubt they can succeed where so many have failed. In the meantime, since most car manufacturers make some good/reliable cars nowadays, my main criteria for my next car will be how well it implements CarPlay. And if Apple builds a car, I know the CarPlay integration will be excellent.
You misunderstood what was written. The internal computer system of the car (not of the smartphone) runs Volvo OS. This is needed to operate the car securely. It controls the engine, breaks, lights, radars, cameras, cruise control ... of the car. By nature, this Volvo OS is a real time operating system, reacting very fast to triggers. E.g. collision detection must be works robustly, instantly and independently of any other system like a connected smartphone.
Apps for Android Auto and Apple Car Play are running on the smartphone, where the smartphone screen is redirected to the car display and its speakers to the car audio system. They provide infotainment to the car, but they don't include any management of the car hardware.
The fact that all apps of Android Auto and Apple Car Play still run on the smartphone, makes it impossible to be the master of ceremony . The car manufacturers want to be and must be in control of the basic functions of car (the driving experience): it is their car , not Apple's or Google's. Moving such thing to an external system like a smartphone would break the robustness and the real time nature of a car operating system. And what if there is no smartphone? Making a smartphone connection a compulsary requirement to drive, is unacceaptable and even dangerous.
Since the 21th centry car manufactures have been adding infotainment to their car OS (think of the in car GPS systems). But the user experience was not that great. So Apple Car Play and Android Auto stepped in, offering a great ecosystem for infotainment. And we all love it
A recent development has been to add basic Android Auto functionality to the car OS system (Volvo OS in this case). Google has to do a lot of work to embed this Android functionality in the car OS. Google calls it GAS : Google Automation Services. It supports a limited number of Android apps (Google Maps being the most important).
It is striking to see that Apple did not react with a similar service for the car OS systems. So GAS could become quickly the de facto standard for in car infotainment systems, running on the car computer.
Volvo has stated that it would still offer support for Android Auto and Apple Car systems running from a smartphone to offer infotainment apps. It does not want to monetize apps running on VolvoOS.
GM has another point of view: it will only offer its own car OS system, with some Android apps built in.
Of course I know that a car's OS hides some things from CarPlay. Let me rephrase it in a way that should be unambiguous to you: I will buy a car only if it takes advantage of all the CarPlay features that are currently available to be used through the latest CarPlay API. How can I be clearer than that? How can you argue with that requirement?
My current Honda forces me to manually alternate, every day, between my Carplay ecosystem and my Honda ecosystem. That's a hard fail. I don't want that. Unless I'm reading it wrong, Volvo wants to support CarPlay/Android but have a separate "Volvo OS" ecosystem for users. I would never use it. I want one ecosystem. Two is too many. And there's only one ecosystem that I currently trust. If Volvo wants my money, they should create a Volvo app inside the CarPlay ecosystem. Then I would consider them.
Manufacturers think that they can create an ecosystem so that they remain the "interface" between the user and the car. They don't want people to "think Apple" when using their own cars, because that diminishes their brand value. The problem is, creating an ecosystem that people like (and trust) is a huge undertaking. The world is littered with failed ecosystems, and I doubt they can succeed where so many have failed. In the meantime, since most car manufacturers make some good/reliable cars nowadays, my main criteria for my next car will be how well it implements CarPlay. And if Apple builds a car, I know the CarPlay integration will be excellent.
You misunderstood what was written. The internal computer system of the car (not of the smartphone) runs Volvo OS. This is needed to operate the car securely. It controls the engine, breaks, lights, radars, cameras, cruise control ... of the car. By nature, this Volvo OS is a real time operating system, reacting very fast to triggers. E.g. collision detection must be works robustly, instantly and independently of any other system like a connected smartphone.
Apps for Android Auto and Apple Car Play are running on the smartphone, where the smartphone screen is redirected to the car display and its speakers to the car audio system. They provide infotainment to the car, but they don't include any management of the car hardware.
The fact that all apps of Android Auto and Apple Car Play still run on the smartphone, makes it impossible to be the master of ceremony . The car manufacturers want to be and must be in control of the basic functions of car (the driving experience): it is their car , not Apple's or Google's. Moving such thing to an external system like a smartphone would break the robustness and the real time nature of a car operating system. And what if there is no smartphone? Making a smartphone connection a compulsary requirement to drive, is unacceaptable and even dangerous.
Since the 21th centry car manufactures have been adding infotainment to their car OS (think of the in car GPS systems). But the user experience was not that great. So Apple Car Play and Android Auto stepped in, offering a great ecosystem for infotainment. And we all love it
A recent development has been to add basic Android Auto functionality to the car OS system (Volvo OS in this case). Google has to do a lot of work to embed this Android functionality in the car OS. Google calls it GAS : Google Automation Services. It supports a limited number of Android apps (Google Maps being the most important).
It is striking to see that Apple did not react with a similar service for the car OS systems. So GAS could become quickly the de facto standard for in car infotainment systems, running on the car computer.
Volvo has stated that it would still offer support for Android Auto and Apple Car systems running from a smartphone to offer infotainment apps. It does not want to monetize apps running on VolvoOS.
GM has another point of view: it will only offer its own car OS system, with some Android apps built in.
Of course I know that a car's OS hides some things from CarPlay. Let me rephrase it in a way that should be unambiguous to you: I will buy a car only if it takes advantage of all the CarPlay features that are currently available to be used through the latest CarPlay API. How can I be clearer than that? How can you argue with that requirement?
That's not a rephrase You've completely thrown away your previously requirement "If Volvo wants my money, they should create a Volvo app inside the CarPlay ecosystem. Then I would consider them." and replaced it with a totally new one.
Have any requirement you want dude, though you'll find that very hard to fulfil for a good while once next generation CarPlay formally launches.
Comments
Back in 2012 when I got my VW, it wasn't in the lineup here in Canada. The XC was the replacement, as were crossovers for wagons in general in the North American market due to the influence of the SUV trend and lower fuel prices. It came back a couple years later as fuel prices rose.
https://www.streetinsider.com/magazine/american-companies-that-are-no-longer-american/?origin=google&utm_source=Google&utm_medium=20529099533&account_id=7381981399&gl%5Bcampaign_id%5D=20529099533&gl%5Badgroup_id%5D=&gl%5Bad_id%5D=&gl%5Bnetwork%5D=&gl%5Bdevice%5D=c&gl%5Btarget_id%5D=&gl%5Bpublisher_id%5D=
Google Automation Service and Goolge Automotive are very related, because they both run on the car computer. The former is the large comprehensive app with a UI running on top of a car OS like VolvoOS, while the l;atter includes the low level routines that interfaces with the car hardware. Volvo uses GAS, while GM uses Android Automotive. see https://www.androidpolice.com/android-auto-vs-android-automotive-vs-google-automotive-services/ for a detailed explanation.
Have any requirement you want dude, though you'll find that very hard to fulfil for a good while once next generation CarPlay formally launches.