CarPlay mostly works, and although it has issues it's definitely user-focused.

CarPlay doesn't prevent car makers from tracking vehicle activity.

In the end, consumers don't give a shit about the in-vehicle infotainment. It sucks, or it's AA/CarPlay. The first generation of iDrive showed that rich people people will buy cars in spite of the in-car stuff. In fact, most car infotainment sucks, yet people still buy cars.

Let's turn the question around: why would car makers want to spend millions of dollars a year rolling their own infotainment system? So they can make incremental revenue selling ads and user data? So they have control? Control over what, exactly?

There's an interesting gap when discussing carplay/aa.

Cars from the 90s up until about 2013 can be easily fitted with a $500 head unit upgrade, and support carplay quite well. With the right tools, it can be done in about two hours right in your driveway.

Cars from 2018 and up pretty universally support carplay, and it's generally quite well integrated into the car's infotainment system.

But, between 2013 and 2017, things were a complete mess. In-car systems were too integrated to be replaceable with a third party 2-DIN unit, but too primitive to run carplay/AA. People who have cars from this era either sell them (for less than they're worth, since only 21% of people will buy a car without carplay!) or put up with it for another 8 years or so until the car's wound out.

For example, my rustbucket '06 Toyota has a great sounding stereo with carplay but my sibling's 2017 Nissan is stuck with flaky and poorly integrated bluetooth.

Or, if you do want to upgrade your 2013-2017 car, you end up replacing half of the in-dash components with ones from a couple model years up, tapping into the car's CAN bus to recognize the new controller, and then running some sketchy scripts to patch the firmware to remove component protection since the VIN's don't match up anymore. Not for the faint of heart.

Article is really about the unofficially called "Carplay 2", a deeper integration that Apple announced in 2022 but hasn't been heard about since.

As the article itself says, CarPlay Original Flavor is a massive success, I'm in the "79% of drivers only consider a car if it has CarPlay" (bye-bye GM!)

>Continuing with the above example, let's imagine I just downloaded a new podcast app on my phone (one that is also available in the automotive Play Store). The next day I have to go on a long drive and I want to listen to a podcast episode I downloaded on my phone. When I enter my car, I have to go to the Play Store, find the app, download it, log in, and then download the episode. When I use CarPlay, I only have to connect my phone.

Does the author have no experience with Android Auto? The same happens there, if the app is on my phone and it supports Android Auto then it will automatically be available in the car, along with all media on my phone. This isn't a CarPlay only functionalitiy, it's just how phone mirroring works on both platforms. Author seems to think there is an extra step involved on Android. Perhaps by "Play Store" they mean the car manufacturer's own app store?

Source: I use Android Auto constantly in my own vehicle and in the 15+ rental cars I have every year.

It's pretty funny to me to see an Apple user complaining about lack of interop with other ecosystems. You've chosen your walled garden; now it's time to realize you're stuck in it.

The author seems to blame everyone but Apple for this, though. Apparently it's Google's fault that his preferred podcast app isn't available on Android. What about the app developer, who has decided not to support Android? And it's the auto manufacturer's fault for deciding to go with Android Automotive as the infotainment OS. What about Apple, for refusing to license any of their OS offerings to third parties? (Let alone not having an automotive-suitable version of any of their OSes anyway.)

Instead, Apple wants auto manufacturers to implement a complex, proprietary Apple protocol to give iPhones the ability to control most aspects of the car's infotainment functions. Why would auto manufacturers want to do this? Not only would the auto manufacturer have to develop their own infotainment system (perhaps even using Android Automotive, but perhaps something else), but then they have to do all this extra work to essentially allow drivers to not use their own system. (And while I agree that most auto manufacturer software is weak or outright garbage, that point of fact isn't really relevant here.)

I don't agree with the author that some car makers are not excited about CarPlay 2 primarily because they want to own the automotive experience. It's because of all the extra work they need to do to support CarPlay 2 (probably an order of magnitude what it takes to support CarPlay 1 or Android Auto), and doing so isn't really in their interests, outside of Apple users who might refuse to consider their cars without CarPlay 2 support. But this is a chicken-and-egg problem: CP2 doesn't exist yet in any car, so customers don't know what they're potentially missing.

The only reason I use CarPlay is because I have an iPhone. The experience with Android auto is way ahead. Did you ever try to call a business that’s not in your contacts? Did you ever try to ask a simple question? Siri integration is horrible

I much rather have car manufacturers creating ‘exclusive to their brand’ themes and skins for the CarPlay 2 dials than not having car play (2) at all.

Car manufacturers have had decades to develop their software but almost all are difficult to work with, slow, give bad user feedback (full screen pop-up with entire paragraphs while navigating) and are cumbersome to get accustomed to when switching cars.

I’m one of the 79% that demands CarPlay, if it’s not part of the car I don’t want it.

A bit of a tangent, but those "distinctive" interior mockups made me instantly cringe. I'm fine with designers having a bit fun with every part of the car other than the top of the dashboard, which should be flat, dull, and dark (ideally covered in something like Vantablack), because any bit of visual clutter there gets superimposed over the road in front of you thanks to the reflection of the windshield in sunny weather.

> But it won't be possible to sell a subscription for a feature when all is controlled by Apple CarPlay

Good I bought the car, now get out of my life. I’m not paying hundreds of dollars for GPS map updates when I can plug in my phone and use any other mapping app’s evergreen maps. Also, subscriptions for heated seats are patently absurd.

Ugh, CarPlay 1 is exactly the division of responsibilities I want. I don’t want Apple anywhere near the actual driving functions and instruments. It takes a long time for my car to connect to CarPlay and it’d be super distracting to have the instruments suddenly change to Apple’s as I’m driving.

If you're in the market for a new-to-you car, then I recommend looking at the model years where they switch from wired car-play to wireless car-play and buying the previous model-year.

Typically this difference of one model-year can add thousands to the cost of the vehicle, especially because wireless car-play is so coveted. The experience of wireless is fantastic, but is it worth several thousand dollars? Maybe, but herein lies the trick.

Buy a dongle. They're about $100 for a good one. They can be tucked away in the vehicle. They work almost* as good as integrated wireless car-play.

*Maybe add 5 seconds to auto-connect when you get in your car.

I have zero interest in the CarPlay v2 (as described in the article).

CarPlay v1, however, is an absolute requirement. It works great and gives me pretty much everything I want.

> Google jumped on this opportunity by releasing Android Automotive. Unlike Android Auto, Google's equivalent to Apple CarPlay, Android Automotive runs natively inside the car and any carmaker is free to use it.

Tangential I know, but I giggled at yet another example of Google's incompetent branding and product naming. How a company filled with so many brilliant people can be so bad at brand strategy is baffling to me.

Something that stuck out to me in the article:

> There used to be a big difference in driving characteristics and technology between premium and budget brands. Compared to a Volkswagen, a BMW used to have a more powerful engine, better handling, and comfort features like seat-heating and cruise control. However, a Volkswagen Golf now has similar tech as a BMW and with the transition to EVs, drivetrains and handling won't be the same differentiator as before.

The thing is: that didn't used to be that way. You can blame it on the transition to EVs, but part of that transition seems to be that a bunch of manufacturers decided not to build their own platforms, motors, etc and are just licensing from other manufacturers*. The article's correct to note that flattens a lot of the value proposition of any given manufacturer, and if that's forcing them to lean in a lot on the software, that's a weird position for an automotive manufacturer, because that's never been anyone in the industry's strong suite - there's a reason 80% of drivers won't buy a car without CarPlay.

It's also notable that the brands who do seem to be going in on CarPlay are those that still make a point of building their own engines and platforms - Aston, Porsche, and even Polestar tries to differentiate itself there.

* to be clear, this was happening before EVs, too - BMW put out a car that shared a platform with a Toyota, in a move that should've caused a plague of locust to descend on Munich if God existed and had a driver's license, and Stellantis put a Lancia badge on a Chrysler a couple years back.

I don't understand why they never formed a committee and decide core basic features an OS should provide, set up an open spec API (a good one), and have that as a basis for android, ios, and mobile phones. Something like that could easily hold up for 20 years. Obviously we could put in climate controls, but all the cars should have the same basic "position" and "heirarchy tree" of where basic controls/settings are. Whenever I rent a car it's always a fkn hastle to find settings. That's all I ask :)

After spending a very long time trying to find the perfect non-Tesla EV with both carplay, good range, cargo space etc… I gave up and “settled” for a Model Y LR. The software in a Tesla is just as good as Elon is bad. Not to turn this into an anti-Elon thing… But the software in the Tesla is really second-to-none, and more folks would find out if it weren’t for Elon.

You don't have to download a new podcast app because you could just play it through Bluetooth. CarPlay and AA probably wouldn't even exist if it weren't for car vent phone holders and 2.5mm/Bluetooth upending automakers' grip on navigation and entertainment.

Two things scare me about Android / Apple car integration - I’d be interested in experiences others have had:

Obsolescence - ‘your phone is too old to use with this car’ or your car being too old for your phone. Double points for software updates to either which disable functions or features.

Vendor lock-in - are the players mutually exclusive? Does having a phone from one manufacturer limit my car choices?

I love CarPlay, but has anyone noticed that Apple just isn’t testing on non-touch interfaces? Some cars use a wheel to navigate the UI, and there are some awful CarPlay UI bugs where certain buttons become unreachable.

> A lot of the concerns around branding focus on the instrument cluster as it's one of the most recognizable parts of an interior. If you look at the CarPlay concept for Porsche and remove the steering wheel, there is no way you can tell it's a Porsche. I'm sure many brands took notice of this... With many traditional differentiators being democratized, design is a good way to stand out.

This is a really good case study in how difficult it is to find a balance between co-branding and maintaining a consistently high-quality design system across co-branding partners. There's a massive amount of work across UI/UX design and implementation done at Apple that assumes that widgets are not only using a serif font, but a specific serif font with specific kerning; that color-primary-60 and color-primary-50 and color-for-text-on-top-of-primary-60 are distinguished in a very specific way.

(Light/dark mode and localization efforts force a degree of flexibility here, but there are still a finite set of QA targets if you focus on primary language markets.)

But what happens if multiple partners want their own primary color and font? This suddenly has far-reaching, costly ramifications across multiple organizations. Even having planned your APIs from day one around color and style customizability doesn't guarantee that this can be done successfully. Taken to an extreme, frontend engineers (not just their embedded designers) are practically required to hold the context of all future potential customization needs in mind when implementing a component - a nigh impossible ask.

Which is to say that there are few companies that could pull off what the OP posits that car manufacturers are requesting, having a world-class interface that is customized to their brand. That's a tall order even for Apple's depth of talent.

As a former iPhone and current Android user, I would be very hesitant to buy any car that has Apple software in it. I don't trust Apple's software to work well with whatever phone I end up picking next.

We are in the golden age of phone<->car integration, so enjoy it while it lasts. In a few more years 100% of auto manufacturers are going to start charging a monthly subscription for this, split between them and Apple/Google.

>Competition aside, from Apple's perspective, CarPlay is also not ideal in its current form. For a company that values control over the user experience, it's an eyesore to see their product embedded inside another product.

Why can't we let the car deal with car-related functions and Apple deal with playing podcasts and showing maps? It seems like the best of both worlds to me. Apple is solving a problem that doesn't need solving.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure Apple could design a better interface than car manufacturers, but is it really worth the hassle?

I went from CarPlay (Kia e-Niro) to Tesla (Model 3) to CarPlay (Volvo XC40 Recharge) and I vastly prefer CarPlay. I've tried wireless CarPlay (BMW M2) and while convenient when entering and exiting the vehicle I found it to be quite laggy compared to wired. While Tesla does have the Apple Podcasts app it's a really bad experience. It won't sync playback state properly so I have to memorize what I'm listening to and how far I've gotten when I switch from car to phone or back. Similar story with Apple Music and even Spotify (which is usually great at keeping state between devices but not with Tesla for some reason). Yes, I paid for "premium connectivity". Tesla did have better route planning though.

I also really don't like wireless charging. It spares the port from constant wear but my device tends to get really hot and the charging is very inefficient. I plan to go back to slow wired charging everywhere to put less strain on the battery. I already have in my car and by my PC. Unfortunately my XC40 doesn't support dual screen CarPlay so I use the Google Maps in Android Automotive for navigation and use CarPlay for music, podcasts, etc. Switching from AA Google Maps and CarPlay and back is not a high friction interaction though so it's an okay solution. I'm also able to deactivate wireless charging so I'm pretty happy with this solution.

Why can't we have a car that only has:

(a) a standardized mechanism for attaching and powering your phone on its dashboard (think a "mini VESA mount" with options for USB/wireless charging)

(b) bluetooth HID-compatible physical controls on the steering wheel and/or center console so you don't have to reach for your device

(c) a minified car "radio" that only offers AM/FM radio and bluetooth audio connectivity

All other controls should be physical, copied straight out of a 90s/00s car.

One thing that is ridiculous with CarPlay is that I can't read messages: it only allows to "speak" it and while I use my phone in English I message with my friends in my native language and speaking works terrible. Even my car's shitty infotainment system can display messages.

This results in the worst possible outcome: I need to take my phone and read the messages on my phone screen, creating a safety risk.

A huge benefit to CarPlay for me is I can travel someplace like Japan, get a car with a CarPlay-supported head unit, and immediately I have Google or Apple Maps available straight off the bat in English with all my saved locations like hotels or places that are bookmarked. Nothing to set up or anything.

The only downside I've experienced with it in Japan is the GPS can be wonky in tunnels whereas the car's built-in GPS seemingly doesn't.

When I worked for an Auto maker (left 2 years ago), the cluster was an independent system from infotainment. They could follow messages from each other on the bus (it wasn’t CAN bus, we’d moved on from that) but basically there wasn’t a way for CarPlay to talk to the Cluster.

I’m willing to bet that the soonest any large OEM could offer CarPlay 2 would be next year. The development process is just too slow to turn around something.

I still drive a 2008 model car with nothing more than a radio and a basic Bluetooth handsfree system, and it's all I've ever needed. When I bought the car, I consciously opted out of a 3500€ built-in GPS, predicting that smartphone navigation would soon surpass it. Over a decade later, that decision still holds up—my iPhone handles all my navigation needs more effectively than any built-in system could.

Now, as I face the inevitability of replacing my car due to dubious environmental regulations (current car emits less than modern but twice heavier ones), I'm genuinely concerned about the current state of car infotainment systems. They feel overly complex, bloated, and fragile, prioritizing features over functionality and user experience. The shift towards these systems seems more like a downgrade, sacrificing reliability and usability for unnecessary add-ons that don't improve the driving experience.

Anyone in the same position? What car would you recommend that meets environmental standards but keeps the infotainment system super simple, or even non-existent?

All I want from CarPlay is for it not to start blaring the last thing I was playing on the car speakers as soon as I plug it in, especially given there’s about a 10 second window between the sound playing and the head unit being booted enough to actually show the screen so I can pause it.

I have no idea if it’s the car or CarPlay but could I please just have a toggle somewhere?

> This is a little unfair because Castro is a small, iOS-only app. [...] But it does mean that if I want to listen to podcasts in these cars, I have to change my podcast app to one available in the Play Store.

That's the downside of choosing apps that are not cross platform. Don't do that if you want to have the freedom to use different systems.

I really hope the lock in with have with car/phone a connection is something the EU addresses next.

I don't like that car manufacturer has to use Apple / Google software, why can they not make an app that you install and your phone connects to the car in a useful way.

The reason is that only Apple apps have the required permissions and system access to do it.

I'd be perfectly happy with carplay for media/navigation only. I want my analog dials, knobs and switches for all other car control and climate control functions.

The screenshots there make me feel pretty good about keeping my car from the 90's if that's the current state of new cars.

Carplay2 seems cool, but if it takes away my ability to just jump into whatever new car with my iphone or android phone and use aa/carplay I don't want to lose carplay. I have 3 cars with carplay and I don't want to have to set all of them up and lose portability.

How significant is the demand for advanced infotainment systems like CarPlay 2 among consumers? Are there market studies or consumer surveys indicating that buyers would prioritize "CarPlay 2" capabilities when purchasing new vehicles?

Tbh CarPlay runs really badly in my 2018 VW GTI and Castro in particular is extremely buggy. It’s pretty much random if the turn by turn audio navigation works at all.

The fact that everyone seems to think CarPlay is great though I guess suggests that the problem lies with the implementation details with the VW.

> there is no match for seamlessly transferring the phone's state to the car.

I’ll point out it’s not at all seamless. In fact it’s extremely cumbersome to fish out a lightning cable and plug the phone in. A good car infotainment system where I didn’t have to connect my phone at all would be seamless.

I use CarPlay but it is very clunky - I need to plug in the device etc. I've been working on using and old iPhone and keep it connected in the car all the time. I plan on using wifi hotspot for connectivity and since the device can sign-in using my ApplID, it can have access to my calendar or Messages as needed. Sharing the routing address from another Apple device can be done easily from Maps.

This seems like a missed opportunity for Apple - they can release a screen less device bundled with a cheap 4g connection and smooth out other integration issues for sharing / setup etc.

Almost bought a ford mustang but for some reason that year ford did not have CarPlay that worked via Bluetooth , you had to have the phone hooked up via usb and maps was glitchy as hell during the test drive. Bought a challenger instead which is a bigger nicer car anyway and CarPlay is flawless. I have a 2020 Yukon XL as well which is amazingly flawless for CarPlay , too bad GM dropped CarPlay. I wouldn’t buy another GM without it.

Shouldn’t this be exactly like the bluetooth integration? It’s just a defined protocol for basic functions like start, stop, play etc. so similarly stream any Apps from your phone with basic commands? I am happy to limit myself to a large google maps screen and the rest is control of my entertainment like I do today (open the app and then control via bluetooth).

By this we have no vendor lock in and just making sure there is a protocol downwards compatibility…

The author admits that they only use 3 apps on CarPlay 1. They're going to get CarPlay 2 and still only use 3 apps.

What's the big deal about CarPlay 2, then? Who cares?

I recently rented a car with Android Automotive. I was not impressed. It was laggy, clunky, and confusing. Fortunately it supported CarPlay, so I mostly used that.

The one cool feature was that Google maps driving directions showed up on the front instrument cluster in addition to the center console. That’s a feature I’d like to have more broadly.

The author is talking about that they only use Google Maps, Spotify and some podcast app and that those are not available in the car. Interestingly for me only the Google Maps thing is a problem, actually Google Maps doesn't work here in South Korea so I have to use Kakao Maps or T-Map. Anyway music and especially podcast work wonderfully over bluetooth.

Recently had two rental cars with CarPlay. Oddly, the experience with a Chevy (who is abandoning CarPlay support) was much better than the Hyundai, though its main problem was connecting and constantly asking permission.

Since my older cars do not have it, having a great mount (Peak Design) makes a huge difference, but damn I want it integrated if only for the bigger screen.

Can I please not have my dashboard change configuration every time I plug my phone in? Infotainment only is a FEATURE, not a bug!

> Thanks to a deep integration with the software stack of the vehicle, CarPlay 2 can control most infotainment functions. It can therefore take over the entire infotainment display, the instrument cluster, and any passenger displays.

The instrument cluster?

Any other safety-critical functions that the iPhone isn't isolated from?

All I look for is a USB connection to the simple stereo, plug my phone in and mount it on the dash. I fail to see why I have to deal with the additional cognitive load of an other interface that WILL go wrong when I already have a perfectly good one in my pocket.

(No, I don't even want Bluetooth, ugh).

I disagree with this love of hooking my $1000 phone to my $30000 car.

Everywhere else in my house, I try to make gadgets independent of one another. I remember when a printer worked only when it was hooked to a PC to be its server. That was bad. It’s much better for my printer to hook to the network directly.

Some thermostats require a phone to program them. That’s bad. The thermostat should have full functionality as a stand-alone device. My dishwasher requires a smartphone app to work some of its features. Bad. My old dishwasher was fully controllable from the panel on front.

A car is no different. I don’t want to have to plug my phone into my car like a dongle, even wirelessly. The car should connect to the network itself and have needed applications like nav and music. Maybe car-makers suck at making this software, so maybe Apple or Google should make it for them. Or maybe carmakers should get better at it.

But no, I’m never going to think that plugging my phone into my car is any better of a kludge than is forcing me to get out my phone to work my dishwasher.

This article is very surprising to me, people actually use and want this software? I always avoid using car infotainment because they suck and just link my phone via bluetooth because it isn't the worst possible thing.

As CarPlay aims to dominate even more screens in our cars, isn't Apple simply replacing buttons and dials with potentially distracting and fingerprint-smeared touch screens just to extend its software reach?

I and most people I know are part of that 70% of people who would never buy a car without CarPlay. Even my elderly relatives who are not GREAT with tech in general seem to love it.

Big fan of apple CarPlay installed an aftermarket one in my 2004 Golf and it can make it feel more modern than some 2013 cars.

As a shopper of a vehicle. I want my car to control car operation/cockpit information. I have enjoyed the continuous improvement of navigation and entertainment functionality of Android Auto/Car Play.

For the love of god, keep them separate. One is critical vehicle functionality. There other can crash/reboot/have connectivity issues, without me being concerned about knowing the engine is overheating/battery pack is dead, a tire is blowing out via TPS or I'm speeding.

I don't want a car that is CarPlay only, guess what, my car is not an accessory to my phone. The genius of current Android Auto/CarPlay is that the car head unit can act as a mostly "dumb" head unit for my external mobile processor.

Volvo's car radio is not easy to use, I hope it would be better to use CarPlay directly

It is bad enough that Mercedes decided to emulate Tesla. Now, fuck this, I don't want my merc dashboard to look like an IPhone. It cheapens the experience.

A lot of this is a parable about what is wrong with the tech industry, which rewards dominance and market seizure rather than utility, longevity, and other consumer benefits.

Car makers what "differentiation". Uh huh. That is literally, exactly, what consumers do NOT want or benefit from.

I want consistency so that I can get in a rental car, or my friend's car, or my new car,

and have sh-t just work.

The LAST thing I want is a curated subset of familiar apps and controls, plus crappily designed but "cool looking" replacements all about convenying Brand(tm) Values.

My next car must have CarPlay...

> I use only three apps when driving: Google Maps for navigation, Spotify for music, and Castro for podcasts. The number of cars on sale today with these three apps available is zero.

My car (a Volvo) has two of these three apps built-in.

I stopped reading the rest of the article.

This article could really use a tl;dr. I tapped out about a third of the way through after I got bored with slogging through so much windup in search of a “risky bet.”

It’s amusing when the author says “when the phone crashes.”

My 2022 Subaru Outback head unit frequently crashes or is really unresponsive. My iPhone never crashes.

Car infotainment systems are garbage. I’d never buy a car without CarPlay. It’s maybe the #1 measure I have for vehicle quality when I rent on vacation.

I used to be fascinated with Apple but I no longer want anything to do with them.

I could care less if my car has Apple or android auto at this point. I would rip it out immediately if it had one. Any always on connectivity would be removed.

Car manufacturers are increasingly selling off your private data and leveraging all of these technology upgrades you paid for to do it. As soon as the car is connected to the internet, it’s shipping off your private data and selling it to data brokers. Manufacturers are hiding behind their wall of text called “terms of service” to do so [1]

In some cases the manufacturers are reporting your driving history to insurance companies so they can get any reason to bump your rates or deny you coverage . [2]

My dream car is now a “dumb” car.

Give me a car with a simple backup camera, manual transmission, and regular sized vehicle (no trucks or suvs, fuck that).

[1] https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/article...

[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/14/technology/gm-lexis-nexis...

Apple is a predatory partner

Every partnership Apple enters must result in Apple winning and the other party simply being a subservient cog

So, no one wants to do business with them in new markets where Apple doesn't have leverage

This is why they couldn't get a manufacturing partner for the now-dead Apple car...no one wanted to be the Foxconn of cars (they do all the work, Apple gets all the credit)