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.
Here's the Latest on Next-Generation CarPlay After Missed 2024 Launch
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple gets nothing from CarPlay that they would need anyone for anything. It's a feature, like Android Auto, that makes their users happier. The manufacturers needed Apple and still do.
So the difference between what people think 2.0 does and what it actually does is that it skins the UI, not takes it over. The manufacturer still builds that skin themselves, it could even look identical to the screen without the skin. The only reason this is done is because that skin can interact in sync with the phone, so CarPlay elements aren't limited to a window but can be put anywhere on the screen. Like, an app could come along that adds a widget to the dashboard...and that app could be made by the manufacturer. And the manufacturer could even charge for that app. And mine data from it.
The only thing that would hold up manufacturers, from what I can see, is that they need to do work to make it happen. And it is likely a little overwhelming for their developers to understand from a high level. And that is likely why Apple released the training style videos at WWDC, they make it much more clear what this is and how it works.
The EV's own maps do a poor job of looking for charging spots across all the different networks. Apple Maps does it a lot better, Google Maps in Android Automotive only grabs a couple of networks unless you install more apps - and the manufacturer needs to make those apps available. It's a pain in the butt, and I'm experiencing it right now since my new car doesn't have CarPlay available yet. Even plain old CarPlay can do this, so I'll be happy when just that comes along.
The assets are there to make the screen 100% available to displaying other elements anywhere else at any time. Without the manufacturer having to build something new into their OS, something that not all of their users might want but a certain subset would love to have. Think of it in terms of allowing room for widgets and whatnot rather than retooling what they have already. So yes, they might have to copy the art assets they use for their radio controls into CarPlay so that users don't have to "minimize" CarPlay to get to the radio, which is painful for everyone.
I really don't understand the need for CarPlay 2.
My BMW can put all my CarPlay app icons in the main menu for my car infotainment. When I navigate via CarPlay, it shows the map in the center of the gauge cluster and on the home screen of the infotainment (also provides distance and maneuver information in the HUD).
Frankly, the iDrive OS is good enough for all the things other than the stuff specifically on the phone it can't get to like music and podcast apps that I don't feel the need to lean on CarPlay.
My BMW can put all my CarPlay app icons in the main menu for my car infotainment. When I navigate via CarPlay, it shows the map in the center of the gauge cluster and on the home screen of the infotainment (also provides distance and maneuver information in the HUD).
Frankly, the iDrive OS is good enough for all the things other than the stuff specifically on the phone it can't get to like music and podcast apps that I don't feel the need to lean on CarPlay.
It looks cool and I love wireless CarPlay, but with all the bugs in Apple’s software in recent years I don’t think I trust them to have full control of my car’s displays.
Still kind of sounds to me like it puts a layer of Apple between the car maker and the car user, like the iPhone except Apple makes the hardware for the iPhone.
It seems like it would do for the car what the iPhone did by adding a software abstraction layer, if I understand you correctly. But would that then require things like sending updates through Apple?
Maybe I should watch the WWDC videos. And maybe this is why adoption isn’t going as planned, maybe I’m not the only one who doesn’t quite get it.
I was my company's contact to Microsoft for our app's inclusion on the Windows desktop. They definitely felt like they could tell us how our application looked under normal use, messaging, etc. I went in thinking this was going to be a cakewalk and sort our icon color, style, text, but MS had to be beaten back with a stick with their "suggestions" of how to make our app fit their design motif.
This is really about trying to salvage something from the AppleCar project where the bones of this came from.
They did have a few auto makers sign on.... but in the last 2.5 years, everyone is shifting to find ways to turn your infotainment system into a subscription product.
They did have a few auto makers sign on.... but in the last 2.5 years, everyone is shifting to find ways to turn your infotainment system into a subscription product.
Me too
Apple are sort of "out of good ideas" if we look around and what they are doing, have tried and failed at (Vision Pro, among other things)
Honestly, and I have no great love for the car makers, they are smart to not buddy up with Apple on this
Apple are bullies who are famously hard to work with and dictatorial and arrogant
If one does not "need them", I'd not work with Apple on anything given their track record
Apple are bullies who are famously hard to work with and dictatorial and arrogant
If one does not "need them", I'd not work with Apple on anything given their track record
It's also gives CarPlay control if anything the infotainment system controls - change radio, heat/AC, etc. which is a little more than just reskinning. The concept is instead of having to exit car play, do those things, and reopen, one stop shopping.
That's a lot to ask an automaker to do, and it's a lot of custom programming for both parties to achieve.
Take a page out of Apple's playbook and own the whole widget, that's what Tesla and Rivian do. I wouldn't want to rely on Apple for CarPlay fixes and enhancements given their lousy track record with carplay and some of their first party software.
Funny, because Apple currently controls ZERO cars.
AAOS controls a bunch. My Volvo runs fully off AAOS... GM is using a forked version of AAOS and shut Apple out all together. Several others on that list and more adopting.
What's intresting is NO ONE wants Apple at that party, which is telling. Android Auto is still somewhat open where any Apple OS is completely locked down. Google and Car makers can play nice - car makers can form and customize AAOS however they like, and Google is much easier to collaborate with.
Now, I HATE AAOS and Volvo for this system probably 50% of the time. Something simple like "Hey Google, set the temperature to 68 degrees" works well, but if you say, "Turn the blower to 2" it becomes a hand banging affair of annoyance. Some voice commands have to be very specific to work, and in turn, you end up using the freaking touch screen of death because it's quicker.
Pros are I don't even need a phone in the car. I can use everything just fine. I can download apps from Google Play.
Where its really broken it some car features are still tethered to manual imputs like auto high beams. I can't say "turn on auto high beams" because I have to use a physical lever.
What happens if you forget your phone? What comes up on all those screens? Does your car still work? I often leave the house without my phone.
"iPhone not required if you have a family Apple One subscription"
😂
Joking ... well ... sort of
Who knows what "Subscription Tim" would have in mind if they ever got meaningful adoption of this
What are you even talking about? Android Auto is phone projection, like carplay, what you’re thinking of is Android Automotive, which is a full on OS running on the car’s hardware. Carplay 2 is still phone projection, “Apple OS” isnt a thing to be “completely locked down”, Apple doesnt make an equivalent to Android Automotive. No one is shutting Apple out from that, they arent trying to enter that part of the market to begin with
Last edited:
That and. Cutting out a large swathe of people who don't own an iPhone probably also figures prominently in. Why would someone pay for what will likely be part of a feature package including CarPlay 2 if they do not have iPhone? Where's the incentive? Reducing car functionality for someone that doesn't have an iPhone seems like a poor business decision too. I'm not sure where Apple can reasonably go here.
All the relentless adding screens and wrestling for "control of the car" makes me just want the most basic car possible and I'll mount a cellular iPad Mini if I really must have this stuff
None of this is "for the consumer" -- they all just want to control the information, the tracking and the money
None of this is "for the consumer" -- they all just want to control the information, the tracking and the money
I'd argue it is for the consumer, just not in the way you'd expect. Distracted drivers are a huge problem. Taking away reasons for them to take out their phone is really important for their overall safety.
This is where good UX matters. Automakers need to remove reasons to use my phone instead, and they need to do that by making their UX better than the phone's.
It’s because Apple won’t share your data with the car manufacturer. Google has no issues with that, as long as they get to Hoover up your data too.