Honkers

22july2013 said:

cropr 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 misunderstood what was written.    The internal computer system of the car (not of the smartphone) runs Volvo OS.  This is needed to operate the car securely.  It controls the engine, breaks, lights, radars,  cameras, cruise control  ...  of the car. By nature, this Volvo OS is a real time operating system, reacting very fast to triggers.  E.g. collision detection must be works robustly, instantly and independently of any other system like a connected smartphone.  

Apps for Android Auto and Apple Car Play are running on the smartphone, where the  smartphone screen is redirected to the car display and its speakers to the car audio system.   They provide infotainment to the car, but they don't include any management of the car hardware.

  

The fact that all apps of Android Auto and Apple Car Play still run on the smartphone, makes it impossible to be the master of ceremony .  The car manufacturers want to be and must be in control of the basic functions of car (the driving experience): it is their car , not Apple's or Google's.  Moving such thing to an external system like a smartphone would break the robustness and the real time nature of a car operating system.  And what if there is no smartphone?  Making a smartphone connection a compulsary requirement to drive, is unacceaptable and even dangerous.

Since the 21th centry car manufactures have been adding infotainment to their car OS (think of the in car GPS systems).    But the user experience was not that great.  So Apple Car Play and Android Auto stepped in, offering a great ecosystem for infotainment.  And we all love it

A recent development has been to add basic Android Auto functionality to the car OS system (Volvo OS in this case).  Google has to do a lot of work to embed this Android functionality in the car OS. Google calls it GAS : Google Automation Services.    It supports a limited number of Android apps (Google Maps being the most important).    

It is striking to see that Apple did not react with a similar service for the car OS systems.   So GAS could become quickly the de facto standard for in car infotainment systems, running on the car computer.

Volvo has stated that it would still offer support for Android Auto and Apple Car systems running from a smartphone to offer infotainment apps. It does not want to monetize apps running on VolvoOS.

GM has another point of view:  it will only offer  its own car OS system, with some Android apps built in.

Of course I know that a car's OS hides some things from CarPlay. Let me rephrase it in a way that should be unambiguous to you: I will buy a car only if it takes advantage of all the CarPlay features that are currently available to be used through the latest CarPlay API. How can I be clearer than that? How can you argue with that requirement?

tmay said:

Honkers said:

13485 said:

mikethemartian said:

So Apple claims that it doesn’t trade on user’s privacy but they push you towards a company that does and Apple takes a 36% cut.

Huh. I must have been in a meeting on the day Apple "pushed" me to using Google, instead of  it being my choice. Please tell me when this happened.  

Making Google the default is a clear push.  The fact that you can push back doesn't mean it isn't a push.

Uhm, no, not even. For most people, phones are appliances, and Google is noted for being the "best search engine". Whether that is true or not, "google it" is a thing for consumers.

13485 said:

mikethemartian said:

So Apple claims that it doesn’t trade on user’s privacy but they push you towards a company that does and Apple takes a 36% cut.

Huh. I must have been in a meeting on the day Apple "pushed" me to using Google, instead of  it being my choice. Please tell me when this happened.  

robin huber said:

chasm said:

robin huber said:

Hiding behind a Swedish fig leaf is a 100% People’s Republic car. Hard pass for me. 

Boy do I have terrible news for you about the clothes you’re wearing, the TV you watch, the computer you use, the smartphone in your pocket, the TV-connected game system you use, etc.

You’d better sit down.

Read more carefully. I used the qualifier 100% in anticipation of your critique. Of course I understand too much of everything is made in China. But we can be nuanced in our purchasing choices. The profit generated by Apple’s products nearly all ends up here. With Volvo/Polestar nothing goes to Sweden, just what’s left in the bank from the sale of their business lock, stock, and barrel to China.