As CarPlay aims to dominate even more screens in our cars, isn't Apple simply replacing buttons and dials with potentially distracting and fingerprint-smeared touch screens just to extend its software reach?
Apple's risky bet on CarPlay
161–170 of 537 posts
Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay
#162It's pretty funny to me to see an Apple user complaining about lack of interop with other ecosystems. You've chosen your walled garden; now it's time to realize you're stuck in it. The author seems to blame everyone but Apple for this, though. Apparently it's Google's fault that his preferred podcast app isn't available on Android. What about the app developer, who has decided not to support Android? And it's the aut…
I also think the author misses the mark on this statement > Apple’s long-term goal is likely to find ways to directly monetize CarPlay. It could license CarPlay to carmakers at some point. But with the entire global car market amounting to only around 70 million cars per year and the car industry’s slim profit margins (ranging from 5% to 15%), it must reach a high market share to get significant revenue from it. Howe…
Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, never. This would mean to concentrate only to customers with Apple devices. Why should a carmaker do this?
I assume Apple would also provide code for a fallback UI that offered basic functionality for when you didn't have an iphone attached.
Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay
#164I love CarPlay, but has anyone noticed that Apple just isn’t testing on non-touch interfaces? Some cars use a wheel to navigate the UI, and there are some awful CarPlay UI bugs where certain buttons become unreachable.
In some 2024 Mazda models they are finally letting you choose to keep the touch screen working while moving, letting you use either the wheel or the touch screen. I don't think either company will still be disabling touch screens/wheel only inputs for CarPlay for very much longer. Similarly, the new infotainment platform for Lexus cars has done away with weird input devices ("Remote Touch") and you can just poke the screen with a finger.
Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay
#165>Competition aside, from Apple's perspective, CarPlay is also not ideal in its current form. For a company that values control over the user experience, it's an eyesore to see their product embedded inside another product. Why can't we let the car deal with car-related functions and Apple deal with playing podcasts and showing maps? It seems like the best of both worlds to me. Apple is solving a problem that doesn't…
Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Control over what, exactly? Planned obsolesence. Without proper CarPlay/AA integration, car manufacturers get to decide when those whiz-bang infotainment features stop working. You'd have to replace the whole car to get those features back instead of just buying a new phone.
Do people do that? I just use my phone beside the old useless infotainment. Honestly, I wouldn't buy a new car that used an in-house infotainment specifically because they go obsolete quickly (<5-10 years) and cannot be economically (or at all) to the latest tech. Carplay seems to be long lived.
Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
GM's plan is to sell a subscription service that covers all the things you already pay for on your phone (maps, music streaming, etc). It's why they're killing CarPlay, because they know that even if their service is good, nobody will pay $20/mo for shit they already get for free on their phones. Basically, their goal in life is to be a worthless middleman who takes peoples money while providing no real value to soci…
Yea but that's the joke is they plan. Toyota should also plan to expand their manufacturing capacity to pickup GMs lost sales to anyone under the age of 60. Lol
Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay
#168> A lot of the concerns around branding focus on the instrument cluster as it's one of the most recognizable parts of an interior. If you look at the CarPlay concept for Porsche and remove the steering wheel, there is no way you can tell it's a Porsche. I'm sure many brands took notice of this... With many traditional differentiators being democratized, design is a good way to stand out. This is a really good case st…
Probably unpopular opinion, but I preferred mechanical gauges anyway.
Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay
#169> Google jumped on this opportunity by releasing Android Automotive. Unlike Android Auto, Google's equivalent to Apple CarPlay, Android Automotive runs natively inside the car and any carmaker is free to use it. Tangential I know, but I giggled at yet another example of Google's incompetent branding and product naming. How a company filled with so many brilliant people can be so bad at brand strategy is baffling to m…
that the really good computer thinking people aren't really really good at people thinking is surprising to you?
I'm sure there's a few PR/Marketing people in there. It's not all "Good computer thinking people"
Google isn't a plucky startup with just a few dedicated engineers.
Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
Phone navigation apps are surprisingly bad in Japan (Google ones in particular). Not unusable, but the in-car GPS is more competitive than in other markets IMHO. Also with an aging population a phone screen is just too small for many. BTW, to parent's point VW has been trying different approaches with a top mounted GPS/infotainment unit that can be omitted on cheaper trims.
That's not true. Google Maps, in particular, has by far the best route guidance. It used to be different - but not anymore. Most in-car systems don't even attempt to route the last 300m here because the detailed one-way street narrow layout of tiny streets isn't in their mapping data, or their algorithms are too weak. Google has mostly no problem with that. Entering Japanese addresses IS tricky, though; here, custom-…
On one side, it can't route through a bunch of valid paths. I first assumed it could be because of residents asking Google to cut traffic, but sometimes it's not even through residential areas. I see routes on the map that are avoided in favor of bigger loops, and when trying the shorter routes they're perfectly fine. Or perhaps it's the vehicle size and they optimize for SUVs ?
On the other side it will happily route you through paths that are restricted to specific categories of cars. It's up to the driver to carefully avoid them, but it really wants you to go through and reroutes you there when you deviate, so it's a huge PITA in areas you don't know and try to navigate while ignoring the navigation instructions. Cops seem to have noticed it, We've got fined the first time we fucked up, and now that I'm aware of the issue I see the cops in many of these spots basically waiting for the jackpot.