astonius
Well-Known Member
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.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?
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?
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.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.
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
Last edited: