Apple CarPlay and Android for R1T / R1S?

[astonius]

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?

Again, the issue is not the interface. The issue is apps and services. Those companies have their own interfaces, yet they still provide access to the apps and services we want to use. Rivian does not.

In your analogy, Rivian is preventing us from accessing this forum on their interface, not just presenting it in a different way. Do you not understand the distinction?

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.

But that's the problem: Rivian's system is not an app ecosystem. It's not an open platform. It is a closed, proprietary system. We are at the mercy of Rivian to bring apps and services to the platform. If it was an open app platform we might be having a different discussion, but it isn't.

This is exactly why CarPlay and Android Auto exist in the first place. Automotive infotainment is a fragmented mess, and developing an app for each platform would be a nightmare even if these platforms were in fact open. Creating a simple but adaptable projection standard strikes a balance between integration and availability. No one here is arguing that CP/AA are superior interfaces.

Sponsored

 

[Toadkillerdog]

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.

We want the option and you don’t. That’s all. no reason to be butt hurt over it

 

[hola29]

No worries at all! I am actually super happy to ditch CarPlay for a fully integrated system not tied to another completely separate largely non-transportation company. I guess we'll see if a company 100% dedicated to transportation just might make a better transportation SW platform w/ all sorts of integration of HW/SW/Cloud services options because they control most of the variables.

It's just funny, I was at Macworld when Steve announced the iPhone and all the grousing about closed platform, lack of this and that. He obviously did not listen, and just like WatchOS, then they marched along getting better and they ended up with a nice platform on both...

I would imagine Rivian will do the same having played with the system last week. It's pretty awesome as is and I imagine it will get a whole lot better. My one concern is texting as I did not try it, so if that sucks then definite mea culpa, but maps, music made CarPlay look incredibly dated....

We want the option and you don’t. That’s all. no reason to be butt hurt over it

 

[Monkey]

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?

Rivian does not restrict you to Spotify and FM radio. They have Spotify as the only one integrated at this time as their preferred streaming service. Personally, I don’t like Spotify at all. Won’t use it. You can select playlists, tracks, whatnot through the interface to control any Bluetooth audio source, like Apple Music on your phone, for example. Of course it’s not as elegant as direct control via Apple’s interface through CarPlay or a directly customized Apple media interface. But it’s not like you can’t use your music.

That said, I don’t understand the resistance to CarPlay/AA from Rivian, or from Tesla for that matter. I suppose from Tesla’s perspective they want you to subscribe to their data plan that also includes their navigation and traffic benefits as well as their limited audio streaming. Most would still subscribe even if they offered CarPlay/AA because of the traffic/nav and charging routes and such. Especially so if it would serve as the hotspot or tethered connection network interface rather than using our cellular plans.

There’s no truly good reason for Rivian to not offer CarPlay/AA support. It really comes down to lack of insight and perhaps a few technical quirks they don’t want to solve or address.

On the flip side of things, as I’m overall not a fan of CarPlay/AA or how they’re implemented, I’d much prefer a fully capable native interface. If Rivian were to license traffic and road data from WAZE, which they can do, to implement into their navigation that would make a lot of people very happy. Likewise they could also offer Siri and Google interoperability without implementing CarPlay or AA. Same goes for iOS and Android media control. But whatever… I’m an embedded systems engineer, software developer and UI designer who understands these things. I’m thinking that the infotainment system people at Rivian are more automotive oriented and familiar with automotive QNX with a couple graphic designers added to the team. The hardware designers for the underlying embedded systems went with what they were familiar with and stuck to off the shelf components. They probably never even considered half of what I just posted above. Also doesn’t help that most of the auto industry is moving away from QNX (or Microsoft Sync in the case of Ford) to adopt Android. So as we see in the new GM/Chevy trucks, Mercedes and a few others, the systems are now android based with smooth interfaces and the Google Play Store directly integrated. The overlay-based interfaces for CarPlay/AA just got obsoleted on those vehicles.

 

[bd5400]

There’s no truly good reason for Rivian to not offer CarPlay/AA support. It really comes down to lack of insight and perhaps a few technical quirks they don’t want to solve or address.

Depends on what you consider a good reason. Adding CarPlay/AA means owners can bypass paying Rivian for in-car connectivity, limiting a revenue stream. It also potentially limits useful data Rivian could be collecting.

From a consumer perspective that’s not a good reason. From a business perspective it may be a good reason because the benefit outweighs the risk in that they will gain more revenue by not offering CarPlay compared to potential lost sales from those who would pass on an entire vehicle because it doesn’t have CarPlay.

Plus, with Tesla taking the same approach, and not being able to make cars fast enough to meet demand, there is nothing truly signaling to Rivian that this is a “bad” move.

 

[astonius]

Depends on what you consider a good reason. Adding CarPlay/AA means owners can bypass paying Rivian for in-car connectivity, limiting a revenue stream. It also potentially limits useful data Rivian could be collecting.

From a consumer perspective that’s not a good reason. From a business perspective it may be a good reason because the benefit outweighs the risk in that they will gain more revenue by not offering CarPlay compared to potential lost sales from those who would pass on an entire vehicle because it doesn’t have CarPlay.

Plus, with Tesla taking the same approach, and not being able to make cars fast enough to meet demand, there is nothing truly signaling to Rivian that this is a “bad” move.

I struggle with understanding what useful information Rivian's gathering from native Spotify or TuneIn usage. I can maybe understand navigation, but there's nothing stopping Rivian from collecting GPS data alongside CarPlay navigation if they truly think it's valuable.

On the revenue side, the only potential revenue I see would be from the data connection, which several other luxury brands provide while also offering CarPlay, so what makes Rivian different in that respect? I can definitively say I will not pay for a data connection for my truck once the free trial is over, with or without CarPlay, and I have a feeling I'm not alone.

 

[hola29]

They are bundling the data connection w/ other services is my understanding, but we'll see what those others services are.

The concept of buying a Rivian, irrespective of the ~$80K price tag, blows my mind one would not want to receive additional services during the course of ownership even if it costs money. I think I want the very best user experience, and as long as that is provided and the cost reasonable, happy to give Rivian my money.

I struggle with understanding what useful information Rivian's gathering from native Spotify or TuneIn usage. I can maybe understand navigation, but there's nothing stopping Rivian from collecting GPS data alongside CarPlay navigation if they truly think it's valuable.

On the revenue side, the only potential revenue I see would be from the data connection, which several other luxury brands provide while also offering CarPlay, so what makes Rivian different in that respect? I can definitively say I will not pay for a data connection for my truck once the free trial is over, with or without CarPlay, and I have a feeling I'm not alone.

 

[astonius]

They are bundling the data connection w/ other services is my understanding, but we'll see what those others services are.

The concept of buying a Rivian, irrespective of the ~$80K price tag, blows my mind one would not want to receive additional services during the course of ownership even if it costs money. I think I want the very best user experience, and as long as that is provided and the cost reasonable, happy to give Rivian my money.

Best user experience is subjective. There's nothing great about paying a subscription to enable a bunch of services I don't use.

 

[PostMinivanDad]

Its a nondescript building just outside Tbilisi. The fear and apprehension are palpable.

-I have to get back to Ankara, the conference is almost over, they will notice I am gone.

-Yes, you must, and then you will await our instructions.

-How will I know when to strike, once I return to Maryland? How can you reach me stateside without arousing suspicions? The FBI keeps a close eye on me.

The FSB handler looks at his newly minted sleeper agent, puts out his cigarette and smiles.

-Simple. Each day, you will visit RivianForums.com and look for the words “You made valid arguments. I change my mind, thank you for your insight.” If you see this, you will know it is time to deliver the payload to the mainframe.

The man in the navy whites seems puzzled.

-What if someone else writes this? What if someone starts to understand Carplay integration would be a great thing.. or that we could live without it?

-You have much to learn Yuri. Enough, time to leave.

END SCENE

 

[Toadkillerdog]

I am going live without CarPlay in my Rivian which I knew when I made my deposit . It is still worth it to me without CarPlay . I Still wish they would add it in. Many have made valid arguments And I thank them for their insights but they have not changed my mind. I still wish Rivian would add CarPlay lol.

 

[hola29]

Lol...ok. Strikes me as perhaps a bad fit for you. You are basically buying a car with an integrated SaaS platform/service with 1 year free. So I guess you miss the next decades of updates, features, who knows really - I guess we'll find out. But that buy and done model is like an ICE car of yesteryear. But, sure, if it really is not of value to you then why pay...

Best user experience is subjective. There's nothing great about paying a subscription to enable a bunch of services I don't use.

 

[astonius]

Lol...ok. Strikes me as perhaps a bad fit for you. You are basically buying a car with an integrated SaaS platform/service with 1 year free. So I guess you miss the next decades of updates, features, who knows really - I guess we'll find out. But that buy and done model is like an ICE car of yesteryear. But, sure, if it really is not of value to you then why pay...

If the services Rivian provided within its infotainment were actually valuable services I wanted to use then I may reconsider, but my car is not going to dictate my music service.

And lol back at you. Ironically CP/AA solves your "buy and be done" problem. They continue to evolve, even without a paid subscription. iOS 14 introduced a new home screen into CarPlay, for example. New apps and services get added to CarPlay without any reliance on the auto manufacturer. Developers can target CP/AA broadly, rather than having to develop a Rivian app or a GM app or a Ford app. I guarantee Rivian will not match the breadth of apps and services made available by these platforms. There's a reason these platforms have become so ubiquitous. Rivian is a carmaker first and foremost, not a software company.

 

[hola29]

They are as much of a software company as Apple is a transportation company. Things are merging. CarPlay/AA are run by giant tech firms that own the platform, approve the apps, dictate terms of use, UI...

If I was the CEO of Rivian or Tesla, guess what? I would depriotize CarPlay/AA in lieu of developing my own platform, my own ecosystem, and my own app library. Google and Apple did it with some success on their respective platforms/ecosystems, Rivian and Tesla seem to as well, so good company...

I think you can buy a Toyota Camry w/ CarPlay, requires a USB cable so you need to take out your phone and plug it in every time, w/ no services attached after the sale to save money so static tech in the years to come...Sounds like exactly what I would like to avoid buying a new car...

If the services Rivian provided within its infotainment were actually valuable services I wanted to use then I may reconsider, but my car is not going to dictate my music service.

And lol back at you. Ironically CP/AA solves your "buy and be done" problem. They continue to evolve, even without a paid subscription. iOS 14 introduced a new home screen into CarPlay, for example. New apps and services get added to CarPlay without any reliance on the auto manufacturer. Developers can target CP/AA broadly, rather than having to develop a Rivian app or a GM app or a Ford app. I guarantee Rivian will not match the breadth of apps and services made available by these platforms. There's a reason these platforms have become so ubiquitous. Rivian is a carmaker first and foremost, not a software company.

 

[astonius]

They are as much of a software company as Apple is a transportation company. Things are merging. CarPlay/AA are run by giant tech firms that own the platform, approve the apps, dictate terms of use, UI...

If I was the CEO of Rivian or Tesla, guess what? I would depriotize CarPlay/AA in lieu of developing my own platform, my own ecosystem, and my own app library. Google and Apple did it with some success on their respective platforms/ecosystems, Rivian and Tesla seem to as well, so good company...

But Rivian isn't doing that, unless you aware of some grand plan to create an app platform within the Rivian infotainment system that the rest of us aren't. Are you aware of any additional apps and services coming that aren't already there? Even compared to Tesla, Rivian's initial infotainment offering is incredibly anemic, and as far as I'm aware no additional apps and services have been promised. Either you have some insider information you aren't sharing specifics about, or you have a lot of unfounded confidence that Rivian's approach is objectively better.

Also consider the limited reach of the Rivian infotainment. Why would a developer spend time creating an application for such a platform if it's only going to reach a few thousand users? That makes zero sense, and your comparison to Apple and Google in that regard are laughable.

I think you can buy a Toyota Camry w/ CarPlay, requires a USB cable so you need to take out your phone and plug it in every time, w/ no services attached after the sale to save money so static tech in the years to come...Sounds like exactly what I would like to avoid buying a new car...

Most modern implementations are wireless. My X5 has wireless CarPlay. I don't take the phone out of my pocket. The car starts up, immediately launches CarPlay, and I never even look at the native iDrive system. Again, the tech is not static. CarPlay and its apps and services have evolved, but if you want to ignore that to bolster your own argument that's on you.

 

[hola29]

Sounds like the BMW X5 is a great fit then lol, because the lion share of CarPlay installs use a cable.

Not going to get into the why's and how's, been working with Apple forever professionally and trust me, when iOS came out w/ an SDK there were very few developers. Same with Android. Microsoft had the lion share of developers but their mobile OS failed for a number of reasons.

I'll leave this here: glad you love CarPlay, glad Rivian is smart enough to prioritize their focus on their proprietary, in-house platform.

But Rivian isn't doing that, unless you aware of some grand plan to create an app platform within the Rivian infotainment system that the rest of us aren't. Are you aware of any additional apps and services coming that aren't already there? Even compared to Tesla, Rivian's initial infotainment offering is incredibly anemic, and as far as I'm aware no additional apps and services have been promised. Either you have some insider information you aren't sharing specifics about, or you have a lot of unfounded confidence that Rivian's approach is objectively better.

Also consider the limited reach of the Rivian infotainment. Why would a developer spend time creating an application for such a platform if it's only going to reach a few thousand users? That makes zero sense, and your comparison to Apple and Google in that regard are laughable.



Most modern implementations are wireless. My X5 has wireless CarPlay. I don't take the phone out of my pocket. The car starts up, immediately launches CarPlay, and I never even look at the native iDrive system. Again, the tech is not static. CarPlay and its apps and services have evolved, but if you want to ignore that to bolster your own argument that's on you.

Sponsored