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

231–240 of 537 posts

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#231

Post by Dylan16807 »

codexb wrote: post #94
roughly wrote: post #18

Something that stuck out to me in the article: > There used to be a big difference in driving characteristics and technology between premium and budget brands. Compared to a Volkswagen, a BMW used to have a more powerful engine, better handling, and comfort features like seat-heating and cruise control. However, a Volkswagen Golf now has similar tech as a BMW and with the transition to EVs, drivetrains and handling w…

What happened is there are no real "budget" cars anymore. Mandatory safety, engine, emission, backup cameras (yes, they're mandatory) has steadily driven the base price of a car so high that the added cost of creature comforts doesn't actually increase the price of a car that much relative to the total price. Why would someone spend spend $40k on a bare bones car when they could get a well-equipped car for $45k? That…

I'm not really seeing why safety or emissions rules drive up the price of a car? Backup camera sure that's an extra $200.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#232

Post by gnicholas »

kelnos wrote: post #108
StephenSmith wrote: post #12

If you're in the market for a new-to-you car, then I recommend looking at the model years where they switch from wired car-play to wireless car-play and buying the previous model-year. Typically this difference of one model-year can add thousands to the cost of the vehicle, especially because wireless car-play is so coveted. The experience of wireless is fantastic, but is it worth several thousand dollars? Maybe, but…

I haven't used wireless yet, so maybe I just don't know what I'm missing, but I kinda just don't see why I'd ever need it. I'm going to plug in my phone anyway to charge, so what's the draw?

The draw is that wireless charging is faster/easier than plugging, or so I understand.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#233

Post by SkyPuncher »

sircastor wrote: post #210

When I worked for an Auto maker (left 2 years ago), the cluster was an independent system from infotainment. They could follow messages from each other on the bus (it wasn’t CAN bus, we’d moved on from that) but basically there wasn’t a way for CarPlay to talk to the Cluster. I’m willing to bet that the soonest any large OEM could offer CarPlay 2 would be next year. The development process is just too slow to turn ar…

Sure, but that's just auto manufactures largely sticking to a legacy system because they don't need to improve.

As soon as customers demand better, there will be better/easier integration between the two components.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#234

Post by SkyPuncher »

StephenSmith wrote: post #12

If you're in the market for a new-to-you car, then I recommend looking at the model years where they switch from wired car-play to wireless car-play and buying the previous model-year. Typically this difference of one model-year can add thousands to the cost of the vehicle, especially because wireless car-play is so coveted. The experience of wireless is fantastic, but is it worth several thousand dollars? Maybe, but…

I have one wired and one wireless vehicle. I will absolutely pay more for integrated wireless. It just works flawlessly.

We've upgraded the wired one with one of those dongles. It mostly works, but has some quirks. The three most annoying:

* Phone calls result in a feedback loop for the other end. Essentially, they break the in-car noise cancellation and playback the caller audio to the caller.

* When my wife pulls in the garage, my phone will connect - even though it should have been connected to her phone.

* The USB port that connects to the head unit remains power for a period of time after the vehicle is off. Annoying when I'm in the kitchen (next to the garage) and my phone keeps trying to CarPlay.

EDIT: I'm also realizing that I believe the car with Wireless has associated each of our keys with our phones. Despite them both being paired, it will prioritize the phone last used with the key. That's pretty handy for not having to fight with pairing.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#235

Post by Nevermark »

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

Few things are as big a win as ensuring your customers are never quite sure they really understand your product line up. Because they actually never really understand your product line up.

I can understand this kind of thinking in a here-and-gone used car lot.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#236

Post by Dylan16807 »

gmadsen wrote: post #26
xyst wrote: post #17

I used to be fascinated with Apple but I no longer want anything to do with them. I could care less if my car has Apple or android auto at this point. I would rip it out immediately if it had one. Any always on connectivity would be removed. Car manufacturers are increasingly selling off your private data and leveraging all of these technology upgrades you paid for to do it. As soon as the car is connected to the int…

kind of funny a back up camera is now considered a "dumb" car feature

What metric do you want to use for smart versus dumb?

CCTV dates back a hundred years. The vast majority of dumb phones have had cameras since before the advent of the smart phone.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#237

Post by eddythompson80 »

MBCook wrote: post #222
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.

I don’t know man. Never underestimate Apple’s marketing. If it’s a good implementation, all they would need is 1 automaker to do it the others will have to. I wouldn’t consider a new car without AA/CarPlay and many others are in the same boat. Automakers had to start offering upgrades to their old cars to support AA/CarPlay. There is no way automakers could invest as much into software development as Apple or Google. I hear people like their Tesla infotainment systems, but I don’t have a Tesla nor plan on buying one. Also don’t see how they could match the AppStore/Play Store.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#238

Post by SkyPuncher »

kelnos wrote: post #108
StephenSmith wrote: post #12

If you're in the market for a new-to-you car, then I recommend looking at the model years where they switch from wired car-play to wireless car-play and buying the previous model-year. Typically this difference of one model-year can add thousands to the cost of the vehicle, especially because wireless car-play is so coveted. The experience of wireless is fantastic, but is it worth several thousand dollars? Maybe, but…

I haven't used wireless yet, so maybe I just don't know what I'm missing, but I kinda just don't see why I'd ever need it. I'm going to plug in my phone anyway to charge, so what's the draw?

Being able to simply leave it in my pocket is really nice. Particularly nice when running errands around town (in and out frequently)

Prior to switching to Apple, I was running into major issues with USB-C ports being hyper sensitive to physical positioning. Charge would always work, but Android Auto would simply drop out seemingly randomly. Didn't matter on cable. It was just something that would happen.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#239

Post by rrdharan »

filoleg wrote: post #211
dmoy wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait I gotta be missing something. Are seat warmers a subscription now? Damn, indeed I missed that section > With their own software platforms, they are desperately trying to find recurring revenue streams, whether it's a subscription for seat heating or driver assistance systems ..........

> Are seat warmers a subscription now? They almost became a subscription, but BMW backpedaled at the last second[0]. 0. https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/7/23863258/bmw-cancel-heated...

Pretty soon the pedals will be a subscription or pay per use.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#240

Post by SkyPuncher »

hedgehog wrote: post #96
spike021 wrote: post #59

A huge benefit to CarPlay for me is I can travel someplace like Japan, get a car with a CarPlay-supported head unit, and immediately I have Google or Apple Maps available straight off the bat in English with all my saved locations like hotels or places that are bookmarked. Nothing to set up or anything. The only downside I've experienced with it in Japan is the GPS can be wonky in tunnels whereas the car's built-in G…

The car probably has odometry and inertial sensors to do position updates while GPS is unavailable. That's actually how some of the original car nav systems worked even pre-GPS in the 80s.

I strongly doubt that.

Cars simply have bigger, more power antennas because they don't have to be packaged in a phone.

One of our cars has a wireless modem that can be used for a hotspot. I've driven to plenty of areas where my phone has no service (think remote and hilly terrain), but the car still has two or three bars.

Post reply on HN