GM is ditching CarPlay in all future EVs and teaming up with Google instead

[Ride_the_lightning]

A year ago I added an aftermarket head unit to an old Toyota Corolla that added CarPlay, AA, and a backup cam. Total cost was $400 to end up with a better UI than my Tesla model 3. I miss the days of being able to pull out an old radio and replace it with a standard size double DIN unit to breathe new life into a car.

Sponsored

 

[HuntingPudel]

<SNIP>
.I would venture that 80% of EV buyers have iPhones.
<SNIP>

Yep. And probably upward of 98% have either an iOS or Android phone, most of whom will likely want their car to support their information hub of choice. ?‍?

 

[Mallthus]

No it doesn't.

Apple's next-gen CarPlay stuff renders to multiple car screens and receives more data from the car, but it doesn't require the automaker to not have a native system.

Picking Google Automotive Services to do the OS inherently precluded Apple inclusion. It is the native system.

Expanded CarPlay runs on top of a dumb OS.

 

[MachKet]

carplay is fine for cheaper cars and served it's purpose during this tech transition by emulating your phone but a premium vehicle like an EV should have it's own dedicated software that can actually run apps. You can't even view a full playlist on spotify in carplay or type in a song, it's extremely limited as a "software"

 

[devmach-e]

carplay is fine for cheaper cars and served it's purpose during this tech transition by emulating your phone but a premium vehicle like an EV should have it's own dedicated software that can actually run apps. You can't even view a full playlist on spotify in carplay or type in a song, it's extremely limited as a "software"

It is limited for a reason: safety. The whole idea behind CarPlay was to allow you to still interact with your phone, but in a safer manner that doesn't require you to look at you phone or use the phone's touch screen. Your eyes can stay focused on the road. It leverages the car's interface (buttons, screen, microphone). You are limited in scrolling a list of things so, again, your eyes stay focused on the road.

 

[Bmr4MachE]

My wife still has an Android and I still think this is dumb.

can’t ignore iPhone users.

 

[scoopman]

Picking Google Automotive Services to do the OS inherently precluded Apple inclusion. It is the native system.

Expanded CarPlay runs on top of a dumb OS.

I'm not sure I understand your point, but GM is supporting Android Automotive / Google Built In right now in the Lyriq, Hummer, and C8 eray. Google Maps is the default "native" mapping option on those vehicles.

All of those vehicles have Android OS versions of the CarPlay protocol that allows the vehicle to run Android natively as the OS for the infotainment, and to support CarPlay rendering.

GM could certainly continue this practice, and has chosen not to for strategic reasons that don't involve current customer preference and choice. Please don't confuse their decision with any technical limitations.

 

[hprose]

carplay is fine for cheaper cars and served it's purpose during this tech transition by emulating your phone but a premium vehicle like an EV should have it's own dedicated software that can actually run apps. You can't even view a full playlist on spotify in carplay or type in a song, it's extremely limited as a "software"

We use our phones for more than tunes on Spotify. You can go native and use the limited app selection that comes with the car in a number of cars. I understand that cars that only cost 50-75,000 are cheap cars and that these owners have no discernible knowledge of true tech. I also understand that GM will be far more capable than Apple and its app providers at producing apps. The have probably even figured out how to get my 600 contacts into their car’s system without, of course, contacting the inferior iPhone. Or maybe they couldn’t come to a revenue sharing agreement with Apple. Since Lucid Air touts their CarPlay as a safer smarter system, at what point are cars not “cheaper”

 

[scoopman]

Two other press stories today on this I thought were interesting:

1. GM Getting Rid Of Apple CarPlay And Android Auto Is Such A Ridiculous Risk, I Don’t Think They’ll Actually Do It. (The Autopian)

2. The rest of the auto industry still loves CarPlay and Android Auto (The Verge)

 

[scoopman]

We use our phones for more than tunes on Spotify. You can go native and use the limited app selection that comes with the car in a number of cars. I understand that cars that only cost 50-75,000 are cheap cars and that these owners have no discernible knowledge of true tech. I also understand that GM will be far more capable than Apple and its app providers at producing apps. The have probably even figured out how to get my 600 contacts into their car’s system without, of course, contacting the inferior iPhone. Or maybe they couldn’t come to a revenue sharing agreement with Apple. Since Lucid Air touts their CarPlay as a safer smarter system, at what point are cars not “cheaper”

CarPlay and Android Auto are free from Apple or Google -- no license fees or revenue sharing required.

One other thing to consider -- if you live in the Google ecosystem and have an Android phone, the transition to GM's land of automotive subscriptions is an easier one. On any car with Android Automotive and Google's Automotive Services (which they awkwardly named "Google Built In"), you sign in to the car with your Google account, and the automaker and Google have then lots of nice info on you, but you also will get all your Google data on the car's Google apps like Maps, calendar, YouTube Music, and even contacts. Play Store also works on these cars, but the selection is more limited than the apps that work on Android Auto (the phone projection version) and also, the automaker can have their car have a custom Play Store that excludes apps they don't want to have offered, and they can also use the Play Store to push an app that is only for their cars (such as a lovely GM supercruise subscription app or something like that).

So it's not that simple -- GM's Android apps will be somewhat better than traditional native car infotainment for customers who have all their lives in Google's cloud already -- but its still a step down for choice and those with an iPhone.

People with iPhones in the US make up the vast majority of the new car buyers market, BTW -- they have higher income levels than those with an Android phone in the United States.

So really, GM is shooting themselves in the corporate foot, thinking they are as special a snowflake as Rivian or Tesla (the latter of which has a glut of cars they can't sell according to what they've said today...)

 

[Ride_the_lightning]

It sounds like this only applies to their EVs. That’s one way to say “hey look, told you nobody wants to buy EVs.”

 

[metalpro2021]

GM wants to be Apple. Apple wants to be GM. They both do not want to use each other(s technology), they want to be each other. (the lucrative part that is) Google plays another game. (We take the data, you use the tech)

 

[MG101]

a premium vehicle like an EV should have it's own dedicated software that can actually run apps

And pay for another data plan so those apps can work? Or piggyback off my phone's data? No thanks, the little rectangle in my pocket allready does all that on it's own and it also delivers a consitant experience whether it is connected to a car, tv, bluetooth speaker. No need for yet another app ecosystem to further muddy the waters.

 

[johnmark]

I think most auto manufacturers want to move to fully integrated infotainment systems and ditch phone mirroring. There are 2 reasons: UX and also, haha, yes more control over what they can sell you.

The UX argument actually makes sense. A fully integrated infotainment dashboard integrates the cars data with maps. The example provided is that the car will know which chargers are within range and will preselect for them. Phone mirroring cannot do this because the car doesn't share data with the phone. One could argue it should, but I can see multiple reasons why they wouldn't, and not all of them are cynical product grabs.

Speaking of cynical product grabs you can see why ford's eyes might light up at the thought of selling apps to drivers. Or selling our data to 3rd parties. Sorry, I meant "collecting data to enhance our experience".

Given the momentum with right to repair laws, however, I'm not sure this will work out quite the way they're expecting. Honestly we need better regs in this space before the autos start charging us to do anything beyond applying the gas and brakes.

 

[hprose]

CarPlay and Android Auto are free from Apple or Google -- no license fees or revenue sharing required.

One other thing to consider -- if you live in the Google ecosystem and have an Android phone, the transition to GM's land of automotive subscriptions is an easier one. On any car with Android Automotive and Google's Automotive Services (which they awkwardly named "Google Built In"), you sign in to the car with your Google account, and the automaker and Google have then lots of nice info on you, but you also will get all your Google data on the car's Google apps like Maps, calendar, YouTube Music, and even contacts. Play Store also works on these cars, but the selection is more limited than the apps that work on Android Auto (the phone projection version) and also, the automaker can have their car have a custom Play Store that excludes apps they don't want to have offered, and they can also use the Play Store to push an app that is only for their cars (such as a lovely GM supercruise subscription app or something like that).

So it's not that simple -- GM's Android apps will be somewhat better than traditional native car infotainment for customers who have all their lives in Google's cloud already -- but its still a step down for choice and those with an iPhone.

People with iPhones in the US make up the vast majority of the new car buyers market, BTW -- they have higher income levels than those with an Android phone in the United States.

So really, GM is shooting themselves in the corporate foot, thinking they are as special a snowflake as Rivian or Tesla (the latter of which has a glut of cars they can't sell according to what they've said today...)

The lack of revenue sharing was what I was alluding to. GM wants to do an Apple and build a services business. I use Spotify - I have used others on occasion but never paid for them, just used the free parts. Some have a feature here and there that works better than at Spotify but not an overall better suite of features. That’s according to my use. I’ve written and designed software. You cant
Please every single person. I have learned to quickly ignore facets I don’t like but don’t tell me that I can’t use the software I want to use. If you want to build a revenue stream by providing apps in a car then out them side by side with what I use and if yours are superior I might decide to pay you for them. Sent the article to an ex Tesla owner current MME guy - his comment was “one less set of cars for me to ever look at”

Sponsored