JonG

ihatescreennames said:

alandail said:

Anilu_777 said:

One of the many reasons I will never buy a Tesla. Having CarPlay available means I’m getting access to what I already pay for: Apple Music - plus messaging etc that I use many times a day while commuting. No CarPlay, no sale. 

There is no need for CarPlay on a Tesla.

My car has CarPlay and we use it all the time. One thing I like about it is if I ask my HomePod for the hours of a store and then head there, when I get into the car CarPlay offers to give me directions to that store. That works great for me at our second home where I’m less familiar with the area and tend to use navigation more often. Another thing it does is offer to give me navigation to the next appointment on my calendar. That works without having to share my calendar with a third party. We also use the HomePod  Intercom feature quite a bit. For example, if I’ve run out to pick up some take-out I can send an Intercom announcement that I’m almost home and then the table is set and everyone is ready when I walk in the door. Does that stuff work with Tesla?

I've owned my Model Y since 2019.  Originally I had a separate screen for CarPlay because I thought I couldn't live without it.  I was wrong.  Sold the adapter after 3 months of not using it.  I miss CarPlay a little, but the navigation in the car is much better for an EV, because of the automatic integration of the charging network.  When I need to charge on a long trip (charge at home when I am not traveling far) it automatically routes me and pre-heats the battery for charging.  I've run it alongside Waze and others, and the routing is just as good if not better.

It syncs my calendar via the app and auto-routes to my next appointment, and will automatically pick up my habits and route me to the train station first thing in the morning, and back to the house at night.  I have a bunch of Shortcut automations as well that pre-heat/pre-cool the car before I leave in the morning, remind me to charge at night if I am below a certain level.  In addition I can use Siri to open/close the trunk.  The auto-tie-in with my garage door means that as I pull into the driveway the door opens for me, and after I pull out of the garage it auto closes (unless I manually cancel either).

The voice command inside the Tesla is lacking, I will totally admit.  But Siri works fine.  To your example about take out, I have a Shortcut that I've setup so that when I say "Hey Siri, Take-Out Coming Home" it both sends a pre-recorded message to the whole home intercom as well as texting my wife and kids, for the same reason you mention.  It also auto shares my ETA in the message so they know when I'll be back.

The integration isn't perfect, but it certainly works well enough that I only miss CarPlay when I'm working with Podcasts and Audible.  However, Apple Podcasts is coming out native before the end of the year, so at least one down!

The previous comments on this seem to be non-sensical.  It is 100% arbitrary to disable FaceID when a 3rd party replacement is done.

Look at the car example.  What if Ford/Volvo/Nissan (or anyone with a Pilot Assist System with a front camera) said that if you got a 3rd Party Windshield replacement that they would disable Traffic Aware Cruise Control in your vehicle without any testing. They do have warnings that if you get the wrong windshield you could end up with the system not functioning, but that is up to be as the vehicle owner to decide my own risk.  And that is a direct risk of my life and those riding in my car, not just that someone might be able to look at my web-browsing history.

Putting up a warning that you have used recognized 3rd party parts for a repair and that you have to absolve Apple of any liability for security breaches due to that would be one thing.  Removing functionality that I already paid for is something else.

If they want to do this, then increase the cost of the phone and require AppleCare as part of the purchase, or just reduce the price of screen repairs at any certified center to a small fixed amount with no profit to prove that they aren't soaking people.

"Law abiding..."

And which countries laws would these be?  North Koreas?

There will be problems created by anybody.  This legislation already exists for something a lot more complicated and dangerous than our stupid phones: Cars.

Would you like to be told that the only person who could fix a Ford is the Ford dealership.  Then the dealership near you closes, and the next closest dealership is 75 miles away.

What happens to all those people that don't live near an Apple Store?  Oh... go to Best Buy.. where they never have the appropriate parts in stock. And why should Best Buy be "blessed" any more than any other technician?  They aren't trained by Apple Inc., they are trained by Best Buy (and having worked there I can give you first hand information of the uselessness of their training).

Right to repair legislation gives access to owners and repair centers for the documentation on how to fix something.  It also gives access to purchase genuine parts.  It doesn't make Apple "bless" the repair center as authorized, it just means that consumers have a choice.  They have a choice now, but the problem is that the choices get limited because those repair people can ONLY purchase 3rd party, crap, parts.

For anyone that is against this, please explain how users would be harmed by having information and genuine parts access?  Bearing in mind that users and repair centers can already access cheap, knockoff parts that make "your phone explode".

I think there is a case for anticompetitive behavior, which does not require a monopoly.  All of these comments about "monopoly" address Epic's case (which I agree is rather laughable).  The Cydia case rests on anticompetitive behavior, not a monopoly.

Apple does not OWN the platform, since they sell it to me and do not rent it.  None of these EULAs have been tested in court really. Note that Apple continues to tell me what I can do with something I have purchased. No one would accept this logic in a car; here's the only parts, oil, and gas you are permitted to use. Or how about a lightbulb; you can only use it with the light fixtures that I make, or vice-versa.

How about selling a refrigerator and then saying that it is monitored and will shut down if you buy certain foods that aren't on the approved list?

I'm an Apple user, and even an admin for a company that predominantly uses Apple.  I'm very submerged in their ecosystem, but that doesn't mean I have to defend all of their behaviors.  This all harkens back to a few years ago when everyone who is defending Apple right now was up in arms because Sony started going after hackers who modded their PS systems to run linux.

Also, everyone can remember a few years ago when it wasn't a government regulation that once you had paid off a cell phone, that the original carrier, at their own option, could keep it locked to the network.  Now, once you own it, you own it and a carrier can't tell you that you have to use their service.  You can't call Verizon, AT&T, or T-Mobile a monopoly, but they CAN engage in anti-competitive behavior that freezes out smaller businesses in the same space.

The simple basis is this:  All of these devices are computing platforms and laws have to be universal for computing platforms. Either platforms need to remain open so that you have a right to do with a hardware platform as you please, or we have to agree that all computing platforms can be locked down and companies are allowed to dictate how their product is used after you purchase it.