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

241–250 of 537 posts

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#241

Post by bunabhucan »

makeitdouble wrote: post #170
lobochrome wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-…

Google Maps fails in subtle but weird and sometimes costly ways. 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 an…

>avoided in favor of bigger loops

At this point at google, I wouldn't be surprised if they were selling your route to advertizers to "optimize your driving experience."

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#242

Post by Nevermark »

10u152 wrote: post #169
fragmede wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that the really good computer thinking people aren't really really good at people thinking is surprising to you?

156500 employees. 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.

> Google isn't a plucky startup with just a few dedicated engineers.

They made great long term corporate value and customer relationship decisions then, for their context.

When big corporations full of talent get sloppy, it is usually either a very competent emphasis on short term financial growth or value multiple growth. Or the result of multiple competent actors infighting or working at cross purposes, due to a lack of strong internal alignment. The latter jungle case saves a CEO from having to deep dive, they can just see what happens and select winners.

Either way, by competent I mean someone is accomplishing exactly what they intend. Optimizing their net worth given the company's incentive and power structures, in the absence of a CEO who cares more about the long than the short term.

It only takes that one difference at the very top to trickle down. The greater the talent, the greater the effect.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#243

Post by roughly »

eslaught wrote: post #122
roughly wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re: Tesla - at least in the early days, they did the same thing a lot of boutique manufacturers did: https://www.theautopian.com/how-tesla-engineers-saved-millio... Re: "global manufacturing" - yeah, but there's also a choice being made there. I own an older BMW, and there's been a very clear shift away from what was once a differentiated product to a kind of blah middle-object, which is almost certainly in pursuit o…

> value prop of a BMW made between 1975 and 2005 I'd be curious for someone to explain what this is, and what happened in 2005 that changed this.

For a very long time, BMW's cars were intentionally driver-centric - if you got a BMW, you were getting a car that was luxurious and well built, sure, but more than that, was just sublime to drive in a way the spec sheets don't capture. The handling, steering, suspension feel, engine and transmission, everything combined for something that was engaging and genuinely fun to drive, but didn't sacrifice actual daily usability. That was their sales pitch: Want luxury? Grab a Benz. Care about the actual driving experience? Here's your car.

I really don't know what happened after 2005, and it wasn't overnight, but the general driving experience of the cars has declined every generation since then - steering's gotten a bit more numb, suspension's not quite as communicative, engine noises are more muffled, and they just seemed to lose the thread over the years. I'm not sure if some of it was leaning into technology at the expense of the driving experience, but aside from the one or two models per generation that still have some of the old soul, they really don't seem to know what their sales pitch is anymore.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#244

Post by adamomada »

drekipus wrote: post #89
ryandrake wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't Japanese people have smartphones or tablets with navigation on them that they can use? I'd rather cars just have a place I can mount my own device, rather than include any kind of screen whatsoever with crappy un-updated, un-maintained software.

In car navigation came before mobile smart phones

Ironically, the nav unit I used on a rental car circa 2007-08 (birth of touchscreen smartphones) was exactly like the GP describes, a separate unit that had a mount like the modern smartphone variants.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#245

Post by cjensen »

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

Doesn't matter because CarPlay and AA allow you to bring whatever apps you want to with you. If you listen to podcasts or books on your phone, you can continue them from the CarPlay/AA interface next time you drive.

CarPlay and Android Auto give you the choice of your own app and full integration with the rest of your listening life.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#246

Post by ajmurmann »

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…

> BMW put out a car that shared a platform with a Toyota, in a move that should've caused a plague of locust to descend on Munich if God existed and had a driver's license

Why is this bad on BMW? Doesn't Toyota make the most reliable cars?

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#247

Post by tsudounym »

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

Tesla's Spotify app had a long standing bug where it couldn't recognize playlists with more than 100 songs. To be dependent on a car company to give bugs for every individual apps rather than to just mirror from your phone, which will have patched apps right away..

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#248

Post by lotsofpulp »

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 it's the auto manufacturer's fault for deciding to go with Android Automotive as the infotainment OS.

Yes, as far as I know, any automaker can choose to make the screen in the dash compatible with Carplay, at least the non fancy Carplay that will be able to show all the apps on the phone.

Zero reason, in my opinion, to not offer a Carplay compatible screen, other than to inconvenience car users. Not the CarPlay 2 thing, but just original Carplay.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#249

Post by internet101010 »

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.

My iPhone crashes... intentionally. Because the Spotify app caches everything rather than doing refreshes when loading "new episodes" of podcasts. I had to abandon them for podcasts because of it.

That said, a car without CarPlay is simply out of the pool of possible cars I would buy. It's a requirement.

Re: Apple's risky bet on CarPlay

#250

Post by filoleg »

rrdharan wrote: post #239
filoleg wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

That’s called “leasing a car”, and it comes with a limited number of miles per year, beyond which you pay $X/per 100 miles iirc. I wouldn’t know the details, because I bought my car instead of leasing, but I remember looking at lease terms that all had a mileage limit +extra pay per N number of miles.
Post reply on HN