The reason a car manufacturer would not like CarPlay or android auto is that it reduces the opportunity for upsell to higher cost models using multimedia features at the time of purchase of the car, and selling high priced updates at service intervals. If all that stuff is done by the phone, they lose those revenue opportunities.
"They are not trying to go against CarPlay", "Most of these companies are doing this in addition to offering CarPlay." Sorry you are incorrect. Toyota has already announced that it will not support CarPlay directly. Even Ford currently is planning on supporting both.
"For those of you basing your auto purchase on CarPlay, don't. At the moment its very gimmicky. " That's your opinion. I personally like it very much. And my car purchases going forward will support either or both of Apple's and Google's offerings directly.
"Unless the car offers wireless car play, don't choose a car that is inferior in other categories just to get standard CarPlay or you may end up be disappointed that you did." This applies no matter what even to the open source version. So it is not a valid argument either way. There is a much greater chance of this happening from Apple and Google then the open source version as the Apple and Google version will be several versions ahead of the open source version.
Kinda late to the party...its already taken off on both sides (Android Auto and CarPlay). What will they offer to make others switch and stop supporting this? I think in the end all they're going to do is piss off customers (like Toyota already has) and people just won't buy their products.
If Smart Device Link is the default set-up, and 'it just works', and works well, I'd think most people will just go with it. If you step into your car the first time and it informs you that it has detected your phone and asks if you'd like to set it up it would be tempting to say 'yes'. I wouldn't be surprised if most people think they have CarPlay working. If in order to get CapPlay working you have to go into a convoluted settings menu structure in order to enable it it will further discourage.
Just being a devils advocate here.
I believe to enable CarPlay all you have to do is plug it in and it comes up. There are no special settings to setup or go through. Its pretty much plug n pray. If SmartLink is supposed to work with your phone and stuff I don't see it as it "just working". There are way too many different kinds of phones it will have to support vs Android Auto and CarPlay are just built into the phone's OS. Maybe I'm missing something?
I think the motivation is that with CarPlay or Android Auto is that if it doesn't work, the car company takes the blame for not implementing it correctly. With Smart Device Link the car manufacturer will blame the phone maker for not implementing Smart Device Link correctly.
Dear car makers, your software sucks. I've seen Android CarPlay and Apple CarPlay. Both are similar and are easy to use. Apple's was plug and play. Android you had to fudge around a bit but it worked.
Kinda late to the party...its already taken off on both sides (Android Auto and CarPlay). What will they offer to make others switch and stop supporting this? I think in the end all they're going to do is piss off customers (like Toyota already has) and people just won't buy their products.
If Smart Device Link is the default set-up, and 'it just works', and works well, I'd think most people will just go with it. If you step into your car the first time and it informs you that it has detected your phone and asks if you'd like to set it up it would be tempting to say 'yes'. I wouldn't be surprised if most people think they have CarPlay working. If in order to get CapPlay working you have to go into a convoluted settings menu structure in order to enable it it will further discourage.
Just being a devils advocate here.
I believe to enable CarPlay all you have to do is plug it in and it comes up. There are no special settings to setup or go through. Its pretty much plug n pray. If SmartLink is supposed to work with your phone and stuff I don't see it as it "just working". There are way too many different kinds of phones it will have to support vs Android Auto and CarPlay are just built into the phone's OS. Maybe I'm missing something?
I think paxman is saying that Smart Device could succeed IF two things
are true: (a) it works well and (b) CarPlay is hidden behind menus, etc.
Paxman isn't saying CarPlay is difficult to use - he's saying that
automakers could purposely make CarPlay difficult to use in order to
encourage to encourage use of Smart Device. (b) is possible. (a) seems
unlikely given what we have seen to date from the OEMs.
Yes, that's right. Its all about the path of least resistance.
Kinda late to the party...its already taken off on both sides (Android Auto and CarPlay). What will they offer to make others switch and stop supporting this? I think in the end all they're going to do is piss off customers (like Toyota already has) and people just won't buy their products.
If Smart Device Link is the default set-up, and 'it just works', and works well, I'd think most people will just go with it. If you step into your car the first time and it informs you that it has detected your phone and asks if you'd like to set it up it would be tempting to say 'yes'. I wouldn't be surprised if most people think they have CarPlay working. If in order to get CapPlay working you have to go into a convoluted settings menu structure in order to enable it it will further discourage.
Just being a devils advocate here.
I believe to enable CarPlay all you have to do is plug it in and it comes up. There are no special settings to setup or go through. Its pretty much plug n pray. If SmartLink is supposed to work with your phone and stuff I don't see it as it "just working". There are way too many different kinds of phones it will have to support vs Android Auto and CarPlay are just built into the phone's OS. Maybe I'm missing something?
I think the motivation is that with CarPlay or Android Auto is that if it doesn't work, the car company takes the blame for not implementing it correctly. With Smart Device Link the car manufacturer will blame the phone maker for not implementing Smart Device Link correctly.
If thats the case then Apple simply won't support Smart Device Link and then its dead in the water because hundreds of millions of phones automatically don't work with it. Its really a lost cause if this is the case. With Apple's size and market you cannot just build something completely different when they already have a solution and expect Apple to be forced to comply and forget their own technology. Like someone else said, this kinda sounds like CurrentC.
For me, IMO, someone who has worked in aerospace and with pilot human factors in flight deck design.. one of the first lessons was touch - feel for important systems. This does two things - pilot can feel which system button/knob they are touching; that allows the pilot to keep their eyes out the window for situational awareness! Gosh, I miss buttons and knobs in these new cars. Ford interface to radio etc is atrocious.... and that's their latest 'improved' one. The best I have seen (because the have easy buttons and knobs) are Chrysler and VW... but VW just went touch also... sigh!
Side track comment--- imo- one of the big problems with today computer OS's is cannot find the features or commands, they are buried in menu or force touch or something.... when I started in aerospace CAD design, we had a standalone control box with labeled button commands and a touch screen pencil (sound familiar). A user could fly(pun) in work productivity, it was similar to FCP keyboard short cuts but in an easy to use console .
Cars / keyboards--- they need more visible buttons!!!
Just bought a brand new car with CarPlay. Used for a few days and simply don't use it anymore. It's not all that great (for me) as it doesn't provide that much benefit over using USB/Bluetooth for streaming music or maps which I personally still find a little lacking over Google maps as proven on my six hour drive that I just took.
I'm sure, and hope, it will get better over time. But for right now I just use Bluetooth and or connect use USB.
Here's a car connectivity question. Why hasn't any manufacturer started including a real mounting dock (no wires, a sturdy mount, the correct orientation, etc.)? For iOS it's easy (one connector, only a few form factors, etc.). Even for Android, it shouldn't be too hard to cover most of the dominant devices. The space taken up by a CD loading slot should be about right to have a pop-out platform that includes a sturdy port (that can swap between lightning and micro-USB). This would reduce clutter and wires snaking around the cockpit area (usually from a center console to the dash).
There have been a few cell phone docks offered as options in luxury cars in years past (usually in the center console area), but now that we are well into the smart phone era, I too wonder why the car companies never figured out how to provide a convenient mounting location (with connections) that positions a mobile phone within glancing distance. I can't imagine it would be a liability thing, considering how many vent-clip products and other accessories are out there.
I suppose better mobile device integration like CarPlay/Android Auto may make positioning within sight less important, but an easy to reach dock should be as ubiquitous as cup holders. (Although I guess it took the car companies decades to figure out cup holders).
If I held stock in either F or TM -- thankfully, I don't, directly -- I would unload all those holdings today.
I had a large buy order for Ford stock in 2008 that never went through because it fell just shy of the amount it finally fell to. I would've made quite a nice profit if the order had gone through.
FWIW: I just bought a barely used 2016 VW Golf Sportwagen 2 weeks ago; great car at a great price. One of the selling points for me was that it has Apple CarPlay. Being that my wife and I are both iPhone users, and that both of our cars (one of which we traded in) are old and didn't have anything resembling a modern infotainment system, having Apple CarPlay is great. Plug in the phone and use it. No need for directions; it's very intuitive. We used Maps to get around Arizona last week when we did a long day trip. And being able to easily access music is great. I understand that if you're getting in the car for a 5 or 10 minute drive it's annoying to have to plug in, but that's small potatoes in the grand scheme. I am very pleased with it, and the rest of the car for that matter.
As far as the article is concerned: being that iOS and Android have 95% of the smart phone market (or maybe more for all I know), it makes no sense to me to invest in your own system when there's already something out there that works great. I think it'll just be a waste of money for these car companies.
"...allows the vehicle manufacturer to retain control over the look and feel of the user interface."
Yeah - I've used their crappy interfaces. They suck. Apple and Google have been designing user interfaces for years, and while they may not be perfect they are light years ahead of most Car Manufacturers.
There's another benefit to this - you learn Car Play (or Android Auto) and you're done. New car? Same interface. How is learning a new interface for every single car better? I think the post someone listed above regarding upsell may be right. If you have Car Play, why would you pay and extra $1000 for the navigation system?
If you are like me, you like to get in your car and drive. Not fiddle around with your phone and attaching cables. For long trips its worth the effort but you will soon keep your phone in your pocket for everyday drives. Unless the car offers wireless car play, don't choose a car that is inferior in other categories just to get standard CarPlay or you may end up be disappointed that you did.
I have thought for some time that many people are missing some of the key aspects in this discussion. It doesn't surprise me very much at all that the car manufacturers are reluctant to open the doors too wide for Carplay or android auto. For one thing, they will not want to put themselves at the mercy of Apple or Google in regard to functionality or UI Design. For another there is a clear trend towards more driver assistence systems and more sophisticated computer-based control of many elements in the modern autos .. here I'm thinking about motor and drive train controls, collision-avoidance (radar) and the many elements towards self-driving vehicles. The purchase of Nokia Here maps by the 3 big german auto manufacturers, recently joined by intel, is another aspect that needs to be seen in relation to high-resolution maps, signal recognition systems and road-sign awareness systems. These are all subsystems that are right in the focus of current automotive R&D and require a level of integration and intelligence that the manufacturers will not place in the hands of companies like apple or google. The auto manufacturers are highly focussed on collecting a great deal of data from the vehicles (whether that is good or not is another topic entirely), and they certainly don't want to hand that info over to third parties.
Against that background, the entertainment systems are relatively insignificant. If I remember correctly there were some discussions between Apple and BMW a while back which ended up going nowhere mainly because of the fact that BMW was not interested in allowing Apple as much "say" in the developments as apple wanted to have. It never seemed to me to be realistic for Apple to expect to get the level of access to the automotive computing systems that would be necessary to achieve the deep integration that is essential.
I just think it's silly to expect a manufacturer like Mercedes or BMW to see their core products as nothing more than an iPhone accessory :-).
Comments
Their strategy will fail.
Sorry you are incorrect. Toyota has already announced that it will not support CarPlay directly. Even Ford currently is planning on supporting both.
"For those of you basing your auto purchase on CarPlay, don't. At the moment its very gimmicky. "
That's your opinion. I personally like it very much. And my car purchases going forward will support either or both of Apple's and Google's offerings directly.
"Unless the car offers wireless car play, don't choose a car that is inferior in other categories just to get standard CarPlay or you may end up be disappointed that you did."
This applies no matter what even to the open source version. So it is not a valid argument either way. There is a much greater chance of this happening from Apple and Google then the open source version as the Apple and Google version will be several versions ahead of the open source version.
If I held stock in either F or TM -- thankfully, I don't, directly -- I would unload all those holdings today.
For me, IMO, someone who has worked in aerospace and with pilot human factors in flight deck design.. one of the first lessons was touch - feel for important systems. This does two things - pilot can feel which system button/knob they are touching; that allows the pilot to keep their eyes out the window for situational awareness! Gosh, I miss buttons and knobs in these new cars. Ford interface to radio etc is atrocious.... and that's their latest 'improved' one. The best I have seen (because the have easy buttons and knobs) are Chrysler and VW... but VW just went touch also... sigh!
Side track comment--- imo- one of the big problems with today computer OS's is cannot find the features or commands, they are buried in menu or force touch or something.... when I started in aerospace CAD design, we had a standalone control box with labeled button commands and a touch screen pencil (sound familiar). A user could fly(pun) in work productivity, it was similar to FCP keyboard short cuts but in an easy to use console .
Cars / keyboards--- they need more visible buttons!!!
I'm sure, and hope, it will get better over time. But for right now I just use Bluetooth and or connect use USB.
I suppose better mobile device integration like CarPlay/Android Auto may make positioning within sight less important, but an easy to reach dock should be as ubiquitous as cup holders. (Although I guess it took the car companies decades to figure out cup holders).
As far as the article is concerned: being that iOS and Android have 95% of the smart phone market (or maybe more for all I know), it makes no sense to me to invest in your own system when there's already something out there that works great. I think it'll just be a waste of money for these car companies.
Yeah - I've used their crappy interfaces. They suck. Apple and Google have been designing user interfaces for years, and while they may not be perfect they are light years ahead of most Car Manufacturers.
There's another benefit to this - you learn Car Play (or Android Auto) and you're done. New car? Same interface. How is learning a new interface for every single car better? I think the post someone listed above regarding upsell may be right. If you have Car Play, why would you pay and extra $1000 for the navigation system?
EDIT: Pipped by Rare Comment!
Against that background, the entertainment systems are relatively insignificant. If I remember correctly there were some discussions between Apple and BMW a while back which ended up going nowhere mainly because of the fact that BMW was not interested in allowing Apple as much "say" in the developments as apple wanted to have. It never seemed to me to be realistic for Apple to expect to get the level of access to the automotive computing systems that would be necessary to achieve the deep integration that is essential.
I just think it's silly to expect a manufacturer like Mercedes or BMW to see their core products as nothing more than an iPhone accessory :-).