Sponsored

Fire TV in the future?

R1S Maineiac

Well-Known Member
First Name
Chris
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Threads
4
Messages
145
Reaction score
227
Location
The Foothills of Western Maine
Vehicles
2021 Volvo CX90 Recharge PHEV
Occupation
Medically retired 8/27/21
https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/4/22313111/jeep-2022-wagoneer-amazon-fire-tv-integrated

It appears that some of the 2022 Jeeps will have integrated Fire TV with screens. Considering the R1S will have 4G, I wonder if this is a viable option down the road.
Not a huge deal, now that most of the major streamers allow you to download (highly repetitive and annoying kids') content to a device, but might still be cool for road trips.
Sponsored

 

CommodoreAmiga

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Threads
39
Messages
4,104
Reaction score
7,706
Location
INACTIVE
Vehicles
INACTIVE
Tablets are better, imo. Tablets are cheaper than what most manufacturers charge for "screens" in their vehicles. Plus it's easy to upgrade/replace a tablet. You may keep a vehicle for 10+ years, so using a tablet let's you get better tech, and a more personalized experience. And when you reach your destination, the tablet can come with you.

I'd rather just give my kids an iPad or Amazon Fire Kids tablet. I don't want it integrated into the car. They make mounts if you want it to stick to the back of the headrest.
 
OP
OP

R1S Maineiac

Well-Known Member
First Name
Chris
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Threads
4
Messages
145
Reaction score
227
Location
The Foothills of Western Maine
Vehicles
2021 Volvo CX90 Recharge PHEV
Occupation
Medically retired 8/27/21
Tablets are better, imo. Tablets are cheaper than what most manufacturers charge for "screens" in their vehicles. Plus it's easy to upgrade/replace a tablet. You may keep a vehicle for 10+ years, so using a tablet let's you get better tech, and a more personalized experience. And when you reach your destination, the tablet can come with you.

I'd rather just give my kids an iPad or Amazon Fire Kids tablet. I don't want it integrated into the car. They make mounts if you want it to stick to the back of the headrest.

That's what we use now in the X. He's got a Fire tablet and the headrest mount. At least he's still rear-facing, so that CocoMelon isn't right in my ear.....
 

Chris S

Well-Known Member
First Name
Chris
Joined
Nov 25, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
81
Reaction score
92
Location
Dallas-Fort Worth, TX
Vehicles
'18 Model 3 Perf, '19 MX-5 Club, '22 Model Y Perf
Occupation
REALTOR
Tablets are better, imo. Tablets are cheaper than what most manufacturers charge for "screens" in their vehicles. Plus it's easy to upgrade/replace a tablet. You may keep a vehicle for 10+ years, so using a tablet let's you get better tech, and a more personalized experience. And when you reach your destination, the tablet can come with you.

I'd rather just give my kids an iPad or Amazon Fire Kids tablet. I don't want it integrated into the car. They make mounts if you want it to stick to the back of the headrest.
If you're just relaxing while re-charging, don't underestimate how nice it is to have a single sceen everyone can watch in a central position, pumping home-theater quality sound. We have several tablets in our family, but they can't compete with the theatrical experience of our Model 3's screen playing Netflix and other streaming content.
 

CommodoreAmiga

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Threads
39
Messages
4,104
Reaction score
7,706
Location
INACTIVE
Vehicles
INACTIVE
If you're just relaxing while re-charging, don't underestimate how nice it is to have a single sceen everyone can watch in a central position, pumping home-theater quality sound. We have several tablets in our family, but they can't compete with the theatrical experience of our Model 3's screen playing Netflix and other streaming content.
Just integrate chromecast and airplay for the center screen. Problem solved. Less expensive, doesn’t become out-of-date immediately, nor lock people into limited services or require Rivian to constantly update their app ecosystem.
 

Sponsored

OP
OP

R1S Maineiac

Well-Known Member
First Name
Chris
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Threads
4
Messages
145
Reaction score
227
Location
The Foothills of Western Maine
Vehicles
2021 Volvo CX90 Recharge PHEV
Occupation
Medically retired 8/27/21
Just integrate chromecast and airplay for the center screen. Problem solved. Less expensive, doesn’t become out-of-date immediately, nor lock people into limited services or require Rivian to constantly update their app ecosystem.

Highly unlikely considering Amazon's involvement.
 

CommodoreAmiga

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Threads
39
Messages
4,104
Reaction score
7,706
Location
INACTIVE
Vehicles
INACTIVE
Highly unlikely considering Amazon's involvement.
I love how this becomes the default response any time Rivian chooses not to make their vehicle better -- ignoring the fact that this is ILLEGAL.
 
OP
OP

R1S Maineiac

Well-Known Member
First Name
Chris
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Threads
4
Messages
145
Reaction score
227
Location
The Foothills of Western Maine
Vehicles
2021 Volvo CX90 Recharge PHEV
Occupation
Medically retired 8/27/21
I love how this becomes the default response any time Rivian chooses not to make their vehicle better -- ignoring the fact that this is ILLEGAL.
Never enforced, though, so don't hold your breath waiting for Google Home integration.
 

Rhidan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2020
Threads
9
Messages
585
Reaction score
1,505
Location
Denver
Vehicles
R1T
I love how this becomes the default response any time Rivian chooses not to make their vehicle better -- ignoring the fact that this is ILLEGAL.
How would this be illegal?
 
OP
OP

R1S Maineiac

Well-Known Member
First Name
Chris
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Threads
4
Messages
145
Reaction score
227
Location
The Foothills of Western Maine
Vehicles
2021 Volvo CX90 Recharge PHEV
Occupation
Medically retired 8/27/21
How would this be illegal?
There's precedent when the Feds sued Microsoft about including their browser with windows machines, but it would be a big leap to argue that car OEMs need to open their platforms to third parties.

If it was going to happen, all of the Tesla owners who have been asking for Android Auto or CarPlay would have sued successfully by now.
 

Sponsored

CommodoreAmiga

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Threads
39
Messages
4,104
Reaction score
7,706
Location
INACTIVE
Vehicles
INACTIVE
There's precedent when the Feds sued Microsoft about including their browser with windows machines, but it would be a big leap to argue that car OEMs need to open their platforms to third parties.

If it was going to happen, all of the Tesla owners who have been asking for Android Auto or CarPlay would have sued successfully by now.
Although it is anti-trust, it's different than you describe. Tesla not allowing AA/CP would not be considered anti-trust because Tesla does not make AA/CP and they're not conspiring with either company to keep the other off of the platform.

How would this be illegal?
The Sherman Anti-Trust act makes it illegal for a company (such as Amazon) to enter an agreement with another entity (such as Rivian) whereby a restraint of trade or commerce between states occurs. This is a Federal law, so that's why it regulates commerce between states. Section 2 of the act also says every person who shall (or attempt to), or combine or consider with any other person(s) to monopolize, any part of the trade or commerce among the several States... shall be deemed guilty of a felony.

It's not illegal for Tesla to choose not to offer AA/CP for their own business reasons -- even if those reasons are stupid.

However, It would be illegal for Amazon, who has given Rivian money, to stipulate that Rivian many not include AA/CP in their vehicles, because it competes with an Amazon product.
 
OP
OP

R1S Maineiac

Well-Known Member
First Name
Chris
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Threads
4
Messages
145
Reaction score
227
Location
The Foothills of Western Maine
Vehicles
2021 Volvo CX90 Recharge PHEV
Occupation
Medically retired 8/27/21
Although it is anti-trust, it's different than you describe. Tesla not allowing AA/CP would not be considered anti-trust because Tesla does not make AA/CP and they're not conspiring with either company to keep the other off of the platform.



The Sherman Anti-Trust act makes it illegal for a company (such as Amazon) to enter an agreement with another entity (such as Rivian) whereby a restraint of trade or commerce between states occurs. This is a Federal law, so that's why it regulates commerce between states. Section 2 of the act also says every person who shall (or attempt to), or combine or consider with any other person(s) to monopolize, any part of the trade or commerce among the several States... shall be deemed guilty of a felony.

It's not illegal for Tesla to choose not to offer AA/CP for their own business reasons -- even if those reasons are stupid.

However, It would be illegal for Amazon, who has given Rivian money, to stipulate that Rivian many not include AA/CP in their vehicles, because it competes with an Amazon product.
Right now, technically, Amazon is a partial owner of this private entity.

I'm sure the rules governing that are different, and will change based on Amazon and Rivian's relationship in the future.
 

Rhidan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2020
Threads
9
Messages
585
Reaction score
1,505
Location
Denver
Vehicles
R1T
The Sherman Anti-Trust act makes it illegal for a company (such as Amazon) to enter an agreement with another entity (such as Rivian) whereby a restraint of trade or commerce between states occurs. This is a Federal law, so that's why it regulates commerce between states. Section 2 of the act also says every person who shall (or attempt to), or combine or consider with any other person(s) to monopolize, any part of the trade or commerce among the several States... shall be deemed guilty of a felony.

It's not illegal for Tesla to choose not to offer AA/CP for their own business reasons -- even if those reasons are stupid.

However, It would be illegal for Amazon, who has given Rivian money, to stipulate that Rivian many not include AA/CP in their vehicles, because it competes with an Amazon product.
Thanks. I’m an attorney. You’re referring to section 1 of the Sherman Act, but what you’re describing is very unlikely to ever be considered a restraint on trade.
Sponsored

 
 




Top