Apple Says CarPlay Now Available in Over 800 Vehicle Models as GM Plans to Phase Out Support in EVs

[H2SO4]

Have you ever driven a car with a CD player only long term in 2023?

Yesp.
But I usually have one that has an SD card slot. 16GB is enough for most of my music. The built in AM/FM/DAB tuner suffices for radio duty.

For a new car options like heated windscreen, higher engine power ouput, 360 degree camera, head up display, park assist, matrix headlight, increased fuel tank size, built in dash cam, (there may be many more options), I'd rate way above Carplay. But that's just me.
Bold ones I find particulary useful. If you've ever driven a car with matirx headlights, (or whatever the other brands may call it), it's hard to go back. The feeling of safety and security you get from having that increased level of vision for me is unmatched by any ICE system I've ever had to use.

 

[H2SO4]

Most of those "options" are stuff I don't care about.

Hell, many of the "standard" features are stuff I don't care about.

You know what I really want? A BASIC, CHEAP CAR, without all of the extra crap on it. I'll take a real spare tire, Airbags, AWD, CarPlay and a train horn.

Don't need or what:

1. Anything involving RADAR, LIDAR or other external sensors, including any self-driving or self-parking function
   • Brake assist​
   • Collision warnings​
   • Automatic emergency braking​
   • Pedestrian detection​
   • Adaptive Cruise Control​
   • Blind Spot Warning​
   • Rear cross-traffic alert​
   • Lane Keeping Assist​
2. Anything other than a basic safety glass windshield
3. TMPS
4. Run flat tires
5. Automatic headlights
6. telematics

Yeah, the spare I'll certainly take. For some of those things you've left out makes me think you trust your driving a LOT.
Whether you want them is a matter of choice. Need. I can't comment on as I don't knwo how good a driver you are. I'd suggest you maybe don't appreciate brake assist as might as you might. If you look at the research on it you'll see why it's an option that is worth considering.
Ever had a blow out at speed?

Still, your car, your choice.

 

[H2SO4]

For me, it's not CarPlay for the sake of CarPlay?

It's that this will both be used to collect and sell consumer data, and push consumers into endless subscriptions for what many think of as basic features after you get past a certain price point with cars.. Seat heaters? That'll be $30 a month. Intermittent wipers? $15/mo...

I think it's actually a GOOD thing that they decided to toss the baby out with the bathwater and try for both at the same time by saying "No CarPlay", because the CarPlay aspect will generate more attention to the issue outside the "Car People" circles where people are already honked off about this bull-butter.

The more consumer outrage at all of this, the better.

Maybe, but I don't get why car manufacturers can't design a good system.
Subscription is coming though, I fear the brands are trying it in baby steps. Could be great for the hire industry though, imagine speccing the options you want that they enable as you pick the vehicle up.

 

[mixy]

Interesting choice of photo, GM. Opened their website to leave a complaint about this, when suddenly…

 

[Robert.Walter]

GM, all my life it seems you've been trying to drive away customers by making otherwise stupid decisions.

Generations come and generations go and GM still doing some really unfathomable things.

 

[JamesHolden]

Huh..

You sure about that?

Yes, I am sure. I'm also sure that I was talking about the App Store and all software on Apple platforms, not just 1st party subscriptions.

Apple is the one who pushed the consumer subscription model. They are basically the largest subscription clearing house in the world, raking in billions of dollars a year simply by processing subscriptions. Other companies have seen what Apple accomplished and they want subscription revenue too.

I'm trying to think of a single Apple subscription I have, and I'm failing...

Apple doesn't need to produce the software or service. They 100% control the third party software market on their devices and they want a cut of everything. They are the largest subscription clearing house in the world. They are 100% responsible for the massive shift we are seeing to subscription services for everything. An Apple fan criticizing GM for wanting subscription revenue is, frankly, hilarious.

I own my MBP outright, with AppleCare..

AppleCare is technically a subscription. You can pay monthly or buy it for several years with the option to renew monthly at the end of the term. That's a subscription.

Ditto with the iPhone SE...

I don't pay for additional iCloud storage?
I'd rather light myself on fire than rent music from any streaming service, Apple or otherwise?
I subscribe to AppleTV+ maybe one month a year, haven't so far this year..
Fitness+? Nope.
News? Nope..

Again, when talking about Apple, you must look at the whole platform because Apple controls access. So any third party subscription counts. And it's also totally fair if you don't subscribe to anything.

Personally I think music subscription services are amazing and I say that as someone who has been a music nut for many decades and ran an indie label for 15 years. For $10/month, I can listen to anything. I still buy the stuff I love because I want lossless audio, no DRM, and I want to support the artist. But how amazing is it to be able to preview anything I want all month long for less than the cost of one CD back in the day?

And, when it comes to subscriptions nickel and dimeing customers to death, I think the cable companies have everyone else beat, and have for decades.

Cell service companies coming in a close 2nd place.

I pay a flat monthly rate for internet service and that's it. Cable and cell companies offer tiers of service. This is no different than what many third party apps on the App Store do. Pay so much to unlock these features. Pay a bit more and get these features. Etc. Same thing as the cable company offering basic cable and then offering additional channels for an added fee.

And when it comes to subscriptions for software, Adobe and the $%^&! at Intuit are probably the all time champions, hands down.

I totally disagree. Apple is the champ. Adobe, Microsoft, and Intuit are all business-centric companies. SaaS in the business world has made sense for a long time. Businesses are used to paying monthly or annually for services, so software becoming a service too made sense in the business world.

Apple is the one who pushed the model into the consumer space and proved that consumers would pay monthly for features (via first- and third-party apps and services). They raked in nearly $80B in "Services" revenue last year. What is that revenue, if not subscriptions?

I have no problem with anyone objecting to the subscription model. But let's not delude ourselves. Apple has demonstrated just how successful the consumer subscription model can be. Of course other companies want to find ways to generate recurring revenue too. That said, there's no reason GM can't create subscription revenue AND offer CarPlay. Offering CarPlay doesn't prevent GM from charging a seat heater subscription. So their decision to move away from CarPlay has nothing to do with subscriptions.

 

[Robert.Walter]

View attachment 2193077
Interesting choice of photo, GM. Opened their website to leave a complaint about this, when suddenly…

No point in letting your advertising or splash pages be a competitive advantage before your product content decisions actually are...

 

[monstermash]

Yeah, the spare I'll certainly take. For some of those things you've left out makes me think you trust your driving a LOT.
Whether you want them is a matter of choice. Need. I can't comment on as I don't knwo how good a driver you are. I'd suggest you maybe don't appreciate brake assist as might as you might. If you look at the research on it you'll see why it's an option that is worth considering.
Ever had a blow out at speed?

Still, your car, your choice.

I am an excellent driver. 20 years in Alaska will do that to you

And yes, I've had a blow out at speed - on a motorcycle.

 

[tdar]

True that many of the infotainment systems have been built on Android. But that is not the same as Google built-in. The direction with built-in is that all car systems are managed (or at least displayed by) Google's dash and car management software (built-in). CarPlay over top of the Android infotainment system helped alleviate the pain of the poor UIs. CarPlay over top of built-in (if supported) will provide a consistent interface for those of us familiar with and preferring CarPlay, but still rely on all the rest of the pains Google will likely (or enable the manufacturer to) inflict on us.

Oh I totally agree. But the point that I always make is that not only is this unnecessary, but it’s completely about GM making more money. All at the expense of their customers. Volvo is offering the exact same system in their new cars. Even the electric cars. And every one of those cars is going to have both CarPlay and Android Auto.

 

[tdar]

BMW was able to code misfiring cylinders sounds, so yes, you could do the same to an EV

GM has existing Engines that have software that can turn off as many cylinders of the eight that are the there. And hey, they didn’t even need Google to make it work.😂

 

[JamesHolden]

This may be the worst take I've seen yet. So let me understand, you want to pay for seat heaters when you buy the vehicle, then pay monthly to use them? 😂

No, I want seat heaters to be installed and I only want to pay for them if/when I want them. In many ways this makes a lot of sense for the manufacturer. Instead of producing many different seats with many different configurations, they produce one seat and the customer pays to activate features if desired. This makes the seat cheaper to produce. It also makes every car buyer a potential user of that feature. We see this same business model today with some consumer electronics. The device doesn't cost a lot and contains all of the necessary hardware for the more expensive subscription-only features.

Then you completely contradict yourself with the AC example. As much as heated seats don't make sense to people in Mexico, AC might not make sense to a lot of Canadians. Why does one make more sense than the other? Where would it stop?

You obviously missed the multiple heat waves across Canada in recent years. I think most people would agree that climate control features are a standard feature. Heated seats are not.

You do realize the price of the hardware is going to be included in the price of the vehicle whether you use them or you don't? That wiring harness isn't free. Software add-ons and hardware add-ons are two different things.

Yes, of course I realize that hardware comes with a cost. But so does software. Hardware I'm paying to design and manufacture it. Software I'm paying to design, develop, and support it. There are costs either way.

I can also imagine that by producing one seat instead of many different seat configurations, costs can be reduced and service can be simplified. How that works out in the end, I don't know.

Subscriptions are here as long as we continue to partake in them. When we stop, they will stop, (as long as true capitalism exists).

Lol. They aren't going anywhere. They make a lot of sense when done right. Apple will probably rake in $100B this year on the back of subscriptions, so if you don't like subscriptions, you're supporting the wrong company!

 

[xmarcuswildx]

Guess I’m never buying a GM.

 

[lazyrighteye]

I have the capacity to understand why an automaker would want to drop CarPlay support in favor of their own. Amongst other things though, it does wreak of typical executive ego/greed/control that often yields a crappy experience for their customer.

I also have the capacity to understand why doing so would be a stupid move. Sure, roll your own, if you want. But it would seem wise to also offer CarPlay support - let the user decide. Then if you are getting traction in your proprietary offering, then cross the no CarPlay bridge - buttony when/if you get there. But cold-turkey dropping CarPlay support seems weird/dumb/bad. Granted, I am not the CEO of an automaker, nor any company for that matter. And still... my company would not remove CarPlay support.

 

[Stromos]

Most of those "options" are stuff I don't care about.

Hell, many of the "standard" features are stuff I don't care about.

You know what I really want? A BASIC, CHEAP CAR, without all of the extra crap on it. I'll take a real spare tire, Airbags, AWD, CarPlay and a train horn.

Don't need or what:

1. Anything involving RADAR, LIDAR or other external sensors, including any self-driving or self-parking function
   • Brake assist​
   • Collision warnings​
   • Automatic emergency braking​
   • Pedestrian detection​
   • Adaptive Cruise Control​
   • Blind Spot Warning​
   • Rear cross-traffic alert​
   • Lane Keeping Assist​
2. Anything other than a basic safety glass windshield
3. TMPS
4. Run flat tires
5. Automatic headlights
6. telematics

Go back a few years and people were up in arms about seatbelts. Safety features are a requirement not a option. People going on a rampage and driving a car through the front of a building or mowing down people/bikers will likely not be possible in the future.

 

[Dionte]

I tried a model 3 without CarPlay and it was a horrible experience. CarPlay is a must and the next generation version looks awesome.

 

[monstermash]

Go back a few years and people were up in arms about seatbelts.

I dunno...good for them?

People going on a rampage and driving a car through the front of a building or mowing down people/bikers will likely not be possible in the future.

Sure it will be. They can just use an older car. And if that doesn't work, they can just make a bomb. If that doesn't work, they can run around and stab people. If that doesn't work, they can fling acid. On and on and on.

But honestly, this concept that you have to add $X to every vehicle ever made to guard against some rare, unusual and highly unlikely event (in this case, measured in total annual miles per event) is ridiculous and a big part of what's wrong with society. You would THINK that recent events would have adequately demonstrated this, but clearly that didn't happen.

 

[carl76tr]

GM wants to compete in the software market? in my experience, they have their hands full just trying to make cars.

 

[AtomicDusk]

GM won't integrate CarPlay into their vehicles, and I won't integrate GM into my life.

 

[sjsharksfan12]

Has anyone changed their infotainment system so they can have access to Car Play and what was that process like? I have a Honda Accord 2017 (Bought it in 2016) and my Car Play crashes when maps is used. I've been going by a car mount for the last 6 months and it's been fine, but I miss Car Play. I bought the car thinking I would enjoy Car Play for a long time and that ended up not being true. I don't want to pay an arm and a leg to get it back, but if there was something reasonable, I might consider a replacement. I also don't want to replace the car as it only s 47,000 miles on it.

 

[kbotc]

Charging is why I went with another gas guzzler for my new vehicle. Look at what has happened in recent years with power grids nearly failing multiple times due to weather events - and that's with a tiny percentage of cars being electric. How is everyone going to charge their cars if 10% of vehicles are electric? 50%? We're going to need a solar farm at every corner. The writing is also on the wall with electricity prices. They just keep going up, up, up.

Home solar and then you use your car as a battery when the power grid fails during a weather event.

Ford's Electric F-150 can run your house for about 10 days when the grid fails due to someone else's incompetence: https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/...ectric-pickup-intelligent-backup-power-house/

 

[_Spinn_]

My next car has to have CarPlay

 

[Stromos]

I dunno...good for them?

People going on a rampage and driving a car through the front of a building or mowing down people/bikers will likely not be possible in the future.

Sure it will be. They can just use an older car. And if that doesn't work, they can just make a bomb. If that doesn't work, they can run around and stab people. If that doesn't work, they can fling acid. On and on and on.

But honestly, this concept that you have to add $X to every vehicle ever made to guard against some rare, unusual and highly unlikely event (in this case, measured in total annual miles per event) is ridiculous and a big part of what's wrong with society. You would THINK that recent events would have adequately demonstrated this, but clearly that didn't happen.

If you think people get rear ended and side swiped is a highly unlikely event I guess we aren't on the same page. The point of these new features are to prevent the types of accidents that happen daily. The new cars will have features to avoid the old cars. Old cars will soon be cost prohibitive to drive when insurance catches up.

Yes I used an extreme example, but I see Johnny either playing with his phone or talking to his crotch daily on my 40 minute commute.

 

[monstermash]

If you think people get read ended and side swiped is a highly unlikely event I guess we aren't on the same page. The point of these new features are to prevent the types of accidents that happen daily. The new cars will have features to avoid the old cars. Old cars will soon be cost prohibitive to drive when insurance catches up.

Yes I used an extreme example, but I see Johnny either playing with his phone or talking to his crotch daily on my 40 minute commute.

I was specifically responding to the comment about people going on a rampage and running people over - as clearly indicated by my post.

But that said - adding ever increasing technology to overcome a lack of skills is not the way to go, in my opinion. I think the better way to go is to have real consequences for causing fatal and serious accidents. Simply dispossess and execute the offenders. Those remaining will get the idea at some point that perhaps, just perhaps, they should pay attention to their driving.

But sure - keep adding more technology to cars, keep driving up the prices and making private vehicles unaffordable to the masses, to make and keep them dependent on govt-provided transportation. We all know that's the real goal.

 

[monstermash]

My next car has to have CarPlay

My current car does not have CarPlay. If my next car doesn't have it, I see no reason to have a next car.

 

[Sidram]

IMHO, Google Maps pales by comparison with Apple Maps.