Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Ford CEO Provides Update on CarPlay Ultra
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah that makes sense. I feel like touch screens is such a bad interface for controlling a car while driving. Physical buttons and knobs are so much easier to use without taking your eyes off the road. I get that the direction is moving towards a world where we don't have to pay attention and everyone is just a passenger, but until that reality exists I hope that we can go back to cards with buttons and knobs.
I believe this is what Apple is hoping to get to eventually, but the auto manufacturer's don't want it to happen because it makes it too easy for you to change vehicles.
Same with controls. People keep talking about not wanting to have to use the touchscreen to make changes to the climate control, etc. How they would prefer to go back to dials and buttons. Carplay Ultra aims to make it so you don't have to use either. It will set it depending on what you normally like, but then if you want to change something you would just have to ask Siri.
Imagine being able to say:
Hey Siri, move my seat forward.
Hey Siri, turn the temperature down, and speed up the fan.
Hey Siri, turn on the seat warmers.
Hey Siri, set the radio to XXX.X FM and turn up the volume.
Hey Siri, turn on the windshield wipers.
Hey Siri, turn on the headlights.
Hey Siri, how much fuel/charge do I have left.
Etc.
In some vehicles that console display is pretty much only used for nav and media. In others, like mine, that display is also used for a number of vehicle functions and data reporting that have nothing to do with CP. There is no misunderstanding about unprompted switching of that display to CP. It’s triggered by something on the phone. It’s Apple’s problem to fix.
What did I misconstrue about this?
That jumping “in and out” you used to trash talk OEM UIs is not due to the design of the OEM UI, it’s due to the fact that the current CP implementation knows nothing about vehicle systems, and note that I am not complaining that switching is necessary for some things, but that CP takes over when I don’t want it to. There are things I use as a driver that use the same display CP uses, so I prefer to keep CP hidden. If Apple could just fix Siri to reliably respond to requests, and publish other notifications/data to the vehicle like it does for phone calls and media, and provide the options of not taking over the screen unpromted, that would be great.
As for “Ultra”, I know it’s not a popular opinion here in an Apple-centric forum, but not everyone even wants an Apple version of their vehicle’s UI. I don’t. And it doesn’t look like OEMs are beating down Apple’s door to get on board with Ultra so for whatever reasons, they don’t see a significant up side for them. Unless something changes drastically in that equation, it would be years (if ever) before we see widespread Ultra implementations and the vast majority of iPhone users are stuck with the current version of CP for the foreseeable future.
That is why I’ve said elsewhere I would prefer Apple make the current CP more reliable (Siri should work) and less intrusive for those of us who don’t need it in their primary display. It shouldn’t be a big ask for a $3-4 trillion tech giant, but then again, an improved CP experience relies on Siri and we know how that has gone the last 10+ years.
The face of cars is changing, if they don't change with it then eventually they will be left behind. All it takes is someone with some foresight and the willingness to bring in people to craft their UI who know automotive and what is needed and not needed and how it can be accessed well. Tesla has only really been out around 15 years and only now are companies starting to take the whole interior seriously. The high end cars are putting effort into their UI, and this will eventually trickle down.
This is becoming something that people are wanting in their cars and frankly CarPlay looks childish and simple in comparison to what Tesla and others are doing now.
Try posting about it on your automakers forum because you still don’t understand how CarPlay is implemented.
The new Cadillac infotainment isn’t exactly getting rave reviews. Its gone about as well as expected, which was that they would just plaster screens everywhere.
I will never own another car with analog gauges or lots of buttons, both inaccurate (analog gauges) and distracting (buttons).
Relevant to this -- this is good to see from car makers
www.bloomberg.com
Sometimes Car Tech Goes Too Far. Automakers Are Admitting It
Just because a feature is new doesn’t mean it’s better.
www.bloomberg.com
It most certainly is an issue with the manufacturer. Original CarPlay knows nothing of the vehicle systems nor of the infotainment system. That is true. But if CarPlay is somehow taking over then entire screen that is 100% the manufacturer's screw up. CarPlay projects onto the car's display in the manner the manufacturer allows. Honda, for example, displays CarPlay in a split screen with other OEM display elements. The fact that BMW allows CarPlay to display full screen by default when that display is also required for systems controls is a very bad design decision on BMW's part.
Ultra would take over the screen(s) as that is the whole point. When you have your phone, and opt into using CarPlay Ultra, then CarPlay is what you see. When you don't have your phone with you, or opt to not enable Ultra, the you get whatever the OEM provides. I am not sure, but I would imagine that even if a manufacturer supports Ultra they would also enable regular CarPlay to put the options totally in the users hands. Ultra, OEN with CarPlay, or OEM only.
The Honda split screen thing sounds interesting. Is that something new? Every Honda I’ve seen has a screen surrounded by vertical columns of vehicle controls on one or both sides of the screen, but the screen is ever only doing one context (CP, AA, Vehicle). In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a picture of CP that didn’t use the whole screen.
And that screen on the BMW is not required for driver-critical functions aside from parking cameras but those get priority so CP is not an issue there. The screen is used to navigate car settings and for driving, can be customized (in 1/4, 1/2, or full screen sized ”widgets”, with multiple “pages” of widgets supported) to provide additional elements (things like map, media, weather, clocks, traffic info, performance oriented displays, drive video recording trigger, etc.). This works well, is visually cohesive, and is what I prefer when I’m driving because there is more that is useful to me from the vehicle side. I use CP primarily for a better experience than plain Bluetooth when playing audio from the phone, a CP-savvy weather radar app, and occasionally other things.
The manufacturer has to allow phone-initiated switching. In the same way the phone knows nothing of the car systems, the car systems know nothing about what you are trying to do with your phone. If you ask Siri to navigate and want to use Apple Maps, would you not expect it to show up on the screen? What else would you want the car manufacturer to do?
- Prompt the driver to allow CP the screen every time there is a trigger on the phone? Distracting, and people who like using CP extensively would legitimately have something to complain about.
- Have the vehicle be selective about ceding the screen to CP? Not possible due to the lack of info from the phone context.
- Implement an all or nothing option for CarPlay display. I could get behind this if Siri was more capable than it is, but would Apple be OK with manufacturers further limiting CP capabilities that presumably form the basis for pushing Ultra?
- The already existing option of simply not using CP at all. Again, I would think Apple wants more people using CP, not fewer.
The phone side of the equation, OTOH, could easily be selective about triggering the switch for things that happen in the phone.
I understand Ultra addresses the context switching issue, but that does not automatically make it a desirable direction. You may be touching on one of the reasons we are seeing pushback from OEMs with Ultra. Putting aside the fact that some people don’t actually want an “Apple” version of the UI in their car, for the OEM to provide those options you mentioned they would essentially be using resources to develop/maintain two UIs instead of one.
Beyond the cynical view that OEMs are not flocking to implement Ultra only because they want to monetize user data (and I agree this is likely one factor), implementing/maintaining 2 UIs looks like extra investment and risk for questionable returns. Most auto manufacturers develop systems to support sales of vehicles around the world. For every person in a “1st world problems” forum like this one that insists “no CP = no buy” when they shop for a car, there are many others worldwide who couldn’t care less whether or not a car has CP or what flavor it is when shopping for a car, or would not rule out a vehicle they otherwise like if CP wasn’t there. Could that change down the road? Sure, but right now implementing Ultra is far from a slam dunk for manufacturers. Since most of us will be stuck with regular CarPlay for the foreseeable future, what is wrong with Apple making it a smoother experience for more people?
It has been a long time since I drove a Honda but I do recall the split screen from when I did. I verified online that they still use the split screen. I cannot provide authoritative details on how it works from direct memory - too long ago.
I keep my Infotainment screen in CarPlay all the time - unless I need some vehicle control, like climate. So I I want to use Apple Maps for navigation there is no need for the car to do anything. I'd venture that most CarPlay users work the same way.
As for the Ultra development - I don't follow your point. They already have the current OEM screens. They could carry forward with little or no modification. The Ultra interface, when selected or when iPhone is present would simply replace it.
OEMs are already ceding their UI. Any vehicle using Google's thing - Android Automotive, or whatever it's called this week - already does that. Chevrolet completely ceded their UI to Google. And it is a nightmare of a dashboard. My wife drives one and it is horrid - congested, confusing, and distracting. How can ceding the UI to Apple be any worse? I posit that Apple's UX designers are better than the ones Google has on their dashboard team.
ETA: At least hers supports CarPlay. She got the last model year to do so. I avoid driving her car due to the interface to start with - without CarPlay it would be intolerable.
Last edited:
OK, I'll grant that. The current incarnation is not the best, but it is really not all that bad either. And it is possible to reduce or disable the parts that most are complaining about.
But even with Liquid Glass as it stands now it is STILL loads better than the Android Automotive dash provided in my wife's car.
I stand behind my statement.
Are you sure you weren’t looking at a CarPlay split screen? This is a CP supplied view that shows 2 or 3 apps and typically includes an oversized map flanked by 2 additional app “widgets” (for lack of a better term), but those are all for app use, not connected to vehicle functions AFAIK.
Yes, I expect many use it the same way as you and in that case it makes perfect sense to keep the CP view up all the time. When I’m driving, I prefer more car-centric displays. I don’t use CP for navigation but if I did, the directions show up on my instrument display and HUD, so I don’t need a map display on the infotainment screen.
My point was that there are costs and risks associated with the Ultra commitment. It’s true OEMs often leverage past work for new models but even then there is some development work necessary for the native UI. So OEMs would effectively have to develop (in future vehicles) and maintain two UIs instead of one, and those costs and risks make going with Ultra a difficult decision. Indications are that few are moving ahead with it. Maybe Apple can do something to “sweeten the deal” and make it more attractive but for now, most of us are stuck with current CarPlay.
I can’t speak to Chevy’s UI specifically, but can I certainly understand if you find it unhelpful/unintuitive for some things. I’m curious, when you refer to the dashboard, are you including the instrument cluster, or largely refering to infotainment?
I suspect the Chevy UI was developed by Chevrolet/GM using toolkits from Google, in much the same way they would have to use Apple toolkits to implement Ultra. As I understand it, Apple would not be the one developing Ultra implementations.
Now, speaking about the currently available CP, while you and many others may prefer seeing a CP screen, others do not. I find myself more distracted by CPs refusal to stay in the background than anything that goes on in my OEM UI.
BTW, Thank you for taking the time to engage and keeping it civil.
No. Not CarPly's split screen mode. Here is an example from a Hyundai Ioniq 5. CarPlay is on the left (ironically in split screen view) while the right side of the infotainment screen is showing car systems. In this case it is the native nav system map, but there are other options
I prefer to use AppleMaps for navigation, unless I am going on a longer trip so I can route charger stations, or I want the turns in the HUD. I'd be happy if OEMs would share battery level, battery usage, and projected range stats so that Apple Maps (or ABRP or whatever) can incorporate that into the route and then allowed for projection to the HUD. But that is not likely without the integration and communications of Ultra.
I actually think Apple's approach of Ultra with iPhone and user preference over Android Automotive only is a much better options. OEMs can keep their dash for non-phone users (or those that do not want the Apple UI). For those with iPhones they can have the complete CarPlay experience. CarPlay Ultra does allow for some level manufacturer branding in the UI configuration.