auxio

gatorguy said:

auxio said:

The lure of the money generated by data harvesting and advertising is certainly strong. Especially combined with most people choosing the "cheapest" option, which these days is typically the one which collects the most data about you. I hope Apple can hold out, but sadly I see it going in the same direction as the battle against foreign manufacturing did in the 80s. This is really where governments need to step in and decide that privacy is a fundamental human right (as Apple has done). The decision should always be "opt in" rather than "opt out", and there should be no limitations if you choose not to opt in.

I 100% agree about the default being OPT-OUT. Way too many of the features on smartphones, media streamers, apps, etc just the opposite. 

But if you choose "Opt-Out" I believe you should be prepared to do without the service. There are typically lots of alternatives, both free and paid, but I know if I perform a service, I expect to be compensated in some manner, just as I'm sure you are. 

If you opt-out to Apple's ToS you can't use the iPhone you just purchased for anything other than a paperweight. Same with an Apple TV. So you do without or you accept the terms of service. Is that unfair or should you get to opt-out and enjoy the phone or TV streamer without limitations? 

If you look at the list of ad trackers here in AppleInsider, many of them don't ask or even reveal themselves, and you get nothing of any value for the data they take during your visits to the forum.  Worse than that, too many of them don't offer an opt-out, they're going to take from you despite what you want, which means we have to load up a 3rd party app to do so,

avon b7 said:

22july2013 said:

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.

chadbag said:

auxio said:

Graeme000 said:

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 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.