GM says it's dropping Apple CarPlay and Android Auto because they're unsafe

https://jalopnik.com/gm-drops-apple-carplay-android-auto-unsafe-phone-1851093013

by thunderbong • 3 years ago

183 422 3 years ago

vondur• 3 years ago

I won’t consider a car that doesn’t support CarPlay. This is going to backfire on Gam big time.

I imagine quite a lot of people will be. There might be room for after market head unit replacement for these new models.

dylan604• 3 years ago

are you basing that on the entire history of after market replacement head units, or did you just make up something in favor of your preference?

Bluecobra• 3 years ago

Problem is that a lot of vehicles have displays that stick up like a wart on the dashboard now. Though it would be great if you could reuse the display and just replace the internal components.

MBCook10• 3 years ago

Is that really possible anymore on modern vehicles that come with fancy screens?

covercash• 3 years ago

9to5mac polled their (obviously biased) audience and 80% said they wouldn’t consider a car without CarPlay. I wonder how Android Auto users feel since GM’s software is basically going to be their own hard baked version of AA… all your settings will probably sync but I think I’d still rather just plug my phone in and let it handle my data.

kelnos2• 3 years ago

I can only assume it'll be just like most non-Pixel versions of Android on phones: a horribly-skinned menace with terrible UX, and random bugs here and there, because I'm sure somehow GM can take Android Automotive's base and make it worse.

And then they'll only support it for a few years, while anyone with a car supporting Android Auto or CarPlay will continue to get a better experience as their phones get updated.

(Also: still annoyingly confusing that Android Auto and Android Automotive are two completely different things.)

MBCook10• 3 years ago

A few years ago Apple said that 95% of car buyers want CarPlay based on some industry survey.

I’m actually surprised 9 to 5 Mac got a number as low as 80%.

Tesla is the only real brand to be able to get away with it, and I suspect a lot of that is because they were the only big electric car brand for a long time (people never seemed to consider the volt/bolt or leaf).

Rivian is trying the same thing, but they’re very small. I’m not sure about other relatively small manufacturers like Lucid.

Of the major brands it’s now Tesla, who is slightly special and has good developers, and GM. Against the entire rest of the industry.

They’re doomed.

alsodumb• 3 years ago

Wait, so they're saying CarPlay and Android Auto are buggy on their cars, most likely because of their errors in getting the mirroring part right, so instead of fixing the issues, they think switching to their in-house system that they will design from scratch, that'll probably have hundreds of bugs, that's most likely gonna suck, is a better option?

They could've just said we're out of excuses we just want to make money on infotainment system lol.

NewJazz• 3 years ago

Maybe they can go find rastermon and revive Tizen lol.

upon_drumhead2• 3 years ago

My Samsung fridge is running Tizen! It's awful!

kQq9oHeAz6wLLS• 3 years ago

This way they can wrap the errors in try..catch blocks and suppress their output.

Boom - error free code!

function_seven2• 3 years ago

“Try..catch”—what the hell is that? When I craft my performant error-free code, I only use the finest bug-squasher:

On Error Resume Next.

No need to wrap anything. You declare it once and cruise to your solution.

mushufasa• 3 years ago

but think of all the promotions and headcount for the internal teams...

rezonant10• 3 years ago

Followed swiftly by the biannual layoffs. It's fine just reapply at the beginning of the fiscal year after they've shown investors how responsible they are.

jandrewrogers2• 3 years ago

What makes you think they design it in-house? Automotive companies outsource most of this software to third parties at bottom-feeder rates on a hard delivery deadline. They don’t know how to produce good software like this. Every aspect of the process is the antithesis of what is required to have quality software come out the other side.

I have my issues with CarPlay but the OEM software is hot garbage by comparison.

dntrkv2• 3 years ago

It's hilarious just how bad OEM car software is. One of those many moments in my day to day that I realize how bad 90% of software we interact with is absolute trash.

ATM machines, credit card readers, parking meters, TVs, microwaves, ovens (really any appliances), phone trees, any kiosks, etc.

If the device registers my touch within 500ms that's usually enough to impress me at this point.

somerandomqaguy• 3 years ago

AFAIK GM's new software is going to be based on Automotive Android.

https://source.android.com/docs/automotive/start/what_automo...

ungamedplayer3• 3 years ago

Call it what it is.. they like the control of their in car entertainment systems and they don't want external companies taking that part of the pie.

It's okay gm, we understand. Let's hope you are able to make a compelling competition to this, otherwise your sales will suffer.

Traditional car software is very very poor for whatever reason. I don't think that car manufacturers have the mindset and capability to make even passable software, let alone competitive software.

Kurd• 3 years ago

Calling it car software is very generous. More like abandonware.

mulmen13• 3 years ago

I want abandonware in my car. Don't include alpha-grade software in a mid-five-figure product. If you can't get it right don't ship it.

The navigation/infotainment space is a thoroughly solved domain. We don't need biweekly OTA updates to add the latest trendy thing. I don't want controls moving around or menus changing based on a perverted engagement metric.

BMW "pathced" several mechanical features of my car. This is called a "recall". Auto manufacturers try to avoid them.

threatofrain2• 3 years ago

Unfortunately consumers don't really punish companies for doing these kinds of things, at least I presume that's the story since high-end cars often have very shitty in-car computer experiences, like BMW or Porsche.

KerrAvon2• 3 years ago

All car infotainment systems are essentially garbage. But BMW and Porsche both have excellent CarPlay support.

catchnear4321• 3 years ago

with there being a limited number of auto manufacturers, with the general consensus seeming to be that consumers should own increasingly nothing and increasingly like it, there aren’t many alternatives.

which is why it becomes less and less crazy to imagine apple offering a car subscription - might as well, they have the payment platform and the customers have already spent their anger on the incumbents. not that apple is alone.

pandaman• 3 years ago

I've tried Android Auto a couple of times and it was much worse than the BMW's iDrive for navigation and for the entertainment. Perhaps different consumers have different preferences?

dietr1ch2• 3 years ago

I'm guessing that when buying a car most people can't afford to be picky with the infotainment system and will prioritize buying a better car over infotainment quality.

Worst-case scenario these days is not too bad either, you'll get an aux connector or somewhat stable Bluetooth (if you set it up once and avoid doing anything other than play/pause/next). Yeah, from the software engineering point of view it's slow unreliable crap, but as a consumer you have little power to fix things.

shric• 3 years ago

I bought a 2017 Mercedes a few months ago and was disgusted to find that I was unable to update my map data beyond 2020. In the first week of ownership I had driven on to roads that didn't exist in their map.

Also, it appeared to have no network connection so would not pick routes according to traffic.

I spent $600 on an aftermarket CarPlay and Android Auto device and couldn't be happier.

viraptor3• 3 years ago

Punish how? What can I do after I bought a car which I intend to drive for at least the next 10 years?

tirant5• 3 years ago

BMW infotainment system has been considered the bet in the market for a long time. Far from shitty experience.

dreamcompiler2• 3 years ago

I expect they don't want to pay what great software engineers cost, and even if they did, most such engineers probably wouldn't want to put up with GM's bureaucracy.

It's probably kinda the same story with great mechanical and industrial engineers, which is why approximately nobody finds GM cars exciting.

jimmaswell2• 3 years ago

It doesn't take much more than not going for the cheapest offshore team possible to make better car media center code than we get. I'm sure most of us could easily do it ourselves in a month or less. It seems like such a simple problem. Play songs and interface with some controls/radio receiver/etc while being at least a tiny bit conscious of efficiency.

mulmen13• 3 years ago

A friend of mine has a 2022 Cadillac something. I was actually very impressed with it. Comfortable, quiet, no-nonsense self-driving capability. Seemed like a fine car. If GM can build similar no-nonsense infotainment software they will be fine.

shiroiuma3• 3 years ago

I expect they don't want to pay what great software engineers cost, and even if they did, most such engineers probably wouldn't want to put up with GM's bureaucracy.

IMO, the bureaucracy isn't that big a problem; all big companies have this problem. The big problem for GM is their locations: who the heck wants to move to Detroit? Or any of the other places their suppliers tend to locate?

jandrewrogers2• 3 years ago

The tragic aspect is that they spend inordinate amounts of money on this software with nothing to show for it. The money is spent so poorly and ineffectively, while trying to cut every inconsequential cost corner along the way with the output being micromanaged by people that don’t understand software, that if you directed a fraction of that money at a small team of highly paid and experienced software engineers you’d likely get a brilliant product.

Automotive OEMs don’t work that way, they spray money at hundreds of the cheapest engineers they can get away with and hope something good comes out the other side. I’ve seen it over and over. Their problems could be solved by paying a small team of excellent engineers proper Silicon Valley wages. It would be cheaper and produce a better product, but they don’t think that way. The concept of a highly paid software engineer is objectionable to the executives in that industry.

foobazgt4• 3 years ago

Many years ago, I discussed possible employment with a major head unit manufacturer. They were very excited about modernizing but basically stunned into silence when I mentioned typical senior FAANG pay. I'd be surprised if things have changed much.

jader201• 3 years ago

This just feels like suicide, honestly.

I mean, GM doesn’t seem to have a reputation for building the best, most reliable vehicles as it is — even just looking at domestics (factor in imports, and there’s no comparison). Every time I shop for a vehicle, it’s crazy how GMs are almost universally lower rated than all other vehicles.

I mean, maybe they have cost on their side, but they better hope that and brand loyalty is all they need.

Maybe this was once not a major factor, and maybe it’s still not for some. But I’d say the number of people that don’t care about CarPlay or Android Auto is shrinking.

mulmen13• 3 years ago

My 2010 BMW has excellent infotainment software. Better than any new car I have driven (all rentals).

Navigation is easily controlled with the iDrive knob. Previous destinations are sorted in reverse chronological order. New destinations are easy to enter. Adding destinations works as expected (insert/append). When the fuel gauge reaches 1/8 of a tank the car prompts to add a gas station on the route which can be accepted with a single button press of the main iDrive knob. When a trip is in progress I can search on the route by category for points of interest like rest stops. It picks up traffic information over AM radio and uses that information when routing.

Similarly pleasant experience when operating the radio/built in mp3 player. Everything can be done with iDrive but there are also dedicated buttons on the steering wheel and dashboard.

Climate control is managed by physical knobs.

Bluetooth calling is supported but Bluetooth audio (music) is not.

Overall an excellent experience. It's obviously dated and a little slow but completely serviceable even today. The system is completely self-contained so it does need map updates from time to time. OTA updates, even on wifi would be nice.

From a design perspective I have no complaints at all, it is well integrated with the car and otherwise stays out of the way. A helpful tool.

msh3• 3 years ago

It would be useless to me personally.

I hate radio. I don’t listen to much music. When driving I mostly listen to podcasts and audiobooks which sounds like is not really practically possible.

hnav• 3 years ago

iDrive 5 forward (2015ish), map updates are OTA.

seanmcdirmid8• 3 years ago

Tesla is the exception here: they seem to have mastered making a car software experience that doesn’t suck, and they don’t even support CarPlay. But Tesla is a tech/software company that happens to make cars (of dubious build quality), I don’t think conventional automakers can replicate that.

andsoitis• 3 years ago

Tesla software experience far outshines CarPlay and Android Auto.

pankajdoharey• 3 years ago

No its a car company which writes its own software. Their primary business in not software its cars. Although i agree they are not very good at it, the build quality is obviously dubious. Perhaps the Know how of old car companies + Tesla's battery and Motor tech + Software could result in an overall better product. A merger would be a net positive IMO.

stephen_g• 3 years ago

My impression of Tesla (from driving a friend's, who is a massive Tesla fan) is that I get the feeling that the systems aren't as clever as they think they are, and it led to some "interesting" (actually downright scary and dangerous) experiences with the driver assist functions on a long distance drive we did. It wasn't the full Autopilot, just the lane following/adaptive cruise control kind of thing but we almost did go off the road at least once.

But in general with the UI, there was a lot of, "Hey, how do I do [elementary car function]" and he'd be like "Oh I think they changed that [or moved it in the menu] in the last update, uh let me have a look"...

Elon Musk's antics had already basically made me decide my next car wouldn't be a Tesla, but driving one a bit didn't really sell me on it anyway...

bmitc• 3 years ago

I'm not sure I consider rediscovering why buttons matter is mastering anything.

Zetobal• 3 years ago

It's okay I wouldn't call it great.

kmlx3• 3 years ago

Call it what it is.. they like the control of their in car entertainment systems and they don't want external companies taking that part of the pie.

they did call it as it is. it's in the article:

In addition to potentially buying things from GM or GM’s partners through their car’s infotainment system, GM is also looking at subscription services that would be managed through the same interface. GM’s chief digital officer, Edward Kummer, told Reuters as much when the decision to drop CarPlay and Android Auto was announced. Automakers see subscriptions as huge new source of income to be tapped, with GM alone hoping to make as much as $25 billion per year just off subscriptions by 2030.

bluefirebrand2• 3 years ago

I am dreading the future of cars, where they somehow are worse than a car I could buy right now but also I have to pay a monthly subscription for the worse experience.

The enshittification of everything is making me want to go berserk.

eviks• 3 years ago

They didn't call it as it is, that's just the obvious conclusion the author of the article makes based on another source, they make up unverified safety allegations

though Babbitt admits that GM hasn’t exactly tested this in a controlled setting to see whether or not it’s true.

theyeenzbeanz• 3 years ago

Good lord the greed just never ends does it? They should look at BMW and see how quickly the heated seat thing fell through for them. At least I know what manufacturers to avoid from now on.

xnx4• 3 years ago

GM should go the other direction and ditch their software entirely in favor of Android Automotive.

internet2000• 3 years ago

They've done that. That's what this is about.

xnx4• 3 years ago

Ah, thanks. I assumed GM was just using Android Auto, I didn't realize they had models that used Android Automotive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_Automotive#Vehicles_wi...

warbeforepeace3• 3 years ago

With the cheapest processor and touch screen possible.

upon_drumhead2• 3 years ago

Don't worry, they'll launch it as a monthly subscription service that ensures that you get the latest version of their software, which is going to be decades behind Android Auto and Car Play.

mike_d• 3 years ago

This is just nonsense to justify locking consumers into Ultifi, their new Android based infotainment system. GM has stated they expect to generate $20-25 billion in app and subscription revenues by 2030 [1].

GM is about to figure out people are more loyal to their phone than their car.

1. https://gmauthority.com/blog/2022/08/gm-ultifi-to-generate-2...

chrisdbanks2• 3 years ago

Yep. Never buying a GM now. It would never pay for a subscription to have something just in my car that I also have on my phone.

AmVess3• 3 years ago

These people are certifiably insane. How are they not aware that people carry their entire digital lives in their pockets and purses and aren't going to swap that for whatever pile of garbage GM will come out with?

Further, how are they going to handle rental fleets? Do they think people will fork over $20 on top of a rental fee just to use their junk service?

mattmaroon• 3 years ago

Yeah, bullshit. You know what’ll really many people just pick up their device? Whatever second-rate voice to text GM licenses from god knows who. Or all the things GM’s software can’t do because iOS won’t let them.

I wouldn’t buy a GM car anyway since they’re consistently low quality (they’re the Detroit Lions of auto making) so I won’t act like they just lost my business, but I especially wouldn’t buy one after they inevitably bungle the software.

My Stellantis car nearly never has some sort of Car Play bug. Third party Car Play apps can be extremely buggy but this won’t solve that problem except to just have no ability to use such apps without again picking up my phone.

Look GM, if you insist on owning the in car experience, fine. You’ll lose a ton of sales but that’s your call. Just don’t act like you’re helping us when we all know it’s not about that.

KerrAvon2• 3 years ago

I’ve been pretty impressed with the Bolt for the price. It’s a shame the next generation one won’t be on my list due to lack of CarPlay.

MBCook10• 3 years ago

I agree. I’ve had them as rentals before, they’re pretty amazing.

The latest is the Bolt appears to be dead, only the Bolt EUV will survive.

But it doesn’t matter. Like you the lack of CarPlay makes it a non-starter and I wouldn’t recommend it in the future to anyone for the same reason.

system7rocks• 3 years ago

I like Apple CarPlay. I like that it simplifies things and I don't have to login with my Google account. But, the head unit I have is super laggy, because it is just a dumb android tablet. Imagine an iPad with an M1 processor. Gosh it would rock.

MBCook10• 3 years ago

It really shouldn’t matter much. My 2016 car wasn’t laggy with CarPlay. I promise you that thing wasn’t fast.

Or are you using wireless? I don’t know if other vehicles are better but the only times I’ve gotten to try wireless CarPlay the lag drove me nuts. If I plugged it in instead it was great.

warbeforepeace3• 3 years ago

Having rented a dozen different cars with car play i can say some manufacturers make car play feel just as painful as their in house infotainment systems.

beretguy• 3 years ago

So, they will completely remove infotainment system/touchscreen and replace it with physical buttons? Right? Right?

nichos• 3 years ago

GM is one of the few manufacturers that still has physical buttons for almost everything (climate, volume,etc)

lostmsu• 3 years ago

Few? Which ones (apart from Tesla) don't?

mgarfias3• 3 years ago

you know whats unsafe? Getting rid of physical buttons and putting everything on a touch screen with no tactile feedback and constantly changing the position of things - looking at you tesla.

All things considered though: im not likely to buy any new car. I'd rather buy an old and busted early 70s boat, and stuff in modern running gear.

epistasis2• 3 years ago

I was sort of convinced by this argument, theoretically, until I actually experienced the alternative.

I've had a Toyota for four years now with all physical switches, but the complexity and number of controls is absolutely mind bogging large. I can't operate these physical switches without looking at inscrutable, small labels in awkward places. A centralized screen which allows clear view of the road at the same time is much safer than stalks with arrays of switches that have 4+ settings. At least when I'm operating it.

slantyyz3• 3 years ago

I dunno, my 18 year old Honda (and wife's Toyota of same age) is pretty much all physical switches (and that's not counting all the cars I've driven since the late 80s). Outside of the occasional manufacturer idiosyncrasies, my Honda's controls pretty much behave the same way that all my prior cars did too.

Yes, there are a lot, but I only use a handful of them at any given time. They work predictably, without any random lags related to CPU load or any other weird stuff that could be related to running a -large- complex operating system. Everything just works, and all the time. -- edit: might want to add that they don't need software upgrades either

I would prefer that over a touchscreen any day.

brandonagr24• 3 years ago

Maybe you missed them, but there are actually physical buttons in a Tesla, I use the tactile physical buttons constantly, the scroll wheels to control volume / audio and cruise. The other common buttons are turn signals which are under your left thumb and have tactile feedback. What other buttons are you pushing constantly?

drdaeman2• 3 years ago

IIRC, AC controls are only available through the touchscreen, not through any physical dials or buttons.

(In my Honda, I operate AC by touch - I remember the physical button layout for the essentials like rear window heating, and the knobs have a grove that can be read by fingers without looking).

mgarfias3• 3 years ago

HVAC controls: on my truck I reach down by feel and turn a knob. Can’t do that anymore n the Tesla.

Wiper controls: yeah I can trigger them with the button on the end of the stalk. But I gotta turn my head to adjust the speed after pushing said button.

Head/fog lights.

That’s just thinking about it for a few seconds.

nneonneo5• 3 years ago

My Mazda disables the touchscreen once the vehicle is going more than ~10 km/h, yet CarPlay is very usable. It's got a physical knob that rotates through the various on-screen widgets in a fairly predictable order. Most of the apps I use are also good about keeping their CarPlay interfaces very consistent across time, so it's possible to learn the "tab" order by muscle memory and not really need to look at the screen.

There's also physical buttons for app switching, for volume controls, voice input, accepting or hanging up calls, and for next/previous music tracks, and in practice those cover enough everyday functionality that I rarely even need to use the selector knob. I feel like I get the benefit of CarPlay (seamless access to my phone's capabilities) with all the niceties of tactile controls too.

maratc• 3 years ago

Mazda are amazing in this sense. In about 2017, my Mazda did what you describe, but starting at about 2019 they don't have any touchscreen at all (at least my current Mazda doesn't). The knob does everything. Mazda, if you're listening: continue doing what you do, and I'll continue buying your cars.

antoniuschan99• 3 years ago

I went ahead and googled if tesla uses android auto or carplay and apparently it doesn’t either. Neither does Rivian.

dreamcompiler2• 3 years ago

In almost every car I turn the screen as close to off as possible and just use my phone for navigation and music. The Tesla is the only exception: Their software is good enough to use rather than automatically ignore.

mullingitover3• 3 years ago

Ehh, hard disagree. I rented a Tesla for a few days. I didn't have time to spend an hour learning their UX before driving off in it, and I expected the Coca Cola of EVs to have intuitive controls. Huge mistake, I came away with the impression that Teslas are designed by people who don't actually drive cars, and I was thrilled to get back to Carplay and sane Honda ergonomics.

conk2• 3 years ago

Yes which is a major factor in why I bought a Mach E and have held off on getting a Rivian for now.

MBCook10• 3 years ago

Tesla absolutely refuses for some reason.

Rivian has said they might add it later, but they didn’t seem to think it was enough of a priority over everything else they were doing. That’s somewhat understandable.

If I was in the market for a car, they would both be a no-go though because of that. I like CarPlay too much.

chr-s• 3 years ago

Tesla absolutely refuses for some reason.

That reason might be the $10/mo they get people to pay for live traffic, satellite maps, and access to music streaming.

jrsj• 3 years ago

If this was actually about safety they would just get rid of the touch screen entirely. You really don't even need a display at all anymore, HUD + physical controls could cover all essential functions.

Der_Einzige• 3 years ago

If it were up to me, I'd mandate that all cars are required to have a HUD. HUDs are insanely useful, mainly because it doesn't require the driver to take their eyes off the road for directions or for checking their speed.

Elon refusing to put a HUD in the tesla's is one of the reasons why he shouldn't be the CEO of anything, let alone a car company.

ageitgey3• 3 years ago

Once you've owned a car with a decent HUD, it really does feel insane to go back to a car where you have to look away from the road for something as basic as checking your speed. It's a great feature.

slantyyz3• 3 years ago

I'm probably in the minority of the minority, but I don't want a touch screen in my car. Or even any big LCD screen in my car. I would prefer my car to be relatively dumb, and free of distractions where possible.

Saris• 3 years ago

The only screen that would be nice is a small diagnostics one that shows trouble codes, and some live info like temperatures and sensor voltages.

YPPH• 3 years ago

The major advantage of AA/CP is they are simple screen projection protocols capable of being supported for decades.

The "brains" of the system, namely the phone, can be easily upgraded as technology changes. People will get new phones. Operating systems will be upgraded. Apps will come and go. Maps will update. The system will keep working flawlessly.

This can't happen with fixed hardware in vehicle - the firmware and apps will be promptly outdated.

yborg• 3 years ago

That is a feature as far as the manufacturers are concerned.

MBCook10• 3 years ago

Yep. I got my first car with CarPlay in 2015. That’s 8 years ago.

iPhones are always faster than the infotainment systems in cars due to development cycles and cost.

Now my iPhone is eight years newer than the one that was already better than my car. So it’s obviously faster. Apple has delivered numerous new features in those eight years, the car never received a single update. That wasn’t even an ability on the car.

As John Gruber is a fan of saying, the phone eats everything. You can’t compete with it. It has better specs, it gets updated more often, it’s more customized to the user. It has better connectivity (I’m not paying $30 a month or whatever to give my car cellular service).

It has the apps I want to use, not the ones who gave the car company a payoff. If I have to get a rental car on a vacation, all my same stuff is right there.

GM will suffer. I’m curious how long it takes them to reverse this. Just one year? Or more? I’m willing to bet a nontrivial number of people just flat walk out of dealerships when they hear the car they’re looking at doesn’t have CarPlay (or Android Auto).

overgard2• 3 years ago

I dunno, I got my first car with Car Play a year ago. I'm not super impressed. It's buggy and slow and the interface is clunky. It's better than using my phone directly, barely, but I still would have bought the car if it didn't have it. All I really want is music and maps anyway, and I can just get a cheap phone mount for my dashboard like I did with my old car so I don't have to look down at it.

bryanlarsen2• 3 years ago

My wife's car, a Tesla, gets updates more often than my phone, a Samsung.

thih9• 3 years ago

To be fair, this kind of redundancy and reducing likelihood of third party changes seems safer to me.

Nothing about “Operating systems will be upgraded. Apps will come and go. Maps will update.” says “The system will keep working flawlessly.” - if anything, the system will accumulate flaws.

rezonant10• 3 years ago

On the flip side, the custom weird UI the car manufacturers contracted some cheap outside firm to write at low cost, and is filled with paid product placement and data mining, will be flawed from the start and never fixed.

brandonagr24• 3 years ago

My car updates every month over the air, so the firmware and apps are never outdated (at least within the life of my ownership of the car, which will be less than 6 years probably)

ageitgey3• 3 years ago

The major advantage of AA/CP is they are simple screen projection protocols capable of being supported for decades.

There's a whole weird gray market for Chinese-manufactured "computers on a stick" that reverse-engineered the CarPlay protocol and use it to display a custom computer/Android interface in your car. You can do things like stream Netflix, use Chrome, install any Android app, play games, etc.

I'm not recommending it as it seems both sketchy and unsafe, but it's a funny niche that exists. For some reason, they are usually marketed on AliExpress as a "Car AI Box" but of course have nothing to do with AI.

Here's a random example video of what they look like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrFHjrYnoDE

J_Shelby_J• 3 years ago

what will win; the best ux design teams in the world or the finance bros that have become GM. No question mark because it’s not a question.

The sooner that realize they’re a tape deck aux in with a motor attached, the better for everyone involved.

DannyBee2• 3 years ago

They think people are willing to pay 135 a month in software subscriptions for their car.

That's what they think their research shows.

They are so far gone it's astonishing

wannacboatmovie• 3 years ago

Then why can't "the best ux design teams in the world" design CarPlay apps that work?

Regardless of GM's ulterior motives here (follow the money), they're not wrong.

CarPlay stinks. It indeed has caused me distracted driving while I execute a complex task such as, oh I don't know, choose a song/playlist. The worst offender by far is Amazon Music, which is nearly unusable, though Apple isn't too far behind. The mapping apps are just as bad and getting worse. Want to report a hazard etc. in Apple Maps? You have to tap a chevron and wait for a fold-out menu to appear, it's like 3 taps deep. By this point you have passed the hazard and become one yourself as you fight these terrible UIs designed by... you guessed it, "the best ux design teams in the world".

And yes 90% of it are the apps but at its heart CarPlay is just display mirroring.

The UX of most CarPlay apps is downright TERRIBLE.

seydor• 3 years ago

google and apple should pay for it.

You can get $200 car units that run android and support both

kelnos2• 3 years ago

I've never owned a car made by GM, but a decision like this guarantees I never will.

I don't buy their take that the safety issues are because Android Auto and CarPlay are buggy and have connection issues and other crap that cause people to use their phone directly. I've only had a new enough car to use Android Auto for a year and half now, but I've literally never encountered a bug that required me to touch my phone. If there are bugs on GM's cars, I expect that's an issue with the car's software, not Google's or Apple's.

Obviously GM is putting forth a bad-faith argument to justify their real reason, which is that they just want full control over the experience, and likely want to find ways to monetize things that people can do with their own interface.

Good luck with that, GM. Even if GM somehow manages to build a nice, performant, featureful, non-buggy infotainment system (yeah, right), guaranteed they're going to stop releasing updates for each car's version of it within 5-10 years of the car's release. Meanwhile, as long as my phone keeps getting updates, Android Auto will keep getting updates.

evanelias2• 3 years ago

My GM-made car does indeed have connectivity issues with CarPlay at least a few times a month. Turning my phone's Bluetooth off and on again fixes it, which makes me wonder if the problem really is on the phone side.

On the other hand, it happens more often when switching between a built-in car app (like the 360 cameras app) and the Carplay app, which probably implicates the car's software more?

In any case, it is pretty annoying. It sometimes happens at really inopportune times, which can be a distracting safety hazard just from the loss of connectivity/functionality alone (i.e. not even considering needing to touch the phone, which is illegal while driving in many US states.)

AmVess3• 3 years ago

That is a GM problem. I've never had Carplay connectivity issues across 4 different brands.

plasticchris• 3 years ago

I’ve seen wireless CarPlay connectivity problems in certain locations which makes me think there’s interference there and I’m driving through it.

65a• 3 years ago

guaranteed they're going to stop releasing updates for each car's version of it within 5-10 years of the car's release

That's probably a feature and not a bug to them, since it damages the value or desirability of used vehicles.

user2342• 3 years ago

I don't buy their take that the safety issues are because Android Auto and CarPlay are buggy and have connection issues ...

Ack. From my experience, connection issues with Car Play are 100% due to the shitty software on the car's side and never on phone's side.

I regularly have connection problems (i.e. black screen in Car Play when entering the car - a Fiat with UConnect 5). They can _always_ be resolved by rebooting the cars's entertainment system. _Never_ by rebooting the phone.

danaris• 3 years ago

and likely want to find ways to monetize things that people can do with their own interface.

There's no "likely" about it: they've publicly said that they intend to be making $25B/yr in subscription revenue from this.

darrylb42• 3 years ago

I thought I wanted a new car, but all I really wanted was Android Auto. Added a new touch screen to my 10 year old car, wireless Android Auto is great. I do wish there were a few more app icons at the bottom of the screen. I tend to switch between three apps and there are only buttons for two that are not maps or making calls.

s3graham• 3 years ago

"s3graham dropping GM vehicles because their infotainment system is garbage."

chrisdbanks2• 3 years ago

Why don't they just add a dock for my phone so I can use my phone's screen and control the car through their app. That would cut their costs and make me happier. There's no way I'm paying a subscription for my car. This is as stupid as the BMW idea to charge a subscription for aircon.

conk2• 3 years ago

“Essentially, the thinking is that if a car’s in-built infotainment system is good enough, drivers will be less likely to use their phone for what they’re trying to do while they’re behind the wheel”

If the car company makes me pay for another subscription to get Nav data or stream music then by default the infotainment system is not good enough. I’m tired of companies thinking just because I bought their product I’m ok with another ~$20/mo subscription service.

MBCook10• 3 years ago

the thinking is that if a car’s in-built infotainment system is good enough

Everyone knows they lost that battle

drivers will be less likely to use their phone for what they’re trying to do

If you’re trying to claim safety, saying that your thing that no one has seen that was developed by a company that doesn’t know what they’re doing and probably runs way too slow is safer than the thing the customer is already used to seems like a stretch.

For safety you want people not to do it in the first place. But that’s not an argument for making them use your software is it?

—-

This is just so incredibly blatantly self-serving. It’s like a two-year-old telling you they won’t ruin their dinner by eating five more cookies. They couldn’t even come up with a plausible reason?

I’m with you. I don’t need to pay for a cellular connection for my car. I don’t need to pay $200 a year for map updates. I don’t need to pay $20 a month for SiriusXM when I already have a streaming subscription on my phone.

Nothing they want to sell us is something we want. Maybe that’s what they should fix first.

IF a someone was able to make something better than CarPlay or Android Auto then you don’t need to cut them off. People will choose to use your better system even with AA/CP available.

IF.

DannyBee2• 3 years ago

In this case they think you are okay with 135/month.

"Alan Wexler, GM’s senior VP of innovation and growth, said previously the automaker’s own internal research indicates that most new vehicle owners would be willing to pay up to $135 per month for various subscription-based apps and features for their vehicle."

rightbyte• 3 years ago

That is lunacy? Unless "engine starts" and "release handbrake" is a subscription and there is a hefty discount on the upfront price. But then you can just as well lease.

polski-g• 3 years ago

You should write to your federal and state legislators to have subscription software banned in automobiles.

mullingitover3• 3 years ago

Their dealers must be furious. This is clearly going to harm sales, and they probably expect they're going to trade up-front revenue for subscription. Auto manufacturers famously produce excellent software so I'm sure they'll rake in the money.

I wonder what this will do to their fleet sales. Rental companies probably won't be thrilled about customers turning up their noses at GM vehicles that don't have Carplay. I wouldn't be surprised if they have to start renting them at a discount.

bigtunacan• 3 years ago

My last 3 cars have all supported Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. First a Honda, then a GM, now a Hyundai.

All three had some issues with cord becoming disconnected. In all cases this was a car manufacturer problem because they aren't giving enough thought to the sizes of the phone and how they will lay in the inadequately sized phone compartments.

I had periodic Android Auto crashes on the GM. Since it was only on the GM I chalk it up to bugs on GM's side.

If they can't even properly integrate to the Android Auto standard why on earth would I believe they can build an entire enfotainment center that is safe, stable, and anywhere equivalent to Apple Carplay or Android Auto?

Ridiculous. I hope they enjoy not getting any of my money in the future.

GM stock short coming in hot.

xnx4• 3 years ago

Source article: https://www.motortrend.com/news/general-motors-removing-appl...

rasz• 3 years ago

Unsafe to subscription based profits.

clipsy• 3 years ago

Genuine question: Are there any auto manufacturers that do a good job of just supporting CarPlay and Android Auto and getting out of the way?

noirbot• 3 years ago

I haven't had any real issues with Mazda over the years? I got it installed by them on a 10 year old car a few years ago and had no issues that weren't "the entire system wouldn't turn on" issues with a flaky battery or heat/cold extremes. The initial load time isn't stellar, but it loads into the phone interface cleanly and all the physical car buttons interface well with the phone. No complaints.

nneonneo5• 3 years ago

Second this, I am extremely happy with CarPlay on my Mazda. There are lots of physical controls that just work naturally with CarPlay. No need to use touch controls!

ausaus• 3 years ago

VW Passat 2019 is very good with Android Auto and Carplay, now that I've got it connected.

Pixel 4a needed a specific cable which did not work with a Pixel 6a. No cable worked so I now use a Motorola wireless connector and it works well with both phones.

tirant5• 3 years ago

BMW has wireless support for both and even displays navigation instructions in their HUD. I still consider the native infotainment system, iDrive, a much better experience.

pkulak• 3 years ago

I don’t like hooking my car up to my phone. And I generally like in-car nav. Google Maps has ads, bugs me to report accidents, routes through neighborhoods to save 30 seconds, and won’t show up in a HUD or binnacle. All I want is a good way to enter a destination, Bluetooth support, and I’m happy. I remember hearing that Audi can use What Three Words, or some similar scheme? That’s my ideal. My Volvo has a phone app that can send an address to the car. It’s a bit slow sometimes, but it works great and gets me where I need to be every time. If GM has something similar, I’m down with dropping the complicated phone support.

nneonneo5• 3 years ago

Google Maps for CarPlay has never shown me any ads nor bothered me to report any accidents. The phone app does, but never when I'm driving.

For what it's worth, if Google Maps isn't what you like, you can use any other maps app with real-time directions; Apple Maps (obviously) works fantastically well on iPhones (and in suitably large cities), and you can also pick others like Waze, OSM, TomTom, etc.

We previously had a car that required the in-car nav to be updated at the dealer annually, as part of their service package. It felt like a quaint thing to have to do. I guess the alternative is that the car has some connectivity so it can download updates by itself?

user3939382• 3 years ago

If it doesn’t have CarPlay I’m not buying it so thanks for making things simple.

AmVess3• 3 years ago

GM is the very same company who recently bricked nearly all of their new model Colorado mid-size trucks with an OTA update that drained the car batteries.

That they think they have the chops to roll their own system is rather laughable at best.

Oh well, at least they are used to losing billions by now.

gumby• 3 years ago

I am sure they will be as successful as VW's software revolution, cariad, that's ejected a couple of CEOs and almost brought down the CEO of the parent. Here's a link in English: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/05/volkswagens-troubled-so... but the full story is utterly scandalous.

I've seen zero evidence that GM is even slightly more competent in this area.

ageitgey3• 3 years ago

The funny part is that while VW's bad software has been the main negative review of their otherwise great EVs, the general perception online is "Carplay/Android Auto works great, so who cares?"

I own a VW EV and use Android Auto with it. It's great. I would not have bought the car if it didn't support that. The real miracle is how well Android Auto/Car Play integrate with the car itself - speakers, microphones, steering wheel controls, heads-up display for directions - it all feels like a native experience.

valgaze• 3 years ago

July 2022: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/22/apple-carplay-could-be-a-tro...

Not sure how they arrived at the number (maybe only new vehicles), but there was a claim that 79% of US carbuyers would insist on carplay support

  Apple engineering manager Emily Schubert said 98% of new cars in the U.S. come 
  with CarPlay installed. She delivered a shocking stat: 79% of U.S. buyers would 
  only buy a car if it supported CarPlay.

  “It’s a must-have feature when shopping for a new vehicle,” Schubert said 
  during a presentation of the new features.

jwells892• 3 years ago

I certainly would insist on it. CarPlay and its Android counterpart are a far sight better than the infotainment systems the majority of cars ship with to begin with, plus they won’t have problems like their navigation data becoming outdated with updates costing money.

My car dash should be the “dumb TV” to my phone’s “streaming box”.

tristan9572• 3 years ago

What is the benefit of CarPlay or Android Auto if you have Bluetooth audio? Navigation and music go through the car's speakers.

rezonant10• 3 years ago

I have to assume they meant 79% of US consumers who use iPhone, since only about 60% of the US uses iPhone, and Carplay specifically is useless to the remaining 40%.

Or perhaps they were grouping in AA under the covers.

kbf• 3 years ago

When I last heard this stat it specified that it was buyers of new cars and that iPhone users are over-represented in that group.

foogazi• 3 years ago

Was looking at the Bolt EUV or the new Blazer, but I need CarPlay

nneonneo5• 3 years ago

We had narrowed down our car choice to one of two vehicles a few years back - and the deciding factor was which one came with CarPlay standard. It's so invaluable for us - navigation is great, voice input is excellent, my wife and I can pick the media we want by plugging in our own phones, etc.

GM is going to lose this fight, I think. Maybe they're hoping that other auto manufacturers will join them in rejecting CarPlay/Android Auto, and I sincerely hope they won't.

larusso• 3 years ago

During 2020/2021 I was on the lookout for a new car. It was important to me that it support Apple CarPlay. My last car was the last model in the lineup that didn’t support the first wave of back then tethered CarPlay support and I hated to use my old iPod classic as a media device because loading up new music was kinda laborious. Tesla etc fell out because I actually use Apple Music and a switch to Spotify just so I can listen to music in the car was and is still a no go for me. I also stayed away from the new android based systems. So this move just means that another car brand is out as a potential option. Not that GM is big in Europe. I guess that also means Opel/Vauxhaull is out of the picture too.

bastard_op• 3 years ago

Automobile companies tried for years to make a decent infotainment system in cars, and almost universally they were all terrible no matter how expensive the vehicle. Finally Android Auto and CarPlay gave everyone what they wanted - decent access to music on their phone, call capabilities that actually work, and program integration with things they actually use with internet service they already have.

Then manufacturers realized they were losing control to Google and Apple, and want it back. So now I guess we're back to random garbage half-baked solutions that no one likes, just so they can sell subscriptions for seat heaters and music players. Back to the walled gardens everyone, move along.

I'll never buy a new vehicle again, particularly GM now, and simply stick to something older I can either put any standard double-din deck into, or a vehicle with 3rd party mods that then add Android Auto like my Infiniti that shipped with the worst infotainment system ever.

sublinear• 3 years ago

For what it's worth, most vehicles still have aftermarket dash panels and wiring harnesses so you can install whatever you want. Way less of a compromise than buying an older vehicle, but I wouldn't expect some of the control integrations with the steering wheel and other displays to work though.

Really in retrospect nothing has changed from the days double-din was standard apart from some extra steps. Does anyone know if there are projects that reverse engineer these misc integrations for various manufacturers? Is it all just CAN bus or something proprietary?

askvictor• 3 years ago

Do they really? Most recent cars I've seen have a touchscreen LCD popping up out of the dash and it all looks rather custom. Are there some kind of standards like double-DIN?

palemoonale• 3 years ago

Nope, isn't as easy as it has been during the 90s.

Ever had to deal with abominations like CAN-but-not-really-CAN like PSAs own VAN? Having to find out which model has which bus? Non-standard size cutouts / bays? Alone the FW versions i had to test of Alpine / OEM adapter products to get steering wheel controls working. The PDC i couldn't.

And MOST is a different topic.

baz00• 3 years ago

I think you pretty much nailed it.

On the other hand I will only buy a car where the car is a BT audio unit and control head and nothing else. Everything more than that sucks.

gambiting7• 3 years ago

Just an anecdote - I own a Volvo XC60(with Sensus not AAOS) and 99% of the time I'd rather just use the built-in OS than Android Auto - AA is slow to respond and imprecise(clicks are almost always recognized as swipes rather than clicks, problem which doesn't happen in the built-in OS), and every time you need to do something it locks you out for 5 seconds to look at the road, even though it's my passenger using it. The integrated navigation and Spotify work great and don't give me this minimalistic interface of AA that is barely usable.

Like, I get that it's a great solution in a lot of cars. But I don't think it's universally true that "no one" wants to use the built in system - I definitely do.

>just so they can sell subscriptions for seat heaters and music players.

Yes, that is absolutely horrendous trend that I hope we manage to stop - but I suspect we won't, the genie is out of the bottle now so to speak.

jacquesm2• 3 years ago

every time you need to do something it locks you out for 5 seconds to look at the road

Whoever came up with that wasn't entirely right in the head: so now people will stare at the device for another five seconds wondering what they did wrong. Sound of impact.

nilsherzig• 3 years ago

To be fair Volvos entertainment system is by far the best one I've used so far. Night and day compared to a lot of other manufacturers

tirant5• 3 years ago

Same here with a BMW and iDrive8.5 I’ve never used CarPlay with it. BMW infotainment system just works, and its navigation system is superior to Google Maps (more up to date and better high traffic alternatives). Said that, I’d still like to have CarPlay in case BMW stops updating its system after 5-10 years.

lycopodiopsida6• 3 years ago

As an observation point - I drive a company car (a BMW) and will be looking for a new car next year. I would not even considers Volvo until they support wireless CarPlay. GM must very much believe in appeal of their car to piss off android and iOS users simultaneously.

epolanski3• 3 years ago

I have like the opposite experience...AA and Carplay have always been cause of issues, having to take the phone in my hand while driving, sluggishness..

In fact I feel the opposite you say: car play has been an excuse for some automakers for subpar infotainment.

That being said removing it completely is madness, because people like you are millions and want it.

lloeki• 3 years ago

None of these issues exist on my Mazda car. Screen is tactile at stops, but I only ever use the rotational+directional knob. Phone stays plugged and untouched. It's snappy.

I bet some other cars have poor HID but here they put the work in and it is good.

huytersd• 3 years ago

Why do you have to take your phone in your hand? You just do all your actions on the screen in the car. I’ve never had to touch my phone in the car once it’s plugged in.

mngdtt3• 3 years ago

I think you need to upgrade your phone. I have never had these issues with a (more or less recent) iPhone.

warbeforepeace3• 3 years ago

$40 bucks on fiver gets you a better management system than what GM will develop.

urbandw311er• 3 years ago

It’s interesting how you correctly identify that this is a massive play for control by Apple and Google, and yet you still seem to sympathise with their position!

I can completely understand why vehicle manufacturers are so wary. Just look at the history of how Apple, Google, etc companies have behaved when it comes to “partnerships”. Look at the App Store. Look at what Google did to supposedly open source Android.

It begins with some generous offer of allowing access to the UX/platform in exchange for innocent sounding things like control over user data/login. It ends with the platform completely taken over, GM being held to ransom, and no in-house systems or staff left to revert back to their own solution.

esyir• 3 years ago

Turns out doing it better influences people's preferences. The problem is fundamentally that the carmakers do such a shit job.

If infotainment systems matter at all to consumers, we'd expect to see GM take a hit for this, and get their market share eaten by competitors who don't do so.

nottorp• 3 years ago

Yea but CarPlay and android auto work :)

I have little compassion for poor GM not being able to upsell me a touch screen system that doesn’t work

OJFord• 3 years ago

I don't read GP as sympathising with Apple/Google at all, they just want a nice experience in their car; say that they think they get it from A/G, and that they didn't for years before that from car manufacturers.

i.e. it's not about being a fan of particular brands, it's a self-interested desire for a decent UX/platform.

BrandoElFollito• 3 years ago

I sympathize with my need to have a proper car display.

I have a Toyota RAV4 from 2 years ago and the display is straight from the '80s.

I had to use the gps ONCE and I almost crashed into a trashbin because I had to manually follow the car pointer as it was leaving the display. Yes, that's right.

If I was Apple or Google, I would make GM execs use a 15 years old version and make it cash I've a day. Revenge.

fallingknife4• 3 years ago

Nobody is being held ransom. GM can win this any time by building good software themselves. This is just another example of tech companies gaining a market through the fair competition of building a better product.

tarsinge2• 3 years ago

Vehicle manufacturers are not (edit: end-user/OS) software companies, it doesn't make sense (or for any company for which it's not the core business) to build their own OS. Yes OS builders control the OS by definition. What's next, car manufacturers producing music so they get control back on what drivers listen to?

theshrike79• 3 years ago

I sympathise with myself.

I don't want to have an infotainment system in my car I need to spend hundreds of euros to update the software for. Or order a Totally Legit Upgrade DVD from Slovenia via eBay for only 50€. That just happens to require me to insert a CD that says "unlock" on it first :D

Then the upgrade took two hours, 1h 50min of which the device was totally unresponsive and I wasn't sure if it would be OK to turn off the car or not.

Oh, and the maps were always out of date. It cost more to get the "update" (which was always old) than it would've been to buy a separate GPS unit.

And this was a premium VW car, albeit a bit older at the time.

I'd much rather use the device in my pocket that has eons more computing power than all the CPUs in all the cars I've ever owned combined, with up to date maps, traffic data and regular free software updates. The device I can upgrade separately from my car at any time I want.

If a car doesn't support CarPlay, I'm not buying it. (One of the top5 reasons I haven't bought a Tesla)

lelanthran2• 3 years ago

Right, correct, and I understand your position, but the offerings from the automobile manufacturers came with a 1000x markup for stuff that didn't even work half the time ... unless you paid the entire cost of manufacturing an entire head unit all over again.

A premium vehicle I owned (Mercedes Benz) needed the dealer to install the new maps, only had support for BT music on my phone, and cost more than a decent Android tablet each time I wanted new maps.

Honestly, if the automobile manufacturers want to wrest back control from Google/Apple they had better up their game while lowering their greed.

Before Android/iOS was viable, they felt no shame about their display of naked greed when it came to nickle-and-diming the owner.

If they want people to use their system as anything other than an interface to a phone, they need to make the updates free, make the system reliable, and make it so much better than the basic phone interface that people prefer their system to the Android/iOS one.

SllX• 3 years ago

It’s interesting how you correctly identify that this is a massive play for control by Apple and Google, and yet you still seem to sympathise with their position!

Apple and Google got to where they are because people actively want to buy and use their stuff. Apple stuff isn’t cheap and for most of Google’s products, their nearest competitors are a click away and have been even when they didn’t completely dominate major product categories.

People have lots of experience with in-car infotainment and navigation, and here’s the real alternative: people would rather mount their phones in their car using an aftermarket kit or literally just hold their phones in their hands while driving than use the in-built infotainment and navigation systems that car makers provide. CarPlay and Android Auto provide them a nicer experience than doing that which is why new car buyers look for these options by name.

turquoisevar• 3 years ago

I thought, as I got older, that my hearing was slowly deteriorating, but here you are, proving me wrong because somehow I’m able to hear you playing a tune for GM on the smallest violin ever made by humankind.

Nothing stops vehicle manufacturers from making the best entertainment system any customer could wish for. Instead, they’d rather nickel and dime their customers for everything they’ve got.

Subscriptions for connectivity, subscriptions for car features, subscriptions for basic entertainment functionality, fees for current maps, and on and on it goes. All the while pinching pennies wherever they can by using yesteryear’s computers barely more powerful than a Raspberry Pi (if that) while inflating prices in the US market on cars sold cheaper overseas and lobbying to keep the market as closed off as possible so overseas competitors cannot enter the market.

And make no mistake, this isn’t about being “wary of partnerships”; GM happily licenses Android Automotive.

This is about collecting as much data as possible and capturing revenue by gating as much as possible behind a paywall.

After all, who will pay for connectivity and other features when people can hook up their pocket computers with all that to the screen?

altairprime• 3 years ago

Their play for control hinges on creating a better user experience than car manufacturers have bothered to create. GM could simply claim that their experience is better, but they’d have to back that with privacy guarantees which would cost them recurring revenue, and they’d have to compel overdue improvements to Bluetooth and USB standards regarding in-car uses, which would then benefit their competitors. GM, a for-profit corporation based in the United States, has apparently chosen not to take those essential steps that would undercut and destroy Apple and Google’s current plays for control, as it would similarly threaten the “our system is ours” niche GM dug for themselves.

lupusreal2• 3 years ago

decent access to music on their phone, call capabilities that actually work, and program integration with things they actually use with internet service they already have.

I am convinced all of these things are unsafe. I refuse to take calls when driving over bluetooth; distracting yourself with a conversation when you're supposed to be driving is reckless and I think this is doubly true when it's a phone conversation (in which the other participant can't watch the road and know when to stop talking.)

Even music while driving is a nuisance. Nobody talks about the role of music in car accidents because almost everybody likes it, but it contributes to distracted driving and in some cases reckless driving. It encourages people to continue driving when they are mentally fatigued (take note of how many people say music "helps" them during long drives.)

GPS navigation on a screen is a bad idea too; your eyes cannot read a screen and watch the road at the same time. Pure voice navigation giving brief commands and updates is sufficient and relatively safe. Car integration isn't necessary at all; a phone placed in the center console with the volume turned up and the screen turned off gets the job done. If you need to make adjustments or read a text or take a call, pull over.

sokoloff5• 3 years ago

I think GPS screen-based nav is safer than voice-based for any complex interchange situation. Showing me at a glance which lane I need to be in and what my overall path/goal will be is better (at least for me, but I think for loads of people) than describing the same over voice commands.

Voice both takes longer and is subject to being pushed to you at the wrong moment where info from a screen can be pulled on demand and quickly.

aaomidi• 3 years ago

If you have someone in the car with you do you tell them to be silent?

odiroot2• 3 years ago

Ironically motorcycle companies seem to be doing better in this regard. For example Royal Enfield, KTM or even BMW.

koolba• 3 years ago

At least nobody is stupid enough to add a touch screen infotainment system to a motorcycle.

amelius• 3 years ago

The fundamental problem is that once you bought the car, the manufacturer now has a monopoly on everything they can sell you for the car.

In my opinion we should have a "no-tether" law: once you buy a product you should be able to use (and upgrade) it as advertised even if you break all ties with the original vendor. This means that other vendors can supply parts and services. This law could hold for many product categories, including cars and smartphones.

steveBK123• 3 years ago

Yes, and on top of the mediocre infotainment UX, the automakers also have comical/user hostile upgrade cycles.

I bought a new model release BMW which halfway through the 2nd or 3rd year of the models life, they shipped a slightly different head unit. From that point, only the owners with the new head unit get the newest OS/features. Imagine if next year when iOS 18 comes out, we learn that only iPhone 15s made after March 2024 were eligible, and no iPhone 14 or earlier was, lol.

Beyond that, the OTA updates tend to not work and require you to go to the dealer. No one quite knows the rhyme or reason.

ants_everywhere• 3 years ago

Automobile companies tried for years to make a decent infotainment system in cars

To expand on your point, both Google and Apple are rumored to be getting into the business of manufacturing cars (e.g. Waymo and the rumored Apple Car). So GM may be looking toward the future where their infotainment systems are owned by rival car manufacturers.

dsr_• 3 years ago

Finally Android Auto and CarPlay gave everyone what they wanted

Bzzt.

What I want is what I have: there's a $10 bluetooth receiver hooked to the car audio input jack, and a $10 phone holder on top of the dash, and a $10 USB charger plugged into the 12V. If phones routinely came with headphone jacks, I could skip the bluetooth intermediate.

So: when I start the car, whatever phone I have paired reconnects with the bluetooth receiver and plays what I want through the dumb speaker system. If I want to run a map app, I do that. If I want to make a call, I can do that. The phone is in charge of muting the music when a call comes in. It's very good at that.

If I change software on my phone, the new things work in the car. If I want to replace the phone with something not tied to Google or Apple, I can.

The car can't report its location, can't be remotely immobilized, can't show me advertising. No new subscription. No bugs in the car system to exploit; no bugs in the car system to brick the system. Easily and cheaply replaceable parts.

I don't understand why any driver would want more integration than this. Somebody suggested that the car should tell the mapping system when I've clicked the turn signal on or off, but if you need that level of detailed support when driving, I think maybe you shouldn't be driving while distracted by a mapping system at all.

JoBrad• 3 years ago

That’s Android Auto/Carplay, except it uses WiFi or USB, for a better connection.

alufers• 3 years ago

I still have a drawer full of phone holders and bluetooth receivers that I used in my previous car with a "dumb" radio. All of the holders were annoyingly rattling when driving over potholes and finicky to insert or remove the phone. From all the bluetooth receivers I tried (3 of them), none of them had a decent microphone, which meant making phone calls a no go, and the first 2 of them had poor power filtering resulting in a high-pitched hum (I suppose it was from the alternator).

Now I have a car with wireless Android Auto and when I start the car I immediately get a google maps view without having to search for the app, including two recommended destinations (usually places I go to frequently, or the last searched place on Gmaps). The whole interface is easier to use while driving, because of the limited feature-set and larger screen than on the phone itself. Same story with calling, it just works - I can answer calls from the buttons on the steering wheel and the mic is decent and in the right place.

Can we stop pretending that every innovation since 2010 is evil? I get it that it locks in you in Google's/Apple's ecosystems, but their solution is simply working well. For me the alternatives don't cut it, and I believe that their shoddy practices (data collection, monopoly etc.) should be fought with legislation and not by refusing to use their stuff on principle.

JohnFen• 3 years ago

I'm in your camp.

What I want in a car's "infotainment" center is that it doesn't have one in the first place. I can supply whatever I need on my own.

eternityforest• 3 years ago

Seems like that kind of turn signal integration could be easily done via Bluetooth if someone bothered making a standard fo it.

jimmydddd• 3 years ago

I just have a playlist on a USB thumb drive. Works flawlessly.

winternett• 3 years ago

The major problem I have with software is that there's no commitment to maintaining it once it's sold, and no additional money is there to be made. The old boring button-based radios lasted forever without software updates, and they could also be swapped out for newer devices later on if need be. Now cars are being made with very specific parts that are not easily replaced, and with systems that aren't infinitely upgradeable, even as we've somewhat reached a plateau of hardware performance that can handle most application demands. Now hardware is being bogged down by resource-eating ads and limited/ spotty Internet bandwidth more than by processing power.

As we progress into the future, there needs to be a major pushback on the software upsell practices of companies, especially for cars. Cars need to be reliable, and dependable. My desktop PC has been running for 11 years now, with the power on (with only minor hardware & OS updates), the only thing that has been a constant threat to it's reliability is the drive by software makers to milk me out of my money for updates.... They often push updates under the premise that they are for security, but now most updates are to insert ads and up-sell schemes into the apps and OS.

I miss the old days, because even though you could buy new hardware, you rarely needed to... Now, with each update, I'm worried about my PC being bricked and heavy downtime without any real technical support available, because there are so many different greedy brands of companies making tons of devices that they regularly drop updates for. Something has to change about the software-driven economy, or I'm planning to just go entirely "off grid" for the most part in my retirement from being a developer and consumer myself.

xnx4• 3 years ago

Modern cars are of such high quality that they are largely commodity, even moreso with the switch to electric drivetrains. Margins on the hardware will continue to decrease, and automakers will be desperate to recoup revenue through digital and subscription services. The problem is that traditional automakers are way out of their league. GM has a lot more in common with Foxconn than it does Apple or Google.

daft_pink• 3 years ago

GM was created by financially engineering a bunch of car companies together and stamping different name plates on the same vehicles and my whole life they've made terrible cars in the USA. They are run by accountants not car people. From not bothering to make quality vehicles, because they claimed the majority of new car buyers don't drive a car past 100,000 miles to not offering Supercruise on any of their other models, because they had to wait for the Escalade refresh. Dropping the features we actually want is another in a long line of terrible decisions consumer not friendly decisions by their company.

justinator• 3 years ago

Rivian said nope to CarPlay and Android Auto from Day 1.

RagnarD• 3 years ago

I use CarPlay everytime I drive and haven't had any of the mentioned supposed problems. Then again I don't drive a GM ...

aviat• 3 years ago

Large touchscreens and non physical controls are very dangerous for motorcyclists

stpe• 3 years ago

Why, oh why, is in-car infotainment so bad? And I don't mean bad as in subjective opinions about user interface. I mean the fact that my 2 year old high-end Audi A6 still show Yelp ratings in the navigation system in Europe - Yelp pretty much shutdown in Europe 2016!

It feels like there is somewhere an hierarchical organization somewhere completely lacking product management and a connection to what is expected in the digital world.

laichzeit0• 3 years ago

Uh, yeah.. no. I want a dumb display that lets me use wireless CarPlay and physical knobs for everything else. It's like the people making these decisions don't actually drive cars.

tybulewicz• 3 years ago

You're right, they are being driven by their limo drivers.

peterlada• 3 years ago

It's nice to see GM and Ford (cutting back on F150 Lighting production) leading the sales at Tesla.

What a self own.

xyst• 3 years ago

GM is a company known for laying off workers when their quarterly projections are not met or exceeded. Usually starts with their in house tech side because you know they are a CAR company after all. Have worked with many former GM employees through boom and bust cycles.

GM, Ford, and any auto manufacturer need to stay in their lane. They can build physical cars. But building anything in the digital world and they fall flat. For decades these companies had their own "infotainment" systems and each no better than the competition. From what I have heard from former employees, before AA/AC, the work for maintaining and building those systems was often farmed out to bottom tier contracting companies

stakhanov• 3 years ago

Are they also removing cupholders from their cars then? I'd imagine that, in the name of safety, you wouldn't want a driver faffing around with a hot drink while driving the vehicle either.

hooby• 3 years ago

I don't know about cup holders - but it's been definitely shown, that replacing actual physical knobs and buttons with a touch-screen does hurt safety.

The thing with media controls is, that you can use those only when it's safe to do so. You're not gonna change the radio channel or music-playlist while going through a busy intersection. But many of the functions car manufacturers are moving from actual buttons to their touch-screens, aren't that time flexible.

perlgeek• 3 years ago

Currently when I go into my car, I can resume listening to the podcast, or I can listen to my music (different app), or whatever.

I doubt any car manufacturer will be able to offer the same seamless experience when they build their own entertainment system, because now they'd have to scale to all relevant apps, not just one (or two) standard ways to interface.

rezonant10• 3 years ago

Oh they've already solved for that years ago! It'll just automatically send a Play signal via Bluetooth when your phone connects to it! And for good measure, there will be no way to control this at all. Enjoy having random content from your phone's recent media sessions forced into your car audio because the car company thinks it's "convenient"!

ranguna2• 3 years ago

You can just connect to Bluetooth and resume your podcast naturally by continuing to play the current media, or switch to a different app (using your phone in hands free mode).

Neil44• 3 years ago

Yay, let's wait for GM's latest stab at an interface, no doubt running on an out of date OS off an underpowered embedded processor and a flash card they got off ebay in 2005, using an icon pack they found on a chinese pirate site and apps nobody needs. Oh and it will cost them $1Bn to develop. Then they'll open it up to the internet and spam your phone with instructions to go spend money at the dealers again.

gertrunde2• 3 years ago

I don't disagree that they are unsafe - but I'm more inclined to blame touchscreens as a whole for taking attention off the road, rather than bugginess of the software, when generally the built in car system tends to be more buggy than Android Auto or Apple Carplay.

bArray• 3 years ago

GM is now claiming that Apple CarPlay and Android Auto actually cause safety issues.

I remember when I first saw these in-cockpit infotainment mobile integrations deployed and thinking "man, that's dangerous". I have a car with physical buttons, and even then I struggle to dial numbers for example whilst driving.

And when CarPlay and Android Auto have issues, drivers pick up their phones again, taking their eyes off the road and totally defeating the purpose of these phone-mirroring programs.

A number of times I have had to pull up at the side of the road just to get bluetooth music playing correctly. I dread to think how people solve that whilst driving. This software is for sure dangerously awful.

Essentially, the thinking is that if a car’s in-built infotainment system is good enough, drivers will be less likely to use their phone for what they’re trying to do while they’re behind the wheel, — though Babbitt admits that GM hasn’t exactly tested this in a controlled setting to see whether or not it’s true.

My suggestion to GM would be not to compete in the same way. When driving you need a simple, clean, reliable interface. Nobody wants a steering wheel to change location or the numbers on the gear stick to randomly change.

Ignoring the private video on the web page [1]:

Designed in-house by GM engineers, Ultifi has been designed with third-party developers in mind. It runs on Linux and the Red Hat in-vehicle operating system, allowing GM to grant access to external developers to create apps and programs for customers.

I really hope it's all sandboxed to the heavens with external monitoring (they'll probably want to re-write the OOM and scheduler to ensure their processes are always given priority). Don't make the same mistake as Tesla with logging to flash [2].

[1] https://gmauthority.com/blog/gm/general-motors-services/gm-u...

[2] https://www.tomshardware.com/news/flash-memory-wear-killing-...

MandieD• 3 years ago

For occasional drivers like me, it’s much safer to have our mobile OS as the infotainment interface, because it’s the same set of apps we use in most other situations - less cognitive load and time spent glancing at the screen.

kozikow• 3 years ago

Those systems when they work are OK.

But connectivity is so annoying. 1/4 times Android Auto fails to connect. I have to restart the phone, restart the car and it connects. And I'm not surprised it's all ducktape security.

rpz• 3 years ago

The fact that we have touch screens in cars in the first place is an abomination.

ghusbands• 3 years ago

There are many comments here saying that Android Auto is not buggy - in my four years of experience, it certainly has had major and minor issues. Here is a non-exhaustive list of issues and oddness:

1. When you plug it in, it fiddles with bluetooth settings, because although the screen is sent via the cable, the audio and similar is sent via bluetooth. This sometimes results in odd behaviour and requires unplugging/replugging.

2. For a long time, when I plugged it in already navigating, the phone would show an "Android Auto has stopped working" dialogue and the car screen would go blank. I eventually found it was a conflict between Android Auto and the mini-map overlay feature of Google Maps.

3. Currently, whenever I try to use the voice assistant, it says approximately "Sorry, there has been a problem. Please try again later." Trying again later doesn't work. So now I have to pull over to change or add destinations.

4. When you choose to navigate somewhere from another app, it navigates to a place that's like 10m-100m away from it in some direction, which is sometimes an entirely different road. If I unplug the phone, set the destination, then plug it in again, then it navigates correctly.

5. It doesn't support sending messages via anything other than SMS, which is a pain when you're wanting to tell someone on WhatsApp or Messenger that you're five minutes away.

6. I made the mistake of playing a podcast through Google Podcasts (which is built in to Android Auto). Now, it just always plays it when I get to my car. I can't make it forget the podcast, and it plays from the start if it finished. I can only replace it with another podcast for it to keep playing unprompted.

7. Occasionally, it will switch destination to one from an older navigation session. Best hope you notice before you drive too far the wrong way.

8. This might have been fixed, recently, but whenever I would restart my phone, it would have as many Google Maps sessions as I'd had journeys since the last restart; however Android Auto was taking over Google Maps was leaving zombie activities/processes.

9. There have been a good few more, besides.

I still prefer it over what car manufacturers might provide, though.

mensetmanusman2• 3 years ago

Did they not learn from Ford's Sync experience?

mensetmanusman2• 3 years ago

What will GM use for maps?

JeremyNT• 3 years ago

@dang it seems like the jalopnik article is a blogspam/repost of the original: https://www.motortrend.com/news/general-motors-removing-appl...

nkotov• 3 years ago

CarPlay has been amazing. Almost all the rental cars support it, connect and you're good to go. The most annoying part nowadays with it is figuring out if the car you're renting supports wireless CarPlay or not. I carry an extra cable for that reason.

Pretty stupid and if they were honest, it's only about control.

2OEH8eoCRo0• 3 years ago

All I need is Bluetooth please!

TradingPlaces• 3 years ago

https://www.wsj.com/video/ford-ceo-on-apple-google-and-elon-...

Transcript:

WSJ Joanna Stern: GM recently announced that it's ditching Apple CarPlay.

Ford CEO Jim Farley: Yeah, how about that?

JS: How about that? How does Ford think about this? I mean, are you going to follow suit?

JF: Okay, so I guess you've got two camps in the software interior car OEMs. Tesla, and now it turns out GM, and then others. We're in this other group. I think the first three software shippable content that's going to be cool for customers is not the interior digital experience. Although that will always be super important because it's a safety critical device and there's going to be a lot more going on inside a car than your phone. So the interior has to be really well done. But in terms of content, we kind of lost that battle 10 years ago. So get real with it because you're not going to make a ton of money on content inside the vehicle. It's going to be safety, security, partial autonomy, and productivity in our eyes. So that relationship for content is between you, the Wall Street Journal, and the customer. I don't want to get in the middle of that, but Tesla and other companies believe differently. They want to have a complete control over the interior experience, and we don't think it's differentiating. 70% of our Ford customers in the U.S. are Apple customers. Why would I go to an Apple customer and say, "Good luck"? That doesn't seem customer-centric. And Apple does a really good job.

ElijahLynn• 3 years ago

I feel for the guy running this program:

https://www.linkedin.com/in/edwardkummer/ Chief Digital Officer at General Motors

I can't imagine he has a large budget or a fancy allure to hire a team of software engineers that can pull this off well enough. I could be wrong...

crossroadsguy• 3 years ago

I have never owned a car but have connected my phone to car systems too many times.

My assumption is — when you do that via an Apple CarPlay enabled console you are guaranteed a level of privacy as well, isn’t it?

I know cars do not have Internet connection on their own but what stops them from making you install an app on your phone that would handle all these connections (BT profile work etc) and then upload whatever they want to their servers.

sandmn2• 3 years ago

I wonder if CarPlay and Android Auto is not safe on GM cars because they are just bad at implementing it. I had my share of issues with Android Auto on my last car - initial setup was not easy and just for Android they were blocking touch screen unless car was in "parking" mode. All of that was entirely on car manufacturer and it was one of the reasons I got a different car without such issues.

GM says it's dropping Apple CarPlay and Android Auto because they're unsafe

Related Stories