Report Examines GM's Controversial Move to Abandon Apple CarPlay

[seek3r]

Failing to understand how your comment is actually a response to my comment. Sorry.

I’m saying the other car companies arent readying any replacements. At most they’re moving to android automotive (like GM is) but not disabling carplay and android auto (not the same as automative) like gm is

 

[seek3r]

As I said, it is verbatim what the verge article says. If they were not controlling, what objection would MB have in allowing carplay access to all its screens?

Because they want to control the UX on luxury cars…

Let’s try this a different way: it’s illegal to tamper with the odometer data on a car, period, if you expect to ever sell it. Apple doesnt *want* write access to that through the carplay API, and no car company is giving it to them, that’s a lot of liability. But you can expose read access just fine, it’s already done several ways in modern cars already, you can build your own digital dash, with btw vastly more info than Apple is planning to expose, off OB2 access alone if you wanted to, lots of hobbyists do. That’s without ever touching the bus otherwise or any data from the infotainment computers and more modern networking.

You can pick up an OBD2 dongle for like $10 and plug it into your car to see how much is readable (and writeable, go whole hog and retune your car if you want) if you dont believe me

 

[Tagbert]

Really? Jeez.
I'd put things like heated windscreen and 4 wheel drive so far above the list of must haves you'd not even see car play in the distance.

maybe, but you can have those features in other cars. If you are seeing two cars both with heated windscreen and 4WD but one has CarPlay and the other doesn't, couldn't that be a deciding factor.

for me, I use CarPlay every single day. I would use 4WD once or twice a year at most. We can have different priorities.

 

[Beautyspin]

I shall tell you. I've decided you're being deliberately obtuse.

I have only one source and I am repeatedly quoting it verbatim. If you think they are wrong, then there is nothing I can do. It is not my opinion.

If what the article says is true, then the scenario I have illustrated should be considered at least as an edge case. If Apple/car manufacturers do not consider these cases, then it is dereliction of duty. It is fine for you to say it is never going to happen as there are no repercussions for you if that statement proves to be wrong

 

[cjgrif]

Because they want to control the UX on luxury cars…

Let’s try this a different way: it’s illegal to tamper with the odometer data on a car, period, if you expect to ever sell it. Apple doesnt *want* write access to that, and no car company is giving it to them, that’s a lot of liability. But you can expose read access just fine, it’s already done several ways in modern cars already, you can build your own digital dash off OB2 access alone if you wanted to, lots of hobbyists do

And the speedometer is just a "meter" - it doesn't control anything and isn't something to be "controlled". The wording of the Verge article that keeps being repeated is just bad.

 

[Tagbert]

You tell me. Apple wants to control those functions in the car with the carplay going forward. I am seeing a lot of things that could go wrong. Could you not? Something so simple as airtags had so many things going wrong. What could go wrong if Apple controlled a 4000-pound object hurtling at 90 mph?

The hardware control happens at a lower level real-time OS. that has most often been QNX though more recent cars have used a an OS based on a real-time Android Automotive. This is separate from the UX. The UX layer can crash and reboot but that doesn't change the RTOS and its control of the hardware.

 

[seek3r]

I have only one source and I am repeatedly quoting it verbatim. If you think they are wrong, then there is nothing I can do. It is not my opinion.

If what the article says is true, then the scenario I have illustrated should be considered at least as an edge case. If Apple/car manufacturers do not consider these cases, then it is dereliction of duty. It is fine for you to say it is never going to happen as there are no repercussions for you if that statement proves to be wrong

I honestly think the problem is you seem to think Apple is dropping in a replacement for the backend and middleware layers of the car

They’re not, it’s a UI with a set of APIs for communicating with the car’s computers that supply or respond to requests to change data. In very simple terms the model looks a bit like this:

UI—>some form of access layer—>backends

Carplay2 replaces a whole bunch of manufacturer UI with Apple’s when a phone is connected, the rest is unchanged. The phone doesnt replace the ECU for ex, it communicates with it (actually probably with a layer that connects to some form of bridge that communicates to it, but I digress)

This is kinda basic software design in action, if you’re not coming to it with that kind of background it may be harder to grasp what’s going on

Now luxury brands, like Mercedes, spend a lot of time creating a unique UI/UX, just like Apple does, and it complements their design language and aesthetic, so they’re not super interested in turning over the whole dash to apple - but they’re fine with apple handling maps, music, calling, etc - things that arent their core competencies. So they like carplay 1, but not carplay 2.

Does that make sense?

 

[Supermallet]

You should read the attached verge article. I am not paraphrasing; I am directly copy pasting the statement in the article.

"Apple announced its next-gen version of CarPlay, in which the phone-mirroring feature would extend beyond the central touchscreen to also include additional screens like the gauge cluster, back in 2022. It was a bold move, with Apple signaling its desire to control core functions of the vehicle like HVAC, as well as the speedometer and odometer. But since then, the new CarPlay has yet to appear on any production models."

Emphasis/bolding is mine.

That’s just poor wording on the Verge’s part. As others have mentioned, it’s literally illegal to tamper with an odometer. All Apple will do is put their own skin on the digital display. The data presented will be the same regardless of whether you’re using CarPlay or the built in display software. Even if Apple had continued on with building their own car their software wouldn’t “control” the odometer, it would just display the reading the odometer is outputting. Same with the speedometer. Same with the HVAC, Apple is just surfacing the controls for the HVAC through the CarPlay interface.

Any critical component of your car’s functions are not going to be controlled by Apple.

 

[DogHouseDub]

Did you read the NYT article from last week describing how GM tracks their customers' driving and sells that information to third parties?

If so, it makes perfect sense why they want their own system in the car.

 

[Obioban]

I honestly think the problem is you seem to think Apple is dropping in a replacement for the backend and middleware layers of the car

They’re not, it’s a UI with a set of APIs for communicating with the car’s computers that supply or respond to requests to change data. In very simple terms the model looks a bit like this:

UI—>some form of access layer—>backends

Carplay2 replaces a whole bunch of manufacturer UI with Apple’s when a phone is connected, the rest is unchanged. The phone doesnt replace the ECU for ex, it communicates with it (actually probably with a layer that connects to some form of bridge that communicates to it, but I digress)

This is kinda basic software design in action, if you’re not coming to it with that kind of background it may be harder to grasp what’s going on

Now luxury brands, like Mercedes, spend a lot of time creating a unique UI/UX, just like Apple does, and it complements their design language and aesthetic, so they’re not super interested in turning over the whole dash to apple - but they’re fine with apple handling maps, music, calling, etc - things that arent their core competencies. So they like carplay 1, but not carplay 2.

Does that make sense?

Pretty sure it's not going to make sense to him, because he's deliberately not understanding.

But, yes-- I actually listened to that entire interview a couple of days ago, not just read a couple of out of context poor summaries-- and you are correct.

 

[CasinoOwl]

Every corporation now is on steroids with squeezing out every penny from the buyer. This is a blatant attempt at getting their customers to buy into more subscriptions, and I'm not having it. I can only hope others will pass on it as well, or we will just get more and more of it.

 

[FCX]

I have only one source and I am repeatedly quoting it verbatim. If you think they are wrong, then there is nothing I can do. It is not my opinion.

If what the article says is true, then the scenario I have illustrated should be considered at least as an edge case.

Understood. What you're not hearing from others here is that the reporter either doesn't understand what's involved, or communicated it poorly. Your entire basis hinges on a reporter's (mis)interpretation.

There is no universe where Apple would control anything other than the display of the car's unmolested underlying systems.

 

[IceOnFire]

First of all, I would never ever guy a GM vehicle, no offense to those who own one. Secondly, as an owner of a Tesla, that is a feature I miss the most about owning an ICE car. Not having CarPlay would certainly be a deal breaker for me in any other circumstance.

 

[AZhappyjack]

Carplay was the deciding factor when I got my current car vs a couple alternatives. When it comes to traveling,I only rent cars with Carplay. There's enough stress travelling. I don't need to be figuring out the info system too.

GM not supporting Carplay means one less option to consider.

This sums up my position, as well. No CarPlay means that I cross that car off my list, regardless of what redeeming value that vehicle may offer.

 

[dozoy]

This is so ridiculously foolish it's not funny. No Carplay/Android Auto is going to turn a lot of potential buyers off. At the same time, I don't want any touch screen controls for anything other than maps and music. And that same sentiment is has been growing rapidly among buyers over the past few years. Apple is behind the curve.

 

[Jodeo]

An in-depth Bloomberg report today resurfaced General Motors' decision to replace Apple CarPlay with its own software.

Last year, GM announced that it planned to forgo Apple CarPlay in its new electric vehicles, starting with the 2024 Chevrolet Blazer EV. Instead, the automaker introduced a proprietary infotainment platform, aiming to control and customize the digital experience within its vehicles. This transition is part of GM's strategic pivot toward enhancing its software capabilities and establishing a stronger digital services revenue stream. However, the change has not been without its hurdles, with numerous customers and automotive reviewers reporting technical issues and a steep learning curve associated with the new system.

CarPlay has become a staple of most new vehicles, offering drivers a familiar interface that mirrors their iPhone's functionality onto the vehicle's dashboard. Apple reported in 2022 that 79% of car buyers in the U.S. insisted on CarPlay support when considering a new vehicle purchase.

GM's new in-house system, Ultifi, is envisioned as a comprehensive digital platform that offers a range of services such as navigation and media streaming, enhanced by subscription-based add-ons to drive revenue. Despite these aspirations, the rollout of Ultifi has encountered significant obstacles such as software malfunctions that dealerships have struggled to resolve.

GM's move is driven by a wish to reclaim customer connections and data insights from third parties, but customer resistance to abandoning a familiar and popular system like CarPlay that directly integrates with their iPhone poses a significant challenge to GM's strategy.

The outcome of GM's decision could influence future industry practices significantly. If GM can refine Ultifi into a robust, user-friendly platform that rivals or surpasses CarPlay's functionality, it may set a precedent for other automakers to follow suit. Conversely, if consumers continue to prefer established systems like CarPlay, automakers may find themselves in a difficult position, needing to balance their corporate interests with consumer preferences.

See Bloomberg's full article for more insights into GM's move to abandon Apple CarPlay.

Article Link: Report Examines GM's Controversial Move to Abandon Apple CarPlay

I'll just sit here and wait for the DOJ to sue GM for being a monopoly in these matters...

 

[Stromos]

This doesn't offend me in the slightest, because Toyota cars have CarPlay. If the car makers want to compete, and offer a service that is superior to carplay, that's great-- compete. It becomes problematic when they lock basic car functionality behind a subscription (even if it has a free trial period first).

That's valid and a good point. Not everyone has a cell nor streaming service outside of the car. You want to offer it for people that's great as long as you allow those who want to leverage what they already have via carplay to do so.

 

[Falkon71]

We have a 2016 Honda Pilot -- which did not come with CarPlay. However the 2017 did. So when the head unit in the car died, I replaced it with a 2017 head unit, just to get CarPlay.

I'm also driving a Chevy Malibu rental car this week. It's a horrible car, bad turning radius, no features, marginally working CarPlay (that took me over 10 minutes to finally get working in the car), very uncomfortable seats, etc. There will never be a GM in my future.

 

[ChrisA]

I would never buy a GM car without CarPlay.

But you know what? You can buy a radio with Airplay from third parties and these radio fit in the standard space. I'd ask the dealer to install one of these. Maybe they would? The car dealers must especially hate this move by GM as they see potential customers walk away in disbelief.

 

[inlvnv]

I bought 2 cars in the last 3 1/2 years, and CarPlay was a must required feature. Then again I won’t matter to GM since My last purchase of a GM car was a C6 Corvette 18 years ago.

 

[Huracan]

They can do whatever they want to do. In the end, it seems clear that they are after our data. Apple too. However, I don't think I would currently buy a car without CarPlay, so GM has just taken itself out of my potential purchase list, same as Tesla. Tesla also because I dislike that big screen that forces drivers to look away from the road. I don't even know how that thing was deemed safe to drive on streets and highways.

 

[sloheim]

6 years ago, I passed on a Toyota Highlander because their infotainment did not yet support Android Auto / Apple CarPlay.

In the future, I will pass on any GM products for the same reason.

I will also pass on any vehicle that puts hardware in the car (a cost that will be built into every car manufactured), but expects me to pay a subscription to "activate" that feature. I'm not paying for the hardware to heat my steering wheel if I'm never going to pay a subscription to use it.

 

[I7guy]

Well, the ambition is not for carplay to stop just displaying the values. It wants to "Control" them. Hence the possibility for disasters. I believe the controls in the MBUX are voice controlled. I do not know if CarPlay controls are voice controllable or not.

There is also the possibility of disaster with the on-board computer systems. I’ve had it hapoen both in multiple ICE vehicles and once or twice in my Tesla.

 

[I7guy]

Not just HVAC. Imagine Apple controlling the odometer. What happens if the wrong speedometer reading is shown and drivers think they are going slower than they are and are causing accidents, or something else leading to loss of life? Who will take responsibility for the wrong display? Looking at all the bugs in Apple software, I doubt users even want Apple controlling safety related software at all, unless they are very brave.

Sure. It’s always good to speculate as to the worst possible thing but not necessarily the most probable.

 

[Stromos]

I would never buy a GM car without CarPlay.

But you know what? You can buy a radio with Airplay from third parties and these radio fit in the standard space. I'd ask the dealer to install one of these. Maybe they would? The car dealers must especially hate this move by GM as they see potential customers walk away in disbelief.

This might be an off opinion but afaik the cars that have these big infotainment systems are not the kind of cars that you can install something third-party.