Firstly, GM was just caught "accidentally" turning on their OnStar+ system that captured detailed information about the driving habits of millions of their customers, then selling this data to Lexis+Nexis, who in turn sold it to auto insurance companies. This is a company that absolutely cannot be trusted with your personal information.
Secondly, the service life of a car is vastly different than the service life of a smartphone. Cars are sometimes kept in use for decades. It's fairly easy for a smartphone vendor to provide limited support for older vehicles as they continuously upgrade their offerings, since the vehicle itself is more or less just a remote touchscreen and speakers. Does anyone think that GM or Mercedes will put any effort into maintaining their software for more than a few years? So what happens then? This is planned obsolescence for expensive capital goods, which is horribly wasteful from a consumer standpoint and an environmental standpoint.
I still don't believe that GM thinks it can have $25 BILLION revenue per year from services when they make only $19 BILLION profit per year from selling cars. If that ever happens, they are no longer a car company, but a service company that makes cars as a sideline.
Yes, I am comparing revenue to profit, but that's probably fair since online services have a profit margin of probably over 80% while car sales probably have a profit margin of under 20%, based on my googling.
What's not mentioned here is the 800-pound gorilla that was in the room, but has now left the room.
Until a few months ago, the supposition was that Apple was planning to make its own car. Imagine every new Ford prominently featuring Toyota components. Customers would start to question whether they'd prefer a Ford with Toyota components or a Toyota with Toyota components. Same would go for GM if they know their customers are also going to be visiting the Apple Car dealership while they're shopping for a vehicle.
Up to now, CarPlay has been filling an emerging and painful gap in traditional Auto manufacturers business model. When you buy a car, it has all the features it's going to have when you drive it off the lot. As features like SatNav systems became a thing, the facilitation of expected map updates and such was never handled well by car companies. Introduce CarPlay, and that problem is solved. Cars could still be sold as complete, and maps and such would be upgraded via the customers' own mirrored smartphones.
That was a perfect arrangement, until the car companies looked at increasingly electronic EVs in their future, with Apple adding options for more dashboard real-estate and car controls via CarPlay, while also working on an entire Apple Car. So it's not entirely illogical for a car company to look at that future and say, nope.
Now their problem is that they've gone down this trail struggling to develop systems that Apple already does really well, and all of a sudden Apple drops the threat of an Apple Car. Now we're back to the prospect of CarPlay being an inviting brand-name feature that you'd want to include, like Bose Speakers and such things. Let Apple deal with all the software updates and whatnot. But now what do they do with this mess that they've already created? Seems likely there will be some painful decisions ahead.
This I think will end up being a multi-billion dollar mistake for GM in the long term. It'll take a bit to get there but I bet in the end they end up reversing back to what they had. They should be focusing on making quality new vehicles not a brand new UI and service to nickel and dime its customers. They'd be better off letting someone like Apple help them with this. It's not like Apple has the absolute final say in what it looks like. We've already seen where the UI can be customized based on different manufacturers already using this.
GM is not the only one. Mercedes Benz officially confirmed that CarPlay will not be supported for next models.
The reason of Mercedes is that Apple wants to strive for "All or Nothign" strategy. Mercedes Benz would have no issue to have CarPlay as long as basic features can be played by Apple, but Mercedes Benz is not willing to give up the entire control to Apple.
I fear that more and more OEMs would follow GM´s and MB´s decision not to support Apple CarPlay if Apple continues sticking to their "All or Nothing" strategy.
But Having driven EQS, I have to say that MB is way way behind in the UI/UX area. MB tries hard to present their cars as a modern technology, but it feels old somehow.
Nothing can top the simplified UI/UX made by Apple.
No. Mercedes Benz did not confirm "that CarPlay will not be supported for next models." What Mercedes will not be supporting is next gen CarPlay.
But Apple may face a critical momentum in the automotive area to lose their relevance. Apple is a premium brand. I think Apple needs MB or BMW as a partner.
I guess Apple will have to settle for Porsche, Aston Martin, Land Rover, etc.
“In favour of its own system”? Its own system from China?
From Google! Not China.
This makes it doubly odd they would block Android Auto and Carplay from running on top of it as it's designed for. It's a stupid choice IMHO, but I'm no automotive business expert,
This is the type of thing large businesses like to do because on paper, it's great. They get all the control and can provide any experience they like without being beholden to a third party. The sticking point is that software will likely be a commodity to them, and they'll never do a good job at it because they won't invest in it. When they learn that it's a big enough differentiator and people stop buying their cars, they'll switch back to Apple/Google software.
I appreciate GM taking themselves out of consideration for my next vehicle.
Couldn’t agree more. CarPlay is the most important safety and convenience feature I have seen in a car in my lifetime. I, and others I know, have gone from being a distracted driver to never needing to take eyes off the road. I could make an argument that Apple should disable most phone functionality by default when connected to a car. At least until we have true autonomy in cars. In my opinion, infotainment systems should also be considered when cars are given safety ratings.
I get that GM wants to sell you subscriptions, but for what exactly and for how much? Accessing maps? Playing music? How does that 25 billion breakout into monthly fees per vehicle?
I have no idea if these numbers are accurate, but my quick back of the napkin, google search turned this out: They sold 6 million cars last year, 2.5 million in US, 2 million in China and the rest in other countries. Don't know how long they expect the cars to last, or at least how long they expect them to produce subscription revenue, but if you figure 10 years then: 25 billion annual sub revenue / 6 million cars per year / 10 years = $416 per year per car.
It will take them 10 years of car sales to grow to 25 billion, but I doubt that they will produce that kind of subscription fee in China or in many other countries, which would point to an even higher number for US owners subscribers. I just don't see it
I’ve bought 5 Tahoe’s and an Equinox from GM since 2010. I currently drive a 2018 Tahoe that I’m going to replace in a year or two. If GM is no longer going to support CarPlay in the Tahoe/Yukon my current Tahoe will be my last GM vehicle. Initially I thought that GM was only planning on ending CarPlay support in their EV’s but keeping it for their ICE models. If they’re now planning on ending it for the ICE models as well, their sales are going to get hammered. I will never buy a car that doesn’t have CarPlay or some other easy way to tie my phone into the infotainment system.
I’m not sure what GM is planning to monetize. Are they charging a subscription fee for access to GPS? I don’t know what else there is that they could think customers would want to buy from them. If they wanted to control their infotainment system they should have started working on it over a decade ago. Now most drivers are use to having access to CarPlay or Android Auto. Going back to a broken system is going to be a big hell no.
As others have just posted the revenue stream is not just from selling services to the customers directly but by selling data to insurance companies, advertisers and I would add law enforcement to the mix.
There is an irony here for Apple as the world forces it to be open to alt stores and apps, the argument being that the phone belongs to its owner, and they should have complete access. Whether that is true or fair aside, you would think that you should be given choices for the interface in your new $60,000 EV. Choices are a selling feature. Of course you could argue that you could just buy another car, but then using the arguments thrown at Apple, GM has a 100% monopoly .. on GM cars LOL. My car is too old to have had CarPlay, but I am envious whenever I see it on other cars.
What's the chance of the EU stepping in to force Mercedes Benz and GM to open up their in-car infotainment systems to third parties, you know, like Apple?
GM is a goofy company. They seem to cycle between trying to do everything in-house and by themselves and divesting their entire supply chain to outside buyers while outsourcing a big chunk of their production to countries with lower production costs. No doubt they got wind of the possible windfall from selling subscriptions to buyers who may be stupid enough to fall for GM's latest get-rich-quick scheme. Somehow in their own little bubble of alternate reality they made themselves an offer they couldn't refuse. Of course it will pay off big time. Very very big time. Yeah. Sure.
I used to be a gearhead but modern cars have become so detached from the reality of just getting you from Point A to Point B, perhaps with some halfway decent music or radio to listen to as an option, that they are now lifeless and joyless road appliances that all basically look the same and cost a fortune to purchase and maintain. Having to share the road with the masses of smartphone distracted morons and those who've been wait listed for several years trying to get into their court ordered anger management classes just adds to the overall unpleasantness. Driving is no longer fun, it's a chore. No wonder teenagers of today are waiting until they're 26 and no longer living with mom and dad, an ever so convenient and affordable taxi service, to even get a learners permit.
Best car I've ever owned was a used 1966 Dodge Dart, 225 slant-6, three on the tree manual, vinyl seats, rubber floor covering, roll up windows, AM radio, and no rust. Pop the hood and you could see and touch absolutely everything that made the thing go forward, and reverse. So few parts and thingamobobs all spaced widely apart. Spare parts available at every auto parts store. Set me back a whopping $150. Drove it for a year and sold it for $175. Totally regretted that decision. A Basic Car like that probably wouldn't sufficiently tweak the ego or signal one's masculinity or wealth of any modern car, SUV, or mini tank buyer today. But you didn't have to take out a second mortgage, sell off half of your offspring, and pimp out your designer doodle dog to buy and maintain it. Got me from Point A to Point B, which was everything I needed it to do. It was just a Car. My wife's current SUV ubiquitous blob-shaped appliance has about 187 features that we've never used, a dozen features we absolutely despise, and it needs to be serviced by someone with a masters degree in computer engineering with a minor in sales and marketing. But it does support Apple CarPlay! I was able to convert the wired-only CarPlay to wireless using a magic dongle. Myself, I drive as close to what would be a Basic Car circa 2020. No stick shift, which is very disappointing, but 42-45 mpg is kind of nice. No CarPlay, but a USB port and a CD player. The future has arrived!
“In favour of its own system”? Its own system from China?
From Google! Not China.
This makes it doubly odd they would block Android Auto and Carplay from running on top of it as it's designed for. It's a stupid choice IMHO, but I'm no automotive business expert,
Not if you look at why they want to do it. As others have said, GM wants to monetize its drivers. They were just caught selling customer data without permission and I’m sure they are planning on selling data subscriptions ‘to allow full features and connectivity’ with their own crap system. GM tried to make their own system a few years ago. It sucked. Customers demanded CarPlay. If their system really is better, offer consumers a choice and see which they choose.
Tesla has gotten away with not offering CarPlay but they arguably have the best EVs on the market and they have added Apple Music and Apple Podcasts, seamless text messaging, a Nav system that is just as good as Apple Maps (and has some features Apple Maps doesn’t) and voice recognition that is among the best in the market so they could get away with it. GM…well, their cars are mediocre at best anyway and now they’re just driving away customers.
Next gen car infotainment system glitches out and get stuck in only being able to play satellite radio of 90’s hits. Anybody else see the laughable irony?
Both Ford and GM live in lala land. They both mass produced EV trucks thinking they will be sold like hot cake. The same goes with infotainment by not having CarPlay. The CEO needs to step down and experience ordinary citizens for once to see what consumers really need.
What never works is a set-up designed to generate revenue with no discernible advantage offered to the end user. GM wants to collect a subscription and so it sees fit to take away a subscription-free set-up and replace it with an arrangement that forces the consumer to pay one. Might seem fine from GM's perspective but from the consumer's perspective it's simply a money grab. It's especially problematic when you force consumers to pay for something that was previously available free. Right now, especially, considering just how much more expensive it is to do just about everything, this is just not going to sit well with most consumers.
Toyota may offer CarPlay again, but they make it difficult. I recently rented a car. I had a choice of cars in my chosen category on the lot. I picked a Toyota initially. I tried to connect CarPlay and found I needed to create an account with Toyota that included entering the car’s VIN. When attempting to jump through the account creation hoops, I received a message that this was a fleet car, and I couldn’t create an account allowing CarPlay access. I immediately collected my luggage and backpack, moved over to a Kia Soul, connected to CarPlay in seconds, and drove off to the car rental exit. Lesson learned about Toyota.
Comments
Firstly, GM was just caught "accidentally" turning on their OnStar+ system that captured detailed information about the driving habits of millions of their customers, then selling this data to Lexis+Nexis, who in turn sold it to auto insurance companies. This is a company that absolutely cannot be trusted with your personal information.
receipts: https://x.com/vxunderground/status/1783111003766448506
Secondly, the service life of a car is vastly different than the service life of a smartphone. Cars are sometimes kept in use for decades. It's fairly easy for a smartphone vendor to provide limited support for older vehicles as they continuously upgrade their offerings, since the vehicle itself is more or less just a remote touchscreen and speakers. Does anyone think that GM or Mercedes will put any effort into maintaining their software for more than a few years? So what happens then? This is planned obsolescence for expensive capital goods, which is horribly wasteful from a consumer standpoint and an environmental standpoint.
Yes, I am comparing revenue to profit, but that's probably fair since online services have a profit margin of probably over 80% while car sales probably have a profit margin of under 20%, based on my googling.
Until a few months ago, the supposition was that Apple was planning to make its own car. Imagine every new Ford prominently featuring Toyota components. Customers would start to question whether they'd prefer a Ford with Toyota components or a Toyota with Toyota components. Same would go for GM if they know their customers are also going to be visiting the Apple Car dealership while they're shopping for a vehicle.
Up to now, CarPlay has been filling an emerging and painful gap in traditional Auto manufacturers business model. When you buy a car, it has all the features it's going to have when you drive it off the lot. As features like SatNav systems became a thing, the facilitation of expected map updates and such was never handled well by car companies. Introduce CarPlay, and that problem is solved. Cars could still be sold as complete, and maps and such would be upgraded via the customers' own mirrored smartphones.
That was a perfect arrangement, until the car companies looked at increasingly electronic EVs in their future, with Apple adding options for more dashboard real-estate and car controls via CarPlay, while also working on an entire Apple Car. So it's not entirely illogical for a car company to look at that future and say, nope.
Now their problem is that they've gone down this trail struggling to develop systems that Apple already does really well, and all of a sudden Apple drops the threat of an Apple Car. Now we're back to the prospect of CarPlay being an inviting brand-name feature that you'd want to include, like Bose Speakers and such things. Let Apple deal with all the software updates and whatnot. But now what do they do with this mess that they've already created? Seems likely there will be some painful decisions ahead.
I have no idea if these numbers are accurate, but my quick back of the napkin, google search turned this out: They sold 6 million cars last year, 2.5 million in US, 2 million in China and the rest in other countries. Don't know how long they expect the cars to last, or at least how long they expect them to produce subscription revenue, but if you figure 10 years then:
25 billion annual sub revenue / 6 million cars per year / 10 years = $416 per year per car.
It will take them 10 years of car sales to grow to 25 billion, but I doubt that they will produce that kind of subscription fee in China or in many other countries, which would point to an even higher number for US owners subscribers. I just don't see it
GM is a goofy company. They seem to cycle between trying to do everything in-house and by themselves and divesting their entire supply chain to outside buyers while outsourcing a big chunk of their production to countries with lower production costs. No doubt they got wind of the possible windfall from selling subscriptions to buyers who may be stupid enough to fall for GM's latest get-rich-quick scheme. Somehow in their own little bubble of alternate reality they made themselves an offer they couldn't refuse. Of course it will pay off big time. Very very big time. Yeah. Sure.
I used to be a gearhead but modern cars have become so detached from the reality of just getting you from Point A to Point B, perhaps with some halfway decent music or radio to listen to as an option, that they are now lifeless and joyless road appliances that all basically look the same and cost a fortune to purchase and maintain. Having to share the road with the masses of smartphone distracted morons and those who've been wait listed for several years trying to get into their court ordered anger management classes just adds to the overall unpleasantness. Driving is no longer fun, it's a chore. No wonder teenagers of today are waiting until they're 26 and no longer living with mom and dad, an ever so convenient and affordable taxi service, to even get a learners permit.
Best car I've ever owned was a used 1966 Dodge Dart, 225 slant-6, three on the tree manual, vinyl seats, rubber floor covering, roll up windows, AM radio, and no rust. Pop the hood and you could see and touch absolutely everything that made the thing go forward, and reverse. So few parts and thingamobobs all spaced widely apart. Spare parts available at every auto parts store. Set me back a whopping $150. Drove it for a year and sold it for $175. Totally regretted that decision. A Basic Car like that probably wouldn't sufficiently tweak the ego or signal one's masculinity or wealth of any modern car, SUV, or mini tank buyer today. But you didn't have to take out a second mortgage, sell off half of your offspring, and pimp out your designer doodle dog to buy and maintain it. Got me from Point A to Point B, which was everything I needed it to do. It was just a Car. My wife's current SUV ubiquitous blob-shaped appliance has about 187 features that we've never used, a dozen features we absolutely despise, and it needs to be serviced by someone with a masters degree in computer engineering with a minor in sales and marketing. But it does support Apple CarPlay! I was able to convert the wired-only CarPlay to wireless using a magic dongle. Myself, I drive as close to what would be a Basic Car circa 2020. No stick shift, which is very disappointing, but 42-45 mpg is kind of nice. No CarPlay, but a USB port and a CD player. The future has arrived!
Tesla has gotten away with not offering CarPlay but they arguably have the best EVs on the market and they have added Apple Music and Apple Podcasts, seamless text messaging, a Nav system that is just as good as Apple Maps (and has some features Apple Maps doesn’t) and voice recognition that is among the best in the market so they could get away with it. GM…well, their cars are mediocre at best anyway and now they’re just driving away customers.