Report Examines GM's Controversial Move to Abandon Apple CarPlay

[CSM2000]

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

The finale deciding factor for our last car purchase was did it have Carplay or not. We will not buy, lease or rent another car without it. The greed of GM and others is certainly the driving force behind their decision to exclude Carplay and force an additional revenue stream from their customers via subscription service. Here’s an idea GM, give the consumer what they want!

 

[bunce66]

And when GM goes bankrupt again (which will surely happen), they'll come begging the government for another bailout.
It's obviously run by incompetent idiots to make a decision like this.

 

[icwhatudidthere]

I actually agree with Mercedes on this one. I love CarPlay. It is definitely been a determining factor on the cars that I have bought.

That said, I think Apple is overreaching in wanting to expand to control any aspect of the vehicle beyond what is offered in CarPlay.

Same. I don't actually want CarPlay to take over everything. The apps have pretty minimal functionality and really only serve as a last resort for me. But at least they work and give me options. Relying on an automotive manufacturer to prioritize development and release of the latest streaming app seems like an exercise in frustration.

Yes, very true. I would put Tesla in the same category as Mercedes on this issue -- one of only a handful of manufacturers with non-CarPlay systems good enough to pull off what GM is attempting.

When I had a Tesla, I had non stop problems with the built-in streaming apps. Maybe it's gotten better in the past year but it was a factor in my decision to sell the car.

Funny enough, I got a Mercedes and they had the gall to sell a monthly subscription to the streaming apps. Except that subscription only let you run the apps. To actually use the apps to stream music, you had to get a second subscription for data. They seem to have recently figured out that was dumb and the apps magically started working without a data subscription.

They support very few streaming services though and that's my major issue with these manufacturers trying to assert themselves. They make cars but want to be in control of what I can stream.

They can't even get software releases working right. They recently added a "Video Streaming" package that's available for purchase but the store doesn't actually let you purchase it.

 

[Obioban]

OG M3F sighting!

👋

 

[azentropy]

It is a bad decision. The only question is how fast will GM backtrack on it.

 

[I7guy]

What would you suggest choosing a car because of?

I know a lot of people think exterior looks matter, but stop and think for a minute. Where do you spend time with your car, outside of it looking at it, or inside driving it? And once you're inside it, what systems do you interact with most? Sure, there's the steering wheel (so no Turdlas) and the other controls like the turn signal stalk (so no Turdlas), the pedals (one pedal driving is stupid, so no Turdlas), the gear shift (no Turdlas), the screen (NO TURDLAS), and the gauge cluster (I ALREADY SAID NO TURDLAS).

Every car has reasonable acceleration now. Every car gets you from point A to point B. Every car has air conditioning. So you've got to pick based on something. In order of importance, that's comfortable seats, no analog gauges, and CarPlay.

Might as well add to your hyperbolic post no oil changes ever, no timing belt belt changes. And that eliminates a bunch of cars right off the bat.

 

[TheShadowKnows!]

Bwahahaha... 7 pages and counting, on the existential need for CarPlay.
Just remember: "The AppleCar is Dead ... Long live The Apple Car" (Forbes 2024)

 

[Beautyspin]

Proof please. Too many of you come in trying to claim Apple "sells your data" and the like just because you think it happens.

No advertisement company/platform sells your data. It uses the data to place ads at relevant positions. Apple does it too, where ever it can. However, there are not as many places available for Apple as they are available for Google.

Apple sued for collecting user data despite opt-outs

Doesn't matter what the data is, they thought they pushed the off switch, argues complaint

www.theregister.com

Apple Tests AI-Powered Ad Tool Similar to Google's Performance Max

Discover Apple's AI-Powered Ad Tool for App Store Optimization. Learn how Apple's new AI-driven strategy is revolutionizing ad placements within its App Store, similar to Google's Performance Max. Explore potential expansions and revenue streams for Apple's evolving ad business. Stay updated on...

www.cdomagazine.tech

Apple faces new lawsuit over its data collection practices in first-party apps, like the App Store | TechCrunch

This sort of data collection would raise questions about Apple's implementation of Apple Tracking Transparency (ATT).

techcrunch.com

Fourth class-action lawsuit filed against Apple for alleged privacy violations | AppleInsider

A fundamental misunderstanding of App Tracking Transparency tools has led to multiple lawsuits against Apple in recent weeks, with the fourth filed in Northern California being the most recent.

appleinsider.com

I could go on, but you get the gist.

 

[Obioban]

That's not extended CarPlay. That's BMW's interface on the left and CarPlay on the right. What BMW does (which is my preferred approach) is to use data from CarPlay in their own interface. That's very different from what extended CarPlay will do.

It's not carplay 2. It is extended carplay. It is an apple projected image into the cluster.

 

[Obioban]

If you base your car decision on Carplay, then you are certainly a phone guy and not a car guy! lol
Honestly, if my SuperDuty had a native Waze app, I could care less about Carplay. Add that neither the Ford Sync or Carplay will let me browse my own library easily while driving, even with a passenger (my Mopar uConnects never had this limitation) and as far as I am concerned they both suck.

As for GM, they stuck with OnStar for years after everyone else had superior services so who knows. I know Stellantis said a couple years ago that they expect over $2B in revenue from subscription services in. the next few years so I doubt GM will be the last to try to milk this.

I'm pretty sure I'm a car guy.

I run the largest e46 M3 forum. I recently rebuilt the V10 in my M5 and manual swapped it.

CarPlay is the ONLY modern car tech feature I care about.

 

[Marek5069]

No Carplay is a complete deal breaker for me. They just want to charge me monthly subscription fees for things like nav or music. I already pay a ton for a phone and service. They can just FO if they think I'm going to set myself up to be gouged by them, hope they go broke.

 

[Beautyspin]

The finale deciding factor for our last car purchase was did it have Carplay or not. We will not buy, lease or rent another car without it. The greed of GM and others is certainly the driving force behind their decision to exclude Carplay and force an additional revenue stream from their customers via subscription service. Here’s an idea GM, give the consumer what they want!

Greed? So, a company that makes a car worth $100,000 wants subscriptions worth about $100 dollars (don't know how much the company earns through native subscriptions, throwing a random figure) is greedy. But a company that has contributed nothing to the building of the car wants to gather money through whatever means after selling $1000 device, is altruistic?

 

[macduke]

Despite these aspirations, the rollout of Ultifi has encountered significant obstacles such as software malfunctions that dealerships have struggled to resolve.

Oh no! Who could have ever predicted this?

All of us. The answer is all of us.

GM's move is driven by a wish to reclaim customer connections and data insights from third parties

Translation: They want to sell you subscriptions for things CarPlay can already do better and they want to sell your private information to data brokers, including insurance companies, so they can spy on you and raise your rates for the smallest of infractions.

I recently read about someone who bought a new car and then a few weeks later their insurance rates jacked up from the already higher new rate on their new car. They spent a ton of time digging into it and the reason their rates went up was because not long after they got the car, they had to avoid an accident and swerve and slam on their brakes. That data was sent to their insurer through a data sharing agreement they were not made aware of, and the insurer’s software determined they were driving recklessly in their new vehicle and increased their rates. So you’re damned if you crash and you’re damned if you don’t.

As consumers, it’s time for us to take back our rights in the US. No more! We’re turning into a corporatocracy where everyone is stealing our data and spying on us. Where we can’t even repair a lot of the things we purchase and are beholden to these billionaire lords as their serfs.

 

[Marek5069]

Well, this is depressing. We will no longer see CarPlay in vehicles at all because of another Tim Apple overreach? I still don’t understand, however, why Android Auto is also being thrown out.

No, you no longer will see Carplay because the auto makers want another stream of revenue from subscription services. That is why Android Auto is also being thrown out, nothing to do with Tim. Sorry if that doesn't fit your narrative.

 

[chrono1081]

No advertisement company/platform sells your data. It uses the data to place ads at relevant positions. Apple does it too, where ever it can. However, there are not as many places available for Apple as they are available for Google.

Apple sued for collecting user data despite opt-outs

Doesn't matter what the data is, they thought they pushed the off switch, argues complaint

www.theregister.com

Apple Tests AI-Powered Ad Tool Similar to Google's Performance Max

Discover Apple's AI-Powered Ad Tool for App Store Optimization. Learn how Apple's new AI-driven strategy is revolutionizing ad placements within its App Store, similar to Google's Performance Max. Explore potential expansions and revenue streams for Apple's evolving ad business. Stay updated on...

www.cdomagazine.tech

Apple faces new lawsuit over its data collection practices in first-party apps, like the App Store | TechCrunch

This sort of data collection would raise questions about Apple's implementation of Apple Tracking Transparency (ATT).

techcrunch.com

Fourth class-action lawsuit filed against Apple for alleged privacy violations | AppleInsider

A fundamental misunderstanding of App Tracking Transparency tools has led to multiple lawsuits against Apple in recent weeks, with the fourth filed in Northern California being the most recent.

appleinsider.com

I could go on, but you get the gist.

Ok so no proof. Did you read the articles you posted? There's literally no proof of sale but what I can see is a lawyer confusing data the app needs to work correctly (like search queries on stocks) being misconstrued as "data collecting".

 

[jiminybob]

For this to work in their favor, GM would have to have vehicles that are so compelling that people are willing to overlook an important feature that is now more-or-less standard on the market. That is not the reality on the ground.

The only manufacturer I’ve run across that has products compelling enough for me to overlook the omission of CarPlay is Rivian, but they’re currently out of my price range.

 

[Larabee119]

If the navigation interface is as good as Waze or google map, I'm happy. But don't charge me $ for the navigation package you filthy car dealer.

 

[Murdock12]

As article says GM is doing this to increase their revenue by collecting information and selling add ons. In my opinion this backfires and they loose more customers due to not having CarPlay. I for sure don’t consider a car without CarPlay regardless of price discounts or other features. I want a seamless connection with my iPhone.

Totally understandable opinion - that’s why CarPlay should remain an option and I wish I had it in my Rivian. I don’t mind paying a subscription for Rivian whenever they finally make me, but that’s a vehicle where the the tech is an integral part of what it is - it’s not just a tool to get from point A to B, and that’s a bit reason why I bought it. A GMC Sierra? Not so much.

That being said, native apps can actually be WAY better if they put resources into development. Admittedly, that’s not gonna happen with most companies, but I solely use Spotify and the native app in the Rivian is exponentially better than using CarPlay in so many ways…and it never has the connectivity issues I’ve experienced with CarPlay in every other vehicle (GM, Ford, and Porsche). But sometimes the Rivian navigation is frustrating enough that I have a separate phone mount that I’ve had to use a few times.

 

[I7guy]

Greed? So, a company that makes a car worth $100,000 wants subscriptions worth about $100 dollars (don't know how much the company earns through native subscriptions, throwing a random figure) is greedy. But a company that has contributed nothing to the building of the car wants to gather money through whatever means after selling $1000 device, is altruistic?

You have it backwards. Why should I pay for something I’ve already paid for in my car and that already has hardware and works or that they are pissed off they can’t fully utilize the customer as a product?

That different than using an add-on product. The company that produces the add-on product is certainly allowed to do what we they want , within the law, with their product.

 

[CloneBB]

CarPlay and screen size are my first two questions. No wireless CarPlay and no 12” screen means no sale. We have a ford and subaru which checked both boxes.

 

[npmacuser5]

We are a pampered lot! If our significant problems are CarPlay or not in our vehicles costing more than most of the worlds housing. Enjoy!

 

[Beautyspin]

Ok so no proof. Did you read the articles you posted? There's literally no proof of sale but what I can see is a lawyer confusing data the app needs to work correctly (like search queries on stocks) being misconstrued as "data collecting".

Oh! So, is that not proof? Did you read them? I had already said no advertising company sells user data. Apple is also an advertisement company. It does not sell user data. It is as shady as any other company in collecting user data nefariously.

 

[theLedger]

I don’t know how Tesla has gotten away with it for so long but as our smartphones continue to adopt levels of vertical integration into our lives, it’s going to be hard for automakers to ignore it.

While we’re talking about screens - I know the automakers are implementing wider screens but what we need are vertical screens - especially for navigation where you get a better sense of where the next turn is.

 

[icwhatudidthere]

Greed? So, a company that makes a car worth $100,000 wants subscriptions worth about $100 dollars (don't know how much the company earns through native subscriptions, throwing a random figure) is greedy. But a company that has contributed nothing to the building of the car wants to gather money through whatever means after selling $1000 device, is altruistic?

Kinda, yes. Take a look at what the Mercedes CEO called us customers:

That marketplace is a potential “pot of gold” for Mercedes-Benz, according to Källenius, who disclosed that the company generated 1 billion euros in software-enabled revenue in 2022 and expects that number to be in the “high single-digit-billion euros” by the end of the decade.

https://robbreport.com/motors/cars/mercedes-benz-tech-update-silicon-valley-1234830050/

The thing is, I already pay for my Apple Music subscription. But Mercedes also wants me to pay them to use their version of the app. And until recently they wanted me to pay for a data subscription to use that app. Both of which I already have on my phone. They just want extra money to do it in an "integrated" way.

 

[chrono1081]

Oh! So, is that not proof? Did you read them? I had already said no advertising company sells user data. Apple is also an advertisement company. It does not sell user data. It is as shady as any other company in collecting user data nefariously.

No, it's not proof. Are you a developer? I am. Everything I read looks like data needed to make the app function. Nowhere in where you linked was any proof (only accusations) that Apple sells data.

Again, did you read what you linked?