Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CarPlay Is Additive

caseyliss.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 764 posts

Re: CarPlay Is Additive

#611

Post by josefresco »

s3p wrote: post #519
linzhangrun wrote: post #302

For pure interaction, CarPlay as a generic solution is very hard to beat infotainment systems that are deeply integrated with the vehicle itself. Its advantages are mainly these: - Consistency. You get into a new car, all you need to figure out is how to open CarPlay, no need to learning a completely different and often complicated infotainment system. - "It's on your phone". You can decide what playlist to play or w…

>For pure interaction, CarPlay as a generic solution is very hard to beat infotainment systems that are deeply integrated with the vehicle itself I can't find one instance of a car UI being as good or easier to interact with than CarPlay.

My daughter's very ordinary 10+ year old Kia Soul has a very nice navigation and media UI. It's not the base model but it's a joy to use because it's incredibly responsive and very well integrated with the car's physical buttons. The SiriusXM radio even has a built-in DAR!

Re: CarPlay Is Additive

#612

Post by rjrjrjrj »

thih9 wrote: post #509
linzhangrun wrote: post #302

For pure interaction, CarPlay as a generic solution is very hard to beat infotainment systems that are deeply integrated with the vehicle itself. Its advantages are mainly these: - Consistency. You get into a new car, all you need to figure out is how to open CarPlay, no need to learning a completely different and often complicated infotainment system. - "It's on your phone". You can decide what playlist to play or w…

“Stays up to date over the long term” is in the “cons” list in my book - I’d prefer to have as few changes and rely on muscle memory as much as possible; and I find updates risky in this context. I don’t mind a built in infotainment system stuck in a previous era, as long as it works.

I'd definitely mind being be stuck in the previous era of maps/driving directions.

Re: CarPlay Is Additive

#613

Post by duxup »

linzhangrun wrote: post #302

For pure interaction, CarPlay as a generic solution is very hard to beat infotainment systems that are deeply integrated with the vehicle itself. Its advantages are mainly these: - Consistency. You get into a new car, all you need to figure out is how to open CarPlay, no need to learning a completely different and often complicated infotainment system. - "It's on your phone". You can decide what playlist to play or w…

Agreed, my car is a tool for going places, consistency is a big attraction and I’ve zero interest in some new UI with every vehicle or vehicle software update.

Sure I would like the vehicle to have some style but trying to navigate with maps or something I want it to work / look consistently.

Re: CarPlay Is Additive

#614

Post by _-_-__-_-_- »

I've had CarPlay on my last two cars, a 2018 VW Golf and a 2024 Ford Maverick. It's fine. Sometimes you plug your phone into the USB port (unlocked) and it refuses to connect for several minutes very frustrating when you want to start navigation and media playback before leaving the driveway. My favourite headunit experience was my aftermarket single DIN Kenwood (https://www.kenwood.com/ca/car/caraudio/receivers/kdc-bt282u...) in my MK4 Golf it was an easy swap. You could plug in any iPod or iPhone and it would play and control the audio directly from the headunit and show title information on the display. Plus, it would take any USB storage device and play music. It was such a simple and efficient experience.

Re: CarPlay Is Additive

#615

Post by spockz »

josefresco wrote: post #610
owlbite wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still astounded my Ford's infotainment system takes 5-10 seconds after opening the radio "app" to present me with the station selection UI. Most of that seems to be some sort of startup delay. The mind boggles.

I'm frankly amazed at the speed at which the Ford and Chevy native UIs will take over from CarPlay for functions like reverse camera, lane camera etc. You'd expect some delay/lag but it's pretty responsive which obviously is essential for safety.

AFAICT, they always run in the background anyway. CarPlay is mostly just a pass through canvas rendered on the phone. The system can decide at anytime to overlay something on the CarPlay canvas.

Re: CarPlay Is Additive

#616

Post by massysett »

macguillicuddy wrote: post #462
massysett wrote: post #451

I think CarPlay is evidence of failure. My aim is device independence. In the old days, to print I had to hook up my printer to a computer. To print from a computer on the network, I needed a print server. I had to administer that. Now the printer itself hooks to the network, which is far superior. I have an older thermostat which allows me to program vacations directly on the unit. This is superior to the newer ther…

I agree that devices should work independently. But I believe the fundamental baseline should be open interoperability. Yes, the dishwasher should allow a delayed start from the machine itself. But it should also have secure yet open interoperability so other authorised systems that care about the dishwasher can interact with it. I think there's ultimately a user experience benefit. I'm familiar with my phone, its UI…

This is a good point, but CarPlay is not open interoperability. Open is DisplayPort. Open is 3.5mm jack. Open is Bluetooth.

The car has two proprietary tie-ins to two dominant mobile operating systems. That’s another reason this feels like failure to me. If the car had some standard way to hook a device to it to use touch screen and output sound, I might like that.

Instead my car (2016 Honda Accord) eliminated the standard 3.5mm jack and added a janky CarPlay implementation that sometimes freezes up entirely, and there’s no way to update it. This is not progress.

Re: CarPlay Is Additive

#617

Post by polarix »

theshrike79 wrote: post #570
maxdo wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, not every car brand suck at that. My 6 y.o tesla still delivers me updates, and new features.

To be honest, Tesla is a computer with a car as an add on. That’s why it works. Traditional companies do it the other way around.

I’m not sure it “works”. I would still drastically prefer if Tesla had CarPlay.

Re: CarPlay Is Additive

#618

Post by nlawalker »

linzhangrun wrote: post #302

For pure interaction, CarPlay as a generic solution is very hard to beat infotainment systems that are deeply integrated with the vehicle itself. Its advantages are mainly these: - Consistency. You get into a new car, all you need to figure out is how to open CarPlay, no need to learning a completely different and often complicated infotainment system. - "It's on your phone". You can decide what playlist to play or w…

Honest question, what are the advantages of an integrated system? These three things are kind of the whole game for me, but I also don't have a very sophisticated taste when it comes to cars.

Re: CarPlay Is Additive

#619

Post by prerok »

picofarad wrote: post #575
xp84 wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes Google Maps does that too, I’m pretty sure.

It does, I saw it in Houston this past weekend on android auto and google maps, "police reported ahead; still there [yes] [no]"

Just came to say this as well. Happens in Europe too (well, obviously :) ).

Re: CarPlay Is Additive

#620

Post by tonymet »

Imagine if customers demanded MacBooks boot into Android when an android phone was connected .

The cars primary UI is the screen. Car Clay defers the cars experience to Apple .

Customers have been demanding CarPlay because most car UIs are poor. But if done properly, they can exceed CarPlay while being consistent and well integrated

Post reply on HN