The author's point is that by using Apple CarPlay or Android Auto, they hand over control over software and become "commoditized hardware providers", just like IBM and the IBM-clone providers in the 1980s and 1990s.<p>I consider this argument ridiculous, as the in-car-software controls nowhere near as much of the user experience as the operating system and applications of a personal computer. Today's car builders have their profit margins because of engine design, build quality, exterior design and branding. They don't lose power by outsourcing their software stack. Actually a lot of them <i>already use the same software over their entire model range</i> (f.e. Volkswagen, Ford, BMW all do) and it does not seem to hurt the sales & profits of their top-end models, so the point that software is the crucial buying factor is basically already refuted.<p>(I think they should rather be afraid of Tesla overtaking them in what actually matters)
This author has a lot of misconceptions what a car is and how it is composed of.<p>The HMI/MMI or however you would like to call that thing in the middle is only a small part of the software in a car. And even using standards like Apple CarPlay or Android Auto does not mean, that they give anything away. Both "platforms" are not even platforms, they are just proprietary versions of VNC. Its like the current iteration of the Apple Watch: there is no application running on the watch. The applications can display information and they have a back channel for the user interaction. But the real application still runs on the phone. That is also true for Android Auto and Apple CarPlay.<p>Then there is much more to control in this second display (the first display is the dashboard), which is air condition, power sliding windows, roof, and all the other car functions. Because anything in a car is controlled by software. In a normal mid-sized car there are about 40 to 60 ECUs (electronic control units), in a luxury car that can go up to 90 and some more.<p>Current estimates are that a modern car is comprised by about 30% software, 30% electronics, and 30% mechanics.<p>Seeing the reason decline of software quality by Apple, I am feeling pretty comfortable that they are only doing user interface stuff, that is unimportant to the cars performance.
Have you checked with the customers? I have never heard of a customer commenting software features of a car. It looks to me that car buyers are interested in other things in a car. I mean, at least for me (potential customer?), an Audi with the shittiest software will always win vs a Fiat with the best software. You can't just compare completely different industries and draw conclusions like that, you should give some more factual stuff to prove your argument I believe.
<i>Cars will become commodified, and as long as it’s running CarPlay or Android Auto, I won’t care what I’m driving.</i><p>Somehow I don't think so. It doesn't help that the author gets the mechanics of the PC transistion wrong as well. The biggest threat at the moment to automobiles is self driving. If we get a self-driving Uber or Lyft we're going to have an entire generation of people who just have their phone summon transportation and never own a car.
Software is only a small part of the car. The other parts to consider is the build quality of a car. For example, compare a Skoda and a VW. Even though, they are from the sample base platform, their build quality is very different. They share plenty of the same software. Build quality includes items like suspension, safety features and about 1000s other items.
This article is a stretch at best. There are too many subsystems in a car that are already controlled by software from Bosch and a few select other companies that have no or little interface into the UI of a car. The author here either doesn't get that cars are a level of magnitude more complicated than computers or he doesn't care. Electric cars can simply things somewhat as it takes a lot of sensors and cpu power to make a gasoline or Diesel engine run and meet emissions standards. However there is still a lot to manage in electric cars too that goes way beyond Bluetooth control and maps.
I think I'd trust Google or Apple more with my self-driving car's security than say BMW.<p><a href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/2878437/bmw-cars-found-vulnerable-in-connected-drive-hack.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.pcworld.com/article/2878437/bmw-cars-found-vulner...</a><p>Alex Stamos on Twitter recently:<p>> <i>If software is eating the world and all companies are software companies, then they all need to learn hard infosec lessons faster.</i><p><a href="https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/600075692731191296" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/600075692731191296</a><p>Couldn't agree more.
CarPlay is not great.<p>I don't have any experience with Android Auto or MirrorLink, but I installed a Pioneer head unit (AVX-4000NEX) a few months ago in my car so I could use CarPlay.<p>The head unit itself is great, gets good reception, sounds great (especially after using the microphone calibration), and the Pioneer interface is fine. I don't know that it's worth the price without considering the deep phone integration. I considered reinstalling the factory head unit (a Scion Bespoke w/ navigation), but I had sold it before I could come to a decision.<p>CarPlay would work great if Siri worked well, but I've never been able to get Siri to work well in the car or elsewhere (and that assumes Siri is taking requests at the moment). Text-to-speech works fine; dictation is a constant frustration. The other week, I tried to send a message to my wife that "I am in a little traffic so I'm running late, but should be there at 5:20". I don't recall the erroneous outputs generated by Siri, but they weren't even close. After multiple tries, I had to give up. The Maps colors are idiotically low contrast and it can be very difficult to see what current traffic conditions are as a result. The zoom levels in Maps never seem to be right, either too much or too little. The touch interface itself requires too much attention to use and is a car accident waiting to happen.<p>CarPlay has a long way to go before it is competitive with iDrive, MyFord Touch, or Uvo, which are the systems that I've experienced. My experience with CarPlay makes me question how much testing it actually got while installed in cars with people driving, because there's a lot of glaring usability problems and general interface quirks that should have been caught during testing.<p>I used to think that CarPlay, Android Auto, and MirrorLink were going to destroy the car maker's infotainment systems. After using CarPlay, I'm convinced it's going to be a while before that happens, if ever. The car manufacturers have a lot of experience with "car UX" and aren't standing still with their own products. Infotainment is also a minor part of the entire car ownership and use experience, and I don't know that I can think of anyone that bought or leased a car because "it has iDrive" or whatever. Drawing an analogy between car manufacturers and 1985 IBM feels forced and is flawed.
This seems a silly thesis, if only because cars are already commoditized due to years of competition. Early PCs has huge profit margins; current automobiles generally do not.