Apple's next-generation 'CarPlay Ultra' is finally here
Hitting the streets at least five months late, Apple's next-generation CarPlay experience that it is calling "CarPlay Ultra" will start arriving in Aston Martin cars in the next few weeks.
CarPlay Ultra on Aston Martin - Image credit Apple
Apple first gave a sneak-peek at the next-generation CarPlay experience in 2022. At the time, it said that it would land on vehicles by the end of 2024.
What Apple showed was nothing less than the complete takeover of a car's entire dashboard by CarPlay. Instead of being confined to a square-ish screen that shows a few apps, CarPlay Ultra runs everything.
And, it's finally coming, after missing the date by five months. Apple made it clear that the feature is imminent in a press release on Thursday morning.
"iPhone users love CarPlay, and it has transformed how people connect with their vehicles. With CarPlay Ultra, together with automakers, we are reimagining the in-car experience, making it even more unified and consistent," said Apple's vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing Bob Borchers. "This next generation of CarPlay gives drivers a smarter, safer way to use their iPhone in the car, while deeply integrating with the car's systems and showcasing the unique look and feel of each automaker. We are excited to kick off the rollout of CarPlay Ultra with Aston Martin -- and this is just the beginning, with more automakers on the way."
Apple says that CarPlay Ultra provides content for every screen, including the speedometer, tachometer, fuel gauge, and temperature gauge. Drivers can choose to show information from their iPhone, like maps and media, along with information that comes from the car.
Another dashboard theme in CarPlay ultra - Image credit Apple
Drivers can also use onscreen controls, physical buttons, or Siri to manage both standard vehicle functions. As rumored, CarPlay Ultra also introduces widgets powered by iPhone that perfectly fit the car's screen or gauge cluster to provide information at a glance.
At the debut, Apple showed a slide featuring 14 car manufacturers, from Audi to Volvo, and none of them have released a car featuring the new CarPlay. Instead, Aston Martin, who just committed to a 2024 launch, is the first to get the update.
Beyond the teaser that it used, Apple filed drawings in 2024 with the European Union Intellectual Property Office illustrating the concept. These are only illustrations, but they at least point to Apple's aims -- and one of them has an Audi logo.
Two illustrations of CarPlay in Audi cars
Apple says that other automakers are working to bring CarPlay Ultra to drivers, including newly committed brands Hyundai, Kia, and Genesis.
Beginning in the U.S. and Canada, CarPlay Ultra will be available for Aston Martin's core model lineup, and will expand to include vehicles globally in the next 12 months.
The experience is available in new Aston Martin vehicle orders in the U.S. and Canada starting today, and will be available for existing Aston Martin vehicles in the U.S. and Canada featuring the brand's next-generation infotainment system in the coming weeks through a software update available at local dealers.
CarPlay Ultra works with iPhone 12 or later running iOS 18.5 or later.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
"...and will be available for existing Aston Martin vehicles in the U.S. and Canada featuring the brand's next-generation infotainment system in the coming weeks through a software update available at local dealers."
It is safe to assume that it will be up to each manufacturer to decide whether or not to do the extra programming work to bring the CarPlay Ultra to vehicles already on the road. Most likely it will be a model-by-model decision with a higher chance of it being deployed on more expensive, premium trims.
In the old days, the car you bought is the car you live with. I don't think anyone should be entitled to think that they deserve all of the latest features when nothing like that was promised when they signed the sales contract. I certainly don't expect CarPlay Ultra to magically appear in my 20-year-old Toyota.
However most people aren't in the habit of changing their automobiles often so bringing the CarPlay Ultra feature to existing recent vehicles demonstrates some goodwill.
It is clear there was a fundamental shift about ten years ago about what constitutes an automobile. They're basically computers with wheels these days. At some point, manufacturers may start charging extra for infotainment software upgrades in existing vehicles. It's not like software engineers work for free.
It's really up to the individual manufacturer who will have to assess the value of the additional engineering effort. There is plenty of precedence for this. Tesla Full Self-Driving Mode (FSD) is an extra charge and GM's OnStar satellite connectivity was a recurring subscription fee after a complimentary first year. Today's consumers are now accustomed to recurring charges (like streaming music/video or satellite connectivity on phones) so at some point car infotainment upgrade fees might be tolerated (albeit not embraced with open arms). It'll take just one manufacturer to start imposing fees and then soon the most of their competitors will follow suit.
Over time CarPlay Ultra will be reserved for luxury cars while the Great Unwashed will be looking at some forgettable, plain UI. It's clear based on the fact that it is debuting in an Aston Martin not a Honda Civic. GM is plain cars for plain people. And that's perfectly fine, however it means keeping a tight control over costs.
Let's remember that CarPlay debuted in 2014, so over a decade old. Automobile manufacturers have had plenty of time to study it and Google's offering. All the companies have likely done some sort of prototyping. GM itself had CarPlay compatible infotainment systems before so it's not like they don't know what effort incorporating Apple CarPlay entails. It's not like any of these companies are just discovering car infotainment systems in 2025 and getting their feet wet for the first time.
It's important to understand that all of the big players here are global corporations. While the USA is typically their largest market, it is the also the only nation that is truly a car culture. GM deciding to go with their more modest in-house solution is likely a strategy that encompasses their entire worldview, not just that of the USA.
So you end up with a spectrum of customers, some of which hang on to an iPhone until it dies and others who change their phone every year. But they all come back to Apple.
It's the perception that the car is old and not supported by the manufacturer. I have a 2017 Prius with the same old boring display in the center console. I bring the car into to Toyota for service as needed but they've never updated the system. It's eight years old now and because it's only done 60K and isn't breaking down there is no reason to buy a new one. But in a few years time I will and it is likely that it isn't going to be a Toyota. Definitely an electric car and one of the key criteria will be that it has to have good CarPlay interactivity and the ability to update the system easily.
Another reason why the iPhone is so successful is the app experience. The comment about GM making their own infotainment system shows how short sighted they are. By engaging in customers who treasure their phones and give them an experience they recognize will win over new customers. Let the customer choose whether they want CarPlay or Google car experience. You'll get more loyalty that way.
Not in huge numbers but enough to warrant migration apps being available on both sides.
There may be loyalty to a product, something that is common for many brands but Apple doesn't make cars so it is at an immediate disadvantage if it wants to get CarPlay onto someone else's product in detriment to their own solutions (in-house or not).
If we take CarPlay a step further (CarPlay Ultra) and seek deeper integration into another brand's product, things get much more difficult.
GM said it would continue to support CarPlay in a fashion similar to that that it currently supports but that it would be developing its own system in collaboration with Google.
As a consumer you can make your decision on whatever grounds you like but you may find that people buy cars mainly for the car and not for the phone system that connects to it.
Historically, car interfaces have been clunky and left without updates but if you look at CarPlay today it looks just as outdated when compared to some competitors.
CarPlay has lagged far, far behind the Chinese NEVs on every level (and there are a lot of levels that CarPlay never ever reached).
Even in 2021, CarPlay was lagging behind many Chinese players and will definitely continue to do so for one simple reason. Apple doesn't make cars.
As the US market transitions to NEVs one would expect the onboard systems to be updated and kept up to date because they will basically be digital car batteries on wheels running mini data centers.
The 'car', in the classic sense, will cease to be what we know it to be now and move into the digital era where software will be everything. Along with communication with road infrastructure. That will require constant updates to the onboard software. Without it, your new car might cease to operate correctly.
Obviously that can be good or bad depending on how you view progress in this field.
As for consumer choice, I'm all for it, but let's not forget that Apple is being battered worldwide with investigations and requirements precisely because it has limited consumer choice.
You might have to settle for an iPhone connection that extends the iPhone side of things without that deep integration with the car.
Some of the big traditional manufacturers have run into serious software issues and have signed deals with companies that already have their own solutions (including not only standard and deep integration but also the entire self driving side, AI and ICT tasks). Apple will find it hard to provide something similar if it isn't responsible for key hardware technologies inside the car.
And if you ever get the chance to experience some of the Chinese systems for example, you might even decide CarPlay (in whatever form) isn't the best option.
I would guess Tesla is in a similar situation to the Chinese with its onboard solutions but Tesla doesn't have its own phones. I don't know much about Tesla's software interfaces so that's guesswork on my part. At least Tesla isn't providing its solutions to third parties AFAIK. That could be a slight advantage for Apple in the US at least.
Now, Apple claims Kia, Hyundai and Genesis will support (or better: want to support).....
I will believe until I see it.
Mercedes has its own MBUX, BMW? I am not aware tbh as I don´t drive BMW. GM ditching CarPlay more and more for new models, I don´t see how CarPlay could remain relevant in the future.
Aston Martin is just nothing, but a cash burning machine. Their production capacity is so small that Aston Martin does not lead to a domino effect to other car makers.
In the automotive industry, the introduction of satellite navigation began to push this problem into their market as well. Roads change and maps have to be updated. Early on, this involved going to the dealer, and/or using CDROMs to update their bespoke satnav systems. The introduction of CarPlay and its Android competitor was welcome, I think, because it moved that responsibility and cost off of the carmaker's ledger. They just had to sell a compatible platform. My question about CarPlay coming to existing models wasn't about 20-year old cars, but rather recent ones like mine that appear to have a multi-screen platform already there, possibly in anticipation of CarPlay 2.0. So we'll see.
I've speculated previously on this elsewhere, but I think the decision by GM (and some others) to move back to bespoke 'infotainment' systems had a lot to do with the looming expectation of an Apple Car. As I noted just above, automotive manufacturers were glad when CarPlay came out, because it moved the expensive responsibility for regular software updates off their books. Their business model is, after all, still built around the old "the car you bought is the car you live with" idea. Then Apple started looking seriously like a future competitor as an automaker. It's one thing to hand over dashboard real estate to an Apple that sells iPhones. It's another question if Apple is going to start selling cars. Then their prominence right there in front of a GM driver stars to look like a perpetual ad to convert buyers of GM (and other) cars to buyers of Apple cars. So GM made the switch with their future EVs. The GM proposal may indeed be gouging, but it's also at least on some level just looking for a way to pay for the cost of doing software updates for years, without resorting to a large up-front increase in the sale price of their cars. The average lifespan of a car is a lot longer than it is for an iPhone. Competitors that use CarPlay don't have to worry about that. Their customers pay for the software updates when they buy their iPhones.
Then Apple dropped out of the car making business. Now GM is in the awkward position of having made a decision and spent money on their bespoke system, when they otherwise might've been glad just to keep going with CarPlay. Turning that ship around will take time, but will be incentivized by customers who won't even test drive a vehicle that doesn't have CarPlay.
Only some of the tech media turned Apple Car into a done deal. Yeah, Apple probably learned something from it, both what to pursue and what not to. For sure some of the gained knowledge would be applicable in other parts of the company. For sure they burned through a lot of R&D dollars on Apple Car/Project Titan/whatever.
Let's remember that the way any Apple Car would be marketed and priced would exclude 99.9% of the planet. Hell, look at Apple Vision Pro at $3500.
The biggest problem with all the Apple Car discussions online was the fact that most people were looking at the project through American blinders, seeing it only from the myopic perspective of the number one car culture on the planet. We know you love walking to your garage, planting your big fat ass in your big fat SUV, attach your iPhone to its MagSafe holder, drive to your company's big fat ass parking lot, and bitch and moan when you have to park more than 50 feet from the front door of your office. We get it.
The rest of the world does not have a car culture like the USA. Plain and simple. Sure, most people want them but for a lot of people, even in technologically advanced countries like Japan, the personal auto is more of a leisure device. Construction workers in Tokyo go to job sites on the subway, not in Ford F-150s or GMC Sierras. In Europe getting a driver's license can be very expensive. It's not like the USA. I think a California driver's license today is $40. Forty years ago it was $2, about the same as three gallons of gasoline.
In the USA, getting your driver's license is a rite of passage for teens. It is not the case anywhere else. ONLY HERE.
Tesla's interface is good but to take full advantage of it you'll need to subscribe to their cellular connectivity -- which adds to the cost because I can't use Spotify (example) over cellular carrying my car in my pocket where I can obtain Spotify on my phone both in my pocket and in my car. Without paying for Tesla's subscription I'm stuck using my phone solely in the car using Bluetooth, and that degrades the user experience.
All of this to say that I'm sure other carmakers were waiting to see how things worked out for GM, and it seems pretty clear that they paid no price to move to their own system and cut Apple out of the picture while earning a steady stream of new profits on every new car sold. I can't imagine that other major carmakers aren't going to follow GM's lead.
But the average Honda or GM sold in Indonesia or Bangladesh really doesn't need it that much.
Many of these automobile manufacturers are looking at shaving costs from a global perspective. Putting in the extra engineering effort to address a benefit that really benefits a handful of markets isn't a great value proposition, especially when they aren't making money off of it. Infotainment systems are a cost center. Most companies would prefer to put in the least amount of effort without coming in dead last amongst the competition especially on basic trim levels.
Nobody really needs album art thumbnails on their dashboard.
I realize that many of these basic concepts, particularly how different US car culture is compared to the rest of the world is beyond the comprehension of many people online.
In the end, whatever infotainment/UX standard the Chinese (or possibly Indian) car companies come up with will dominate. Not tomorrow, not next months, but give it 10 years.
As Charlesn mentions, having your own proprietary infotainment system gives you the luxury of monetizing driver data and/or upselling subscription services. There's nothing inherently new about this. Car navi systems requires paid upgrades. Even standalone GPS devices (Garmin, TomTom et al.) required payment for new map data. Even early iPhone GPS navi apps had add-on features like lane guidance.
Most companies would like user data under their own TOS not Apple's. I expect more car companies to follow GM's lead and abandon CarPlay and Android Auto in the next few years.