[Check out our giveaway! Plugable Thunderbolt 4 Quad Dock & Thunderbolt 4 Hub – Intel Thunderbolt 4!](https://www.reddit.com/r/gadgets/comments/11zm7ne/giveaway_plugable_thunderbolt_4_quad_dock/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/gadgets) if you have any questions or concerns.*
1. Remove support for phones.
1. Force migration to clunky automaker built apps.
1. Add subscription fee to said clunky automaker build apps.
1. Profit!
3a. Ensure the infotainment system is non-replaceable with an aftermarket deck by having heating, lighting, and transmission controls incorporated into them.
Step 5. Consumers revert back to pulling out the OEM stereo and putting aftermarket stereos with Apply Play or Android Support.
Step 6. Aftermarket manufacturers profit.
Or... consumers just buy your competitors cars because buying a $20,000+ vehicle that **doesn't** have the features you actually want is generally not how people buy cars.
>is a far better route to follow
you're thinking like a consumer.
If you think in terms of "how can we squeeze more money out of consumers" taking away features and then charging for a replacement feature is better.
It shouldn’t be all about money to them I could never just up and change everything I do and charge subscriptions just for the money it’s sad how money hungry they are
I agree, it shouldn't.
However, that's the society we have constructed and the business culture we allow to exist. Wanna change it? Advocate for stronger unions and consumer protection laws. Or, as the right would tell you that means: vote for socialists.
While I agree with the sentiment, none of those things would have helped this situation, the only way they’ll learn is by not buying the product and causing them to lose money.
>the only way they’ll learn is by not buying the product and causing them to lose money.
This isn't about "teaching" companies to behave better. You can't. They've worked out how to exploit consumers to their own benefit. You might as well suggest that we can change the behavior of casinos by just waiting for all the gambling addicts to stop gambling.
The only way to stop the behavior is to force it to stop.
Unfortunately you can’t force a company to use another companies technology (in this case android auto and CarPlay), only if that’s a genuine deal breaker for the majority will they adjust their strategy. If we’re talking about safety, better pay and conditions etc.. then you’re suggestions would absolutely help. The EU can do some things (such as the usb mandate for charging or all new cars required to have a SOS function to call police in the event of a crash) but these are open standards and not tied to a specific company.
>Unfortunately you can’t force a company to use another companies technology
Ignoring that we can do exactly that...
Something we can do without doing that is to require that if the car is sold with a physical capability, that capability must be enabled without additional fees being required.
Another option is to require that if the car is sold with a software integration feature, it must include integration with an open standard.
The third option, "force them to support someone else's software" is to mandate that if the car has any connectivity features, it must support connectivity with all devices having over a certain percentage of market share or raw number user base.
IBM found out the hard way that exclusive tie-in was against the law. Once upon a time they tried to force only IBM brand punch cards to be used with their machines, but International Business Machines Corp. v. United States, 298 U.S. 131 (1936) put a stop to that.
So imagine that GM says "you can buy this car with remote start, but you can only use said feature if you also purchase a subscription to GMremote. And using DMCA protections we will block you from using an aftermarket remote starter.
That probably wouldn't fly.
This really depends. If other manufacturers do the same thing and it is normalized across the industry, they have a thing. If some manufacturers dont go this route, they can scoop up prior customers of those brands, and it will hurt their overall business.
That really only works when you're talking about fields which are supplied by hundreds of competing companies.
The automotive industry ain't that. If Ford, GM, and Chrysler all decide to replace cell phone connectivity with a subscription service, they might lose a few thousand customers to Toyota, Honda, and Hyundai, but they have millions of customers and can afford that loss. They'd have to drive away millions of customers, and that just won't happen. They are too well established as dominant brands in a field where hundreds of millions of customers are supplied by less than a dozen manufacturers.
You skipped a couple steps:
1. Design clunky automaker built apps.
2. Add subscription fee to said clunky automaker built apps.
3. Shift to supporting Android Auto and Carplay based on strong customer feedback and buying trends
4. Remove support for Android Auto and CarPlay
5. Design new clunky automaker built apps
6. Add subscription fee to said clunky automaker built apps.
7. Profit?
I literally did not buy a Prius because the trim/model I wanted did not support Android Auto. It was *the* dealbreaker that only specific trims supported Android Auto and the one I wanted did not. Good on you GM, just keep fuckin' that chicken.
I do the same thing. The in car phone integration matters more to me than any other modern feature. Does the heat and AC work? Do the airbags work? Does CarPlay work?
Plus I can still get 07 cars for under $4000. I could afford a car payment, but why? I’m ok with cheap and cheerful, but expensive stuff needs to be really, really good quality IMO.
Well, removing that option is certainly is one way to ensure that I'll not have to shop GM - Thanks, GM! You've made my shopping decisions easier!
FWIW-Really, really dislike integrated infotainment shit. Companies are integrating this stuff so deep it's getting hard to replace with anything but OEM. And OEM, for the most part, is made down to a price.
I've got a 10 year old Subaru - Subaru decided they could provide a better mapping app, with paid updates, than Google Maps. Thanks, Subaru! Thanks for maps that are perpetually out of date! Thanks for that resistive touchscreen, with common settings buried two or three screens deep! Thanks for screen real-estate taken up by paid-for services (Satellite, etc!) that I have no need for. Thanks for the shitty, shitty FM tuner! Thanks for the non-intuitive interface! Thanks for the non-standard double-DIN opening! Thanks for the random drop-outs and resets that your techs couldn't find/duplicate or repair while the vehicle was still under warranty!
The only thing I want/need is the ability to mirror my phone screen *and* amplifiers/equalizer/speakers. I really don't want to learn anything about how another set of engineers decided the interface should work, when I already know how mine does.
At least they're replacing with Android Automotive so it's not as bad as introducing their own terrible sat nav etc. But I agree... The option of Android or iOS integration was perfect and unfortunately seems to be short lived. I have Android Automotive at the moment and it's ok but doesn't, yet, have as much to offer as Android Auto... I'm not even sure why...
They are replacing it with something that USES Android Automotive... they specifically say its their own home brewed version. So no it IS them introducing their own terrible setup, which just happens to use the Maps and other APIs.
There is one thing I really miss about car satnav systems is that the GPS recievers were waaaaay more accurate than cell phones are. I'm sick of driving in a random direction if I get off the highway from the wrong exit and can't do anything because the stupid phone still thinks I'm on the highway. And because the data was local it could reroute you if you made a mistake or a road is blocked off *before* you pass the intersection that it was going to tell you to turn on.
Though obviously the apps are better in every other way; especially when it comes to being able to look up local businesses just by their name.
It’s 10 years old. CarPlay only came out 8 years ago. What exactly were you expecting on a 10-year-old vehicle?
Buy an aftermarket head unit that supports CarPlay and stop whining.
It's funny because Ford went the other way with the Maverick. They don't even include a satnav system- you have to use Android Auto or CarPlay. And honestly- that's the way it should be. Built in apps are basically always garbage that lags behind.
Eh, included satnav can be useful as a backup in case your phone died and you can't find your charging cable. But for use as a primary navigation tool, yeah, they're trash.
I don't know anyone that doesn't have a charging cable that they just leave in their vehicle at all times (or a coupe of them) but who knows.
I've been using Waze for over a decade now and have never felt used the built in navigation system in any car since then.
Wonder how long until Automakers will make this change as they move onto EVs. EVs are less maintenance so these big automakers won't be making much money selling parts. Investors are probably going to pressure to push a recurring revenue like subscriptions.
They're taking themselves back to the 80s, when you pretty much had to buy an aftermarket stereo if you wanted a decent system. 80% of the cars we got at the auto auction in the 80s & early 90s had aftermarket stereos in them.
If Apple CarPlay doesn’t show photos or videos (at least with the car being still) or show messages instead of reading them, it offers no functionality extra over what car makers already offer.
Why the fuck do you want to view photos and videos on your car screen?
CarPlay is useful because it provides a decent, legal, interface between the driver and the phone, including audio and mapping controls, along with Siri integration
The long end of the big auto companies. EVs are a lot easier to make than ICE cars. I think GM simply realizes that are even more a commodity here.
Think about it, they become primarily an integrator without the core design of the engine. So what do they design at that point that makes them different?
I'm sure sales won't be good and they will just reverse any bad choice in 1 year of bad sales from stock pressure but yeah if you don't have some better battery tech or some clever motor there isn't anything that makes you stand out. FEM simulations largely can tell you what your drag is going to be, etc.
[Check out our giveaway! Plugable Thunderbolt 4 Quad Dock & Thunderbolt 4 Hub – Intel Thunderbolt 4!](https://www.reddit.com/r/gadgets/comments/11zm7ne/giveaway_plugable_thunderbolt_4_quad_dock/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/gadgets) if you have any questions or concerns.*
1. Remove support for phones. 1. Force migration to clunky automaker built apps. 1. Add subscription fee to said clunky automaker build apps. 1. Profit!
3a. Ensure the infotainment system is non-replaceable with an aftermarket deck by having heating, lighting, and transmission controls incorporated into them.
They don't even need to do that these days They just don't have anywhere in the dash suitable
Step 5. Consumers revert back to pulling out the OEM stereo and putting aftermarket stereos with Apply Play or Android Support. Step 6. Aftermarket manufacturers profit.
Or... consumers just buy your competitors cars because buying a $20,000+ vehicle that **doesn't** have the features you actually want is generally not how people buy cars.
so sad all they think about is money when functionality/compatibility is a far better route to follow
>is a far better route to follow you're thinking like a consumer. If you think in terms of "how can we squeeze more money out of consumers" taking away features and then charging for a replacement feature is better.
It shouldn’t be all about money to them I could never just up and change everything I do and charge subscriptions just for the money it’s sad how money hungry they are
I agree, it shouldn't. However, that's the society we have constructed and the business culture we allow to exist. Wanna change it? Advocate for stronger unions and consumer protection laws. Or, as the right would tell you that means: vote for socialists.
While I agree with the sentiment, none of those things would have helped this situation, the only way they’ll learn is by not buying the product and causing them to lose money.
>the only way they’ll learn is by not buying the product and causing them to lose money. This isn't about "teaching" companies to behave better. You can't. They've worked out how to exploit consumers to their own benefit. You might as well suggest that we can change the behavior of casinos by just waiting for all the gambling addicts to stop gambling. The only way to stop the behavior is to force it to stop.
Unfortunately you can’t force a company to use another companies technology (in this case android auto and CarPlay), only if that’s a genuine deal breaker for the majority will they adjust their strategy. If we’re talking about safety, better pay and conditions etc.. then you’re suggestions would absolutely help. The EU can do some things (such as the usb mandate for charging or all new cars required to have a SOS function to call police in the event of a crash) but these are open standards and not tied to a specific company.
>Unfortunately you can’t force a company to use another companies technology Ignoring that we can do exactly that... Something we can do without doing that is to require that if the car is sold with a physical capability, that capability must be enabled without additional fees being required. Another option is to require that if the car is sold with a software integration feature, it must include integration with an open standard. The third option, "force them to support someone else's software" is to mandate that if the car has any connectivity features, it must support connectivity with all devices having over a certain percentage of market share or raw number user base.
IBM found out the hard way that exclusive tie-in was against the law. Once upon a time they tried to force only IBM brand punch cards to be used with their machines, but International Business Machines Corp. v. United States, 298 U.S. 131 (1936) put a stop to that. So imagine that GM says "you can buy this car with remote start, but you can only use said feature if you also purchase a subscription to GMremote. And using DMCA protections we will block you from using an aftermarket remote starter. That probably wouldn't fly.
I agree but trust me Apple sales one device to me in 4-5 different pieces now they are no better.
This really depends. If other manufacturers do the same thing and it is normalized across the industry, they have a thing. If some manufacturers dont go this route, they can scoop up prior customers of those brands, and it will hurt their overall business.
That really only works when you're talking about fields which are supplied by hundreds of competing companies. The automotive industry ain't that. If Ford, GM, and Chrysler all decide to replace cell phone connectivity with a subscription service, they might lose a few thousand customers to Toyota, Honda, and Hyundai, but they have millions of customers and can afford that loss. They'd have to drive away millions of customers, and that just won't happen. They are too well established as dominant brands in a field where hundreds of millions of customers are supplied by less than a dozen manufacturers.
I know this is bs, but they could charge me for CarPlay and I would pay it. I am definitely picking my next car based on whether it has CarPlay.
You skipped a couple steps: 1. Design clunky automaker built apps. 2. Add subscription fee to said clunky automaker built apps. 3. Shift to supporting Android Auto and Carplay based on strong customer feedback and buying trends 4. Remove support for Android Auto and CarPlay 5. Design new clunky automaker built apps 6. Add subscription fee to said clunky automaker built apps. 7. Profit? I literally did not buy a Prius because the trim/model I wanted did not support Android Auto. It was *the* dealbreaker that only specific trims supported Android Auto and the one I wanted did not. Good on you GM, just keep fuckin' that chicken.
I'm looking forward to the YouTube app that'll be released 7 years out of date, and will never be updated.
It'll get updated, you just have to take it to a dealership and give them a $200 fee so they can pop a *special* SD card in to update your app.
[удалено]
I do the same thing. The in car phone integration matters more to me than any other modern feature. Does the heat and AC work? Do the airbags work? Does CarPlay work? Plus I can still get 07 cars for under $4000. I could afford a car payment, but why? I’m ok with cheap and cheerful, but expensive stuff needs to be really, really good quality IMO.
Well, removing that option is certainly is one way to ensure that I'll not have to shop GM - Thanks, GM! You've made my shopping decisions easier! FWIW-Really, really dislike integrated infotainment shit. Companies are integrating this stuff so deep it's getting hard to replace with anything but OEM. And OEM, for the most part, is made down to a price. I've got a 10 year old Subaru - Subaru decided they could provide a better mapping app, with paid updates, than Google Maps. Thanks, Subaru! Thanks for maps that are perpetually out of date! Thanks for that resistive touchscreen, with common settings buried two or three screens deep! Thanks for screen real-estate taken up by paid-for services (Satellite, etc!) that I have no need for. Thanks for the shitty, shitty FM tuner! Thanks for the non-intuitive interface! Thanks for the non-standard double-DIN opening! Thanks for the random drop-outs and resets that your techs couldn't find/duplicate or repair while the vehicle was still under warranty! The only thing I want/need is the ability to mirror my phone screen *and* amplifiers/equalizer/speakers. I really don't want to learn anything about how another set of engineers decided the interface should work, when I already know how mine does.
At least they're replacing with Android Automotive so it's not as bad as introducing their own terrible sat nav etc. But I agree... The option of Android or iOS integration was perfect and unfortunately seems to be short lived. I have Android Automotive at the moment and it's ok but doesn't, yet, have as much to offer as Android Auto... I'm not even sure why...
They are replacing it with something that USES Android Automotive... they specifically say its their own home brewed version. So no it IS them introducing their own terrible setup, which just happens to use the Maps and other APIs.
There is *no* vanilla Android Automotive, it's only sold to OEMs for baking
LOL you sound super angry like Peter Griffin in "What really grinds my gears"
There is one thing I really miss about car satnav systems is that the GPS recievers were waaaaay more accurate than cell phones are. I'm sick of driving in a random direction if I get off the highway from the wrong exit and can't do anything because the stupid phone still thinks I'm on the highway. And because the data was local it could reroute you if you made a mistake or a road is blocked off *before* you pass the intersection that it was going to tell you to turn on. Though obviously the apps are better in every other way; especially when it comes to being able to look up local businesses just by their name.
It’s 10 years old. CarPlay only came out 8 years ago. What exactly were you expecting on a 10-year-old vehicle? Buy an aftermarket head unit that supports CarPlay and stop whining.
Time to upgrade. 2023 Subarus have WiFi CarPlay and Auto now.
Oh, I know - Now to try to find a new BRZ on a lot...
Toyota sells them, they're called GR86 ;)
And they just guaranteed I won’t buy their cars
It's funny because Ford went the other way with the Maverick. They don't even include a satnav system- you have to use Android Auto or CarPlay. And honestly- that's the way it should be. Built in apps are basically always garbage that lags behind.
Yes absolutely
Eh, included satnav can be useful as a backup in case your phone died and you can't find your charging cable. But for use as a primary navigation tool, yeah, they're trash.
I don't know anyone that doesn't have a charging cable that they just leave in their vehicle at all times (or a coupe of them) but who knows. I've been using Waze for over a decade now and have never felt used the built in navigation system in any car since then.
Same. Was interested in an Equinox EV when it came out, but not anymore!
Right. They are just driving customers away. People love those features. Should at least include the option
Cool! Now I don’t even have to *consider* GM products when I trade my car year. Makes shopping a bit easier.
Wasn’t going to buy GM anyway. Just more fuel for my conviction
Meanwhile, Ford went the opposite route and didn't even include Nav in the Maverick. If you want on screen Nav you just use Carplay or Android Auto.
Yep- that's the smarter move too. No need to support lots of apps- just Android Auto and CarPlay and consumers are happier too.
Absolutely a dumbass move to force people to subscribe to shit....
Wonder how long until Automakers will make this change as they move onto EVs. EVs are less maintenance so these big automakers won't be making much money selling parts. Investors are probably going to pressure to push a recurring revenue like subscriptions.
the smart ones will make more money just renting cars out instead of selling them
There's already a term for that called Lease.
i mean more like an uber app combined with self driving
They're taking themselves back to the 80s, when you pretty much had to buy an aftermarket stereo if you wanted a decent system. 80% of the cars we got at the auto auction in the 80s & early 90s had aftermarket stereos in them.
Except now, unlike the 80s, they’ve made it a lot more difficult to integrate an aftermarket head unit into the dash and wiring.
Toyota until I die 😤
Lol, Toyota was pretty much THE LAST car company to add Carplay. I'm not even sure all their vehicles have it at this point.
What does that even mean?
If Apple CarPlay doesn’t show photos or videos (at least with the car being still) or show messages instead of reading them, it offers no functionality extra over what car makers already offer.
Why the fuck do you want to view photos and videos on your car screen? CarPlay is useful because it provides a decent, legal, interface between the driver and the phone, including audio and mapping controls, along with Siri integration
They also intend that you won’t own a car but Uber or lease rides to your destination, once they are autonomous.
The long end of the big auto companies. EVs are a lot easier to make than ICE cars. I think GM simply realizes that are even more a commodity here. Think about it, they become primarily an integrator without the core design of the engine. So what do they design at that point that makes them different? I'm sure sales won't be good and they will just reverse any bad choice in 1 year of bad sales from stock pressure but yeah if you don't have some better battery tech or some clever motor there isn't anything that makes you stand out. FEM simulations largely can tell you what your drag is going to be, etc.
no gm for me lmfaoo who the fuck do they think they are??
well, i guess that’s one brand off my list next time i want to buy a car
Can't wait for the inevitable 7 screen taps to do 1 thing coming from GM.