Here's the Latest on Next-Generation CarPlay After Missed 2024 Launch

[mkoesel]

Maybe it'd be better as a "carOS" which would run without an iPhone.

That's exactly what it is.

Apple’s fancy new CarPlay will only work wirelessly

And many other notes about the future of Apple’s ideas for the car.

www.theverge.com

"So, for next-gen CarPlay, Apple’s split things into what it calls “layers,” some of which run on your iPhone while others run locally on the car so they don’t break if your phone disconnects."

There are so many articles about NG CarPlay not releasing on time. I wish there were more articles, like the one above, that explain what it actually is. It would certainly cut down on noise in threads like this one.

 

[Iconoclysm]

This has to compete with "Android Automotive". Note that "Android Automotive' is NOT THE SAME as "Android Auto".

For years cars came with both Carplay and Android Auto and the the customer could run either just by clicking an icon. But now it is different. Android Atomovie runs on the car's computer and replaces the phone.

Here is the "Apple killer" feature: Android Automotive is "Open Source". Anyone can modify it. You can read the code and make changes. Apple will have a hard time competing with that. The other "killer feature" is that "Automotive" is real, not vaporware (yes the source code is real https://source.android.com/docs/setup/download)

I think Apple needs to completely re-think how they distribute their product because Google is giving the car companies exactly what they want, control over the user experience at a very fine level of detail.

You can read more here: https://source.android.com/docs/automotive/start/what_automotive

CarPlay does not compete with Android Automotive. In fact, Android Automotive makes CarPlay 2.0 possible - makes it even easier to accomplish.

AAOS does not provide what CarPlay does, it's extremely bare bones.

 

[Iconoclysm]

How many auto makers are using Android Automotive?

Many of them, it's very popular. But it's not a threat or hinderance to CarPlay.

 

[mkoesel]

How many auto makers are using Android Automotive?

The state of Android Automotive in 2024 - Snapp Automotive

We're experts in Android Automotive - we build world-class, AAOS-based in-car infotainment for a fraction of the cost and development time.

www.snappautomotive.io

"In 2024, most car brands have publicly announced they are switching to Android Automotive."

However, I don't believe Apple is just going to let Google win this. Just like they didn't let Google win control of the TV with Airplay2 now a native feature of many TVs whereas up until a few years ago it was on exactly zero of them (and Chromecast had the market to itself).

 

[Iconoclysm]

I don't do anything, start the car and it is there. What is not true?

You wait for the car to start, the OS to start, the phone to connect, then it's there. With 2.0, the moment Car Key says you are coming to the car, CarPlay starts - before you even get into the car.

 

[Iconoclysm]

How much flexibility do automakers have in this version of CarPlay that compares to say Android Automotive where they are able to modify aspects of it to suit their own brand's software design language as well as add in their own tailored services that they can monetize. If Apple is selling one SKU for lack of a better term and there is no ability for the OEM to add there own services or modify the UI then most OEM's wouldn't be interested in this.

They have the same flexibility as far as design. Monetizing services doesn't require Android Automotive, they can charge for plenty through Apple's own store. So much is being blown out of proportion by GM's shortsighted approach.

 

[mkoesel]

CarPlay does not compete with Android Automotive. In fact, Android Automotive makes CarPlay 2.0 possible - makes it even easier to accomplish.

No. CarPlay 2.0 is Apple's answer to Android Automotive. It does not require Android Automotive, although it is true that an automaker could implement it that way.

 

[Iconoclysm]

I agree they don't, but they think they have one good enough users will tolerate it for the real purpose of harvesting their data.

Maybe arrogance isn't exactly the right word, but the above behavior doesn't really seem to befit the word humility.

To be clear I'm talking just as much about the car makers as Apple if not moreso.

Apple wants to do to cars what the iPhone did to phones, or actually kind of more what Android did to phones.

It won't matter to the software user to makes the hardware, as software continues to eat the world.

So Apple's arrogance is that they can take over the software of all the car makers and that the car makers will allow that to happen.

Again arrogance may not be the right word, but seems like kind of a rock and hard place situation.

That's not what's happening here. It doesn't take over the software - and is completely designed BY the car manufacturer with the CarPlay devkit. It's not like Apple taking over the car.

 

[Iconoclysm]

No. CarPlay 2.0 is Apple's answer to Android Automotive. It does not require Android Automotive.

Wrong. CarPlay 2.0 is CarPlay...2.0. Android Automotive makes it easier as it's consistent across car brands. Android Auto still exists in this scenario.

 

[Cirillo Gherardo]

I mean, have you seen a single automobile on the market that has a dashboard that is even remotely similar to the design required to support this? No. Adopting this requires redesigning the entire dashboard to support the concept of a single display that goes across from one side to another. This is so far away from what any manufacturer is doing that it is no surprise to anyone with a functioning brain why this has not been adopted.

 

[mkoesel]

Wrong. CarPlay 2.0 is CarPlay...2.0. Android Automotive makes it easier as it's consistent across car brands. Android Auto still exists in this scenario.

You said "Android Automotive makes CarPlay 2.0 possible"

Patently false. A manufacturer like Tesla or Mercedes who does not use Android Auto *could* still implement CarPlay 2.0 at the firmware level.

Since I don't think we are in opposition on what CarPlay 2.0 really is - I will agree with you that in most cases, Android Automotive will be the native OS, and CarPlay would run as a native subsystem in supervisory roll

 

[hagar]

Why would any car manufacturer choose this over Android Auto? Google has far more experience with collaborations with hardware companies (smartphones, TV’s, …). And they are far less strict.

 

[mkoesel]

They have the same flexibility as far as design. Monetizing services doesn't require Android Automotive, they can charge for plenty through Apple's own store. So much is being blown out of proportion by GM's shortsighted approach.

Amen

 

[SIGSEGV1]

People like buggy UI on their cars? That's committing suicide!

 

[awisdom]

More patheticness from Apple. Way to go Tim! Pissing off customers again. Great plan!

 

[mkoesel]

Why would any car manufacturer choose this over Android Auto? Google has far more experience with collaborations with hardware companies (smartphones, TV’s, …). And they are far less strict.

Because some automotive manufacturers, particularly in premium / luxury / exotic segments, have a very high percentage of owners and prospective owners who are married to the Apple ecosystem.

 

[ProbablyDylan]

I can't say I'm surprised. Who would want to surrender so much control of their software experience to an external company?

Especially considering that Apple would never make that compromise.

 

[mkoesel]

People like buggy UI on their cars? That's committing suicide!

Ah yes, because the alternatives are completely bug free:

"In fact, more than 41.6% of all vehicles recalled so far in 2024 involved software issues, up from 14.9% in 2023, according to Envorso, a Detroit-based software consulting firm that tracks software recalls. This year's software recalls were driven by two each from Tesla and Stellantis."

GM opened a lab to prevent software bugs in new vehicles

General Motors Co. has developed a software-testing lab inside its Global Technical Center that it's replicating elsewhere, including in GM's Silicon Valley office, to prevent bugs from entering new vehicles and affecting customers.

techxplore.com

 

[DotCom2]

Maybe if Apple was not so arrogant can manufacturers would be more receptive?

I think it's the other way around. manufacturers don't want to give up their own subscription model.

 

[nt5672]

This makes no sense. Nearly every manufacturer adopted the past CarPlay despite Apple's "arrogance".

Because Apple needed them, then. Not now. I mean it is pretty clear the difference to most people.

 

[CarAnalogy]

That's not what's happening here. It doesn't take over the software - and is completely designed BY the car manufacturer with the CarPlay devkit. It's not like Apple taking over the car.

It seems like it's taking over the interface including the instrument display. Maybe I don't understand what's different about CarPlay 2.0. They aren't taking over the car, just a lot of the user's interaction with it, which is where they hope to mine the data.

 

[jgreg728]

"Here's the Latest on Next-Generation CarPlay After Missed 2024 Launch"

"Due to Apple's reluctance to comment on future plans, we do not know if next-generation CarPlay is still happening."


Lol...slow news day today?

 

[Iconoclysm]

I mean, have you seen a single automobile on the market that has a dashboard that is even remotely similar to the design required to support this? No. Adopting this requires redesigning the entire dashboard to support the concept of a single display that goes across from one side to another. This is so far away from what any manufacturer is doing that it is no surprise to anyone with a functioning brain why this has not been adopted.

Funny, the car I just bought is identical to everything Apple shows off for CarPlay 2.0. It's really not that difficult to build out either, probably even easier than the current dual screen CarPlay setups where you need to feed maps and music information to the dash.

 

[Mr_Ed]

The integration with EV's and Apple Maps is crucial. It works somewhat with classic CarPlay, but will be a much better experience with 2.0.

But what exactly is Apple Maps providing that isn’t already in the built-in navigation? Last I checked, prioritizing looking for charging spots is already handled by the EVs.

I think even this forum that follows these things isn't really paying attention to what CarPlay 2.0 does. For instance, it uploads assets to the car for use at any time - and those assets can be designed by the manufacturer and can be used without the phone. When the phone connects, they synchronize and display a hybrid of the two.

Such as? Any assets beyond “mobile device centric” functions? I gather manufacturers would design assets in order to have a UI that does not clash with their own aesthetic. If these assets are simply "CarPlay" versions of built-in vehicle functions, why have more than the built-in one if the reason for designing an iOS version of it is to fit in with the vehicle? If the assets are mobile device functions, how far do manufacturers need to go? Does "messaging" stop with an asset for iOS Messages? What about other messaging apps?

The whole thing just sounds like extra, sometimes possibly redundant (as in built-in vehicle functions) work for the manufacturer for little end-user benefit and even less benefit to the manufacturer.

 

[Iconoclysm]

You said "Android Automotive makes CarPlay 2.0 possible"

Patently false. A manufacturer like Tesla or Mercedes who does not use Android Auto *could* still implement CarPlay 2.0 at the firmware level.

Since I don't think we are in opposition on what CarPlay 2.0 really is - I will agree with you that in most cases, Android Automotive will be the native OS, and CarPlay would run as a native subsystem in supervisory roll

I didn't say that AAOS is the only way to deploy this, its ubiquity across so many models makes CarPlay 2.0 less of a lift for those manufacturers than having to build it from the ground up like Rivian or Tesla would need to do. I expect Mercedes and BMW to have a hard time because they didn't adopt a standard like AAOS, that's what I mean when I say AAOS makes it possible - it's the easiest way and Apple will be able to document implementation for use at all of those manufacturers.

I look at CarPlay 2.0 as more of a skin over the UI, it's just a bunch of art assets that live on top of the OS. It's not needed for the UI to work, it's different for each phone that connects, etc. At most, it's more like a windows system would be on UNIX. They're all leaning on X11 underneath, if that's what you meant by subsystem.

Either way, I believe we're on the same page about what it is and what it isn't. It's not an OS. And I expect Android Auto to follow it (not Android Automotive) in the future.