GM ditching Apple CarPlay is about money, not safety

AppleInsider

General Motors leadership continues to poorly justify why Apple CarPlay has been abandoned, with driver safety being the latest excuse, rather than just admitting it's harvesting and monetizing user data.

GM doesn't want CarPlay

According to a report from Motortrend, GM's head of product for infotainment, Tim Babbitt, blames safety for why CarPlay and other third-party systems needed to go. For some reason, Babbitt thinks that the systems provided by Apple and Google are unreliable and force users to seek out their device to complete a task while driving.

In an incredible stretch of logic, Babbitt claims GM's solution cuts the smartphone from the equation entirely, and is therefore safer.

Subscribe to AppleInsider on YouTube

When GM initially announced the move to ditch CarPlay, it was emphasizing in-car subscription services it could sell to customers as a way to drive revenue after a sale. The pitch didn't mention safety as an issue until now when the shift away from CarPlay is not only happening, it's incredibly controversial.

GM is abandoning user choice by implementing an infotainment system that requires users to opt into GM's custom Android-based operating system. Subscription revenue to premium services plus unprecedented access to user data, which can be monetized, drive GM's move.

Crying "safety" isn't only a joke -- it's an insult to the industry.

GM's safety problem

GM's leadership seems to believe that an infotainment system divorced from the driver's device will promote safety when it is sure to do the opposite. Customers who can't access CarPlay or Android Auto will likely revert to using Bluetooth to control media or make calls.

This is GM's alternative to CarPlay. Source: Motortrend

In GM's "safer" world, where it controls the infotainment system and gets to rake in subscription revenue, drivers will need to fumble around for their iPhones to perform tasks that typically appear on a touch display. Thinking otherwise is naive.

A person's smartphone has their contact database, favorite apps, saved data like frequent locations, and much more. GM expecting people to upload their contacts and maintain a separate information database like it's 2006 is frankly out of touch.

GM's complaints are issues of its own making

The driving force behind Babbitt's comment about safety is the concept that Android Auto and CarPlay "aren't perfect programs." He points to stability issues that "manifest themselves as bad connections, poor rendering, slow responses, and dropped connections."

Subscribe to AppleInsider on YouTube

Apple CarPlay has existed since 2014. It runs as a program on top of the vehicle's infotainment system to bring apps and data from the iPhone to the vehicle's display.

CarPlay can be navigated through touch or, on older models, physical controls like knobs and buttons. The speed at which operations occur and how well touch input is received depends almost entirely on the manufacturer, not the iPhone.

We admit CarPlay isn't perfect. Older iPhones may run into performance issues over time, but connecting to CarPlay is hardly an intensive task. The fault usually lies in cheap processors driving the infotainment systems, terrible touch displays that fail to respond, or software that struggles to render CarPlay.

Apple's vision for CarPlay's future

Instead of trying to make CarPlay and Android Auto run better by investing in better infotainment systems, GM has decided to build an entire software stack using Android. The only way this choice is viable is if GM, a car manufacturer, can figure out how to make a better software interface than Apple or Google.

Yes, with Google's help.

Surveys have shown that people searching for a new vehicle want CarPlay or Android Auto. The rare exception belongs to Tesla and a few other EV manufacturers, which have spent years developing a separate platform users trust.

Regardless of GM's excuse of the week, abandoning CarPlay is about money and has nothing to do with improving the customer's experience. Given that the common refrain lately from purchasers that CarPlay or Android Auto are effectively required in new cars, it seems like a bad gamble.

A statement from GM

After the Motortrend story, GM reached out to publications with a statement in an attempt to clean up what Babbit said. To be clear, Babbit said it, but GM is distancing itself from the comment with this statement.

We wanted to reach out to clarify that comments about GM's position on phone projection were misrepresented and to reinforce our valued partnerships with Apple and Google and each company's commitment to driver safety. GM's embedded infotainment strategy is driven by the benefits of having a system that allows for greater integration with the larger GM ecosystem and vehicles.

The point still stands, GM's move is clearly about control over user data and services. While Babbit's comment about safety aren't directly attributable to GM's official corporate stance, it was an attempt to explain away the move away from CarPlay. And the quote from GM is trying to spin it in a manner that's more palatable to them.

Updated December 13, 4:00 p.m. ET: Added the statement from GM.

Read on AppleInsider

lkmd

I would never buy any future car without Apple CarPlay.     Hope the GM CEO doesn't get too comfortable with his job.   

Panner_Nudding

I’m going to be in the market for a new car in the next couple years and this completely rules out any GM car. 

bradchatellier

We taking bets on how long it will be until they come crawling back?

mikethemartian

It is no different than Apple constantly claiming “privacy and security” to lock down their platforms so that they can maximize profit.

Mark1234

When I went to the NY Auto Show last spring, I made a special point of going to the GM exhibit to tell them if they carried out this anti-CarPlay nonsense I’d never look at another GM car. He snottily asked me what I drove now. It’s an Audi but I’ve bought 3 new GM cars in my life, and always considered them. He was very dismissive and totally uninterested in hearing from me.

rob53

mikethemartian said:

It is no different than Apple constantly claiming “privacy and security” to lock down their platforms so that they can maximize profit.

Not really. GM will heed to provide cellular capabilities, something all iPhone users already are paying for. Why pay twice? As for privacy and security, what China-based programmer are they going to use? GM is going down the drain anyway. Their GM is Mary Barra, a women for those commenters who think she’s a he, and GM’s only chance of staying alive is to build everything in China. Who do you trust for privacy and security?

Anilu_777

Well like a lot of people here I won’t be buying GM or any vehicle (including Tesla) that doesn’t have CarPlay. Their loss. 

freeassociate2

GM engineering and manufacturing have both been running jokes for over 40 years now. The only people that buy them know absolutely nothing beyond the basics about cars or trucks (or GM’s history of endless f*ck-ups). Might as well burn your money. CarPlay is the least of their problems. 

Genuinely hoping they go under in my lifetime.

Prediction: in twenty years the only pieces of GM left will be a commercial truck manufacturer and the Corvette. I doubt they’ll be independent — more likely dependent on or owned by another conglomerate. 

(Disclaimer: Yup, I’ve owned them and repaired them. Truly, truly garbage products.)

Don’t believe me? Just ask Howie Makum.



https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/05/happy-birthday-to-howie/

auxio

mikethemartian said:

It is no different than Apple constantly claiming “privacy and security” to lock down their platforms so that they can maximize profit.

Nope.

In Apple's case, sure, all the people who work in the tech industry or are tech enthusiasts would be able to tell the difference between a legitimate App Store and a scam one run by hackers who are out to harvest credit card numbers and other personal data. But the average person, a large number of whom get duped by internet scams every day because they don't understand technology, wouldn't.

In GM's case, there's nothing to protect people from. The two existing options, CarPlay and Android Auto, are run by legitimate tech companies who have a wealth of experience in the field. There's nothing nefarious about them as there would be in the alternative App Store case. Are they perfect? No, but it's not like they're intentionally sabotaging anything or trying to scam people. And who honestly thinks that GM can do a better job of designing technology than Apple and Google? We'd still be using cassette tapes and manually tuning radio stations if they were in charge of innovating with car entertainment systems.

avon b7

"GM is abandoning user choice by implementing an infotainment system that requires users to opt into GM's custom Android-based operating system."

To be fair, Apple is famous for doing exactly the same. And all over the place. 

It is also in hot water for those practices. 

GM may find itself in a similar position at some point but they can rightly say 'it's our car and we can develop the system as we see fit'. The regulators might see things differently though. It will also go far beyond infotainment. 

It might turn out to be actually very good. We'll have to wait and see. 

capserghst42

I'd also not like not to have Apple CarPlay, but I hardly use mine. I live in a country where you have to have your driving light on during the day, which means that the map switches to night mode ... POS. But I can happily live with the build in GPS and I prefer the Radio over streaming music. 

Still I would not buy a new car without CarPlay. 

wood1208

Often smart people shoot themselves in foot and GM is one good example.

Baddog

I just won’t buy a GM and haven’t for decades because of past lemon issues.  At the cost of cars today, who could want to pay for additional subscriptions they all ready have on their iPhone? If anything, I’d pickup my iPhone much more often with out CarPlay; it’s not about safety for certain…

stuke

Indeed, number one priority when shopping for a new car is Apple CarPlay on board, without any subscription to "premium" features.  No subscriptions for a car.  Period.  There are plenty of other car manufacturer choices.  GM will suffer by this decision, guaranteed.

charlesn

This has all been so totally transparent from the outset. I'm sure the Google sales team came a'callin' at GM HQ and entranced Mary Barra with tales of the riches to be reaped by collecting and monetizing consumer data. I mean, who knows more about abusing consumer privacy for profit than Google? And just imagine the treasure trove that could exist if you could monitor and monetize every consumer decision made in the car! Clearly, Mary swallowed this story hook, line and sinker, and so the GM/Google partnership was forged. 

Unfortunately for Mary, what she forgot to think through was this: selling cars is hard enough in the ultra-competitive U.S. market, where the GM brand holds no special cachet whatsoever. And now GM dealers have to sell cars minus the single most requested consumer feature: CarPlay and Android compatibility. Oh, but there's more: you'll have to pay annual subscription fees for some aspects of the new GM system you'll be forced to use, plus the EULA you'll have to sign just to turn it on will give GM permission to collect and sell your data. Yeah, who wouldn't want to sign up for THIS just to own a GM car? 

I'm sure GM is about to find out that lack of CarPlay/Android compatibility isn't just a deal breaker for many car buyers, but will prevent even consideration of buying GM right from the start. I wouldn't look at any car that lacked CarPlay, and I'm sure Android users feel the same. I'd also venture to say that deeper-pocketed buyers with the most expensive phones are likely the most attached to having CarPlay and Android available, so this may especially impact sales of more expensive models. GM is about to get hit by the proverbial bus that it should have seen coming from the start. 

lordjohnwhorfin

I went from “no CarPlay is a dealbreaker” to “no Wireless CarPlay is a dealbreaker.”
Thanks GM, I’m in the market for a new car, your move saves me a lot of time by removing potential choices from the list of cars to evaluate.

Graeme000

GM also suggested they’ll have voice controls for safety. Meanwhile, studies have shown that voice controls can require enough focus to inhibit driving just as much as being drunk.

ReginaldGraziyos

Most of the general population doesn't even care about the infotainment systems in their car. I understand GM wants to own their in-house OS and the closest thing can be provided by Google while Apple has historically never licensed their OS. All power to them, we will find out how customers like this move in the future. Personally speaking, the infotainment system is the last thing I care about in a car.

danox

GM or Tesla has never been on the buying list.......

irwinmaurice

No CarPlay is a dealbreaker for me regardless of make model etc.

That said, GMs observation that people still use their phones for certain tasks or better experience - spot on.  

Siri still sucks big time when trying to find a location in maps, a specific album in Apple Music and I’ve completely given up trying to get Siri to dial the correct phone number.  All this attempted while I’m articulating clearly at stop lights etc and it’s less than a 50/50 proposition if Siri can get it right.  

After 3-4-5 tries I’m picking up my phone to search the contact/address/phone # or music I want.  Not the ideal safe driving experience.

And no, I don’t have ANY hope that GM would have done this better, just saying CarPlay has its flaws and I’m fine w GM calling them out for them.