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

Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

theturnsignalblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 537 posts

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#221

Post by filoleg »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #187
lanthade wrote: post #179

It’s amusing when the author says “when the phone crashes.” My 2022 Subaru Outback head unit frequently crashes or is really unresponsive. My iPhone never crashes. Car infotainment systems are garbage. I’d never buy a car without CarPlay. It’s maybe the #1 measure I have for vehicle quality when I rent on vacation.

FWIW Teslas infotainment works better than CarPlay

Somewhat agreed (I prefer the Tesla infotainment system over CarPlay, but they both have their own advantages, despite being imo equally good overall), but I would say it’s not super relevant to the argument. And only because Tesla infotainment is the only car manufacturer’s first-party infotainment system I’ve seen that can hold a candle to CarPlay. Not a single other one I’ve seen was even close. CarPlay was the best I could hope for, because anything that was first-party (excluding Tesla) was absolutely awful.

I don’t remember which specific brands had CarPlay and which ran their own infotainment systems, but I remember a couple years ago visiting dealerships of BMW/Mercedes/Honda/Toyota/Kia/Subaru/Ford and walking away either relieved that the car had CarPlay or internally cursing at their first-party infotainment system and promising myself to not even bother trying next time.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#222

Post by MBCook »

RobT7k wrote: post #13

I have zero interest in the CarPlay v2 (as described in the article). CarPlay v1, however, is an absolute requirement. It works great and gives me pretty much everything I want.

I’m curious, but honestly I don’t see any automaker ever playing along.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#223

Post by MBCook »

makeitdouble wrote: post #136
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #125

> 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…

The actual name is Google Automotive Service [0], which shortens as GAS. That's not bad I think, at least it's easy to remember. The fact that it's still confusing with android auto being another thing is I think partly on purpose, to make it look like Android is doing more than what it's actually responsible for. [0] https://developers.google.com/cars

Isn’t that a recent renaming though?

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#224

Post by seanmcdirmid »

kelnos wrote: post #102

It'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…

> and doing so isn't really in their interests, outside of Apple users who might refuse to consider their cars without CarPlay 2 support.

I would be interested in CarPlay 2 if I were buying a new car when it’s out. Infotainment is still a huge weakness in many cars, and is definitely a plus to many users. Carmakers are free to ignore it of course, but unless they are maybe Tesla, they have no good reputation to rely on in selling their own custom infotainment experiences.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#225

Post by pr337h4m »

lobochrome wrote: post #144
makeitdouble wrote: post #131

Earlier 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-…

Why not use plus codes? They're well-integrated into Google Maps: https://maps.google.com/pluscodes/

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#226

Post by [deleted] »

yabones wrote: post #34

There's an interesting gap when discussing carplay/aa. Cars from the 90s up until about 2013 can be easily fitted with a $500 head unit upgrade, and support carplay quite well. With the right tools, it can be done in about two hours right in your driveway. Cars from 2018 and up pretty universally support carplay, and it's generally quite well integrated into the car's infotainment system. But, between 2013 and 2017,…

[deleted]

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#227

Post by eddythompson80 »

mintplant wrote: post #205
dagmx wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author is talking about Android Automotive which is different than Android Auto. Auto is driven from your phone whereas Automotive is running on your car directly.

Alright, but then comparing CarPlay 1 to Android Automotive is comparing apples and oranges. The author should be comparing CarPlay 1 to Android Auto and CarPlay 2 to Android Automotive.

Ummm, no? Sort of. First we don’t really know much about CarPlay 2. It was announced in 2022 but hasn’t been detailed yet. However, all the assumptions are that it runs of your phone just like CarPlay 1, but with more control and integration in the car. Nothing I have seen from Apple or others suggests that Apple is building an Android Automotive-like product. I.e: Apple software that runs off the car itself. Also it will be very unlike Apple to sell software that car companies run, which is what Android Automotive is. Unless the plan is to sell an iOS box that car manufacturers integrate into the car. But I haven’t seen any thing that suggests that.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#228

Post by superfunny »

yabones wrote: post #34

There's an interesting gap when discussing carplay/aa. Cars from the 90s up until about 2013 can be easily fitted with a $500 head unit upgrade, and support carplay quite well. With the right tools, it can be done in about two hours right in your driveway. Cars from 2018 and up pretty universally support carplay, and it's generally quite well integrated into the car's infotainment system. But, between 2013 and 2017,…

"...since only 21% of people will buy a car without carplay"

That statistic is complete bullshit.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#229

Post by talldatethrow »

yabones wrote: post #34

There's an interesting gap when discussing carplay/aa. Cars from the 90s up until about 2013 can be easily fitted with a $500 head unit upgrade, and support carplay quite well. With the right tools, it can be done in about two hours right in your driveway. Cars from 2018 and up pretty universally support carplay, and it's generally quite well integrated into the car's infotainment system. But, between 2013 and 2017,…

Only 21% of people will buy a car without car play? Maaaaybe new cars. Maybe.

I sold cars up til a few years ago. Countless cars got sold where Bluetooth itself barely works, and people are basically fine with it.

People buying used cars will take Bluetooth as a nice perk, but to think they make major decisions based on carplay in a 2015 Chevy Volt is funny.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#230

Post by SkyPuncher »

yabones wrote: post #34

There's an interesting gap when discussing carplay/aa. Cars from the 90s up until about 2013 can be easily fitted with a $500 head unit upgrade, and support carplay quite well. With the right tools, it can be done in about two hours right in your driveway. Cars from 2018 and up pretty universally support carplay, and it's generally quite well integrated into the car's infotainment system. But, between 2013 and 2017,…

We had a 2014 that suffered from this. It some touchscreen that was basically useless besides showing the backup cam and a few random, infrequently changed settings. However, replacing it was essentially impossible it also served as a critical system for a few things.

By contrast, my 98 Jeep and '08 sedan were both easy upgrades to modern head units with standard DINs.

Not having CarPlay/AA was actually a massive reason I wanted to get rid of that car.

Post reply on HN