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

Apple CarPlay

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 376 posts

Re: Apple CarPlay

#101

Post by pioul »

It looks definitely better than most proprietary car manufacturer software out there, but now that we're talking about extending smartphones' screens and features inside cars, something more interoperable would have been appreciated. It'll probably come later, just not from Apple.

    Also, putting the emphasis on voice control is great, but I'm really not sure Siri is up to the task.

    If I had to express my first opinion on Carplay, it'd be "new and shiny but probably not functional enough for it to *really* work as advertised".

Re: Apple CarPlay

#102

Post by nkozyra »

GuiA wrote: post #34

Yay, more touch screen in cars. More ways to distract, frustrate and confuse users who are operating a big box of steel weighing 3 tons and going at speeds the human brain has never evolved to appropriately deal with. 1) Not only are touch screens a very poor interactor in the first place [0], but why do you think planes and other complex machinery have stuck with physical controls? For operating complex vehicles/app…

A touchscreen isn't tangible?

Re: Apple CarPlay

#103

Post by _djo_ »

beloch wrote: post #16

If I were an auto manufacturer, I'd be pushing Apple to open up the standard for interfacing this with phones. iOS and iPhones are great, but are still only used by a fraction of potential customers. Why limit your market so Apple can score some lock-in?

From the brief amount of information available so far, CarPlay doesn't seem to preclude the in-car system from supporting other mobile phone OS's.

For instance it seems possible to equip a vehicle with, let's say, the Open Automotive Alliance's in-car Android system that can use Project Mode with Android phones and also implement CarPlay for when iPhones are present. After all, CarPlay appears to be dependent on the phone's OS for all displays and whatnot, with CarPlay just being the protocols to link the in-car system to iOS in the necessary manner.

This is just speculation, we can't know for certain until some of the technical details emerge, but it seems unlikely that car manufacturers would limit their systems interoperability to one platform.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#104

Post by coldtea »

Marazan wrote: post #63
archagon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you seriously think we'll have widespread self-driving cars — and not just the bare bones technology, but ones that we can ride in without any control at all, even while intoxicated — within a timespan short enough for every other advancement in car technology to not matter? I am almost 100% certain that we won't see that kind of thing even within the next few decades, if ever. Self-driving cars have way too many…

I mean, Europe hasn't even moved over to automatic transmission yet. That's because automatic transmission is the worst and invented by the devil. More seriously, using an automatic transmission results in trade-offs, for instance fuel usage was the historical number 1 sticking point with automatics guzzling up the petrol compared to manuals. Modern engineering has closed that gap but there are still issues related t…

For at least 15 years or so, that's just cargo cult BS Europeans who haven't tried automatic transmission cars say.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#105

Post by furyofantares »

li-ch wrote: post #86

Apple map is still scarily inaccurate [1,2,3]. Why should I or anyone risk this in the car? [1] http://bgr.com/2013/09/25/apple-maps-disaster-runway/ [2] http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/new... [3] http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2013/11/new-clas...

To be blunt I am pretty capable of driving without any maps in the car, or at ignoring instructions that appear incorrect or dangerous. And while Apple Maps might still get it wrong more than other maps, I've never used a mapping service that hasn't gotten some things wrong.

I do hope it supports other mapping apps though, or if not I hope Apple gets pressured to support that. And I don't really see why they wouldn't, it makes their product better.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#106

Post by sbuk »

GuiA wrote: post #34

Yay, more touch screen in cars. More ways to distract, frustrate and confuse users who are operating a big box of steel weighing 3 tons and going at speeds the human brain has never evolved to appropriately deal with. 1) Not only are touch screens a very poor interactor in the first place [0], but why do you think planes and other complex machinery have stuck with physical controls? For operating complex vehicles/app…

http://www.apple.com/ios/carplay/#integration

Re: Apple CarPlay

#107

Post by matthewmacleod »

rimantas wrote: post #85
lutusp wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My inference from that was that the 'simple' problems have been solved, but to have technology that can safely drive an intoxicated person home would require solving another set of much harder problems. But they already have cars that drive themselves, without human interference. Google (and other companies') engineers have been driving them all over the country on test runs. Obviously if the car will drive itself…

> when the technology's edge cases are less dangerous than a human driver's edge > cases. That won't take very long. Just a couple of decades.

A vanishingly small amount of time, really.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#108

Post by bruceboughton »

NextUserName wrote: post #33

I keep waiting to see a car that comes with a tables built into the dash. There are many modders who have accomplished this already, it just seems like the next big thing. Voice control, apps, awesome.

It would have to be a pretty low-functionality tablet to be legal in most jurisdictions... like the one Apple have just announced, for example.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#109

Post by dipth »

Marazan wrote: post #63
archagon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you seriously think we'll have widespread self-driving cars — and not just the bare bones technology, but ones that we can ride in without any control at all, even while intoxicated — within a timespan short enough for every other advancement in car technology to not matter? I am almost 100% certain that we won't see that kind of thing even within the next few decades, if ever. Self-driving cars have way too many…

I mean, Europe hasn't even moved over to automatic transmission yet. That's because automatic transmission is the worst and invented by the devil. More seriously, using an automatic transmission results in trade-offs, for instance fuel usage was the historical number 1 sticking point with automatics guzzling up the petrol compared to manuals. Modern engineering has closed that gap but there are still issues related t…

You should try a proper DSG gearbox, they will change your mind and they're even faster and more economical than manual gearboxes.

I have one in my VW Golf!

Re: Apple CarPlay

#110

Post by furyofantares »

frik wrote: post #87
aggie wrote: post #50

Not that it's any surprise, but it's nice to see an emphasis on Siri. Voice control is very well suited to car interfaces: the car is a relatively-quiet, private space where you can be heard by the interface but not bother a stranger, and voice is as hands-and-eyes-free as it gets (not that this is the only challenge with car interfaces – divided attention from the road will only be solved with full autopilot). What…

Voice control works fine in Windows Automotive since at least 2008 [1]. Remember both Microsoft and Apple are using the same voice technology and sound libraries from Nuance Communication [2]. You can change the radio, mp3-playlist, do phone calls, listen the SMS, etc., though the internet enabled services are missing in older editions. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Embedded_Automotive [2] http://en.wikipe…

Are you sure it's the same tech? It very well could be, but scroll down on that page to mergers and acquisitions, Nuance seemingly buys every company it can in that space. So they actually have a wide variety of tech and perhaps deals associated with them that predate acquisitions.
Post reply on HN