Interesting read on some car manufacturers dropping CarPlay

[DeaneG]

I imagine that implementing and maintaining Android Auto and Carplay interfaces represents a significant ongoing engineering investment for a company, and some smaller burden on customer care. Volvo took a year to introduce CarPlay in its new EVs. Lucid took at least that long for CarPlay in the Air, and about three years to implement Android Auto. Resources have to be allocated at a cost of something else.

 

[ke2]

The other thing car manufacturers can't do if they genuflect to the android auto/carplay interface(s) is differentiate their car from the next guy. I think this is one of the big reasons carplay 2 has almost no penetration into the market, Apple wants to take over the entire interface to the car so the car maker can't do any differentiation.

 

[joec]

All of what you folks are saying is true. But it doesn’t matter ultimately. The vast majority of people want CarPlay/Android Auto, and won’t consider buying a car without them.

And it’s clear GM’s motivation here has nothing to do with making a distinct UX, and everything to do with data collection and selling your private info. It’s not going to fly. They’ll learn the hard way.

 

[FeelLicks]

The data monetization argument is also really lacking data to support it. I remember seeing somewhere (I would have to look for it again) that the data CarPlay/AA would "steal" are the data to insurers/brokers and it is microscopic... something like for Honda is twenty some cents per car and like $6k maybe per year? lol.... And another article mentioning entire industry's monetization was also abysmal, so either theres no market for it or the car companies don't have the business acumen to market and sell it - either way is the same conclusion.

On the other hand car company subscriptions do make a decent amount of money and is not affected by CarPlay/AA.

And as I mentioned a while ago in another thread, listen to the folks on the front lines talking to customers and passing that feedback back up their management chain - customers want CP/AA! Whatever execs lie out of their mouth is totally not what their own data is showing and now you see GM starting to walk back.

I totally agree that CP/AA are really nothing special overall, but MOST car manufacturs just haven't proven they have the chops to make their own and overcome CP/AA advantages. Now AI could change that, and quickly, but until they prove it, customers - especially richer wives and grandparents are going to spend their money on the familiar and proven.

 

[gaskiller]

Car Play made sense 5-10 years ago as car manufacturers were adding bigger screen infotainment but had limited software expertise to optimize them. Currently however, virtually no manufacturer wants to still be offering Car Play. Most car companies are improving their infotainment, learning that that data can be monetized and as they move towards EVs and increasing software defined hardware, prefer to keep their systems in-house. They are still offering Air Play either due to 1.) Their in-house software sucks - Austin Martin, 2.) They were pressured by buyers and were worried about loosing sales - GM, or 3.) Both software and worried about loosing sales - Lucid.

As I have said in the past, Air Play/Android Autos days are numbered and will mostly disappear within 10 years.

Nope, no one makes better software than Apple/Google. Many prefer to have a familiar interface. I’m never buying a car without CarPlay. And why would I want to pay a monthly subscription for subpar software. The seamless integration is a big plus.

 

[raleighone]

For years I've thought we're moving towards a "CarPlay" model for everything computing. Now that phones are fast enough for 80-90% of daily compute tasks for most people, I'm surprised we don't just see tons of Monitor/Keyboard bays all over cafes, airports, etc., where like CarPlay, you walk up and it just connects to give you a "desktop experience." Apple will do this eventually...watch. ;-)

It's fine if people don't want CarPlay, but imo, it's a lot easier to have one personal computing device than trying to sync multiple ones IF you want your info (contacts, texts, apps, movies/shows watched, etc.) in your car. I still use Lucid nav mostly for accurate charge stops...but CarPlay for music, ChatGPT, etc.

 

[DeaneG]

...It's fine if people don't want CarPlay, but imo, it's a lot easier to have one personal computing device than trying to sync multiple ones IF you want your info (contacts, texts, apps, movies/shows watched, etc.) in your car. I still use Lucid nav mostly for accurate charge stops...but CarPlay for music, ChatGPT, etc.

We own a car with native android apps. You just log into each one once when you set up a new profile - more or less like setting up a new phone, but simpler as many of the car app logins are just one tap authorizations on your phone. It's a non-issue. Everything stays synchronized.

 

[Aka-none]

We own a car with native android apps. You just log into each one once when you set up a new profile - more or less like setting up a new phone, but simpler as many of the car app logins are just one tap authorizations on your phone. It's a non-issue. Everything stays synchronized.

Yeap, just depends whose environment you trust more.
Personally, from a paper and documented incidences, I’d trust my data in Apples environment than Google’s

 

[ke2]

The data monetization argument is also really lacking data to support it. I remember seeing somewhere (I would have to look for it again) that the data CarPlay/AA would "steal" are the data to insurers/brokers and it is microscopic... something like for Honda is twenty some cents per car and like $6k maybe per year? lol.... And another article mentioning entire industry's monetization was also abysmal, so either theres no market for it or the car companies don't have the business acumen to market and sell it - either way is the same conclusion.

Doing the math on your numbers would mean only 30,000 cars (6000/.2=30,000). So your math is off because I think Honda sells quite a few more cars than 30,000/year (and the revenue would continue every year for however long a car is in service). I'd also like you to provide the source of the numbers above as they seem way way too low to me. Google (among others) has made an entire company out of monetization of what they know about the people who use their services. Google has a $4 trillion market cap and is a money making machine so someone knows how to monetize user data. Plus it will be pretty easy to target things at the drivers as you already likely know quite a bit about them (so show where whole foods markets are instead of the dollar store for Lucid Gravity Buyers as suggestions for grocery stores)

 

[DeaneG]

Yeap, just depends whose environment you trust more.
Personally, from a paper and documented incidences, I’d trust my data in Apples environment than Google’s

Sure, I agree, but I'd rather have Google's reach and power behind my digital life than Apple's. It's a personal choice, with tradeoffs. I respect yours.

 

[raleighone]

We own a car with native android apps. You just log into each one once when you set up a new profile - more or less like setting up a new phone, but simpler as many of the car app logins are just one tap authorizations on your phone. It's a non-issue. Everything stays synchronized.

Across multiple users? You sure? lol Kidding...but I have heard of issues from others when you get into sync'ing for different drivers.

 

[DeaneG]

Across multiple users? You sure? lol Kidding...but I have heard of issues from others when you get into sync'ing for different drivers.

Yes, my wife and I have separate profiles, no issues at all.

 

[FeelLicks]

Doing the math on your numbers would mean only 30,000 cars (6000/.2=30,000). So your math is off because I think Honda sells quite a few more cars than 30,000/year (and the revenue would continue every year for however long a car is in service). I'd also like you to provide the source of the numbers above as they seem way way too low to me. Google (among others) has made an entire company out of monetization of what they know about the people who use their services. Google has a $4 trillion market cap and is a money making machine so someone knows how to monetize user data. Plus it will be pretty easy to target things at the drivers as you already likely know quite a bit about them (so show where whole foods markets are instead of the dollar store for Lucid Gravity Buyers as suggestions for grocery stores)

man you really made me look through my browser history just for this: https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a61711288/automakers-sold-customer-data-for-small-profits/

Old article so who knows what's changed since then or how good the data is.

Are you really trying to compare car companies to Google though? And the sheer volume and breadth of their data compared to driving data? Its easy for the average person to understand what makes Google successful, not so obvious to me who would even want to buy car manufacturers minuscule data.