Ford, Google form 'strategic partnership' on cloud services, Android(detroitnews.com)
detroitnews.com
Ford, Google form 'strategic partnership' on cloud services, Android
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/ford/2021/02/01/ford-google-form-six-year-strategic-partnership/4337504001/
195 comments
I did some contracting for Mercedes in Germany and Toyota in Japan and learned why this is the case.
The people in car companies (engineering and management) are typically "gear heads". Not only do they care about the mechanical systems, they care enough that they'll make sure certain customer-invisible things (internal to engine, for example) or customer-subconscious things (in Mercedes' case how the hinge on the door works) are "just right". Kind of the equivalent of "I'll spin up another server when the load gets to X% just to have a good safety margin" or "this onboarding path could look like a dark pattern -- let's work around that just in case".
The embedded software developers for engine control are serious. Among the mechanical engineers the folks writing control software for steering stability or performance-vs-efficiency code were treated with respect ("I don't understand what you do but sure, happy to explain this mechanical system"). But the people doing the UI were basically considered marketing.
Seat must be comfortable. Visibility good (cough Prius).
Oh the audio system? Automatic seat adjustment? Bluetooth? Let's write a requirement document, or even just a requirement powerpoint and send it out for quote. It's not that important and cheapest bidder is fine.
The people in car companies (engineering and management) are typically "gear heads". Not only do they care about the mechanical systems, they care enough that they'll make sure certain customer-invisible things (internal to engine, for example) or customer-subconscious things (in Mercedes' case how the hinge on the door works) are "just right". Kind of the equivalent of "I'll spin up another server when the load gets to X% just to have a good safety margin" or "this onboarding path could look like a dark pattern -- let's work around that just in case".
The embedded software developers for engine control are serious. Among the mechanical engineers the folks writing control software for steering stability or performance-vs-efficiency code were treated with respect ("I don't understand what you do but sure, happy to explain this mechanical system"). But the people doing the UI were basically considered marketing.
Seat must be comfortable. Visibility good (cough Prius).
Oh the audio system? Automatic seat adjustment? Bluetooth? Let's write a requirement document, or even just a requirement powerpoint and send it out for quote. It's not that important and cheapest bidder is fine.
> Oh the audio system? Automatic seat adjustment? Bluetooth? Let's write a requirement document, or even just a requirement powerpoint and send it out for quote. It's not that important and cheapest bidder is fine.
Ford Sync 2 (aka MyFordTouch) is exactly this. The interaction design is actually good, people clearly thought about how to go from screen to screen and it would be highly usable, except that the response time is god awful. Rumor is Ford outsourced to Microsoft who outsourced to someone's cousin who wrote it in Adobe Air or something. If it wasn't slower than molasses, it would be pretty neat.
Ford Sync 2 (aka MyFordTouch) is exactly this. The interaction design is actually good, people clearly thought about how to go from screen to screen and it would be highly usable, except that the response time is god awful. Rumor is Ford outsourced to Microsoft who outsourced to someone's cousin who wrote it in Adobe Air or something. If it wasn't slower than molasses, it would be pretty neat.
Former Microsoft employee that worked on MyFordTouch for a little while.
> Rumor is Ford outsourced to Microsoft who outsourced to someone's cousin who wrote it in Adobe Air or something
That's actually pretty close. From what I understood Microsoft and Ford worked pretty closely on SYNC and that was a large success. Ford came back to Microsoft to have them do Sync 2.
Microsoft gave them a quote saying it would take $X and Y time. Ford said it needs to be cheaper and faster. Microsoft told Ford "We can't do that, here are some of our preferred contractors for Windows Embedded, maybe they can."
Some time later Ford came back to Microsoft saying "Please fix this" and that was around the time I joined. I actually heard a Ford VP say "This is the worst quality problem we've had in my time at Ford." He had been there during the Firestone tire debacle. (He was talking about cost in lost sales, obviously iPods not working wasn't as bad in the grand scheme of things as cars rolling over.)
The "backend" of the system was written in C++ on Windows Embedded. The user interface was written in Flash with some insane stringly-typed interface to talk back and forth with the C++ layer. And that's how I became an action script developer at Microsoft for a (very) brief time.
iPhones worked decently with the system. Android barely worked at all (Ford didn't care much about that at the time). Windows Phones actually worked pretty well since all the employees at the time had them and that's mostly what we'd use for developing.
It was the worst job I've ever had.
> Rumor is Ford outsourced to Microsoft who outsourced to someone's cousin who wrote it in Adobe Air or something
That's actually pretty close. From what I understood Microsoft and Ford worked pretty closely on SYNC and that was a large success. Ford came back to Microsoft to have them do Sync 2.
Microsoft gave them a quote saying it would take $X and Y time. Ford said it needs to be cheaper and faster. Microsoft told Ford "We can't do that, here are some of our preferred contractors for Windows Embedded, maybe they can."
Some time later Ford came back to Microsoft saying "Please fix this" and that was around the time I joined. I actually heard a Ford VP say "This is the worst quality problem we've had in my time at Ford." He had been there during the Firestone tire debacle. (He was talking about cost in lost sales, obviously iPods not working wasn't as bad in the grand scheme of things as cars rolling over.)
The "backend" of the system was written in C++ on Windows Embedded. The user interface was written in Flash with some insane stringly-typed interface to talk back and forth with the C++ layer. And that's how I became an action script developer at Microsoft for a (very) brief time.
iPhones worked decently with the system. Android barely worked at all (Ford didn't care much about that at the time). Windows Phones actually worked pretty well since all the employees at the time had them and that's mostly what we'd use for developing.
It was the worst job I've ever had.
Ford Fiesta owners got this awful Sync 2 system and a poorly designed transmission. When I purchased, the Sync system seemed like something I could deal with at the time. It aged poorly. It seems like it is getting slower, but that's probably just in comparison to using newer systems with CarPlay.
I also have this added bug where sometimes (once every 6 months or so) the Sync system gets stuck on when I turn off my car and open the door. The screen goes off and the radio keeps playing. Only way to resolve it is to disconnect the battery.
I also have this added bug where sometimes (once every 6 months or so) the Sync system gets stuck on when I turn off my car and open the door. The screen goes off and the radio keeps playing. Only way to resolve it is to disconnect the battery.
You might try the engineering menu shortcut when the Sync get stuck. I haven't had that happen to me, but it's worth a try. Hold eject and next track for about 2 seconds; it may be easier than disconnecting the battery or pulling a fuse.
WARNING: The engineering menu starts a speaker test in a few seconds if you don't cancel it, and it's very loud. You want to cancel that.
WARNING: The engineering menu starts a speaker test in a few seconds if you don't cancel it, and it's very loud. You want to cancel that.
Did they regress on Ford Sync 3? Because I find it terrible. The UI design for simple things (eg, song playback) is not great. Targets are small. The weird 'FordSync' combo is weird and it seems like the addon-apps section is dead. Luckily it has AndroidAuto - but even that has weird issues with volume level.
Sorry, I don't have access to a Sync 3. From a quick look at the tutorials, it looks like Sync 3 refined the look of the UI, which looks nicer, but is probably harder to use, because the buttons looks like they have smaller borders, so it would seem easier to hit the wrong ones. Also, it looks like there's more buttons on the screen, which again makes it easier to hit the wrong ones.
Sync 2 looks like junk, but if it wasn't so slow, I think that would be fine.
Sync 2 had a hook for addon apps, but never got any. Also, they killed the thing to send directions to the car before I even got my car (it seemed like it was poorly thought out anyway), and the vehicle health report too. Still lets me use an app to find the car / unlock the doors / etc; but only if the car hasn't gone into deep sleep to stop it from killing the battery.
Sync 2 looks like junk, but if it wasn't so slow, I think that would be fine.
Sync 2 had a hook for addon apps, but never got any. Also, they killed the thing to send directions to the car before I even got my car (it seemed like it was poorly thought out anyway), and the vehicle health report too. Still lets me use an app to find the car / unlock the doors / etc; but only if the car hasn't gone into deep sleep to stop it from killing the battery.
Sync3 was better than 2
Audi and Porsche contract Bose for the sound system. The decision is usually based on usually industry alliances, not necessarily the cheapest. The German automakers also have a stake in Here Maps, that's why you'll se it on their vehicles. If they don't have a stake they'll usually pick a German company or buy shares in one.
I remember seeing posted on here, someone trying to reverse engineer or reverse compile the code for a VW ECU unit. I would love a deep dive into, say a BMW or Porsche ECU, steering/suspension software, etc. Although I assume the likelihood is low, because I am sure they are closely guarded proprietary secrets.
Still, though, a decompiler that dumps ECU firmware into LLVM byte code? How cool would that be?
Still, though, a decompiler that dumps ECU firmware into LLVM byte code? How cool would that be?
This is so very slowly changing.
Volvo has been really good in this case (especially as they target the luxury segment very prominently now).
The cheapskates at Audi suddenly released amazing A1 and A3 last year with big bright fast touch screens and CarPlay/Android Auto included by default on all models (and they kept the relevant physical buttons, too!).
I've seen VW slightly improving with new models, too.
Volvo has been really good in this case (especially as they target the luxury segment very prominently now).
The cheapskates at Audi suddenly released amazing A1 and A3 last year with big bright fast touch screens and CarPlay/Android Auto included by default on all models (and they kept the relevant physical buttons, too!).
I've seen VW slightly improving with new models, too.
Yes!
I've been in late model Porsche's, BMW's, GMC's, Honda's, and Ford's.* It's weird being in an $80k Porsche and thinking "this is garbage" because the infotainment system is so poorly designed.
Just get me into Carplay and let me go cough Toyota [0].
*I don't own any of these
[0] https://9to5mac.com/2019/04/29/carplay-toyota-2018-cars/
I've been in late model Porsche's, BMW's, GMC's, Honda's, and Ford's.* It's weird being in an $80k Porsche and thinking "this is garbage" because the infotainment system is so poorly designed.
Just get me into Carplay and let me go cough Toyota [0].
*I don't own any of these
[0] https://9to5mac.com/2019/04/29/carplay-toyota-2018-cars/
Porsche does one very cool thing - they released car play capable head units for cars going back to the 1960's:
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a32254313/1960s-porsche-91...
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a32254313/1960s-porsche-91...
There have been lots of AA-compatible DIN-sized head units. It's a standard, hence the name.
Yeah, but they all look terrible. Would you want some orange glowing Pioneer monstrosity in a 1960's 911?
Plus DIN is a mechanical standard from the mid-80's. Are 1960's Porsche's compatible with that standard?
Plus DIN is a mechanical standard from the mid-80's. Are 1960's Porsche's compatible with that standard?
[deleted]
The new 911, I think, uses CarPlay. I actually hate the idea of only carrying CarPlay and not Android Auto or vice-versa. You should carry both. I don't get locking people into an ecosystem to use a car or making people have to replace the head-unit just to use their phone with their car properly, but then you lose all of the benefits of the head unit as it goes with the car (like A/C controls, etc?) It makes no sense.
I bought a Subaru over the Toyota because the infotainment system in the Toyota was so bad. I just want carplay in my car. I would have chosen a different make had I realized how big of a PITA not having wireless carplay was going to be. I just want to get in my car and have carplay start from my phone. I'm will to pay more money for it.
Hahaha, oh thanks for posting this. We bought a gently used 2018 Corolla just this past autumn. The interface isn't all that bad, I have to say. And it works seamlessly with my phone.
But if I can sort out CarPlay... I just might have to dig into that.
I wish I could say the same. Unfortunately, my experience with Android Auto has been abysmal. Before the pandemic, I used to use it on my commute every day. At least once a week, it just wouldn't work and I would have to go through the ritual of trying the following things, until it started working again:
* turn the car off and on again
* turn the phone off and on again
* forget and then re-create the Bluetooth pairing
* delete the car from Android Auto and add it again
Also, it would randomly decide to stop heeding voice commands.
On top of that, any time there's an update to either Android Auto or Spotify, I had to pray things would keep working. If they didn't, sometimes The Ritual would fix things. Other times, it stayed broken until the next update.
Also, it would randomly decide to stop heeding voice commands.
On top of that, any time there's an update to either Android Auto or Spotify, I had to pray things would keep working. If they didn't, sometimes The Ritual would fix things. Other times, it stayed broken until the next update.
It may be problem with car infotaiment handling of Android Auto, not with Android Auto itself. Bugs in Carplay or Android Auto were very rare in contrast to infotaiment bugs that were causing CarPlay, Android Auto or Baidu Carlife unusable.
I have the opposite opinion. I prefer the entertainment system in my cars because they are not crippled by the network and they understand local media. They also know how to spell the word privacy, unlike Google.
I'm with you. I've had CarPlay and Android Auto in my past 3 cars, and could not be bothered to use them. I'de much rather just use built in navigation, stereo and local media. Involving my phone is just frustrating. Gerneralization, but for model years 2017 to present I've enjoyed Volkswagen's system the most. Chrysler's was not bad either. Ford's was terrible.
Now, wireless CarPlay... that's a game changer!
Our new car has wireless CarPlay and keyless entry and start.. and it's great.
Walk up, open the door, sit down, press start and drive off. CarPlay appears on your dashboard automagically.... No need to fish anything out of a pocket.
I hope someday I can get wireless CarPlay right from my watch and I can even leave my phone at home.
Our new car has wireless CarPlay and keyless entry and start.. and it's great.
Walk up, open the door, sit down, press start and drive off. CarPlay appears on your dashboard automagically.... No need to fish anything out of a pocket.
I hope someday I can get wireless CarPlay right from my watch and I can even leave my phone at home.
Having it built into the car still seems to be an improvement to me. I'm still yet to see any of these systems actually function at all. My '16 Subaru and Samsung phone both officially support it. But if I try to turn it on, you can take a guess from one of [incomprehensible error message | car does nothing, and phone locks up until hard reboot | car shows a blank panel on the screen until you press the home button]
I don't know how unusual my case is, but it seems like there's a greater chance that it would work if there were fewer "moving parts" that had to interface.
I don't know how unusual my case is, but it seems like there's a greater chance that it would work if there were fewer "moving parts" that had to interface.
[deleted]
Agreed, especially with the addition of wireless CarPlay/Android Auto AND wireless charging.
Forgive me but the Pixel and iPhones do not have headphone jacks. I can only wonder what phone do you use. Alternatively you mean "plug in" as bluetooth/usb enabled.
For carplay and android auto, you'd plug your phone in via a lightening or a usb-c cable. I think there is wireless carplay and android auto too these days, but I'm not sure if that's available on many vehicles at the moment.
My Pixel has a headphone jack. It's the larger (3.5mm) of the two holes on top of the phone. However the poster is probably referring to USB or the wireless Carplay/Android Auto equivalents
Yes, Carplay and Android Auto either work over Bluetooth or a wire to the car's USB port.
Carplay requires actual wifi to be wireless, I'm pretty sure. It definitely doesn't work over Bluetooth! (You can of course pair your phone to your car with Bluetooth, but that's a different thing.)
Looks like it technically uses Bluetooth for connecting, but it does indeed require wi-fi for the actual carplay experience.
https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2017/717/?time=4... (click 'transcript' then ctrl-f 'hardware requirements' for transcript)
https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2017/717/?time=4... (click 'transcript' then ctrl-f 'hardware requirements' for transcript)
Wrong. Pixel 4a does have the phone jack.
I really enjoyed having Android Auto in my Chevy Bolt. It's just letting my phone display stuff on my screen, but not running Android. I could run Maps, play spotify as a I drive, and if I had root on my phone I could also play youtube videos for my kids :)
I have to wonder, is having Android in my car going to lead to a situation where I'm stuck with some old, insecure version of Android, just like my shitty Verizon phone which they never bothered to upgrade from Oreo? Because if that's the case, no thank you.
I have to wonder, is having Android in my car going to lead to a situation where I'm stuck with some old, insecure version of Android, just like my shitty Verizon phone which they never bothered to upgrade from Oreo? Because if that's the case, no thank you.
>is having Android in my car going to lead to a situation where I'm stuck with some old, insecure version of Android
Of course it is. This plagues every single device that runs Android. And Ford already has an awful track record of inflicting infotainment software horrors on their customers.
Of course it is. This plagues every single device that runs Android. And Ford already has an awful track record of inflicting infotainment software horrors on their customers.
> This plagues every single device that runs Android
huh? My Samsung S20 is on the latest OS and security patches
huh? My Samsung S20 is on the latest OS and security patches
So is mine. The point here is that it won't be 1-2 years from now when it gets abandoned just like every other Android device.
Considering that the lifecycle of the average Ford is many years longer than that of any mobile device, this is clearly going to be problematic.
Considering that the lifecycle of the average Ford is many years longer than that of any mobile device, this is clearly going to be problematic.
No it won't. Samsung has 3 upgrades policy now. With security updates it is 4 years or more.
My current car is 3 years old and us the newest on the street. There are dozens of phones and Android devices the same age that haven't received updates.
Isn't the Galaxy S20 basically a brand-new phone? It hasn't even been out for a year yet.
[deleted]
The average car on the road is 6-7 years old and won't be junked until about year 15. Show me how well Android devices that old are supported.
> My Samsung S20 is on the latest OS and security patches
The latest available from Samsung. It takes 60 days for updates to get down the pipe to OEMs.
The latest available from Samsung. It takes 60 days for updates to get down the pipe to OEMs.
I'm going to own my truck for 25-30 years. Android devices are abandoned after 2.5-3 years.
This isn't nearly as much of an issue as it used to be. People complain about google grabbing more control over android by cutting manufacturers off from play services, but they needed to get their asses kicked in a lot of cases.
Cars already do this. Most Hondas made around 2016+ are running Android 4.x. Most Hyundais/Kias from 2015+ are running running Android 2.3 or 4.x (including my 2015 Genesis sedan). Meanwhile, most other vehicles are running proprietary embedded OSes (QNX, Windows Embedded) or very old versions of Linux.
So Android Automotive OS is an improvement over this, since Google will be updating the system (or mandating some updates) and system apps will be receiving updates decoupled from the OS. Cars are already insecure and connected.
So Android Automotive OS is an improvement over this, since Google will be updating the system (or mandating some updates) and system apps will be receiving updates decoupled from the OS. Cars are already insecure and connected.
Currently there's one company that uses Android Automotive (Volvo/Polestar) and in that case Google is pushing updates directly - similarly like ChromeOS works.
Still, I guess the update contract will run out eventually, just like on every single other car. The details about how long it'll take for that to happen aren't public though.
Still, I guess the update contract will run out eventually, just like on every single other car. The details about how long it'll take for that to happen aren't public though.
Of course the alternative is that you get the same shitty version of the Ford infotainment software that is never updated from the day you buy your car. So there at least things are actually improving in that respect.
But really the model of just running everything from your phone is probably the best approach.
But really the model of just running everything from your phone is probably the best approach.
My 2016 focus did get some updates, but on the other hand it wasn't connected to the internet so in terms of risk it wasn't nearly as much of an issue
Doubt it...Tesla has made OTA updates a new baseline/table-stakes for the industry, I would expect everyone to follow suit eventually.
Have to wonder if this "partnership" will also result in Waymo tech ending up in Ford vehicles...
Have to wonder if this "partnership" will also result in Waymo tech ending up in Ford vehicles...
Tesla owns the entire car and bears full responsibility for virtually everything in it, including the software that steers clear of reliance upon Google and Apple technologies.
My opinion: The split responsibility of Google and Ford on the entertainment system will inevitably result in the same early obselesence of the software as compared to the car hardware. We have seen this in much Android phone hardware (a year or two of updates, usually not including a major version), and I see it in my Android TVs (Sony). Even Apple, which IMO has a track record of longer support, has done it with Apple TV recently, and Sonos threatened it with perfectly fine working old hardware until outrage forced them to change plans.
All in all, I prefer less integrated things with clear responsibilities that work together under well established protocols. I want a dumb TV with good HDMI and other specs, to which I can connect whatever display device I want (or many). I want my car to be perpetually supported (unlikely beyond Tesla) or a simple display (Android Auto or Car Play or whatever) so I can upgrade the thing doing the display whenever I choose.
Of course, if Ford committed to having a computer module that could be upgraded occasionally for the price of a mid-range phone, and commit to supporting it for 25+ years, that would be okay too. My Acura is in its 12th year and because it is so "dumb" I haven't felt any urge to upgrade it. My (2020) Tesla gets updates probably monthly via WiFi. It changes too much IMO; I want stability from my cars and devices, but honestly the changes are almost all improvements in my (software engineer) opinion.
My opinion: The split responsibility of Google and Ford on the entertainment system will inevitably result in the same early obselesence of the software as compared to the car hardware. We have seen this in much Android phone hardware (a year or two of updates, usually not including a major version), and I see it in my Android TVs (Sony). Even Apple, which IMO has a track record of longer support, has done it with Apple TV recently, and Sonos threatened it with perfectly fine working old hardware until outrage forced them to change plans.
All in all, I prefer less integrated things with clear responsibilities that work together under well established protocols. I want a dumb TV with good HDMI and other specs, to which I can connect whatever display device I want (or many). I want my car to be perpetually supported (unlikely beyond Tesla) or a simple display (Android Auto or Car Play or whatever) so I can upgrade the thing doing the display whenever I choose.
Of course, if Ford committed to having a computer module that could be upgraded occasionally for the price of a mid-range phone, and commit to supporting it for 25+ years, that would be okay too. My Acura is in its 12th year and because it is so "dumb" I haven't felt any urge to upgrade it. My (2020) Tesla gets updates probably monthly via WiFi. It changes too much IMO; I want stability from my cars and devices, but honestly the changes are almost all improvements in my (software engineer) opinion.
> Even Apple, which IMO has a track record of longer support, has done it with Apple TV recently...
This caught my eye because I'm not sure what you mean here -- AFAIK, the current "tvOS" release runs on all Apple TVs released from late 2015 on, and they kept updating the 3rd generation model that came out in early 2012 up to 2019. This still seems to be a pretty good track record, all things considered. (There's a pretty huge CPU jump between the 3rd generation and 4th generation, including a move from 32-bit to 64-bit.)
Unrelatedly, though,
> I want a dumb TV with good HDMI and other specs, to which I can connect whatever display device I want (or many).
I would have loved to have found one of those that also met the 4K HDR requirement I'd set to upgrade from my blissfully dumb plasma set. I'm not unhappy with my my LG OLED by any stretch, but it would be really damn nice if there was a "turn all of WebOS off and just be a TV set" feature.
This caught my eye because I'm not sure what you mean here -- AFAIK, the current "tvOS" release runs on all Apple TVs released from late 2015 on, and they kept updating the 3rd generation model that came out in early 2012 up to 2019. This still seems to be a pretty good track record, all things considered. (There's a pretty huge CPU jump between the 3rd generation and 4th generation, including a move from 32-bit to 64-bit.)
Unrelatedly, though,
> I want a dumb TV with good HDMI and other specs, to which I can connect whatever display device I want (or many).
I would have loved to have found one of those that also met the 4K HDR requirement I'd set to upgrade from my blissfully dumb plasma set. I'm not unhappy with my my LG OLED by any stretch, but it would be really damn nice if there was a "turn all of WebOS off and just be a TV set" feature.
Other manufacturers have OTA updates. My Ford pickup does, my Chevy Bolt does. What Tesla brought to the table was the idea that it is acceptable to update the software on the car every week. The incumbent manufacturers default stance is much more conservative.
I own a Tesla so I'm curious, what kind of updates do you get? Are they mostly bug-fixes and performance improvements or does Chevy also send new features and doodads? I'm curious because I took a look inside someone's bolt at a charging station and the interior looked very nice. I was hoping I could get some feedback on it!
And at 55kW charging rate, the Bolt charging experience won't be like what you're used to with the Tesla (170kW on the SR+). It is a nice car, but they are close in price once you add some must-have options on to the Bolt (DC fast charging!) so really the only reasonable way to get a Bolt is with some unusually large discounts.
I would say it’s almost a certainty that will happen
I'm WAY ot of the loop here but do these infotainment systems actually produce tangible, relevant and unquestionable benefits?
I think most of it, based also on usage of people I know, comes down to "speak on the phone with the car speakers". That's it.
I've personally just bought a car from 2012 with no infotainment systems at all, and I also only miss bluetooth with my phone. That's it.
Am I missing something big or is it really just marketing?
I've personally just bought a car from 2012 with no infotainment systems at all, and I also only miss bluetooth with my phone. That's it.
Am I missing something big or is it really just marketing?
Disclaimer: I work for Google, not on AA, all opinions exclusively my own, etc.
Yes, you are. I had nothing more advanced than Bluetooth, drove a rental car with Android Auto support for a week, and immediately went out and replaced the head unit in both of my vehicles with one that supported AA and Carplay.
The most obvious benefit is navigation. You get the full power of Google/Apple maps in real time, and you never have to pay your car OEM for updates.
Navigation is also integrated with everything else. It knows that I have an appointment on my calendar in half an hour and suggests that as a destination without me having to retype it. It knows that in the mornings my most likely destination is "work" and my most likely evening destination is "home". It knows what brewery I like to go to on Saturday afternoons and suggests that too.
Voice control is another huge one. I don't have as much experience with Carplay, but with AA I can use Google Assistant for nearly everything and keep my eyes on the road.
It makes the connections trivial. Most modern systems should support wireless Android Auto - when I get in the car it connects over WiFi automatically without me doing anything. Even on older vehicles I plug in one USB cable and am good to go. Compare this to my bag of hardware I bring on trips where I'll have a rental car - you need to find a mount that works (sometimes a.dashboard suction cup, sometimes a vent clip), get the phone in a good angle where you can see it and it can get a good GPS signal, go into the car and pair it to Bluetooth, attach the charging cable and make sure it's not getting caught on anything, and so on.
For calls and texts, it just works. I've fought with Ford Sync and other proprietary systems just trying to get it to recognize names. The stock unit in my Subaru was so bad that it couldn't keep "Firstname Last name" and "Othername Last name" as two separate identities because they sounded alike, so I had to map half my family to Harry Potter characters. With Google/Apple, no such problem - just say "Call Firstname Last name" and it works every time.
The system integrates with whatever background noise you want - music, podcasts, and so on. It makes everything automatic and painless.
Android Auto gave new life to my old cars
Yes, you are. I had nothing more advanced than Bluetooth, drove a rental car with Android Auto support for a week, and immediately went out and replaced the head unit in both of my vehicles with one that supported AA and Carplay.
The most obvious benefit is navigation. You get the full power of Google/Apple maps in real time, and you never have to pay your car OEM for updates.
Navigation is also integrated with everything else. It knows that I have an appointment on my calendar in half an hour and suggests that as a destination without me having to retype it. It knows that in the mornings my most likely destination is "work" and my most likely evening destination is "home". It knows what brewery I like to go to on Saturday afternoons and suggests that too.
Voice control is another huge one. I don't have as much experience with Carplay, but with AA I can use Google Assistant for nearly everything and keep my eyes on the road.
It makes the connections trivial. Most modern systems should support wireless Android Auto - when I get in the car it connects over WiFi automatically without me doing anything. Even on older vehicles I plug in one USB cable and am good to go. Compare this to my bag of hardware I bring on trips where I'll have a rental car - you need to find a mount that works (sometimes a.dashboard suction cup, sometimes a vent clip), get the phone in a good angle where you can see it and it can get a good GPS signal, go into the car and pair it to Bluetooth, attach the charging cable and make sure it's not getting caught on anything, and so on.
For calls and texts, it just works. I've fought with Ford Sync and other proprietary systems just trying to get it to recognize names. The stock unit in my Subaru was so bad that it couldn't keep "Firstname Last name" and "Othername Last name" as two separate identities because they sounded alike, so I had to map half my family to Harry Potter characters. With Google/Apple, no such problem - just say "Call Firstname Last name" and it works every time.
The system integrates with whatever background noise you want - music, podcasts, and so on. It makes everything automatic and painless.
Android Auto gave new life to my old cars
>It knows that I have an appointment on my calendar in half an hour and suggests that as a destination without me having to retype it. It knows that in the mornings my most likely destination is "work" and my most likely evening destination is "home". It knows what brewery I like to go to on Saturday afternoons and suggests that too.
I know it makes me terribly old-fashioned, but god that's horrifying.
I know it makes me terribly old-fashioned, but god that's horrifying.
I'm not sure why it's horrifying. Assuming the data is on your device and that's what it's learning from, at least with respect to appointments, this was also an objective of every PDA and productivity software ever made. To help you plan your day without having to sit down and plan your day. Throw in data, it tells you what you need to know and when. Regarding suggesting destinations based on habits it's only (potentially) horrifying if this means the data is going to some Google/Apple/Other server and projections coming from it.
>it's only (potentially) horrifying if this means the data is going to some Google/Apple/Other server and projections coming from it.
Yes, well that's exactly what it's doing.
A local-only solution would of course be a different story. But even if such a thing existed, with suitably ironclad security for such incredibly sensitive data, the mere creation of that data is a liability that many might opt out of if they had the choice - like taking nude pictures, or logging your location at all times.
Yes, well that's exactly what it's doing.
A local-only solution would of course be a different story. But even if such a thing existed, with suitably ironclad security for such incredibly sensitive data, the mere creation of that data is a liability that many might opt out of if they had the choice - like taking nude pictures, or logging your location at all times.
> Yes, well that's exactly what it's doing.
Not for Apple. Siri suggestions are learned on device and end-to-end encrypted when shared with your other devices: https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/tell-siri-about-yours...
Not for Apple. Siri suggestions are learned on device and end-to-end encrypted when shared with your other devices: https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/tell-siri-about-yours...
You absolutely have that choice.
I have Location History turned off in my Google Account and this feature still works. It might work better if I let it use history, not sure - but it absolutely works without it. I do have Search History turned on, so I could hypothesize that it's able to use things I've searched for in the past at certain times, but it's not using my location.
I have Location History turned off in my Google Account and this feature still works. It might work better if I let it use history, not sure - but it absolutely works without it. I do have Search History turned on, so I could hypothesize that it's able to use things I've searched for in the past at certain times, but it's not using my location.
History working at all is a more recent change. Previously, if you disabled location history it would only remember POIs that you navigated to. Not addresses. And it allowed you to add local bookmarks, but didn't let you name them. Have fun with a list with some yellow stars with GPS coordinates only.
The whole thing was outright unusable for no technical reason, as if nobody at Google had tested "non-treacherous mode", or as if they on purpose sabotaged it.
I would be surprised if Google's technology works without it being stored on Google's server.
Aside from being quite creepy, wouldn't one already know how to get to their favorite brewery?
I'm similar to the parent; I have a "dumb" head unit with an aux cord + dongle. I suppose one benefit would be if it could suggest faster routes around traffic or detours.
I'm similar to the parent; I have a "dumb" head unit with an aux cord + dongle. I suppose one benefit would be if it could suggest faster routes around traffic or detours.
"wouldn't one already know how to get to their favorite brewery?" - I navigate most everywhere I go of any distance so I get warned of traffic issues or speed traps.
If you like that stuff, go nuts, but I don't see much benefit to any of it.
I rarely drive anywhere that I don't already know how to get to. I certainly don't need a navigation system to get to work, home, my favorite bar, the homes of friends or family, the local supermarket or other stores I frequent, etc. I only need navigation a handful of times a year, and even then, I usually wish I'd reviewed and memorized the directions ahead of time rather than relied on blindly following step-by-step directions.
I don't need or want voice control of the basic car systems. Give me traditional knobs and sliders. The tactile feedback is better and less distracting than any visual feedback. Voice commands have gotten pretty good, but I still find I have to repeat myself often enough to be frustrated. And why should I have to turn the radio down in order to adjust the air conditioning?
Touchscreen displays in cars are unnecessary and distracting. You should never be looking at one. You shouldn't need a mount for your phone because you shouldn't be looking at your phone. You shouldn't need a touchscreen because you should be using knobs and sliders and other controls that are easy to find without looking and provide tactile feedback.
There's no need to view, listen to, or reply to messages while you're driving. It's dangerous, even hands-free. You shouldn't even be having voice conversations while driving. Sure, we all do it from time to time, but it should be rare and under exceptional circumstances. It's dangerous and unnecessary. Pay attention to the damn road.
I rarely drive anywhere that I don't already know how to get to. I certainly don't need a navigation system to get to work, home, my favorite bar, the homes of friends or family, the local supermarket or other stores I frequent, etc. I only need navigation a handful of times a year, and even then, I usually wish I'd reviewed and memorized the directions ahead of time rather than relied on blindly following step-by-step directions.
I don't need or want voice control of the basic car systems. Give me traditional knobs and sliders. The tactile feedback is better and less distracting than any visual feedback. Voice commands have gotten pretty good, but I still find I have to repeat myself often enough to be frustrated. And why should I have to turn the radio down in order to adjust the air conditioning?
Touchscreen displays in cars are unnecessary and distracting. You should never be looking at one. You shouldn't need a mount for your phone because you shouldn't be looking at your phone. You shouldn't need a touchscreen because you should be using knobs and sliders and other controls that are easy to find without looking and provide tactile feedback.
There's no need to view, listen to, or reply to messages while you're driving. It's dangerous, even hands-free. You shouldn't even be having voice conversations while driving. Sure, we all do it from time to time, but it should be rare and under exceptional circumstances. It's dangerous and unnecessary. Pay attention to the damn road.
I prefer to plan my own routes. But I sometimes use maps before I set out because:
1. Map apps give duration information about different routes - this is interesting as it calibrates my own mental model of potential routes. However I also often optimise my routes for things apart from time.
2. I am in a hurry, and map apps are better at avoiding roadworks and traffic jams than my own mental model. I ignored a route suggestion the other day because I thought I knew better, which delayed me by 15 minutes because a flyover I wanted to use was temporarily closed.
3. Map Apps are great when I am travelling across town on a route I would rarely drive, so I am unfamiliar with the possible routes (e.g. I often go to A, and I often go to B, but I rarely go from A to B).
4. Edit: and map apps are fantastically safer in cities or towns you have no familiarity with. You can pay attention to your driving and not be distracted looking for street names or other route waypoints.
> It's dangerous and unnecessary. Pay attention to the damn road.
Opinion or fact? My opinion is that voice directions makes it possible to pay attention to the traffic, and I am not stressed, and I don’t have to have uncertainty about road choices (which is safer). It certainly makes looking for unknown street numbers or businesses safer - scanning for street numbers or business frontages is very distracting.
Use your tools sensibly and safely - don’t use them like a fool.
1. Map apps give duration information about different routes - this is interesting as it calibrates my own mental model of potential routes. However I also often optimise my routes for things apart from time.
2. I am in a hurry, and map apps are better at avoiding roadworks and traffic jams than my own mental model. I ignored a route suggestion the other day because I thought I knew better, which delayed me by 15 minutes because a flyover I wanted to use was temporarily closed.
3. Map Apps are great when I am travelling across town on a route I would rarely drive, so I am unfamiliar with the possible routes (e.g. I often go to A, and I often go to B, but I rarely go from A to B).
4. Edit: and map apps are fantastically safer in cities or towns you have no familiarity with. You can pay attention to your driving and not be distracted looking for street names or other route waypoints.
> It's dangerous and unnecessary. Pay attention to the damn road.
Opinion or fact? My opinion is that voice directions makes it possible to pay attention to the traffic, and I am not stressed, and I don’t have to have uncertainty about road choices (which is safer). It certainly makes looking for unknown street numbers or businesses safer - scanning for street numbers or business frontages is very distracting.
Use your tools sensibly and safely - don’t use them like a fool.
>I rarely drive anywhere that I don't already know how to get to. I certainly don't need a navigation system to get to work, home, my favorite bar, the homes of friends or family, the local supermarket or other stores I frequent, etc. I only need navigation a handful of times a year, and even then, I usually wish I'd reviewed and memorized the directions ahead of time rather than relied on blindly following step-by-step directions.
This just means that you're blindly following older, possibly out-of-date directions. What happens when you discover that a road is closed? Do you pull over, pull out your maps, and try to guess what the next best path is, possibly involving a fair amount of backtracking? I've done that before - I drove east to west across the US with just printed maps - and it's not anything I look back on with nostalgia.
This just means that you're blindly following older, possibly out-of-date directions. What happens when you discover that a road is closed? Do you pull over, pull out your maps, and try to guess what the next best path is, possibly involving a fair amount of backtracking? I've done that before - I drove east to west across the US with just printed maps - and it's not anything I look back on with nostalgia.
I can't recall the last time I drove somewhere and was impacted by a road closure that wasn't clearly marked with a detour, or there wasn't an immediately-obvious alternate route. If you're not blindly following GPS navigation, and pay attention to signs and what's going on around you, it's not an issue.
I use Google Maps navigation from time to time and I get that it can be helpful negotiating new territory. Of all the newfangled gadgets in cars, that's the one that has the most value, but it should be a supplemental tool; you shouldn't be lost and hopeless without it.
I use Google Maps navigation from time to time and I get that it can be helpful negotiating new territory. Of all the newfangled gadgets in cars, that's the one that has the most value, but it should be a supplemental tool; you shouldn't be lost and hopeless without it.
Your experiences don't generalize to everyone. Just yesterday I drove home from an errand without navigation and discovered that the bridge across the lake was closed in one direction. This wasn't signed well at all and meant that I lost 10-15 minutes turning around and taking another route. Being able to have the car tell me when a turn is approaching rather than having to look at every street sign along the way wondering if this is my turn keeps me focused on the road and prevents the worries of "did I miss it?". It's strictly an improvement.
I know my city like the back of my hand and can chart my own course across it on a whim thank you. I don't just decide where I'm going, but I also choose how to get there. Sometimes the course is more important than the destination.
Reliance on online nav systems is an excuse for poor roadwork planning and lazy accident management. I want robots and helicopters to take of the roads as I know them, not constantly updated paths that need to be tracked. Learned mental map of the territory should prevail. Else we'll end up being floated over non-euclidian chaotic trajectories for reasons of economic efficiency.
Reliance on online nav systems is an excuse for poor roadwork planning and lazy accident management. I want robots and helicopters to take of the roads as I know them, not constantly updated paths that need to be tracked. Learned mental map of the territory should prevail. Else we'll end up being floated over non-euclidian chaotic trajectories for reasons of economic efficiency.
Maps on AC is a game changer for me. Anytime I've never been to a place I use it, and I sometimes use it for other things like if I'm in an unfamiliar place and want to stop for food or find a store. Simple voice command. New route, done. Also the real time traffic updates is huge - so many times now I check just in case there is an accident that will cause a huge delay.
I do agree that for car functions I like physical knobs, but for infotainment? being able to say "hey siri play X" is awesome.
> There's no need to view, listen to, or reply to messages while you're driving. It's dangerous, even hands-free. You shouldn't even be having voice conversations while driving. Sure, we all do it from time to time, but it should be rare and under exceptional circumstances. It's dangerous and unnecessary. Pay attention to the damn road.
You know people are going to do it, so it should be made less dangerous, no?
I do agree that for car functions I like physical knobs, but for infotainment? being able to say "hey siri play X" is awesome.
> There's no need to view, listen to, or reply to messages while you're driving. It's dangerous, even hands-free. You shouldn't even be having voice conversations while driving. Sure, we all do it from time to time, but it should be rare and under exceptional circumstances. It's dangerous and unnecessary. Pay attention to the damn road.
You know people are going to do it, so it should be made less dangerous, no?
First of all, thanks for the detailed reply. Appreciated!
Unfortunately I'm clearly missing something, because it looks like a lot (and I mean a lot) of effort is going in these entertainment systems just to have a map (which you probably already have on your phone), a touch screen (which you should NOT use while driving) and to read/reply to texts (which you should NOT be reading/replying while driving).
Just to be clear, the most usual use-case is maps and music. So, we could say a smartphone paired with the radio via bluetooth solves 90% of the problems with maybe 5% of the effort and technology required. But I guess nowadays Bluetooth is just too uncool to justify 30k for a car.
EDIT: More than anything, from the answers in this discussion I see people have kind of a feticism to over-optimize every part of their lifes. I undertand it in a work enviroment, but to get groceries? That's how you end up playing Cyberpunk in your car. And that's not a good thing.
Unfortunately I'm clearly missing something, because it looks like a lot (and I mean a lot) of effort is going in these entertainment systems just to have a map (which you probably already have on your phone), a touch screen (which you should NOT use while driving) and to read/reply to texts (which you should NOT be reading/replying while driving).
Just to be clear, the most usual use-case is maps and music. So, we could say a smartphone paired with the radio via bluetooth solves 90% of the problems with maybe 5% of the effort and technology required. But I guess nowadays Bluetooth is just too uncool to justify 30k for a car.
EDIT: More than anything, from the answers in this discussion I see people have kind of a feticism to over-optimize every part of their lifes. I undertand it in a work enviroment, but to get groceries? That's how you end up playing Cyberpunk in your car. And that's not a good thing.
Car units are integrated with your car's controls. I almost never need to use the touchscreen because of my in-steering-wheel controls. A smartphone with Bluetooth only covers the basic scenarios where you know where you're going before you leave - and that only if you spend far MORE effort hooking up a charger, a mount, launching the app you need, and you never need to switch apps (such as between maps and music) during your drive.
A good mapping solution enables all sorts of things: * Seeing alternative routes you don't know about or expect along with their anticipated time difference * Easily adding stops on the way (gas stations, restaraunts, you name it) * Letting you know what you need to do soon (such as seeing a pattern of four lanes on the freeway and learning that you need to be in the second from the right) * Giving you a solid idea of when you have to be watching for your next turn and when you can simply focus on the road without reading street signs. "Next turn in 3 miles" means look at the road, "next turn in 0.2 miles" means you need to start looking at street signs * Automatic rerouting. If you DO miss a turn or get stuck behind traffic from an accident, you don't need to immediately start thinking about how best to get back on course. You can focus on the driving instead.
In the music scenario, it gives both voice controls that let you focus on the road ("Play Modest Mouse in Spotify" rather than having to dig through albums or radio stations), integration with your car's controls (next track involves lifting my thumb rather than reaching for a knob in the middle of the car or my phone).
Saying "no one should ever hear a text message while driving" is just abstinence-only education at this point, and the message works about as well as it does for sexual education. That ship has sailed and it's simply not a valid line of argument. "No one should reach for a touch screen" isn't any better - it's not a good model, but it's the reality in a huge percentage of vehicles sold today.
This isn't over-optimization - it's simply a quality of life increase. Most people don't want to have to micromanage every detail of their trips - they want to get from point A to point B safely, reliably, and rapidly. Good car systems make that simple. If you want to sit your Rand McNally atlas next to your manual transmission and your 8-track, that's your right, but other people want to focus on the parts that they HAVE to be involved with, not the parts technology can help with.
A good mapping solution enables all sorts of things: * Seeing alternative routes you don't know about or expect along with their anticipated time difference * Easily adding stops on the way (gas stations, restaraunts, you name it) * Letting you know what you need to do soon (such as seeing a pattern of four lanes on the freeway and learning that you need to be in the second from the right) * Giving you a solid idea of when you have to be watching for your next turn and when you can simply focus on the road without reading street signs. "Next turn in 3 miles" means look at the road, "next turn in 0.2 miles" means you need to start looking at street signs * Automatic rerouting. If you DO miss a turn or get stuck behind traffic from an accident, you don't need to immediately start thinking about how best to get back on course. You can focus on the driving instead.
In the music scenario, it gives both voice controls that let you focus on the road ("Play Modest Mouse in Spotify" rather than having to dig through albums or radio stations), integration with your car's controls (next track involves lifting my thumb rather than reaching for a knob in the middle of the car or my phone).
Saying "no one should ever hear a text message while driving" is just abstinence-only education at this point, and the message works about as well as it does for sexual education. That ship has sailed and it's simply not a valid line of argument. "No one should reach for a touch screen" isn't any better - it's not a good model, but it's the reality in a huge percentage of vehicles sold today.
This isn't over-optimization - it's simply a quality of life increase. Most people don't want to have to micromanage every detail of their trips - they want to get from point A to point B safely, reliably, and rapidly. Good car systems make that simple. If you want to sit your Rand McNally atlas next to your manual transmission and your 8-track, that's your right, but other people want to focus on the parts that they HAVE to be involved with, not the parts technology can help with.
Again, thanks for the in-depth answer.
You got a point on the integration side (on-wheel commands) and the eventual app-switching needs. I also concede that modifying the route (more than merely following it, which I find trivial in any setup) is easier on an integrated system rather than a mounted smartphone.
I usually throw my smartphone away in the backseat when I drive, so that's where our paths start to diverge I guess.
I usually throw my smartphone away in the backseat when I drive, so that's where our paths start to diverge I guess.
Just to +1 this - a major reason we picked the car we picked last year was because it had AA. Now, you can upgrade most any system to it, but given we were buying a new vehicle anyway? It's just.... superior to any in-car system, and I'm not even an Android user !
You can’t get to work or your favorite bar without a computer navigating you?
Traffic reports. Saved me hours a month (usually 1-2 hours each time) when I got rerouted around a bad accident on my primary route home at my previous job. It was the main highway connecting the area near my office to the town I actually lived in. When there was an accident, it was 30-90 minutes of being stuck without moving, depending on if there were serious injuries/fatalities (versus a fender bender). With a notification before I left the office [0] I could choose the longer but not backed up route.
[0] I usually left halfway through rush hour, most accidents seemed to occur just before I left but I never crunched the numbers so just an observation.
[0] I usually left halfway through rush hour, most accidents seemed to occur just before I left but I never crunched the numbers so just an observation.
I know 5 or 6 given paths. Which one is fastest depends on all sorts of things. Is there traffic? Has an accident on the highway brought things to a standstill? Is going North around the lake slow enough that the toll lanes are worth it?
Even when I know where I'm going, it's very useful to have an accurate ETA. If I get a call, I can tell someone quite precisely when I expect to arrive.
Even when I know where I'm going, it's very useful to have an accurate ETA. If I get a call, I can tell someone quite precisely when I expect to arrive.
Reminded me of this "ad" for google that google never made - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0ysH2Glw5w (folks from India might appreciate more, but it is in English so should be accessible)
I just got a vehicle that supports it, but when my Pixel 3 tries to connect, the AA UI shows briefly for a second, then fails, every time. Any tips? I've tried over USB and wireless, same result.
Not the parent but in my ‘18 Audi I think I called the dealer and they did some kind of software update which resolved the issue.
Mines wired only but my issue seemed to be cable related. I bought an anker powerline II usb c to a cable based on reddits recommendation and haven't had any issues since!
I've certainly seen issues with cables before (even ones that seem to half work), as mentioned in another reply. My first step in debugging would be to unpair the devices (on both sides) and try to set them up again to see if that helps.
Might have to go to a dealer to get a firmware upgrade.
Android Auto as an infotrainment system has been a major game changer for me. Being able to have a large screen GPS that is updated in realtime (google maps / waze), access to all my audio apps, etc.
Yes technically you could mount your phone up but that always seemed to be a hassle, smaller screen, mount points were rarely as good, have to have charging cables running across dash.
Yes technically you could mount your phone up but that always seemed to be a hassle, smaller screen, mount points were rarely as good, have to have charging cables running across dash.
My car came with a built-in GPS system, with integration into a smaller screen visible right on the dashboard, so I don't need to turn my head to look at the might screen to see the estimated distance remaining to an upcoming turn.
This GPS system is pretty terrible compared to google maps. It does nominally have voice recognition to allow setting it eyes free, and disables most of the physical buttons when the car is in motion to "comply" with anti-distraction laws.
However, the voice recognition system is so shitty, it would literally be safer to lock it out when moving, and enable all touchscreen features instead. Think have to spell the destination out one letter at at time, with an 80% chance it even understands the letter right in the first place.
Using google map's voice recognition system is orders of magnitude better and less distracting.
Plus user's can access their preferred non-radio music sources like Spotify.
This GPS system is pretty terrible compared to google maps. It does nominally have voice recognition to allow setting it eyes free, and disables most of the physical buttons when the car is in motion to "comply" with anti-distraction laws.
However, the voice recognition system is so shitty, it would literally be safer to lock it out when moving, and enable all touchscreen features instead. Think have to spell the destination out one letter at at time, with an 80% chance it even understands the letter right in the first place.
Using google map's voice recognition system is orders of magnitude better and less distracting.
Plus user's can access their preferred non-radio music sources like Spotify.
You get to feel warm and fuzzy that you won't be pulled over like one of those poors that actually have to touch the cell phone to answer a call.
Integrated nav is nice and convenient but it's only real benefit over a $20 phone mount of $15 GPS from 2006 is less clutter.
Integrated nav is nice and convenient but it's only real benefit over a $20 phone mount of $15 GPS from 2006 is less clutter.
> I'm WAY ot of the loop here but do these infotainment systems actually produce tangible, relevant and unquestionable benefits?
Does any entertainment or arts 'produce tangible, relevant and unquestionable benefits'?
But anyway - yes. For example my car's maps knows where it is in a tunnel because it can dead reckon with the speedometer. My phone cannot do that. For my example my car has a DAB receiver and my phone does not. For example my car's infotainment has cameras I can use to park, sensors to tell me how deep I'm wading, my range left, etc. Obviously my phone doesn't any of that. How is none of that useful?
Does any entertainment or arts 'produce tangible, relevant and unquestionable benefits'?
But anyway - yes. For example my car's maps knows where it is in a tunnel because it can dead reckon with the speedometer. My phone cannot do that. For my example my car has a DAB receiver and my phone does not. For example my car's infotainment has cameras I can use to park, sensors to tell me how deep I'm wading, my range left, etc. Obviously my phone doesn't any of that. How is none of that useful?
I think the responses here are missing the point in your questions.
> do these infotainment systems actually produce tangible, relevant and unquestionable benefits?
Yes for many people, but not you.
The driver and passenger can change music, podcast, directions without needing to look at the phone, nor asking the driver (phone owner) to unlock their phone.
A passenger can also plug in their phone without needing to figure out the bluetooth dance, and it just works, play their spotify, or podcast, or any number of things.
It's also right there on the dash, you don't need a car mount to mount your phone on the dash, or window to get the directions, change a playlist, or podcast. It works on the dashboard and if you have steering wheel controls, they usually work there too.
> do these infotainment systems actually produce tangible, relevant and unquestionable benefits?
Yes for many people, but not you.
The driver and passenger can change music, podcast, directions without needing to look at the phone, nor asking the driver (phone owner) to unlock their phone.
A passenger can also plug in their phone without needing to figure out the bluetooth dance, and it just works, play their spotify, or podcast, or any number of things.
It's also right there on the dash, you don't need a car mount to mount your phone on the dash, or window to get the directions, change a playlist, or podcast. It works on the dashboard and if you have steering wheel controls, they usually work there too.
Older cars can sometimes accept upgraded radios with carplay/android auto.
My '07 got a Sony head unit that does both, along with a nice 6.95" capacitive touch display for ~$400. It was worth every penny when I was commuting. You're missing convenience: Siri is nice, maps on the screen are nice, sharing the screen with passengers, quickly choosing a song without risking a cellphone use ticket (at a stop).
My '07 got a Sony head unit that does both, along with a nice 6.95" capacitive touch display for ~$400. It was worth every penny when I was commuting. You're missing convenience: Siri is nice, maps on the screen are nice, sharing the screen with passengers, quickly choosing a song without risking a cellphone use ticket (at a stop).
Having navigation on the infotainment screen is a gamechanger. Even though you can buy nav units for cars, they typically slow, light on features, and have data that is years out of date (and a pain in the ass to update).
Being able to just use the same map app that my phone does is so much more convenient, and feels safer than glancing down at my phone in the cupholder.
Being able to just use the same map app that my phone does is so much more convenient, and feels safer than glancing down at my phone in the cupholder.
A lot of modern cars have large and well positioned displays that are ideal for maps; CarPlay/Android Auto let you put Google Maps on them instead of the car's crappy built in GPS.
"Speak on the phone with the car speakers" just needs Bluetooth which is much older and more widely available. This tech is about the display.
"Speak on the phone with the car speakers" just needs Bluetooth which is much older and more widely available. This tech is about the display.
it basically extends certain apps (music, maps, phone, messaging) to the car display. Allowing you to control them like they are native apps on the car.
Dammit I'm old. I'm sorry if I do the old man barking at clouds.
But.
How's different or better than this 9$ smartphone mount? https://www.amazon.com/AUKEY-Car-Phone-Mount-Compatible/dp/B...
All this compromises and costs just for a slightly bigger screen? While I'm driving?
But.
How's different or better than this 9$ smartphone mount? https://www.amazon.com/AUKEY-Car-Phone-Mount-Compatible/dp/B...
All this compromises and costs just for a slightly bigger screen? While I'm driving?
Superficially it's a bigger screen, but the real difference is in a user interface designed for minimal driver distraction.
I've only used CarPlay, but the messaging app is a perfect example. The phone's native messaging interface is of course inappropriate for safe driving, being primarily visual. CarPlay's messaging app only gives you a glanceable list of contacts, and you tap one to dictate a message, which is then also read back to you for confirmation (no message text is ever displayed on the screen). I've had entire text conversations without taking my eyes off the road.
For maps and music, the difference may be somewhat less profound, but the same design principles combined with a larger screen that equates to fewer milliseconds scanning for information or steadying your finger to touch a small button, still have a significant effect in keeping driver app use as safe as possible.
I've only used CarPlay, but the messaging app is a perfect example. The phone's native messaging interface is of course inappropriate for safe driving, being primarily visual. CarPlay's messaging app only gives you a glanceable list of contacts, and you tap one to dictate a message, which is then also read back to you for confirmation (no message text is ever displayed on the screen). I've had entire text conversations without taking my eyes off the road.
For maps and music, the difference may be somewhat less profound, but the same design principles combined with a larger screen that equates to fewer milliseconds scanning for information or steadying your finger to touch a small button, still have a significant effect in keeping driver app use as safe as possible.
I would also note that (Android Auto, at least) will stop you from doing a number of things.
When the car is parked, you can use the on-screen keyboard to type in your searches; driving, voice search only. If you scroll too deep in your Audible library, past the first five or ten audiobooks, it will be all, "no, you can't browse your media library while driving, what the hell is wrong with you".
It's annoying, but annoying in the kind of way that keeps you from getting in the habit of distracting yourself while driving.
When the car is parked, you can use the on-screen keyboard to type in your searches; driving, voice search only. If you scroll too deep in your Audible library, past the first five or ten audiobooks, it will be all, "no, you can't browse your media library while driving, what the hell is wrong with you".
It's annoying, but annoying in the kind of way that keeps you from getting in the habit of distracting yourself while driving.
I don't know about America but I recently discovered that using any system not built into the car is illegal in the UK.
The fact is that a lot of people use such a mount anyway, but they are technically breaking the law and can be sent fines (eg if spotted by a motorway/freeway automated camera system).
It kind of makes sense.
Devices built into a vehicle have to meet safety specifications and it can be proved that they have. There is no such reassurance on a dash mounted phone. It could easily switch mode and distract you and cause an accident.
The fact is that a lot of people use such a mount anyway, but they are technically breaking the law and can be sent fines (eg if spotted by a motorway/freeway automated camera system).
It kind of makes sense.
Devices built into a vehicle have to meet safety specifications and it can be proved that they have. There is no such reassurance on a dash mounted phone. It could easily switch mode and distract you and cause an accident.
The bigger screen is nice, but the benefit is more around proper integration with in-car controls such as the stalk on the wheel for changing tracks etc, and often in-car microphones for voice assistants and hands free which have been tuned to work in that specific vehicle.
Yes, a bigger screen but not "slightly bigger". 15" diagonal screen is significantly larger than 6" diagonal. And it's built in, no goofy clamps or mounts protruding into the cabin.
How do you safely use that phone mount to switch from Spotify to a PocketCasts podcast while driving on the highway?
Because on my Mazda I can do all that with the physical builtin car controls. Or I can just tap the voice control button and say it.
Also the navigation on a 7" dashboard mounted screen is significantly more glanceable than squinting at a small phone screen.
It's all a great benefit for the 8+ hour highway drives I need to regularly do.
Because on my Mazda I can do all that with the physical builtin car controls. Or I can just tap the voice control button and say it.
Also the navigation on a 7" dashboard mounted screen is significantly more glanceable than squinting at a small phone screen.
It's all a great benefit for the 8+ hour highway drives I need to regularly do.
Agree with you, the only benefit I see is that Android Auto "uses the built-in screen" or allows you to use the "built-in controls in the steering wheel." That's it.
It sounds like a $9 smartphone mount and a mini headphone to cassette adapter (or FM audio adapter) you can get 95% of the benefits in any vehicle manufactured since 1980.
It sounds like a $9 smartphone mount and a mini headphone to cassette adapter (or FM audio adapter) you can get 95% of the benefits in any vehicle manufactured since 1980.
I had a mount like that, but in the winter time when I was blasting the heat, it would overheat my phone so much that it would stop charging and eventually have to turn off. I switched to the suction cup kind, and they would work for a few months and then the mount would stop sticking. Having something built in would be nice.
There's more to it than just the screen size. Voice commands work better, phone apps can use the display, plus you can use the smartphone screen for one thing and the built in for another (eg. media player controls on the phone screen and maps on the dashboard screen). It's actually pretty nice.
That mount blocks your AC vents and most infotainment screens are 2x bigger or more than a phone.
I have a similar (but magnetic) mount in my car, and if I'm not careful my phone will fall off and cause a distraction.
I have a similar (but magnetic) mount in my car, and if I'm not careful my phone will fall off and cause a distraction.
Phones are not automobile rated. For example, while driving in the summer, I've had issues with my phone overheating and shutting down. Infotainment systems are rated to not do that.
The smartphone mount IS the compromise. CarPlay is the ideal.
> Am I missing something big or is it really just marketing?
CarPlay is awesome. I'm sure AA is, also. All the necessary communications functions, but specifically adapted for use in a car, along with navigation, music, podcasts, or whatever app.
I won't buy another car without it. I'm all done having to hear my phone buzzz or ring and wonder what/who is trying to grab my attention. All done using outdated navigation systems that don't have traffic information. Etc.
CarPlay is awesome. I'm sure AA is, also. All the necessary communications functions, but specifically adapted for use in a car, along with navigation, music, podcasts, or whatever app.
I won't buy another car without it. I'm all done having to hear my phone buzzz or ring and wonder what/who is trying to grab my attention. All done using outdated navigation systems that don't have traffic information. Etc.
[deleted]
Waze. You can run Waze.
I would prefer a dumb terminal and then I can just plus my phone in and have the OS I prefer. This way the software is updated and moves with me as I change platforms
With that said Android Auto is fantastic.
With that said Android Auto is fantastic.
Isn't that exactly what AA and CarPlay are? Proprietary signalling, which isn't ideal, but they're essentially just dumb terminals for the phone. Though there is some pass through of technology (e.g. the phone will utilize the vehicle GPS in some cases).
I think in this case it will have Android Auto built in like the polestar.
I think in this case that is true. I sincerely hope they don't plan to do this in lieu of CarPlay/AA. I get that they want to have some kind of infotainment setup for people who don't have a smartphone to use for that, so this can serve that purpose.
> dumb terminal
This is evoking imagery of a car whose mid console has been replaced with the tube of a VT100, maybe accoutremented with RoboCop-era keypads along the edge(s), and I like it.
This is evoking imagery of a car whose mid console has been replaced with the tube of a VT100, maybe accoutremented with RoboCop-era keypads along the edge(s), and I like it.
Aston Martin Lagonda, then.
ha ha
Anything has got to be better then the Microsoft Infotainment system in my old Ford.
To be honest though, I wish all of these addons would stop. I don't think they improve anything related to driving, but infact make it worse by cramming all kinds of important interfaces behind a touch-screen.
To be honest though, I wish all of these addons would stop. I don't think they improve anything related to driving, but infact make it worse by cramming all kinds of important interfaces behind a touch-screen.
Reassignable control surfaces (touch screen, multi-purpose dials, etc.) is by far the worst extant UI paradigm for anything that has to be operated without full attention. Cameras are another example where not having dedicated physical controls for each property is horrible for proficient operation.
I used to pair the Microsoft SYNC system with my Windows phone in my Ford Fiesta and it was awesome. It would link immediately, the voice commands were straight forward and always worked quickly and accurately.
I barely use the voice commands in my Corolla right now. It almost never works, takes forever to sync with my phone (Samsung Android) and the voice commands are total shit. It either doesn't understand me or the commands are so cumbersome just do something basic, its a waste of time compared to just grabbing my phone and pushing a few buttons. Compared the SYNC where I could say, "Call parents, home." and it just worked.
I barely use the voice commands in my Corolla right now. It almost never works, takes forever to sync with my phone (Samsung Android) and the voice commands are total shit. It either doesn't understand me or the commands are so cumbersome just do something basic, its a waste of time compared to just grabbing my phone and pushing a few buttons. Compared the SYNC where I could say, "Call parents, home." and it just worked.
Agreed. My wife has the Microsoft one in her car, and it's such a disaster that she went back to listening to CDs.
Yeah. The ms infotainment really sucked.
"Further improve customer experiences for customers with differentiated technology and personalized services;"
I must say, from a privacy stand point, that does not sound good. I know most people out in the general public probably don't care, and maybe anyone walking around with an Android phone is already sending the same data back to Google, but something about "personalized services" being generated by my car... I dunno, just doesn't sound good.
I must say, from a privacy stand point, that does not sound good. I know most people out in the general public probably don't care, and maybe anyone walking around with an Android phone is already sending the same data back to Google, but something about "personalized services" being generated by my car... I dunno, just doesn't sound good.
Non-personalized Android Auto would be pretty dumb. I like that when I get in the car it puts my usual destinations on the map. Why would I want it to pretend it doesn't know?
> Why would I want it to pretend it doesn't know?
I (and I think OP) want it to not know in the first place.
I (and I think OP) want it to not know in the first place.
People who want their software to act stupid are a tiny minority, though. You can probably flip a bunch of switches to make it never remember anything but it sounds like you’re probably better off just not using it.
I don’t want privacy derangement to break my favorite features of AA. I like that I can ask it to navigate to that Vietnamese restaurant I went to last week. Or “to school” and have that work correctly.
I don’t want privacy derangement to break my favorite features of AA. I like that I can ask it to navigate to that Vietnamese restaurant I went to last week. Or “to school” and have that work correctly.
I want my stuff to act smart, and I am happy to share my data to enable that. I just don't want the data I share to be used for anything other than making my software smart. I would be happy to pay, given the option. I am not ok with my data being used for advertisement.
I see a dangerous trend of car manufactures aligning with mobile OS manufactures for "preffered" treatment. I am afraid in future battle lines will be drawn and some cards like Ford will support Android Auto while neglective Apple CarPlay while other manufactures will go another way around. So consumers will be forced to chose compatible phones and cars. To make it worse, some families use Android and Apple phones which would make them imposbile to find a car supporting both. I would prefer car manufactures to stay mobile-OS neutral, without showing any preferences and try to support major ones at the same level.
At least for the near future, this new OS will support Carplay:
https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/5/20851021/general-motors-an...
https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/5/20851021/general-motors-an...
This is exactly where this is going, and it will continue to do so until the DOJ breaks the back of vertical integration based tech monopolies.
I might be an old fogie but I don't want car integration. I just want phone accommodation. I want a good place to mount it and I want its audio to come out my stereo. Maybe play controls on my steering wheel but that's it. The car doesn't need its own software. My car is fourteen years old. Hopefully my next car will last at least that long. Sundar Pichai himself could personally promise me that my car will receive security updates for twenty years and I'd still laugh in his face at the very idea.
This is why I like android auto / apple car play soo much. The car just becomes the speakers & display for your phone.
Genius idea, and works great
Genius idea, and works great
As long as they continue to support CarPlay, then fine. But I am not going back to a homebrew infotainment that ages right along with the car. When I buy a car now, I won't buy anything that doesn't support CarPlay *.
* Yeah, I bought a Tesla, I broke my own rule. That part I regret, even if it is otherwise a good car.
* Yeah, I bought a Tesla, I broke my own rule. That part I regret, even if it is otherwise a good car.
Fwiw Volvo shifted to integrated Android a little bit ago and continue to support CarPlay.
Hopefully Ford follow suite
Hopefully Ford follow suite
Wow Tesla doesn't support CarPlay? That's crazy in such an expensive car. I had no idea.
It makes sense since the car has a snappy, not-trash UI (at least with mcu2) and does most carplay stuff like maps well, but it sucks in terms of not being able to select music using the screen - if you don't have Spotify, you're treated as a second-rate listener and have to select your music using your phone which can be both dangerous and annoying (plus both BT and Spotify such for audiophile listening[0]).
0: https://twitter.com/SnazzyQ/status/1295606564703748098
0: https://twitter.com/SnazzyQ/status/1295606564703748098
It calms my mind to not have a complicated connected computer on my CANBUS.
Old car + 10$ device channeling the phones audio via bluetooth to the radio + extra screen for parking cameras is a nice enough setup.
Not sure what would make me choose a computer car. Besides drive-me-home-drunk mode, of course.
Old car + 10$ device channeling the phones audio via bluetooth to the radio + extra screen for parking cameras is a nice enough setup.
Not sure what would make me choose a computer car. Besides drive-me-home-drunk mode, of course.
Lots of people praising Android Auto in here. I used it once on a MY19 VW Polo a few years back (car was essentially brand new). I had a Nexus 4 at the time, now I dont know if it was the car or the phone or Spotify itself but the interface was terrible and slow. It would constantly hang and sometimes spotify would crash all together. The google maps navi worked reasonably well but after trying it for one day I switched it off and used the standard bluetooth pair which worked fine. Also, I will rage quit any car OEM that starts showing me ads in the car - because this totally sounds like the next logical jump after "Ford, Google form partnership"...
Google gets their money from ads in Google Maps which already show up as promoted pins[0] (although this might not have gotten into the car UIs yet).
0: https://9to5google.com/2020/06/17/google-maps-square-pins/
0: https://9to5google.com/2020/06/17/google-maps-square-pins/
Did Android become Ford's platform or did Ford become Google's?
Polestar also runs Android.
This is the best comment I've read in weeks!
... and we'll have no idea who's getting access to our recorded location, and what other information about the driving systems is being transmitted where else.
That last bullet point is key, Ford wants to advertise to you and likely sell your attention to others. Trade in alerts? Oh joy.
In other words, they are jealous of OnStar and the only question remains is, how much will Ford charge for other than the most basic of services by incorporating Android into their cars.
Do not assume what they are adding is free of a monthly charge
In other words, they are jealous of OnStar and the only question remains is, how much will Ford charge for other than the most basic of services by incorporating Android into their cars.
Do not assume what they are adding is free of a monthly charge
Agree but this is bigger than an Onstar feature clone. This is data. Now there is always on driving data from everyone with a new ford, not just a Ford AND AA plugged in.
Read: spyware in all Ford cars.
Yes, of course. Just don’t be deceived and think that it is only Ford, or only Android Auto.
This is what you get when you buy a new Toyota, for example:
https://www.toyota.com/privacyvts/
This is what you get when you buy a new Toyota, for example:
https://www.toyota.com/privacyvts/
How feasible is it to disable the hardware for this stuff?
Nobody's even really bothered to aggregate and quantify what different cars are collecting, to my knowledge. I don't think anybody's done much real work into privacy-modding modern cars. I'd love to be proven wrong though. I was recently forced to buy a 2016 Kia, and all the smart features have me grinding my teeth.
Search for manufacturer and disabling telematics/telemetrics
Example: http://toyota.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/7954/rela...
I've heard that SOS collections can be turned off by activating it and telling them you want to opt out.
It would be nice if someone documented where models wifi/cellular antennas are. Perhaps there's a market for faraday cages built by model.
Example: http://toyota.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/7954/rela...
I've heard that SOS collections can be turned off by activating it and telling them you want to opt out.
It would be nice if someone documented where models wifi/cellular antennas are. Perhaps there's a market for faraday cages built by model.
I like Android, but I really don't think it belongs as an integral part of a car. I also don't like cars having connectivity with other devices or the network, but that's another tangent.
I like older car control panels - knobs, switches, buttons. You can feel what you're doing so you're not looking at a screen instead of the road. That's not to say I don't like technology in cars. Voice commands for playing songs and a HUD for critical data (speed, RPM, tires, warnings, etc) are awesome.
I like older car control panels - knobs, switches, buttons. You can feel what you're doing so you're not looking at a screen instead of the road. That's not to say I don't like technology in cars. Voice commands for playing songs and a HUD for critical data (speed, RPM, tires, warnings, etc) are awesome.
It's not really integral, at most it's a node on the CANBUS and usually it's not even that, just a head unit wired to the steering wheel controls and a built-in USB port.
You can rip it out in an afternoon with a pair of DIN keys and a screwdriver.
You can rip it out in an afternoon with a pair of DIN keys and a screwdriver.
I guess what I'm getting at is that if it's part of the CANBUS, it can be an enrtypoint for malicious software.
Sure you can pull it out. I had OnStar in a car and I was able to disconnect it by pulling the connection between the cell/gps card and the reat of the car. It's still a pain to have to do that when buying a car.
Sure you can pull it out. I had OnStar in a car and I was able to disconnect it by pulling the connection between the cell/gps card and the reat of the car. It's still a pain to have to do that when buying a car.
Head units are extremely restricted in what they can do with CANBUS, generally it's a read-only arrangement so the head unit can lock out functions when the car is in motion, or show statistics. An example, in a modern car I recently purchased, there are settings in the head unit for a bunch of personalization aspects of the head unit...
To change settings on the ADAS behavior, you have to use buttons on the wheel to control a menu that appears directly above the steering wheel: The entertainment unit has no ability to control settings for vehicle motion-related behaviors, so you have to deal with a less friendly menu that isn't touch capable to set them.
This is also why Tesla is particularly unique (reckless?) in pushing OTA updates which can change the car's driving behavior. Nobody else would use OTAs that way, and most OTA-capable hardware in cars can't actually interact with driving behavior components.
To change settings on the ADAS behavior, you have to use buttons on the wheel to control a menu that appears directly above the steering wheel: The entertainment unit has no ability to control settings for vehicle motion-related behaviors, so you have to deal with a less friendly menu that isn't touch capable to set them.
This is also why Tesla is particularly unique (reckless?) in pushing OTA updates which can change the car's driving behavior. Nobody else would use OTAs that way, and most OTA-capable hardware in cars can't actually interact with driving behavior components.
Ford can't seem to figure out that their infotainment is a buggy mess because they insist on developing it in house and they are completely incapable of developing quality software.
The last time Sync was good was when Microsoft handled the full stack. As soon as Ford decided to put their own software on top of Windows Automotive (MyFord Touch) was when it all fell apart.
The last time Sync was good was when Microsoft handled the full stack. As soon as Ford decided to put their own software on top of Windows Automotive (MyFord Touch) was when it all fell apart.
What are modern cars like with regard to needing a data connection? My car (2012) just stored all the data from North America locally and that's been incredibly useful when driving without cell service. The Google way in other products seems to assume an internet connection is available, and offline performance is an afterthought.
My car from 2016 had its own cellphone data and gps. It was unclear to me if the data connection was always on, or if I had to pay for something to enable it.
It seems like even in base model cars, cellular connections are included and enabled for vehicle services. We recently bought a base model car, and without any sort of subscription, the car is connected to always-on cellular as such that the car can be started from a phone app.
Another manufacturer I bought a few years ago had similar capabilities, but only included a couple years of access to it before a subscription fee was involved.
My guess is car manufacturers can get a pretty special rate for cellular plans that are almost certainly IPv6 only and have extremely low/restricted usage for car telemetry.
Another manufacturer I bought a few years ago had similar capabilities, but only included a couple years of access to it before a subscription fee was involved.
My guess is car manufacturers can get a pretty special rate for cellular plans that are almost certainly IPv6 only and have extremely low/restricted usage for car telemetry.
Seems like a good guess.
I wonder what the privacy story is here?
I wonder what the privacy story is here?
Only partially on topic...
The worst part of my 2020 Toyota is the “ETunes” infotainment system. This is my 4th Toyota and the only one that has felt like a step backwards due to how bad that system is. Cars have had working radios since before I was born. This car has a radio with a bad UI and a habit of showing error messages...
This is a dumb way to lose a customer.
The worst part of my 2020 Toyota is the “ETunes” infotainment system. This is my 4th Toyota and the only one that has felt like a step backwards due to how bad that system is. Cars have had working radios since before I was born. This car has a radio with a bad UI and a habit of showing error messages...
This is a dumb way to lose a customer.
I find it curious that the headline was written to say "Forc cars" when Ford has pretty much exited the car market and will focus (no pun intended) on the truck market.
Ford vehicles would be more accurate. I forget the Ford lineup, but I do not think they have lower cost trucks.
Ford vehicles would be more accurate. I forget the Ford lineup, but I do not think they have lower cost trucks.
Only in the US; the Focus and Fiesta are still being manufactured for the European market.
"Accelerate modernization of product development, manufacturing and supply chain management, including exploration of using vision AI for manufacturing employee training and even more reliable plant equipment performance;"
Oh sweet baby Jesus they're doing digital transformation. Look for a billion in losses over the next few years from poorly executing a DevOps transition.
Also there's this:
"I see you're driving through Virginia! Stop by Crazy Larry's GM Dealership for a deal on an oil change! We both know you wait too long for that oil change, Phil."
Oh sweet baby Jesus they're doing digital transformation. Look for a billion in losses over the next few years from poorly executing a DevOps transition.
Also there's this:
"Further improve customer experiences for customers with differentiated technology and personalized services;
"Fast track the implementation of data-driven business models resulting in customers receiving real-time notices such as maintenance requests or trade-in alerts."
"I see you're driving through Virginia! Stop by Crazy Larry's GM Dealership for a deal on an oil change! We both know you wait too long for that oil change, Phil."
How does this work with the short EOL times of Android devices? Is there some special arrangement to supply patches for the lifetime of the car?
Unfortunately many cars are already running Android for their infotainment (notable Hyundai/Kia/Genesis and Honda), have Wi-Fi and cellular connections, and never get updated. From this point, securing infotainment systems (such as by using a system updated by Google that also supports updating individual system components, i.e. modern Android), is a step in the right direction.
[deleted]
[deleted]
So does this mean your car can be deprecated?
6 year deal is substantially less than the life of a car.
I can’t say anything great about old android devices. Large numbers left on older versions with security flaws
6 year deal is substantially less than the life of a car.
I can’t say anything great about old android devices. Large numbers left on older versions with security flaws
Android, in most setups, sends constant data to Google about what you do. Will this now happen with our cars? Google has an opportunity to collect even more data. This could help their data scrapping for surveillance capitalism.
If you have your google account blocked, will features in your car stop working?
If you have your google account blocked, will features in your car stop working?
Ah, can’t wait for Java’s GC to hit in the middle of my breaking manoeuvre.
The only connection between the infotainment system and your brakes is over the CAN bus, nothing happening on the infotainment should affect braking.
but back to your original topic, I'm semi-familiar with the buggy world of automation drivers and the shady industry practices after a brief foray into home and industrial automation. I'm not referring to CAN drivers, particularly. Doubtless there are industry standards and compliance etc.
You surely must recognize that having any connection whatsoever between an automotive control network and an onboard infotainment system represents a potential attack vector, right? There are countless low-hanging fruit already on the market as far as automotive hacks, and this simply will enrich that supply...
You surely must recognize that having any connection whatsoever between an automotive control network and an onboard infotainment system represents a potential attack vector, right? There are countless low-hanging fruit already on the market as far as automotive hacks, and this simply will enrich that supply...
It's a controllable risk that can enable some useful things like getting meaningful error messages instead of a single check engine light.
I'll take exception and note that many metrics are displayed on the infotainment system, to say nothing of GPS and phone calls. I know that laws are intended to mitigate this, but the basic issue is that Android has frustrating UI issues that will likely contribute to an unsafe motor vehicle environment. Distractions exist.
Android nearly gets me killed on a daily basis as-is, without making my car into a glorified smart phone.
Say what?
You know only the infortainment system will be handled by Google Auto?
Wow, I guess I know which mark of cars to avoid in the future.
I'll likely get downvoted for what amounts to a negative review of a popular Google product but I find that Android is frustrating to use, hangs in the middle of tasks like typing the word "the" and has extremely dark UI patterns, like the word "backup" in one's photos immediately starting a cloud upload of what could be gigabvtes that even a power cycle won't stop. (there's no "stop" nor "x" on this upload either, and one wonders where "backup to SD" card fits into this all...)
Seriously, I can't tell if the ultimate Windows editions since XP were deliberately designed to throw away decades of power-user "ah yes, there's the Start Menu Button" knowledge, and by the same token, I can't tell if Google is merely incompetent or helping sling hardware and dataplans. "Sorry sir, this phone that has 6 processing cores and more ram than 4 90's computers that ran Skype and some IM clients just fine, along with an IDE, a music player etc. this phone just simply isn't advanced enough to handle our material design concepts" or?
I'll likely get downvoted for what amounts to a negative review of a popular Google product but I find that Android is frustrating to use, hangs in the middle of tasks like typing the word "the" and has extremely dark UI patterns, like the word "backup" in one's photos immediately starting a cloud upload of what could be gigabvtes that even a power cycle won't stop. (there's no "stop" nor "x" on this upload either, and one wonders where "backup to SD" card fits into this all...)
Seriously, I can't tell if the ultimate Windows editions since XP were deliberately designed to throw away decades of power-user "ah yes, there's the Start Menu Button" knowledge, and by the same token, I can't tell if Google is merely incompetent or helping sling hardware and dataplans. "Sorry sir, this phone that has 6 processing cores and more ram than 4 90's computers that ran Skype and some IM clients just fine, along with an IDE, a music player etc. this phone just simply isn't advanced enough to handle our material design concepts" or?
> Android is frustrating to use, hangs in the middle of tasks like typing the word "the" and has extremely dark UI patterns, like the word "backup" in one's photos immediately starting a cloud upload of what could be gigabvtes that even a power cycle won't stop.
Buy proper phone, this had nothing to do with Android.
Buy proper phone, this had nothing to do with Android.
I don't care how crappy the infotainment is anymore in a car as long as I can plug in my phone.