Is it just me, or is anyone else suspicious about Pandora missing from the supported apps?
Apple CarPlay
311–320 of 376 posts
Re: Apple CarPlay
#312I'd like to see Android's response.
Google announced the Open Automotive Alliance (OAA)[0] at CES 2014[1] with car manufacturers Audi, GM, Honda, and Hyundai, and chip manufacturer Nvidia[2].
[0] http://www.openautoalliance.net/
[1] http://officialandroid.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/new-partnershi...
[2] http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/01/06/were-joining-google-...
Re: Apple CarPlay
#313Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't blame car companies for resisting change. They can't send out patches. Their product life cycle is a few years, maybe even a decade, not a year... Funny to see Hyundai called a great marquee by apple... In S Korea, Samsung is considered THE marquee company and Hyundai Motor is a few steps below it...
Samsung makes cars?
Yes, but generally considered a flop.
However I think Samsung is planning to reboot their car business with the new wave of electric cars.
Why I think that?
There were rumors that Tesla was talking to Samsung about Samsung making batteries for Tesla, mainly because Tesla wanted to increase supply AND diversify supplier (going from Pasasonic only to Panasonic/Samsung). Considering Samsung's reputation as a reliable supplier for quality/scale, it was a good idea. Even Apple considers Samsung as essential for their parts due to quality/scale. The rumors were reported for months.
But nothing came out of it. And then we started hearing about Tesla building ITS OWN billion dollar battery factory in cooperation with Panasonic. So I started thinking WHAT happened?
My guess is that Tesla wanted guarantee that Samsung would NOT get into electric car business in America (not unreasonable looking at apple/samsung), but Samsung didn't want to go along with it. I think Samsung is willing to lose the battery business with Tesla to have another crack at the new (electric) car business again.
The Dell/samsung deal is a good example. Around 2000, Dell/Samsung signed a 10-year part deal. This was at the height of the RAM crisis (due to shortage prices were wildly fluctuation, if available at all). Samsung was up-and-coming RAM maker and Dell wanted to a secure supply of RAM. Dell signed deal with Samsung and Samsung agreed to meet parts demand from Dell (RAM, cddrive, monitor etc). It was a billion dollar, 10-year deal. Along with it, Samsung agreed to withdraw from PC business in US at the request of Dell (unknown to public at the time). This I think Samsung regretted later as Samsung was forgotten as a PC maker in US. In the decade of 2000-2010, I remember reading about good Samsung laptop reviews on notebookreview.com but you couldn't buy them in US. They were available only in S Korea/Asia/Europe/etc, but not in US. One of earlier very popular Dell laptop (everyone I knew had one) was a rebadged Samsung laptop actually.
Basically Samsung was locked out of PC business in America and it cost them dearly in brand recognition in US, which Samsung apparently wants to avoid.
In a way, Samsung not agreeing the possible Tesla's request is reasonable (I should admit I have no proof of it but circumstantial evidences support it). Samsung is ALREADY in car business (albeit it's a flop) and with the new generation of electric cars that will replace gas powered cars, Samsung made correct choice of not agreeing to Tesla's request.
Re: Apple CarPlay
#314Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty hard to see the iPhone and iPad as anything other than a revolution. Similar to how Windows was a revolution in desktop computing (whether you liked it or not). "Gaining widespread adoption" was never an area Apple was very good at. They were always good at creating consumer-focused PCs. The initial line of MacBooks and iMacs are good examples of this — minuscule user base compared to Windows, but built t…
The Ipad definitely wasn't a revolution.
What is your criteria for "revolution" in the tech industry?
Re: Apple CarPlay
#315Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah dude it's totally because we haven't tried them. It's not because they're 'intelligent' pieces of shit with virtually no control or anything.
While in motion, a driver should maintain 100% of their focus on two things: direction and speed. Having to juggle another pedal and lever to make sure upcoming speed change would be suitable to the driver is unnecessary and a distraction. Modern cars perform gear changes good enough, at the worst. If you have a CVT, it is even better (but very expensive to buy/repair, I acknowledge that).
Changing gears manually is you paying a lot of attention to speed and direction. Once the first part of getting comfortable changing gears is past, you as the driver change gears based on paying attention to engine noise, speed, driving conditions, other vehicles.
You end up paying a lot more attention to everything, vs being largely on autopilot with automatic transmission. Or at least having the option of being a lot more on auto pilot with auto transmission.
Of course this varies driver to driver, but having driven both types for about 10 years, I personally find mysel way more engaged with the manual vehicles.
Re: Apple CarPlay
#316Earlier quoted context omitted.
second. I don't know what it is with it exactly, but automatic shifting kills any pleasure in driving I still have. All the ones I tried seem to react to pedal movements too slowly, which I find sometimes even dangerous because I'm not used too it, and I cannot use the engine to do light to intermediate braking anymore. and normally leave the lights on auto as well. Why don't you just leave them always on anyway? Or…
Down-shifting puts extra stress on transmission and engine components which are far harder to replace than brake pads. If you're heading down a long slope, sure, use the lower gears to add control. If you're just trying to come down from your amazing commute freeway race into the clover leaf... use the brakes for braking. Most people downshift incorrectly and add unneeded wear to their clutch. There's few enough stic…
Irrelevant amounts of so. Any driving school teaches using engine braking for increased fuel efficiency and decreased wear of brakes. Manual clutches still last for far longer than even high-end automatic ones.
Re: Apple CarPlay
#317Yay, 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…
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…
>Europe hasn't even moved over to automatic transmission yet.
I wonder if there's been a study that looks at the safety of manual vs. automatic transmission vehicles. This coming from a guy who made it a pre-req that his future wife drive stick...
Re: Apple CarPlay
#318Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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. This reduces distraction. You have to remember to take into account human behavior. In the real world, people get into their vehicle and use their phone's map application, as well as text, phone, and m…
In 2011, 3,331 people were killed in crashes involving a distracted driver. 3,267 in 2010. [1] When you say "This reduces distraction." you mean compared to holding the phone and doing those actions, right? The way I would account for human behavior is to intelligently disable certain functionality as the car is moving. Compared to someone else's life, how important is that text message? Even dictating a text message…
Not true. Driving a car with bluetooth, I now see how wonderful and useful this feature is. I don't have to take my eyes off the road and I don't have to hold anything to my ear. Its very very seamless.
If you can't talk while you drive, then you shouldn't have passengers either.
Re: Apple CarPlay
#319Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I am almost 100% certain that we won't see that kind of thing [self-driving cars] even within the next few decades, if ever. Come on -- self-driving cars are already legal in California -- "Self-driving cars now legal in California" : http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/25/tech/innovation/self-driving-c... -- and the military are testing self-driving trucks to prevent IUD casualties in hostile areas -- "Army tests self-driv…
As I understand it current self driving car technology fails whenever the situation becomes sufficiently complex (eg. icy/wet roads, some other unexpected traffic situation) and require the driver to take control at this point. 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…
It seems likely to me that automated cars could do the following with incremental, predictable progress:
1) Drive with good road conditions on pavement in areas that have accurate maps.
2) Recognize when conditions change and the car has a lower chance of functioning correctly.
3) When 2 occurs, pull over and yield to the human, or turn around and go back to another location.
This isn't the fantasy of "get wasted, get driven home, no matter what," but it seems good enough to ensure people are safe. Maybe you can get home, or maybe you sleep it off on the side of the road, or maybe your car drives you to a motel.
Re: Apple CarPlay
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
You ignore the fact that this is meant to be controlled by Siri Nothing to improve road safety like elaborate arguments with a speech recognition engine...
You think Siri is bad, try the ones built into 5 year old cars.
You don't even need to look that far back. Cars being released as new today have horrible speech recognition compared to what you can get with siri/google now.