A couple of days ago, Rivian CEO RJ Scaringe was on The Verge‘s “Decoder” podcast. While on there, he was asked about Rivian’s decision to not support popular in-car phone-linked infotainment systems like Apple CarPlay or Android Auto. This is a decision shared with other companies, like Tesla and GM. It’s also a decision that, upon careful consideration, I have determined to be “stupid” and “inane.” There’s a good reason many, many people want systems like CarPlay, and it’s an act of colossal hubris to just dismiss all those people under the illusion that somehow Rivian and other carmakers know better, because, let’s be honest, they don’t.
Let’s take a look at what was actually said in the podcast;
Nilay Patel/Verge: The other thing I’m curious about when it comes to demand and what people are shopping for with these cars is CarPlay. Apple is very insistent that no new car buyer will buy anything except a car with CarPlay. Tesla famously doesn’t have CarPlay. Rivian famously doesn’t have CarPlay. GM is taking it out of its EVs. Are you committed to that, that you’re just going to stick with your software and your interface? Or are you open to using Apple’s next-generation CarPlay?
RJ Scaringe: You and I talked about this before. This is a question that certainly you see a lot of buzz around on the internet. Some of our customers make some noise about this. We’ve taken the view of the digital experience in the vehicle wants to feel consistent and holistically harmonious across every touchpoint. In order to do that, the idea of having customers jump in or out of an application for which we don’t control and for which doesn’t have deep capabilities to leverage other parts of the vehicle experience… for example, if you’re in CarPlay and want to open the front trunk, you have to leave the application and go to another interface. It’s not consistent with how we think about really creating a pure product experience.
It seems Scaringe’s main point is that they want the “digital experience” in their cars to be “holistically harmonious,” meaning that they want to retain control of the user experience, and not pass UX control over to anyone else, like Apple. He also mentions that using CarPlay is a problem because if you have to – and this is his example – open the front trunk, you have to leave CarPlay and go into Rivian’s interface.
Now, there are some real problems with these arguments. First off, the opening the front trunk thing: that’s Rivian’s problem, because putting a control to open a trunk inside a menu on a touchscreen is just shitty design that nobody actually wants. You know what people will do when you ask them to open the front trunk? They’ll reach around under the left side of the dash (on LHD cars) because that’s where they’ve known hood releases have been, forever.
Putting controls that open parts of the car – hatches, doors, glove boxes – on a touchscreen interface is just idiotic, and not something anybody really wants. Who asked for that? Who decided they wanted to navigate a touchscreen UX to locate where the control to open a trunk is? That’s garbage.
And here’s the other thing – the idea that people buying cars care about anything like a holistically harmonious digital experience is absolute delusional crap. Sure, RJ Scaringe (a clearly sharp guy) cares about that, and so do his UX designers, but the people who actually want to buy and use the cars? They do not give a brace of BMs about that.
People want to use the interfaces they already use and understand. They use their phones all day long; that’s the interface they want for their car’s infotainment and navigation systems, the same interface they’ve been using all day as it is, the one that already has their preferences and seamlessly knows the address they looked up before even getting in the car and has their playlists and contacts and everything, right there, ready to go.
Nobody wants to learn some dumb new UX for their car. They just don’t care, and, why should they? Plus, let’s look at these harmonious digital experiences that RJ is talking about. Here’s a walkthrough of Rivian’s new UI/UX system:
One of the things they’re most proud of is the new look, which includes 3D cell-shaded graphics provided by Epic Games, and, yes, it does look great:
Very attractive! The cell-shaded, animated illustration sure is evocative and pretty! But is this actually a good interface? Is it so good that Rivian should prevent another sort of UX from controlling things like music and navigation and texting and other infotainment features? I’m not so sure. Let’s just take a look at this screen:
The UX is nothing to write home about here. 75% of the screen is an illustration that doesn’t do jack shit and the actual controls are just a bunch of basic text-and-icon buttons in a small panel. The text is pretty small, you’d have to really focus on this if you were to try to adjust any of these things while driving, and if there’s anything actually innovative going on here, it’s incredibly well-hidden.
Really, if this UX reminds me of anything, it’s another cell-shaded, illustrated UX concept, one you may remember. It was called Microsoft Bob.
At least in Bob the buttons were made to look like objects in the environment, instead of on some gray floating panel. But nobody liked Microsoft Bob.
The black strips on the top and bottom remain there regardless of whatever main interface is on screen, and I’d imagine that could be retained even if the main area of the screen was running Apple CarPlay or Android Auto, so things like climate controls and other always-available controls (even opening trunks, if you insist on having it on a touchscreen) should be accessible even with something not holistically harmonious on the main screen.
There’s so much hubris here, as these carmakers all are so sure they’re making incredible digital user experiences people are just thrilled to have. They’re not. Here’s another example from this Rivian video:
What we’re looking at here is actually two things: the Rivian interface for controlling the direction the HVAC vents blow and a visual reminder of how misguided and wrong it is to put some controls on a digital touchscreen.
HVAC vent direction should never be controlled on a touchscreen: the very concept is too idiotic. Simple control vanes and knobs on the vents themselves work immediately, intuitively, and can be adjusted any time at all, independently of what may be on a touchscreen. They require no additional servo motors or wiring or software. They’re a solved problem.
This interface is an abject failure, and you can tell that by this simple clue: it’s a picture of the dashboard that you’re already looking right at. The little picture of the steering wheel is inches from the actual steering wheel. They’re simulating moving physical vent controls by having you move simulated, drawn vents on the screen, when they could have eliminated all of this by just letting your same fingers move the vents directly. It’s like a joke. The people that design this and think it’s just great have no business telling anyone what UX they can or can’t use in their own cars.
I should note that Rivian is not alone with this inane idea; plenty of other carmakers do the same thing, controlling HVAC vents via the touchscreen, including Tesla, whose implementation is especially fussy and stupid:
There are a number of articles out there already defending Scaringe’s take, including one from my beloved ex-editor, Patrick George. Patrick is great, but boy do I not agree with him, here. One of Patrick’s main points is that carmakers’ software is getting better and better, and while he may certainly be right about this, it just doesn’t matter.
He uses the Mercedes-Benz Hyperscreen system as an example of how much carmaker UX systems and software have leapfrogged systems like CarPlay and Android Auto, but the honest truth is that when most people see something like this:
…the reaction isn’t one of fascination and excitement, but rather a ragged sigh of dismay at the thought of having to figure out what all of that is and what it does when all they want to do is listen to their damn Spotify playlist and get directions to that new Peruvian-Dutch fusion restaurant where they’re meeting everybody.
Patrick compares that Hyperscreen experience to CarPlay, and comes up with this conclusion:
I can’t imagine wanting to swap that experience for the same set of Apple icons I’ve seen since the Obama years.
…but his conclusion is completely wrong. People want the same set of icons they already know and understand. People want something that just works, that they already understand, that has become second nature to them. Swapping those out for some other set of unfamiliar icons that do basically the same shit in just a different, more blue-glowy way is of interest to nobody, and I suspect deep down that includes Patrick, too.
Nobody gives a shit about their car’s unique software or UX or digital experience or whatever you want to call it if they have the option of just using the system they already know, already have set up, and already are using. There’s a reason a full third of car buyers consider the lack of Android Auto or CarPlay a dealbreaker when it comes to picking a new car.
We’ve already seen how this works for years, as people will stick with the phone ecosystem they’re used to even if the other side has better hardware or features. If you started with an iPhone, you’re far more likely to stick with what you know than switch to Android, for example, even if there’s some new Android phone with a better camera or whatever.
People can come up to you and say, hey, we have a new phone with better features and battery life and smells better than your iPhone, but most iPhone people would say, ah, I don’t really care, I just want to stick with my iPhone. People are invested in what they know.
It’s absolutely fine that people treat CarPlay or Android Auto as a dealbreaker for a new car. It’s what works for them, and what they want, and for Rivian or Tesla or GM or whomever to ignore what buyers clearly want because of what essentially comes down to corporate ego is just absurd.
Nobody gives a shit about any carmaker’s unique, bespoke “digital experiences” when it comes to doing the shit they already do a thousand times a day on their phones. They just want to do it the same way, just on their car. We’re all tired, and we just want to listen to our damn podcasts, send our damn texts, get our damn directions, and if we never see any of your cell-shaded animations done in collaboration with Epic Games then I think, somehow, we’ll all live.
Now, I do need to acknowledge some things here: David Tracy, my co-founder at The Autopian, is insistent that I note that I am in no way smarter than the many, many smart people who develop UI/UX systems for carmakers, and of course he’s right about that. I worked in UI/UX for a long time myself, but that’s not what I currently do. They know what they’re doing.
But my argument isn’t that I somehow know better; it’s that the experts who make these systems do know better in many ways, but that has also blinded them to what people actually want, which is what they know.
David also thinks my main point is that people don’t like change, but that’s an oversimplification; people don’t like needless change, they don’t like change that doesn’t actually make anything better, and I think that’s the argument for the current carmaker-designed infotainment system interfaces.
Also, Tesla, the biggest-selling EV brand does not offer CarPlay or Android Auto (though there are third-party projects to do this, because people do want it) and that must mean something; clearly, not having CarPlay is not necessarily a hinderance to success.
So, they’re smart, I’m dumb, Tesla is a success despite all this, but what I say still stands, I think.
Carmakers need to just sit down and give people what they want, which is the same UX as on their phones. They’ve made that very clear. And also to remember that not everything needs to be on a damn touchscreen. No one’s touchscreen UX is so amazing that it’s better or easier than just moving a knob to change where air is blowing or pulling a lever that is always available to open a trunk.
It’s time to get a grip. No one cares about being “holistically harmonious,” so it’s time to just let that shit go and we’ll all pretend no one ever said something so embarrassing at all.
Deal? Good.
TBF, Apple Carplay does suck pretty bad.
Apple CarPlay is significantly limited and a poor user experience. The argument for universal user interface and experience is a failed one since not every car is the same and not every use case is the same. Auto Manufacturers, should they choose, should be allowed to craft a user experience that’s inline with their vehicle’s nature.
I would be more receptive to Apple Carplay or Android Auto if the UI / UX wasn’t so dogsh*t.
A better combination would be:
I think this option far exceeds expectations of UI/UX for most customers and allows for flexibility.
Are you just using buzzwords? what does any of that have to do with carplay/android auto? That’s car design
YOUR DESIRES TO MODIFY THE APPLE INTERFACE ARE WRONG
YOU BRING SHAME TO YOUR FAMILY
Maybe I’m misunderstanding, but are you trying to have carplay connected, but have the Google map and navigation directions shown on your phone screen? If so, why? If not, you can definitely have carplay Google maps running on your car screen and use like the search function and start navigating from your phone. At least in my car.
You have to do it on your phone in settings, but you can rearrange the icons in Carplay.
I also can use maps on my phone if Carplay is connected. Maybe that is a per car thing?
Yes you can (settings>general>carplay>pick your car>customize)Groups are too fiddly for drivingIt shows the recent of nav, communications, and music. maybe a valid pointYou can absolutely still control google maps from your phone, if you mean show the navigation on the phone, that defeats the primary reason for having carplay. It shows turn list on the phone instead.Google maps doesn’t work? valid depending what you meanyeah you can’t play candy crush while driving. any driving friendly app not on carplay is the app devs fault, not a flaw with carplayThere are no visual ads on carplay. Sure, a streaming music service might play ads, but that’s gonna happen wherever you use it, unrelated.I don’t think you have actually used apple carplay. Most of your complaints have nothing to do with carplay or just aren’t true. Or because you want to be able to do things you really shouldn’t be doing while driving.
It’s 2024, I literally carry a tiny computer with everything I could ever possibly want or need in my pocket. You’re telling me I can’t hook it up the car I paid good money for because you’re afraid it will “ruin” the delicate balance of touchscreen-controlled cabin functions?
…All I need from an infotainment center is Google Maps and Spotify. The rest can be done with cheap, reliable buttons.
One thing worth remembering when you see all this redundant UI/UX work being done for “bespoke automotive digital experiences” is that the designers don’t work for The People, they work for their bosses.
Nobody should give a flying fuck about Apple Car Play. Android Auto is where it’s at. That is what you need to support.
Unless you are Tesla. Tesla owners are these annoying people that may pay the iDiot tax to have iPhones or other crap. Apple users. The people nobody likes. You know the kind. Teslas need to support Apple Fucking Car Play.
For the rest, Android Auto is quite enough, thank you very much.
Got a lot of anger there, you ok?
Can I just get a CD player back?
I’ve found that 3.5mm of connectivity solves every single infotainment concern I’ve ever had inside a vehicle.
I’m I the only curmudgeonly old bastard who just … doesn’t give a rat’s ass about this debate? I don’t want any of these damn screens at all!
Please tell me I’m not the only one that now wishes my car OS was MS Bob.
I’m sure we can make that happen. Nerds untie!
The best companies don’t only give customers what they want. They give customers what they didn’t know they wanted in the first place.
Carplay and Android Auto are good. Make something better and customers will buy it.
Now I have no idea if Rivian’s system is better or worse. But the few people I know that have owned or still own Teslas really like the infotainment in their cars.
I hate how my phone changes where features are after some updates, and how I have to redo my home screen workflow when an app stops being supported (I just want a great email client again!). The only thing I want updated on my infotainment screen is newer maps. I love my Tesla, but hate the lack of physical buttons and vent controls.
Interesting, are you on Android or iPhone? I don’t remember my iPhone moving any apps after updates. The internal menus change sometimes. But it’s remarkably consistent from one iOS version to another.
iOS. My apps don’t change, but menus inside settings do. Old apps drop support, and then have to be replaced
So I really don’t care enough to look but does this mean Rivian doesn’t have android auto or it does?
No AA
Hot take. The fact that someone will choose a car based on whether or not they can easily connect their phone to it is ridiculous. The fact that a supposed full third of carbuyers consider it a deal breaker is honestly just sad to me.
If integration is easy to allow, then go for it. If it significantly raises costs, I am not one to care that they won’t offer compatibility.
Certainly a hot take. Considering you can get apple carplay and android auto on the cheapest base model Mitsubishi, Nissan and Toyota means it isn’t expensive to integrate. The thing is this is about revenue streams. Rivian is probably planning on charging people to use their “connectivity apps” in the future. CarPlay and Android Auto make this impossible since a user can easily bypass the built-in UI with a phone projection.
The problem is less with phone connectivity and more with replacing that phone connectivity with integrated apps and/or data subscription plans. People aren’t just annoyed at different interfaces, they are annoyed at relying on the car manufacturer for features that they could easily have via AA/CP without an additional cost or concerns about how often it’s updated.
And I forgot about concerns that your car will stop being able to connect to the servers because the car company stops supporting them or that car. Or because we’ve moved on to a different connectivity for cell service and sunset the one your car supports.
The issues you raise here are valid, but go so much deeper than just whether or not Carplay is present in the vehicle. But also, there is absolutely zero guarantee that in 20 years when the car company moves on from 5G, that Carplay will remain backward compatible enough to still function on the car. Arguments that support might end are arguments that work for any tech company, not just the carmaker.
It’s a lot cheaper to replace a phone than a car. And, incidentally, I (and most others) replace my phone a lot more often than my car.
As to the backward compatibility issue, it’s possible that it would pose a problem. But it’s a lot more easily solved than the hardware compatibility of your car’s modem being incompatible with wireless networks.
Yeah, that’s my biggest concern with Tesla (and bambulabs)
That happens with infotainment systems not being compatible with new versions of car play or android Auto. We need a decoupling of critical vehicle services from the infotainment or a standard so we can upgrade them.
I am old enough to remember a new DVD form the maps was $500.
Absolutely this. If we were back to double DIN stereos with a connection for the back up camera and maybe something feeding range data to them, there’d be no worries about infotainment losing support or being exploited.
Considering that prior to AA and Carplay some infotainment systems were dreadful, I get it.
Microsoft Sync was so bad, for so long Ford dealers had to train employees on how to train customers how to use it.
Say what you will about AA and Carplay, they mostly just work and you don’t have to learn a new UI.
I rent a lot of cars. More and more, I see heads up displays and LCD dashboards in use. With the factory navigation, both these displays are frequently used to display relevant directional information. IE, left turn in 3 miles, lane recommendations, etc. No need to look to a display off to the side. However, it’s less frequent that the same car when using CarPlay or Android Auto will port the their native map systems to these same displays. I presume this is an issue of differing hardware and the inability to program every car to read the signals correctly. Not all cars have avoided this feature, but it’s quite common I found.
If this type of integration that is easily done with the factory navigation but is hard with CarPlay/Android Auto relays into other functionality the car offers, I can see why an argument can be made for it being more streamlined to use the manufacturer’s native software. After all, if the manufacturer doesn’t have to spend time trying to make it compatible with CP/AA, that’s time they can spend on improving their native system.
That said, I’m really having a hard time thinking of what other functions of the car the CP/AA would really need to be compatible with, so it’s a pretty limited argument not to include it. And most people would likely be willing to give up the dashboard navigation to use their preferred mapping system anyways. Makes the whole argument kind of weak…
Regardless of what these car companies say publicly, the reason for removing buttons and moving physical activities, that we could do blindfolded, to a screen is cost. A $1 button or lever costs more than a couple lines of code. They will continue to remove physical controls till they lose sales or some government agency forces them to put buttons back.
After over 25 years in IT, I’ve learned that simplicity and familiarity always win out over something marginally better. It has to truly be worth the effort for a consumer to pursue and embrace a new technology. Until someone’s new infotainment system brings more pleasure than a dentist’s drill without Novocain, CarPlay and Android Auto will continue to win the day.
That’s a terrible attitude in IT. Let’s do it this way because it’s how we always did it. It’s why COBOL haunts us to this day. For the end user facing stuff you can make it look similar.
Why is that a terrible attitude? End users choose their experience. They don’t want to be bothered with taking time to learn something radically different that might be slightly or marginally better when what they have works fine. Are the benefits worth their time investment? And, if they are forced, as is the case with automakers not offering CP and AA, they’ll react quite negatively. Now, if someone makes something substantially better, they’ll flock to it. As for your COBOL analogy, that’s under the hood technology, can and should be addressed, and isn’t related to consumer adoption.
This is going to be a very unpopular take but I had a Tesla Model 3 for six years always thinking I was missing something by not having CarPlay (or Android Auto). I made the mistake of trading it in on a Rav4 Hybrid in March (I say mistake because it’s kind of like going back to a horse and buggy tech wise, especially since I’m one of the apparently rare people for whom FSD worked very well) due to eventually getting sick of not having charging in my building, and oh my do I think CarPlay is actually terrible now that I’ve gotten to finally try it. Maybe Android Auto is better?
But either way I do agree that Tesla and Rivian and others should at least give the user a choice and let CP/AA run in a window or something for those who want it. And as far as the vents and mirrors are concerned I set them where I wanted them via the touchscreen back in 2018 and never needed to adjust them again so I’ve never understood the hate about that either?
You might sort of prove the point Jason is making. You switched from one thing to another and prefer the one that’s familiar to you. If all these companies settled into relative standardization instead of trying to differentiate themselves, this whole conversation might be moot.
You sent the vents in 2018 and never need to adjust them again. So we can assume nobody else ever drives your car?
I don’t care about AA or CP, because I don’t do anything with my phone but talk/text, unless I’m stuck someplace without a decent computer. I think my Garmin is better than Google at directions, and doesn’t require a cell connection. I’ve got a USB jack that I can feed music into, if I don’t want to listen to the garbage that’s OTA. So my infotainment requirement is: radio.
If you’re the only driver of that car, fine, set those things and leave them. If the car is driven by several different members of the family, folks will be adjusting vents and mirrors all the time. Also, on long drives, I move the seat around to alleviate the arthritis I’ve had since age 17 and need to adjust the mirrors with each time. If I need to go to a screen, that’s distracted driving.
I adjust my vents just about every time I drive, so does my wife
Thank you Jason. I’m 100% with you on this one. I can tell you first-hand that no carplay is nearly a deal-breaker for me and my wife. I can deal with not having it only on cars that didn’t come with it before it was invented (e.g. MY 2017). My wife on the other hand will not even consider a car without it now that she’s had it in two vehicles since 2017. When you have 2 kids and a thousand other things on your mind, you don’t want to figure out someone’s idea of a great, holistic UI/UX experience. You just want your damn toddler’s music to work, your maps to load, and not be bothered anymore.
Pointing out the stupidity of Scaringe’s example of the frunk release is perfect. That’s a hole they dug themselves. No one wants to control stuff indirectly when it’s much easier to do it directly (like the vents, or maybe a transmission lever, etc).
These CEOs need to get over themselves. Problems that were solved decades ago don’t need new “solutions” that actually make things harder to do. And why deliberately piss off potential customers? I’m really interested in the R3 but it’s a non-starter if I can’t sell my wife on the idea of no carplay.
As usual, Jason, you nailed it on this topic. I will never understand why automakers take such a direct user requirement and cast it aside. Here we have a ton of people telling them exactly what they want, and they won’t do it. Car Play is a requirement for me, too.
It can’t possibly cost them much to integrate into their system as an app. The problem is Rivian and the other companies that are specifically avoiding CarPlay/AA are doing it to try to make some revenue from the end user during the ownership period. My guess is some sort of connectivity package with a monthly fee. It’s all bullshit.
Yup. It is. Automakers should make automobiles. They are NOT technology firms. Here apple car play can do most infotainment and they insist on trying to develop a piece of technology hardware when they should be developing an automobile.
Yes — this is a total $$$ play by Rivian. They charge $15/month so that you can stream music on their UI. Otherwise you got to use bluetooth and stick your phone on a mount like it’s 2010 all over again.
Can we please got back to double DIN standard infotainment, and make sure HVAC is separate? I’ve been able to add CarPlay to a 2006 E150, a 1998 Ranger, and a 2002 Outback, but not a 2016 Sienna, 2010 Accord, or 2007 Volvo.
You’re absolutely right, but it’s beginning to look like new car buyers won’t have a choice. There’s too much money to be had in controlling the whole user experience and having access to all the user data (not to mention subscriptions). They can say all the right things about making everything mesh correctly and getting the right vibe, but data is big money these days. It’s also why we keep seeing the push for all billing for EV charging to go through the vehicle.
If you buy their car, then you have to connect your Google/Spotify/Amazon/etc. if you want the features you’re used to. Now [car company] can use/sell that data, location data, and the payment info you’re using. Other companies will buy that info, just like they pay for your shopping data at grocery stores and all the data they can get from your cell phone. The full picture of the consumer is valuable.
And, of course, if you want to keep using features with internet connections, you’ll need to pay for connectivity. They’ll push hard to upsell you to a connectivity plan with extra features. And they’ll probably start offering your Spotify or other subscriptions through the car interface, skimming a little of that money. Once that’s all normalized, they can expect most people will keep paying them indefinitely.
I can’t believe PG has fallen so far. For someone I respect and admire to have such a bad take, well, it’s a sad day.
Why do you need your phone again? I thought you were driving.
CarPlay is overrated. You can’t make a physical button for everything so we’re instead stuck with “frankenstein” interfaces. CarPlay either needs to control all the the things, or GTFO
I think Apple is rolling that functionality out – they’ve already presented it as something that automakers can start designing around. It’s really up to the individual manufacturers to embrace it. I mean, check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPJGN5rBrzU
Android automotive is already out and manufacturers are using it with mixed success. Volvo and Polestar seemed to be first and they launched it before there was a working apple Carplay interface. That was a deal breaker to me, but they finally released an update that has the carplay UI working after more than a year of delays.
Automakers have proven time and time again that they can’t be trusted with good infotainment software experiences, which is why people still want their CarPlay and Android Auto. Customers are skeptical that they’re not going to get burned again by automakers who can’t execute and layer it with penny-pinching compromises. The one exception is, ironically, Rivian, who can actually execute infotainment pretty well. But that’s only infotainment, and the mistake Rivian is making is trying to put non-infotainment functions (like opening the frunk, controlling HVAC, etc) into an infotainment area. Thereby mixing their good experience with bad ones.
It’s still a step ahead of GM, who can’t make a good infotainment to save their life. Chrysler/Stellantis has come very close, but their QA/bug squashing leaves something to be desired.
You know this reminds of what happened when 3g connectivity was turned off in the USA. A LOT of connectivity systems built into cars simply stopped working (I’m looking at you, Audi) because there was no other way to get data into the car. No 4G or 5G antenna. If only there was a way to project the most current stuff from a phone onto a dumb screen. Oh wait. That’s Apple Carplay/Android Auto.
This is more complicated than just replacing the antenna. Data connectivity includes a modem, and who knows how that was integrated into their telematics connectivity unit. A lot of times the chips are integrated directly on to the board. Now, if the telematics could go into a client mode and connect to a hotspot, or (gasp) have an ethernet or USB port to plug into a separate hotspot…
He don’t want to give vehicle data for free, probably.
As far as I remember, Apple was asking more telemetry data or connection with the OBD even when it is not the Carplay interface. Also worth to remember that they were developing a car at that time.
Don’t know the requirements, probably they should have something public, but most will go thru NDAs.
At least Google does have a management system (Android Automotive) that also support the Android Auto, but it is up to the automaker adopt it or just the phone interface.
Still, they grab a lot of data (speed, locations, POIs visited, etc.) that is worth some money. I do believe that they don’t split this revenue with the automaker and that should be why so many are not adding these phone interface anymore.
And touchscreens sucks mostly, I like knobs and buttons and would love to have them back.
The thing is you could make a interface that is unquestionably better than Carplay. Faster, more intuitive, integrates more seamlessly with the vehicle and nobody will care. Carplay is consistently the number 1 item on people’s list. Even if you’ve done it better those people won’t know because they won’t even look at your car. I think not having it is a huge mistake simply because it is a must have for many. I won’t debate which interface is better or worse than Carplay because it frankly does not matter. I’m not sure how execs can be so blind to this and not realized that with the decision to not have it you have erased your car from existence for a huge swath of potential customers.
Jason, you know I admire and respect you, but you’re just wrong about onscreen controls for vents.
If cars don’t abstract and intermediate ventilation controls so that they’re accessed through a touchscreen, we’ll never get to Level IV Full Self-Driving Ventilation. This, you see, is the ultimate goal: for the car to detect and respond to your slightest discomfort, using Large Bodyheat Model Machine Learning.
“How is that an improvement over moving a knob?” you ask.
“You just don’t get it, do you?” I reply.
GENIUS.
At what point in my timeline can I say “hey Rivian, cool my nuts down” and it’ll just direct all airflow at my crotch at full blast.
No crotch blaster, no deal. I’m out.
If a car can’t detect that my nethers are getting swampy and automatically cool them down without my having to ASK (my god, how pedestrian), then it’s not on my list.
He can spew all the corporate mumbo jumbo he wants but this is only about locking people into subscriptions for data, updates, navigation and all the other things your phone already does for free. The minute your 3 years or whatever of free data and updates expires your system is useless and you have little choice but to pay them until the networks shut off whatever tech your system connects to, then you’re really boned.
Edit: not to mention all of your precious data they can sell to 3rd parties. You are a gold mine and they wanna squeeze you dry.
I get it, ever car is flawed in some way; but the cases like this where the flaw is 100% intentional due to shear stubbornness and stupidity (even after being repeatedly questioned) is extra frustrating.