Apple CarPlay and Android for R1T / R1S?

[godfodder0901]

I won't buy the truck if they don't add non subscription wireless carplay.

Carplay means two things to me:
1) I don't need to pay for a monthly data plan for my car, to use any internet features.
2) a decade (+-) from now, with Rivian stops sending updates out for the nav, the feature set on the nav will remain up to date.

I buy cars and keep them for a long time, and tend to have 5-6 of them. I refuse to pay for a data plan for each car, and nothing dates a car faster than an obsolete ICE setup (which carplay avoids).

Plus, even today it doesn't have the features I want-- Apple Music and Waze for nav/police alerts .

So, if they won't add it, I'll just wait for a truck that does. AFAIK, Tesla is the ONLY company out there not offering CarPlay. Not coincidentally, I've never owned a Tesla and currently have no intention to.

Meanwhile, my 20 year old M5 and 15 year old M3s (purchased new) have wireless Carplay, giving me every ICE feature I actually care about in modern cars

No carplay guarantees tech obsolescence and means you have to pay a monthly data plan (once the free included period is over). To me, that is unacceptable.

You clearly have the right to make that choice, and I hope it all works out for you. That said, don't hold your breath. Rivian has repeatedly said that they will not support CarPlay or Android Auto.

Sponsored

 

[Attesan997]

You clearly have the right to make that choice, and I hope it all works out for you. That said, don't hold your breath. Rivian has repeatedly said that they will not support CarPlay or Android Auto.

Maybe I'm forcing this into too binary of a decision tree: Ford/GM/Stellantis will likely support AA/Carplay because they don't have the infrastructure to monetize user data. Rivian, Tesla and any other "new" company that enters the game does have the ability to further monetize that data so there's zero incentive for them to give it to Google or Apple for free. Not saying its the "right" decision but its a good one from an investor standpoint.

 

[Sgt Beavis]

I would offer up that the more likely successful approach is that, instead of beating heads against the wall asking for CP/AA, the more likely outcome is asking for the things about CP/AA you like to be integrated into Rivian's UI/UX. It will be a living thing that will continually change.

Asking for CP/AA will fall on deaf ears. Letting Rivian know how they can create the most loved and well thought out UI will not, because that will be a core differentiator in the future of the vehicle industry. There is little reason Rivian can't create most if not all of what people love about CP/AA. If they are to be successful, their software department will grow to a size that will rival that of Apple or Google's smartphone teams (they already include many people from there). I think some people don't believe that because of the experience with legacy makers who don't have a software department.

I tend to agree with this. What I really want/need is Waze and Gaia (off roading GPS). Unfortunately, Waze is owned by Google and I don’t see that integration ever coming. Gaia or ONX (another off roading GPS) is a possibility, but only a small one IMO..

At the end of the day, I’m planning to either use my phone or an iPad Mini to get those services in my truck.

 

[ERguy]

I won't buy the truck if they don't add non subscription wireless carplay.

Carplay means two things to me:
1) I don't need to pay for a monthly data plan for my car, to use any internet features.
2) a decade (+-) from now, with Rivian stops sending updates out for the nav, the feature set on the nav will remain up to date.

I buy cars and keep them for a long time, and tend to have 5-6 of them. I refuse to pay for a data plan for each car, and nothing dates a car faster than an obsolete ICE setup (which carplay avoids).

Plus, even today it doesn't have the features I want-- Apple Music and Waze for nav/police alerts .

So, if they won't add it, I'll just wait for a truck that does. AFAIK, Tesla is the ONLY company out there not offering CarPlay. Not coincidentally, I've never owned a Tesla and currently have no intention to.

Meanwhile, my 20 year old M5 and 15 year old M3s (purchased new) have wireless Carplay, giving me every ICE feature I actually care about in modern cars

No carplay guarantees tech obsolescence and means you have to pay a monthly data plan (once the free included period is over). To me, that is unacceptable.

I agree with your points. I'm more of an AA person myself, which has similar benefits.

I get frustrated by out-of-date GPS databases. That's never a problem with CP/AA. I also want to avoid having to pay money to keep my gos up-to-date, which is easily accomplished with CP/AA.

I still have my Rivian reservation, but I'm leaning farther toward the F150 Lightning every day.

I currently have a Mach-e, and the AA integration has been great. I'm sure the Lightning will be the same.

 

[astonius]

If I end up buying the R1T and Rivian continues to refuse to add CarPlay I'll probably get something like this:

 

[hola29]

lol...I love that both Tesla and Rivian, but multi-billion dollar companies on the vanguard of transportation, do not listen to folks asking for CarPlay and AA. Adopting sub-standard interfaces to be part of the herd is automakers 1.0...Looking forward to 2.0

 

[astonius]

lol...I love that both Tesla and Rivian, but multi-billion dollar companies on the vanguard of transportation, do not listen to folks asking for CarPlay and AA. Adopting sub-standard interfaces to be part of the herd is automakers 1.0...Looking forward to 2.0

More like 0.0. Less available apps and services is a distinct step backwards. Interface isn't the concern, nor is "being part of the herd." Your argument seems to be that including CP/AA precludes Rivian or Tesla from doing whatever they want within their own interface, which is of course not true. Rivian can still do whatever they think is right and simply provide the option to use CP/AA in addition. When Rivian offers native Waze, Apple Music/Podcasts and doesn't require a second data plan to use those services through the infotainment then you might have a cogent argument.

 

[hola29]

Both interfaces are a mass produced joke, and neither company grew on compromise like that in explosive mode. Just now mass produced mode hence the lame folks clamoring. The loudest complainers barely heard of CarPlay a few years ago. Lol.

More like 0.0. Less available apps and services is a distinct step backwards. Interface isn't the concern, nor is "being part of the herd." Your argument seems to be that including CP/AA precludes Rivian or Tesla from doing whatever they want within their own interface, which is of course not true. Rivian can still do whatever they think is right and simply provide the option to use CP/AA in addition. When Rivian offers native Waze, Apple Music/Podcasts and doesn't require a second data plan to use those services through the infotainment then you might have a cogent argument.

 

[CommodoreAmiga]

Both interfaces are a mass produced joke, and neither company grew on compromise like that in explosive mode. Just now mass produced mode hence the lame folks clamoring. The loudest complainers barely heard of CarPlay a few years ago. Lol.

Tesla doesn't offer CarPlay out of hubris. Tesla has grown at the rate they have because their product was unique and customers didn't have a choice. If you wanted a good EV, for many years your only choice was Tesla. You had to accept the bad with the good, because there were no other options. That is not validation for the "bad".

 

[Max]

I would be fine with Bluetooth connection and one of these. Smaller screens don’t bug me that much. What I care most about is how much of “my data” will be used without my knowledge or consent in what way and what functionality will I lose if I don’t rent my $80K Rivian after purchasing it (if I don’t get the data subscription). “Trust us, we care about your privacy” is not good enough for me. U.S. regulations (or lack of) leans toward protecting the predators more than pray (consumers). If I was in Europe, I would be a little less worried about it. Tesla charging $50K-$100K for a car then using the owner and the car to collect data and selling the FSD back to them for $10K has set a precedence. May be RJ is nice today but tomorrow his replacement is not and decides to sell my driving habits to Geico. My data should remain in my possession. I understand Google already knows me better than my wife does but that does not mean everyone else should get to know me that well too.

I would love to hear from one of non employee owners, what it is like living with your Rivian when you turn off data connection.

 

[Toadkillerdog]

Both interfaces are a mass produced joke, and neither company grew on compromise like that in explosive mode. Just now mass produced mode hence the lame folks clamoring. The loudest complainers barely heard of CarPlay a few years ago. Lol.

You constantly deride other peoples preferences for CarPlay because you don’t like it. I get that you don’t like it. You have made that clear. We do like it. We want the choice. Let Rivian give us the choice to use it and you can happily ignore it. But please stop insulting us because we want the choice. We are not “lame folks clamoring” like you said above. We want a choice to have it and use it because we have used it, like it and find it adds a lot of utility.

 

[hola29]

Right, and Apple lets users do whatever they want on their platform. Of even Google for that matter. Or Tesla. Or Rivian.

What do all these companies have in common? They don't listen to folks making bad decisions as best they can to improve user experience on their respective platforms.

But people will complain and make demands, but luckily they don't run these companies and are not part of the decision process in any way.

More like 0.0. Less available apps and services is a distinct step backwards. Interface isn't the concern, nor is "being part of the herd." Your argument seems to be that including CP/AA precludes Rivian or Tesla from doing whatever they want within their own interface, which is of course not true. Rivian can still do whatever they think is right and simply provide the option to use CP/AA in addition. When Rivian offers native Waze, Apple Music/Podcasts and doesn't require a second data plan to use those services through the infotainment then you might have a cogent argument.

 

[Jehorton]

Right, and Apple lets users do whatever they want on their platform. Of even Google for that matter. Or Tesla. Or Rivian.

What do all these companies have in common? They don't listen to folks making bad decisions as best they can to improve user experience on their respective platforms.

But people will complain and make demands, but luckily they don't run these companies and are not part of the decision process in any way.

There is a big difference between an established UI and a brand new UI ( rivian )

 

[astonius]

Right, and Apple lets users do whatever they want on their platform. Of even Google for that matter. Or Tesla. Or Rivian.

What do all these companies have in common? They don't listen to folks making bad decisions as best they can to improve user experience on their respective platforms.

But people will complain and make demands, but luckily they don't run these companies and are not part of the decision process in any way.

By all means, please enlighten us how leaving out CP/AA support is somehow better than adding it as an option. We’re all ears.

Maybe you’re perfectly content with your car dictating use of Spotify and FM radio. I’m not, and lots of people aren’t. Adding more options doesn’t prevent you from using those options.

Apple doesn’t force users to use Apple Music. Lots of other options are available natively on iOS. Why are you simping so hard for companies removing choice?

 

[hola29]

It’s what makes great companies. Seems like people don’t really understand that and that’s ok. Limiting choice produces outcomes than can be far better. I can list off many examples from basically all products used by folks here to make that fairly obvious point (but get it’s counterintuitive to some) but people can think about their own favorite products to think it through.

Maybe start with the interface to use this forum. What choices were limited by iOS, Android, OS X, or Windows to make an overall better experience for users?

And then from a business standpoint, Rivian wants to “own” the platform. Why give it to Apple or google? Create a Rivian app ecosystem. Business 101.

I won’t go into the horrendous tiny UI designed for every ICE screen, but it has no business in a modern EV.

These were the complaint from very early iOS as well when blackberry people were bellyaching.

By all means, please enlighten us how leaving out CP/AA support is somehow better than adding it as an option. We’re all ears.

Maybe you’re perfectly content with your car dictating use of Spotify and FM radio. I’m not, and lots of people aren’t. Adding more options doesn’t prevent you from using those options.

Apple doesn’t force users to use Apple Music. Lots of other options are available natively on iOS. Why are you simping so hard for companies removing choice?

Sponsored