General Motors has caught a lot of flak for not having Apple CarPlay or Android Auto in its electric cars. It decided to stop offering the smartphone-mirroring software back in 2023, forcing drivers to use GM’s own Android-based native infotainment system for stuff like navigation, phone calls, and music projection.
CarPlay and Android Auto are pretty much expected by buyers to be standard on any new car these days, so some people were pretty angry about the move. Others went as far as to develop a retrofit to get CarPlay running on some of GM’s new EVs, but it was quickly shut down by the company a few months later.
Neither of my cars has CarPlay, but I have to admit, I absolutely love using it whenever I’m driving my parents’ cars or press cars. It makes the experience a lot more pleasant and simpler, even if having to switch between the car’s native system and CarPlay isn’t “seamless,” as GM describes.
That’s why I was sad to see this news that GM plans to eventually drop Apple CarPlay and Android Auto across its entire lineup in the future—not just its EVs as previously planned. CEO Mary Barra revealed the news to The Verge in an interview with Nilay Patel. Here’s the relevant transcript:
Let me ask you the second part of that question again, because, again, we’re talking so much about the future, and I understand the argument about the future you’re making, but you still have the smartphone projection in the gas cars. Why is it still in the gas cars?
MB: A lot of it depends on when you do an update to that vehicle. When you look at the fact that we have over 40 models across our portfolio, you don’t just do this and they all update. As we move forward with each new vehicle and major new vehicle launch, I think you’re going to see us consistent on that. We made a decision to prioritize our EV vehicles during this timeframe, and as we go forward, we’ll continue across the portfolio.
So we should expect new gas cars will not have smartphone projection?
MB: As we get to a major rollout, I think that’s the right expectation. Yes.
When exactly GM plans to drop CarPlay and Android Auto from its lineup isn’t clear right now, with Barra hinting to The Verge that the move will likely coincide with its plans to roll out a new onboard computing platform in 2028, starting with the all-electric Escalade IQ. From The Verge:
The automaker is calling it a “full reimagining of how vehicles are designed, updated, and improved over time,” which it says will include “10 times more over-the-air software update capacity, 1,000 times more bandwidth, and up to 35 times more AI performance for autonomy and advanced features.” The new computing platform will be rolled out to both GM’s EVs and internal combustion engine vehicles, the company said.
Aside from having the latest and greatest software available, the computer will add stuff like Google’s Gemini AI as a voice assistant, and more importantly, GM’s Level 3 hands-free, eyes-off highway driving. This is a step up from the company’s Level 2 Super Cruise system, in that drivers will be able to take their eyes off the road in certain situations (the SAE officially calls this “conditional driving automation,” and it’s all very confusing).
Level 3 systems like this aren’t fully autonomous, of course, because they require the driver to be able to take control at any time. So don’t go buying a new GM vehicle thinking it’s going to drive you around like a Waymo. It’ll likely be something similar to Mercedes’ Drive Pilot, which is classified for use as a Level 3 system, but only in very limited sections of highways and at speeds under 40 mph.
If I had to choose between Level 3 autonomy and CarPlay, I think I’d take the latter every time. But maybe that’s because I just love driving, and I’m familiar with how CarPlay works. I’m sure with time, I’d get used to GM’s system if I owned a car of theirs without phone projection. But it’s nice just being able to hop in and immediately know what’s going on with regards to stuff like navigation and music. That’s one of the biggest draws for CarPlay—it’s the same no matter what you’re driving. And people love familiarity.
Top graphic image: General Motors
Rental Cars – If you use Hertz you are usually given the choice to pick any car on the lot. I will always chose one with carplay so i instantly have maps and music set up and ready to go. I’m guessing Hertz know their customers and will buy their fleet accordingly
Phone projection is awesome in rentals for sure.
Non-issue that far too many people will freak out over.
Those same people have never freaked out over Tesla not supporting AA or CP.
Or Rivian.
Or Lucid.
Or any car older than 2014.
Nobody buys:
Rivian
Lucid
Cars older than 2014.
So nobody cars they don’t have AA or CP.
And as someone else pointed out, Tesla owners are illogically apologetic to Tesla’s missteps.
You can get a $300 double-DIN stereo with CarPlay for cars older than 2014. It will probably have more functions than a lot of modern infotainment systems too. I have a 1997 and 2003 cars both with wireless CarPlay. I love having the same UI in every car I own.
Tesla owners will gladly overlook any failings of their cars with fanatical denial
Rivian owners are outdoorsy Tesla owners
Lucid owners are Tesla owners with more money
It influences my decisions for sure. I can tell you that I drive a 2006 Miata in the summer enough that I replaced the radio with one that has Android Auto. And that about 75% of the NC’s I see in the Miata Club have done the same.
I wanted it in my Gen 1 Volt to the point that I had it running on a Raspberry Pi with an auxiliary touch screen. And someone bought this setup from me after I sold my car. Now they have aftermarket systems to do this.
This seems all about GM wanting the data instead of giving it to Google and Apple. This is not about the consumer. Given GM’s history of continuing to support products after the sale, I’d much prefer to have something like AA or Carplay built in that is going to get constant updates and continue to work.
Okay, now I am genuinely curious about apple carplay for my Gen1 Volt. I am most emphatically not a programmer, though – how difficult was it for you to get android auto running without interfering with the normal screen functions like the power flow and energy usage metrics?
AA integrated shocking well with my Volt. It still used the bluetooth connections on my phone to the radio in the car, so everything that was managed through the AA still came through the car audio system, including calls and music. I had it mounted the screen in the cubby above the radio screen and left the factory screen in place.
They make a lot of devices on Amazon now that are well under $100 that have the touchscreen and system built in that don’t require any programming.
“shocking[ly] well” I see what you did there
But yeah! That sounds pretty rad. My other thought (given Apple is doing its level best to get me to quit buying its products, and I suspect Android may be similar) is to get a decent mp3 player and just load that up with the songs I want.
Straw man arguments, all of them.
Not everybody wants AA or CP. But plenty of people do want them.
And if the choice is “GM car without AA or CP” versus “another brand that has AA or CP”… quite a lot of people with choose AA or CP and go with another brand of car.
Not everybody, but enough that it will hurt GM’s sales
Even if YOU don’t care about it either way.
Consumers don’t give a shit what OS their music or navigation runs on as long as it lets them listen to what they want and gets them to where they want to go. Can they log into their music app just like they log into it on their phone? Then that is all that matters.
Not this consumer. I will have nothing to do with Google in my vehicle.
Nope. More and more consumers expect to be able to access what is on their phone through their car screen because it is the best way to manage navigation, music, etc. Nobody wants to manage more apps and logins on more devices.
You use Spotify on your phone? Or some other app? Then you would be installing that app on GM’s infotainment.
Google Maps for navigation? Then you would install that on GM’s infotainment.
Just like you would install it if you got a tablet or some other Android device. How is that “managing more apps”? Its the same apps.
Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill.
Some of ya’ll are such drama llamas you give my cat competition when she’s asking for treat-treats and acting like she hasn’t been fed in days.
Olive, you got competition over here!
Why should I need to install a mirror set of apps in my car when I already have them in my pocket at all times? All my devices update automatically when I download something on one, and they appear on all the others, ready to use.
There is zero consumer benefit to eliminating CarPlay and Android Auto. GM is making things pointlessly worse with zero beneficial tradeoff for the consumer. But that is basically GM’s brand.
I can swap my headunit to one with carplay in a car older than 2014. Like I just did last month.
Ditto, but it was 5 years ago. One of the worst things that car manufacturers ever did was drop the ol’ double-DIN radio that just did infotainment stuff.
I could PROBABLY swap my wife’s 2015 Odyssey for an Andoid-auto deck, but then we’d have this whole screen in the dash that’s just a dead orphan.
A lot of places now offer custom-fit head units for specific car models, so you replace the old screen, not ending up with two. There’s also iLink Maestro so HVAC and other car functions are retained.
Metra will also sell you the specific bracket and dash trim to fit the double-DIN standard or sometimes the same car manufacturer has different dash consoles (with/without nav) so you can buy the OEM parts to relocate the screen. I haven’t seen a car where I can’t put a double-DIN or a custom-fit screen in it and have it work 99% to 100% as the factory unit.
And in that new headunit, did you not have to log into your Google account so the data syncs with your navigation and music selections?
Tell me how this GM thing is any different? You’d be logging into the same app that is running locally on GM hardware versus the headunit you just bought. Its the same thing. How is this so difficult to understand?
No, they didn’t. Because it had CarPlay.
Well, actually they didn’t because it has Android Auto.
Well, actually he was replying to JuarassicComanche25 who said he used CarPlay then and below this comment.
If it was Android Auto, they he absolutely WOULD need to sign into the device.
I couldn’t give two fucks about Apple and their garbage.
ha. you obviously do care because you sound angry.
Looks like your projecting, John Smith.
No. I plug in my phone and pop! Maps and music. One wire.
Wifes iphone? One wire.
Friend? One wire.
Cat? Eats wire.
No plugging in, all our settings are there, all our stations and playlists on our apps are there. The destination histories from our other cars? There.
10 bucks GM wont sync destinations from my honda or her Jeep or my Ford to their system.
Fuckin’ cat.
Or NO wire and POP! Maps is already installed and ready to go and same with your music.
If you guys had any idea how this worked, then people here could have a nice conversation about it, but you guys haven’t even used something and you’re talking like some kind of expert.
None of my aftermarket CarPlay head units require me to enter my personal details, not even an email. CarPlay and AA are glorified screen mirroring features, the unit needs nothing from you and knows nothing about you.
I couldn’t care less about whatever garbage Apple makes, but to access typical Android Auto features you do need to be signed-in.
No, because it’s all done on your phone. Not on the car.
Connect your phone with one wire and boom!, everything is done. And on many cars it’s wireless.
No logging in to all your accounts, no syncing, nothing.
It’s not the same thing at all. Please read the comments above.
And there’s no extra subscriptions to pay with CarPlay or Android Auto. Whereas GM want to charge a monthly subscription for everything. In fact that’s their entire motivation for this,
How is this so difficult for you to understand?
Even if YOU don’t use or care about CarPlay or Android Auto, a LOT of people do. And it’s about choice.
Use it, or don’t use it. Whatever.
But if you take it away (and especially if you replace it with your own janky system that requires a monthly subscription) then some of your customers will buy a different brand.
If your headunit is running Android, you ARE signed into that device. You can not run Android Auto on a device without being signed in.
So you are accomplishing the same thing with more steps.
The thing about Tesla, Rivian and Lucid is that none of them had a proven track record of making shit code. And cars older than 2014 you can usually upgrade the head unit, and not lose control of your A/C.
People are constantly complaining about Lucid’s buggy cars and Rivian seems to only be slightly better. What are you even talking about? r/Lucid is an endless stream of buggy interface complaints.
GM’s infotainment system out right now is one of the best in the business – not laggy, not particularly buggy and real physical buttons and knobs. People like to complain because people like to complain. Unless it is a Tesla, Rivian or Lucid and in those cases, they just make up shit about them supposedly having a “proven track record”.
This is just another proof point in the long list of why I will never really consider buying a GM product.
Yes. Unfortunately, since their products seem to have improved recently, and I might have considered them again when vehicle replacement time comes.
I’ve got a 2017 Volvo with the Sensus display. It was the last year that it came with a 3g modem, which was permanently disabled in 2022. They offer a 4g upgrade that is ~ $800 to $1200 to install, which is completely unnecessary thanks to CarPlay.
What happens when these hyper connected GM vehicles end up with an expired cellular modem, or GM just decides that you don’t get software updates after 4-5 years? GM is likely going to be watching profit margins on their subscription dues and once the vehicle hits an age where people don’t feel like paying $30-$100/month to keep the display connected and AI chatting, no more support!
Exactly right. GM has no appetite for (nor experience) providing this type of software support. Apple and Google do…
GM just wants to spy on their buyers habits rather than letting Apple or Google do it. People will end up not plugging their phones into the USB on these cars, mounting them to the dash, and maybe using line in to play music. I see it now already. People in brand new cars with their phones mounted to the dash.
I see Tesla owners/drivers with their phones mounted to the dash all the time so they can use Google Maps. It’s amusing.
Exactly!
Woah. I don’t think I realized until just now that there was an Autopian writer with only two cars, and one is for sale even! We gotta get him out of NYC so he can start building up his Autopian approved fleet of shitboxes
Or hire me instead, I already have my fleet of shitboxes.
Hey now! No cutting the line to try to get a job before me!
How many more shitboxes I need to buy before I earn a “skip the line” ticket? Only the wife is stopping me but s… She’s not around, is she? Ok …she can go.
Only valid line jumps are for people who have more cars than Mercedes. Case by case considerations can be made for those with more than David or more than SWG, but waivers are hard to get.
Customers rejoiced when AA and Carplay became the standard interfaces for two reason.
A UI, especially one meant to used by the general public, and most especially one in a CAR should intuitive and easy enough to figure out without training or the need for a manual.
Good luck with this one GM. In a market where the distinction between mid-size SUV is a handful of features or how a car makes the customer feel, not having AA and Carplay is bug, not a feature.
You aren’t interacting with the DEVICE. You are interacting with the app that you use to run navigation or music. That doesn’t really change since those will simply be running on GM’s internal infotainment system.
How is this different than you running Spotify on your phone and then you get a tablet that you also want to play music on? You simply install Spotify on the tablet, sign in, and there are all your playlists, right? This is no different.
It’s extremely different. IMO you’re assimilating the wrong things.
If you have an iPhone (Android), you’re presumably buying an iPad (android Tablet), therefore nothing is different in using it, signing in, downloading spotify and running spotify. This is buying a complimentary device that runs a completely different/custom operating system and costs $5000. When you could just buy an ipad for $400 or android tablet for $200 and you already know how to use it.
In a 3000-6000 pound automobile, nobody wants to worry about how to operate the god damn stereo. It’s safer to use something that they already know, AA or CP, OR to just go back to putting two knobs on the dash; a tune knob and volume knob.
You clearly have ZERO knowledge about any of this or else you would know GM puts in more knobs and real physical buttons than just about any other carmaker. You also would know the UI for the various apps you would otherwise be running on your phone act and look similar to the ones that now would be running locally on GM’s infortainment system. That’s because they are the same app.
I’m not advocating for two knobs. I’m not even advocating for more knobs. I’m advocating for keeping people’s lives simple and that’s not accomplished by adding more software and more cost.
I don’t think people have the appetite for ANOTHER complex and costly set of software in their life that they have to operate while driving 80mph down the highway. This won’t be free forever. It will be for the first little bit but the marketing blitz of giving this away will end and people will have to pay for it if they want it, and I don’t think they will.
What makes you think Google won’t start to charge for AA? Or Apple for CP? There is just as much chance they do as GM would.
If if’s and but’s were candy and nuts we’d all have a merry Christmas.
That’s just a strawman argument. But I’ll entertain it.
IF that happens, people will probably pay for it because it keeps a consistent and natively integrated UI while driving a 5000 pound vehicle at 80 mph with their kids inside.
It’s the same app running on a different screen. Most sane, logical people don’t have an issue with it, especially since the integration with real physical controls makes it a muscle memory thing. And then there are those who simply want to spread misinformation and throw up random hurdles because one play button might be a circle instead of rectangle so they can’t even function anymore.
Just stop. You can’t be serious at this point.
I disagree. Google and Apple get their revenue streams off the phones, and the apps on their phones, already; and part of that value is linked to the fact that your phone is also the entertainment and navigation unit for your car, with zero friction involved.
GM introducing needless friction, in the form of additional logins, dependence on connectivity, OS security updates, and possible subscription fees, is stupid. IMO.
GM’s thing is “pay us to access this app you use all the time on a device you already have on the screen in your car”.
AA and CarPlay are “display the screen of your phone on the screen in your car”.
Sure they might start charging for it at some point in the future. But today, now, to date, they don’t. So the options under comparison today are: pay to have it on the car screen vs do not pay to have it on the car screen.
That’s not accurate. You are making up situations. You don’t have to pay now.
GM data subscriptions are totally a paid thing, and are also what Barra said was a goal of the thing this article is talking about.
I travel quite a bit for work and AA makes it a breeze. I’m not going to give my personal login info to a rental car, that’s pretty stupid security imo.
I wonder how it works with a car you own; if I take my wife’s car, is it easy to swap profiles?
How do you log into your computer at work? Or when you go to a conference room and need to use the projector there? You just log into that computer as well, right? Its an account with a password. I have multiple accounts connected to my car and switch between them. Also delete them if I want as well.
This is a non-issue that non-techies and tech illiterate young folks are freaking out about for no good reason.
Sorry but that’s not at all analogous. I don’t care that another work computer at my work has my work login, it’s all on the same intranet. I don’t like putting my personal password into a device I don’t own, especially my Google password. That’s basically the keys to the kingdom of all my personal details and I have to trust GM’s security, and car companies aren’t exactly at the forefront of that.
But it IS analogous, but you are choosing to make it an issue. You buy a new tablet or build a new PC or get a new console, you will be doing the exact same thing. But somehow THIS is different. For some unexplainable reason.
He’s talking about rental cars not personal vehicles. Calm down and read better.
Yeah, he’s really weirdly defensive of GM’s decision on this thread. Maybe it was his call lol. I’m curious to see how this plays out for them, I don’t think it will be quite as big a deal as many of us are saying, but we just don’t know yet. The Autopian commentariat also skews a certain way, so I wouldn’t base my automaker decisions on comments here. But people have also gotten conditioned to expect CP/AA, and I don’t think this will do GM any favors.
I was thinking the same damn thing. The way he is responding feels like how GM came to this decision!
I straight up told him I thought he was a GM employee and he didn’t address it in the response. Curiously absent.
Just an example that happens fairly routinely. My wife has an address in her phone, she finds it in Apple Maps and sends my phone (connected to CarPlay) a link, we hit one button in the text notification to begin navigating.
In fairness, this probably isn’t THAT big a deal to the car owners except for particular cases (like above) where it feels like a step back to the pre-CP/AA days. As many others have said, this will make GM cars much less attractive in rental fleets which isn’t an insignificant consideration.
I look at an address on Google Maps on my phone when I am in the house and it appears as one of the locations when I go to my vehicle. Its the same app under the same account. It knows I want to go there. This isn’t some insurmountable hurdle that no one has ever tried to solve before.
Are you asserting that software devs (and their associated decision making management) across disciplines, companies, expertise levels, hardware, management strategies, goals, financial backing, countries with all their individual laws, regulations and specific geographic and cultural concerns are going to somehow align and make this a better idea than mirroring?
It already magically happens, so the only answer is YES. How can you say otherwise when it already works?
You missed the point of easily adding a shared location that wasn’t previously searched. It is far from insurmountable, but does detract from the seamlessness we’ve come to expect.
Also, it’s dumb as hell to have to log into the same apps in your car that you already have on your phone. Also, guess where most people have all those passwords saved…
None of this takes into account the fact that it will all depend on another cellular connection that may or may not continue to be supported down the road (ie. 3G connected cars) and hardware that will unlikely be up to the task sooner than later (look at smart TV’s vs. streaming boxes). It makes everything objectively worse on the user end in favor of more money for GM, and that is the biggest problem.
What do you mean? Like searching for a new pizza place? It works the same as it does on any other device.
You buy a new phone and you’ll have to sign-in to your accounts anyways. You’re just making up random stuff that doesn’t matter. Music, navigation and maybe messages. What more is there to it? Why would you need to sign in to your Grinder account on your car? Or Roblox? Or Twitter? ewww
Few normal folks consider signing in to a whopping THREE apps on a device that they’ll probably keep for years and years as a huge undertaking.
If I have an AA/Carplay capable car and my spouse has a GM car without AA/Carplay, they now have two different UI systems. I have to learn 2 and switch between them. I don’t want to do that.
The UI is the crux of the discussion. In the smartphone era prior to AA/Carplay every brand of car, and in some cases models within a brand had a different system to interact with the phone plugged into it. Customers HATED this. I don’t blame them. Imagine if, depending on the brand of computer you purchased MS Windows looked different and the menus changed. It would be a terrible user experience.
In a time when cars(especially EVs) are changing the ways drivers interact with them a little consistency in the infotainment UI is a good thing.
“Imagine if, depending on the brand of computer you purchased MS Windows looked different and the menus changed.”
But that is EXACTLY what happens on most Android devices. Its seen as a positive and a way to distinguish a phone from one Android maker to another. Samsung has OneUI, Oppo has ColorOS, Xaimi has HyperOS and so on and so forth. These are some of the largest phone makers in the world and they all skin their phones differently for a reason.
You’re not trying to operate a car while doing this. The market spoke on this issue. I, and the vast majority of consumers don’t want to back to using Microsoft Sync, U-Connect, i-Drive or some other inferior UI.
The distinction here is the operation of a car. Being able get in and quickly deduce how to use its systems is important. I can get in ANY car with AA/Carplay and use my nav and entertainment systems easily.
Anyone want to start an over/under on how long before GM backtracks on this issue?
Its still running the same apps. Its simply running them locally.
How about the fact that you will now also have to start paying for network access on the new device (the car)?
This is something that has been pathetically lacking in all of the reporting on this story. GM says they will have a music app and navigation app etc all built in but can the car access my phone for network or GPS access or do I have to purchase this from GM as an addition to my already growing subscriptions?
That is a non-starter for me. I hope it is a non-starter for most people but people make bad financial decisions all the time.
I don’t make a purchase choice based on something like this for most of my vehicles. If I have a fun sports car I drive on weekends I’m not going to base my decision off the infotainment. But my daily driver/commuter? I don’t think I would ever consider one without CarPlay. I’m also never going to pay for secondary access when everyone else has figured out how to connect to my phone’s connectivity.
Also, another area no one is asking GM: What about user privacy? We’ve already seen how they sold user data to an insurance company (through a data broker, but still) and the insurance company used that to raise the rates based on data without context. How else is GM looking to monetize this? Are they going to pump ads into the cabin after you’ve owned the car for years? Will I be able to opt out without paying them for an ad-free experience?
No way do I trust GM on this and there are a lot more reasons to avoid them at all costs than is being reported.
You can use your phone as a hotspot like you’ve already been able to do.
Not even remotely good enough. Most everyone is limited on the data they can use in hotspot mode.
Most people have either unlimited or around 15 to 50 GBs of hotspot data per month. Using the low end of that, and depending upon compression that’s anywhere from almost 5000 to a whopping 50,000 songs per month. Say its on the low end. Say its just 5000 songs. That’s nearly 200 songs per day. That’s 12 hours of non-stop music every single day of every month.
Yeah, like I said, its a non-issue for anyone who actually looks at this clearly and logically and doesn’t just freak-out because they are easily triggered.
It is actually a huge issue from a cost, data, privacy and convenience issue. Only the largest family plans have the amount of data you’re claiming, this is just not true for so many people. Also until I hear from an official source, I don’t actually believe you can use your phone as a hotspot in these systems and it doesn’t matter anyway. It’s too damned inconvenient for the vast number of users to go through every damned time they climb into their car on a daily basis.
GM is making this decision to benefit themselves with no benefit to the consumer. Worse, it is actually so much worse for the consumer who won’t be able to choose their music, navigation, meeting apps etc now that you have to go through GM and pay for network access.
That does not work. I don’t know if you work for GM, are a fan of them at a Tesla level or just not seeing the vast number of problems this creates but your arguments just do not hold up.
I fucken hate misinformation and that is what 80% of the posts about this topic seem to be. People driving around in clapped-out 1997 Nissan Sentras getting all triggered about shit they have no idea about, but acting like this CP or AA issue is what is keeping their broke asses from signing papers on a Cadillac Escalade IQ.
If you run Spotify or some other music app on Android, then that’s what you install on GM’s platform. This has been a non-issue for Tesla owners for a decade now, but all of a sudden people want to act like its a big deal.
Because it is if you value any of the other issues I brought up that you conveniently ignore. Privacy; GM will sell your data, or will have access to your account. Convenience: I don’t want to sign into multiple systems when I have one that is with me at all times. Cost: I am not paying GM to connect my vehicle when my phone is already connected, no matter how much you say I can work around it (see also above under convenience).
I’ve already mentioned you can use your phone as a hotspot but you conveniently ignore it. And signing in – a process that takes all of 30 seconds that you do once in the life of the vehicle is not a convenience issue. It’s a made up issue you’re using to try to explain your irrational stance on this. I don’t care if someone does or doesn’t want to use this system, but don’t just blatantly lie about things or make up random situations where typing in a password is some arduous task. That’s just misinformation mixed in with ignorance.
No I answered that. It is neither convenient enough nor protected enough from the prying eyes of GM’s desire for all of our data, a point you conveniently ignore repeatedly.
Not lying about anything. Your premise is that we are all irrational in rejecting this decision and continuously ignore all reasoning and cherry-pick individual points to rail against while (inadvertently) highlighting those things that you ignore in your silence.
Man, if you love the business model GM is proposing, go for it. Buy a car and enjoy their system. Your defense of this BS through multiple threads reeks of you being a GM plant in our comments section. These things are not made up. GM really doesn’t want us pointing out their deficiencies and here you are to blindly defend them. I can’t quite figure it out. Your arguments are inaccurate and also shit and you shout down others saying they do t know tech. What exactly are you trying to prove?
Whatever man. Based on myriad comments your position is a losing one anyway. If you are a GM plant you should just report back on your failure. It didn’t work.
Huh? I get 5GB total data per month, and it’s silly to think the car would be the only use (though some months it might be). And I think one can’t assume that car cell connectivity will be free for the life of the car (up to 20 years).
You’re missing the BIG issue here: personal data control.
You’re defending GM and claiming it’s the just logging into the same apps, so I’ll be happy when GM sells you a weekly “play music without ads in your car” subscription because you ceded control of your apps to them.
You deserve that dystopian hell.
They aren’t MY apps. They aren’t YOUR apps either. My music app of choice is YT Music. It runs the same on the vehicle’s infotainment as it does on my phone or my tablet. It isn’t a GM music player. But it could just as easily be Spotify or something else.
Some of ya’ll have no idea how technology works and its showing.
Speaking as someone who uses Android Auto in all my cars except our Chevy Equinox EV. Android Automotive is fine. Everything I use is already built in. Initial purchase included
3 years App Access which covers essentially your apps data plan
8 years Remote Access for remote commands
8 years Connected Access for vehicle diagnostics and dealer notifications
8 years Navigation and Voice Assistant which covers basic Google Maps, Waze, and Assistant
8 years EV Access covering EV specific connectivity
I don’t miss AA at all when driving that car. At some point I’ll have to deal with App Access when it expires.
…or when GM has decided to abandon it. I have a hard time thinking that they have a game plan that will keep this alive and functional for the 12-year current average car lfespan.. JUST SAY NO to vendor lock-in.
So the car will be good for 8 years. Then what?
This. Then, you have to pay. How much? How often? You’ll have to pay in addition to your phone plan that you also pay for.
That and when the network protocol expires/sunsets and won’t be available anymore (remember 3G networks?) is there an upgrade path? Does the car brick itself when it can’t phone home anymore?
Not surprised. It’s all about the money and pleasing shareholders and has nothing to do with listening to the customer. The promise of a recurring revenue stream is the ONLY thing this is about. Don’t buy the BS about the tech or features (they could do whatever they want AND still provide CarPlay/AA as options), but as I said, it’s not about the tech… it’s about the $$$
Guess I won’t be buying another GM vehicle. Total no-sale to me.
For me, it’s also not about the tech though CarPlay has been pretty good… it’s about CONSISTANCY. I want the SAME user experience in all my vehicles. CarPlay gives me that. I get the SAME UI, same contacts, SAME apps (WAZE, Amazon Music, CarScaner), SAME settings, SAME favorites. I don’t have to teach or learn a different system. We’ve a number of vehicles in our stable (25 Mav Hybrid, 25 Escape PHEV, a 23 Chevy BOLT EV (w/Carplay!) and even my 91 Miata with aftermarket double-din stereo has CarPlay. I get the same experience, features and functions regardless of the ride.
Fortunately for us, GM has plenty of competitors that will offer what I want, so goodbye GM..
The header graphic should be BoldMoveCotton.gif
But I was already planning on not buying a GM product.
I’ve only ridden in GM’s CarPlay-less models a little bit and thought the infotainment system was actually pretty dang good. But my only questions are:
When we picked up my wife’s EVquinox, they told us something about how connectivity (because of course now you have to worry about your car having internet) was supported through the OnStar subscription. I think they said it’s included for 3 years, and we have a 2 year lease, so I stopped paying attention at that point.
Maybe someone can provide some more insight.
As far as how the system works, you basically log into the apps in your car the way you would on a new phone. So you’d login to Spotify, for example, on your car. I think the intention is only phone calls go through bluetooth, but I don’t know for certain whether it supports media streaming as well.
Not for nothing, but if I have to stream via bluetooth on my phone, that means I have to open my phone and pick what I want to listen to before I can then use the car to skip/rewind/whatever, which further demonstrates how dumb this whole thing is. Why are we going backwards in technology.
Oh, they are just going to make me download an app on their infotainment? WHY!?!?! MY PODCAST APP IS ALREADY ON MY PHONE, AND IT ALREADY HAS MY QUEUE ALL READY THERE!
Here is the thing with CarPlay: everything I want/need is on my phone, logged in with my accounts, and set up to my preferences. With CarPlay, I don’t have to do a damn thing to bring that into my car. Even if GM thinks they can replicate or improve the experience that is already on my phone, it still requires more work than literally nothing required for CarPlay. It isn’t perfect but it is completely effortless in a way that configuring a dedicated in-car system will never be.
“ it still requires more work than literally nothing required for CarPlay.”
Excellent point. ANY extra effort to make GM’s solution is an inconvenience to the user in favor of profit for GM.
This strikes me as a very “journalist-specific” complaint. I own my cars. I drive them all the time. Familiarity is part of the equation. I’m not driving a new press car every week, I’m buying a new car every 5 years. I don’t pair my phone to rental cars or other people’s vehicles if I happen to be driving them.
I’m not sure I’m 100% on board with this decision by GM, but as a late and relatively reluctant convert to Car Play anyways, I’m willing to give it a shot.
You’re right that most people aren’t bopping around to different cars all the time. How much of an annoyance this is depends on your use case.
In my wife’s case, even though she is an iphone user, she used google maps and calendar and such already. So one quick login when she got the car and off to the races.
In my case, it would be less seamless, I think. I have my phone and my work phone, different accounts for different things, different numbers, etc. Maybe not a big deal, but probably some quirks to figure out. We’ll see when my equinox gets replaced in a couple years.
This, it takes 5 minutes to setup your google account and it mirrors basically the same information you look at your phone. I send addresses to the car from my phone and by the time I get in, the car is already showing me the destination. Since I use the same spotify account, the car resumes the same song I was already playing at the gym. The integration is seamless and I dont miss carplay on my Blazer EV.
So you car has some form of data connection like a cellular chip to do that then, right? After the free period ends, what does it cost to maintain that functionality? Or is the car pulling at that directly from your phone? If it does that that from my phone, then I would agree, it’s not really any worse/better than Android Auto or CarPlay, just different. If I need to pay a subscription to maintain functionality I already get for free, then F that.
During the lease period, the data is covered. After that, either you subscribe or using your phone as hotspot it takes 5 sec to connect. I have unlimited data that is faster (T-Mobile) than the one provided by GM (AT&T)
So basically for 3 years you get, at best, the same functionality as any other car that has CarPlay or Android Auto. After that you have to start paying for it, unless you’re lucky and then you can do an annoying work around to keep that free functionality. That is a pretty big downside.
If it was always free, I literally could not care less about GM ditching CarPlay or Android Auto; but the fact you basically have to pay to regain functionality that currently exists is a big crock of shit.
And considering I pretty much only buy used, it’s game over from the jump. Maybe one free month of service then it’s time to pay up.
Agreed. It’s a HUGE downside. The hotspot workaround also has it’s costs; a lot of plans have limited hotspot speed and data.
As someone who travels quite a lot for work and is in a lot of rental cars (including internationally in places like Europe), using CarPlay in rental cars is a lifesaver. I get a consistent user interface regardless of vehicle, and I’m not trying to prop up my phone somewhere for navigation. I only ever use wired CarPlay in rentals, and I delete my phone’s connection off the system when I return the car.
That said, I won’t even rent a GM, so they’re free to dig their own holes for all I care.
The much larger issue I have with that is the complete lack of follow-up questions regarding how I access the network using these built in systems.
Navigation requires GPS. Music requires cellular internet (mostly these days). Is GM requiring that I pay for access separate from my mobile? Are they requiring access to all of my personal data on my phone if they are able to somehow access the phone for network and GPS access?
The level of detail in the reporting was a true disappointment for me. Perhaps it is also a symptom of being a journalist and not having to pay for the features in the vehicles you review but surely they have dealt with the payment issues at some point?
Plenty of people will choose Apple CarPlay and Android Auto over GM cars
It’s that simple
This will hurt them
GM and shooting themselves in the dick, name a more iconic duo….
“OUCH! WHEN I SHOOT MY WIENER IT HURTS!”-GM as we speak
GM Management: “Have you tried curing your wiener pain by shooting it?”
Rest of GM: “But that’s what made it start hurting!”
GM Management: “It might also make it quit hurting, shoot it again!”
When a car company puts user data collection above car sales, something something profit?
I’ve used CarPlay like 4-5 times in my life. I don’t think it’s bad software, in fact it’s quite good, but I just don’t really have a use for it. I rarely use navigation since I’ve lived in the same area my entire life and I’ve always enjoyed SiriusXM radio, which I know is an unpopular opinion. For the rare times I use navigation the native system in my car has always been perfectly fine.
I also don’t want to worry about my damn phone while I’m driving because I actually enjoy driving and a lot of the time it’s really the only serenity I get. Whatever texts, emails, etc. I’m receiving can wait and I don’t take work calls when I’m off the clock. My phone is hooked up to the Bluetooth, will let me know if someone is calling, and 99% of the time it’s just more godforsaken spam that I can ignore.
Ok Boomer me all you’d like, I know that saying you don’t care about CarPlay on a blog is basically the equivalent of saying fuck manual transmissions on a blog. THAT BEING SAID…I do question what GM’s motivation is. Is this so they can get their grubby little hands on those sweet sweet micro transactions or have more control over my data, which they’ll then sell to the highest bidder and share with my insurance company?
It feels like that’s almost certainly what it is. I have a huge problem with that, and you should too.
So I have 4 cars. The one that doesn’t have Android Auto luckily gives me SiriusXM (I like it too) for $3/month, including internet. I then use my SiriusXM app on Android Auto for the other 3 cars. So I have SiriusXM on all for cars for $3/month.
This is the way, wife’s lyriq (which has the new system AND CP) gets SXM for 3 bucks a month so now I can use SXM anywhere. People can say what they want about music but I love SiriusXM, even if my wife hates how much I dial scan.
Literally no to all of this. Just stop. Please.
No one wants more goddamn AI. It’s a dystopian nightmare foisted on society by antisocial billionaires who want to drive us into techno feudalism. It’s also incredibly harmful for the environment.
that AI Friend necklace thing campaign from the NYC Subways is the perfect distillation of this
It’s just so OBVIOUS where the push is coming from and why. Sigh.
“Car, take me to the supermarket”
“I’m sorry, Dave, I’m afraid I can’t comply with that request.”
Genuinely this sounds like Professor Frink talking about computers of the future.
I don’t know if this is my Boomer moment or the point in life where I start to reject all new things, but the more they try and push AI the more repulsed I get.
Think my next car is going to be something mid to late 2000s or early 2010s and just maintain as long as I can.
I was reading about this change elsewhere (forget where) but I remember this quote standing out enough that I copied/pasted it to my buddy who works at an American Big 3 OEM (that isn’t GM):
“Alan Wexler, GM’s senior VP of innovation and growth, said previously that the automaker’s own internal research indicates that most new vehicle owners would be willing to pay up to $135 per month for various subscription-based apps and features for their vehicle.”
I was so dumbfounded reading this quote that I actually had to stop and re-read it three times because of how profoundly off-base I think this imbecile is – and there were so many problems I saw with it that I was overwhelmed thinking of which angle to reply to. It was like if you’ve seen that video of a dog’s reaction to a laundry basket of tennis balls being dropped.
Ultimately, what I bring it to is this: These executives are thinking of “connected cars” as a new platform – akin to the introduction of the smartphone as a platform with an associated app store with purchases and subscriptions, and the introduction of the Smart TV as a platform with ongoing subscriptions to streaming services. 20 years ago neither of these platforms existed (Cable TV existed, sure, but compare the ease of taking a free trial for Disney+ & forgetting to unsubscribe to the ordeal of signing up to a cable service and waiting for the bloke to come wire it up for you).
So in these dipshits eyes, the connected car is a new platform, like the App Store, like Amazon, like Hulu – an opportunity to monetize. They’ll offer features and subscriptions of their own and capitalize on that – they’ll sell a subscription to heated seats that’s basically just enabling a button on a touchscreen for $17.99/mo – and the things they don’t sell like a subscription to the Fart Machine Pro app – they’ll pull in 30% of that revenue and it’s all gravy!
But here’s the thing:
-People immediately identified the benefits of the smartphone. People wanted the smartphone. It put the entire internet right in your pocket. And the subscriptions people sign up to on their phone – let’s say Spotify or Audible or whatever – they are genuinely things that people want to have with them, wherever. They’ll listen to their music and their books wherever they are, and when they get in their car, boom, there they are.
-People also immediately recognized the benefits of connected TVs – waning as they are – as a way to “cut the cord”. You want Disney+ because you’ve got little kids and also enjoy Star Wars? Knock yourself out. You want Netflix to binge a whole new season the night it drops? Of course! Does it cost more than cable does in 2025? Depending on what you want to watch the answer is somewhere between “potentially and absolutely” but you get the point – this was a real, tangible improvement to the legacy experience for most people, and the change was invited with open arms.
I’m not only convinced that GM’s connected vehicle experience is going to be materially worse – the suggestion that people are going to pay for it – that most new vehicle owners are willing to pay up to $135/mo for the kind of features they’re already getting today is so laughably out-of-touch Wall Street/Silicon Valley brain that I feel like it’s a John Oliver bit. My current car (a 2021 Mini) has software that’s “adequate”; I have driven a 2025 model running Google’s software and somehow, inexplicably, its speech recognition functionality is worse. I don’t trust the maps to stay up to date for free and I refuse to pay for something I’m getting for free on my phone simply for convenience’s sake. Moreover, I don’t trust Google any longer with my personal data – I am certain that the car “phones home” with a million datapoints about my location and driving every minute, and I abhor ads.
The kind of delusional dipshit who thinks that most new vehicle owners are going to be happy to spend $135/mo is absolutely the kind of delusional dipshit to think that fullscreen audio/video ads for Dominos while you wait for a red light to clear are “innovative”.
Ultimately what it comes down to is this: what would I possibly subscribe to which lives exclusively in my car?!?
The only thing I can think of is full self-driving – and in the many decades it’s going to take for that to actually become remotely feasible for a mass-market affordable vehicle I’m sure that GM will walk back this insufferably stupid fucking decision and I’ll have CarPlay available in my fucking car again.
In an article in the Detroit News GM says they want to be known as a tech company, not a car company. I wish I had whatever they’re high on over there at GM. We’ve seen their tech (first year Blazer, anyone?) and it’s laughable at best, dangerous at worst. To think people will pay up to $135/month for stuff that as you note only lives in your car is an insane fever dream.
The high is on stock prices of tech companies and their price to earnings ratios. GM’s P/E is ~12. Tesla is ~250. If GM is successful in branding themselves as a tech company, then their stock price can go up way more vs what they actually earn. The name of the game is maximizing shareholder value, not building great cars without custom software that won’t work after 5 years. Capitalism is sometimes depressing.
Any company can hire a consulting firm that will gladly provide a very official sounding report that comes to any conclusion you are willing to pay for, even the batshit idea that people are willing to pay $135/mo for car apps.
Forgot to add three things:
1). The quote is from GM Authority, from this article:
GM Ultifi To Generate $20 To $25 Billion In Annual Software And Services Revenue by 2023
2). When this inevitably fails to do the numbers GM pulled out of their ass, one of two things is going to happen:
thing 1: Bluetooth Audio streaming will stop being available – hands-free calling only.
“Sorry, you can’t stream Spotify from your phone. To access Spotify*, simply install via the GM App Store! *subscription required”
thing 2: Bluetooth Audio streaming will remain available but GM will use the provided Bluetooth track metadata to install whatever app you are using from their app store, and then nag you to use that app non-stop every time you stream audio – to the point where it’ll pull you out of apps like navigation to pop up a Spotify QR login link until you actually finally give in and do it.
3). Fuck GM.
$135 per month?!?
What utter bullshit.
Maybe a multi millionaire GM executive might pay that. Nobody else will.
With the average monthly payment for a new car hovering just a hair under $750 a month, what’s another $135 tacked onto that? That’s chump change, at least to a GM executive that pulled in $30 million last year.
You touch on something very important here I think:
All of those examples you cite were actually providing something new. Something that added value in our lives, even if we don’t fully accept that the value added is equal to the cost, it was an addition to our lives.
GM is trying to make a change for solely their benefit. Historically, this does not work when offering a new product (unless maybe you have the government mandating it or some other external factor).
If GM or any other auto manufacturer wants us to spend our dollars on in-car subscriptions they have to find some new benefit they can bring to the table. Making the process of connecting our phones, where all of our digital content resides these days, more difficult just so they can take a slice of the pie just isn’t going to work.
They don’t seem to have been hurt by the decision yet but then the EVs are lower volume. I hope this blows up in their face because this level of hubris just should not be rewarded and I desperately hope no other manufacturer tries it.
LOL $135 per month, that’s hilarious
For those that will complain about Apple Maps, Apple Music, etc, you can install today APK files using a USB to your Google Automotive on your electric EV from GM and get the same functionality you will get from Carplay, its just apps that you install directly on the vehicle that are not available in the Play Store from Google because they are “locked”.
Until GM finds a way to lock that down, too. You’re not going to be allowed to mess with their subs.
And the fact that your comment is a foreign language to the vast majority of people buying GM cars makes it largely irrelevant.
I’m an Android guy and happy with Android Auto. I download podcasts to my phone and play them through the interface for the bulk of my daily driving – commuting and running errands.
If that’s not an option when I go vehicle shopping, then that vehicle isn’t even a consideration.
I installed an Android Auto/Carplay compatible head unit in my 2014 Sportwagen and it’s probably one of my favorite mods. The screen isn’t very big but having nav integrated is so much better than having to mount my phone somewhere.
So I would use AA for my Crosstrek and GR Corolla, but if I bought a GM I would need a completely separate thing? Reason #55732 not to be a GM, got it.
yeah, you probably shouldn’t be a General Manager, I agree.
I think you mean Grand Moff. The Imperial Army doesn’t have “managers”.
Most citizens are closer to being Gundark Mauled than they are to being Grand Moff.
And I guess they took away the ability to edit comments. Bring on the jokes.
The problem with this is the same problem virtually all car companies had with their infotainment system/phone integration before CarPlay came along… they are car companies, not software companies. There is no way they can compete with a software company on making a user friendly interface that will stay relevant with constant updates to the phones and software. It has and will virtually always come off as clunky and buggy compared to Car Play.
Is Carplay perfect? No, far from it. But does it generally work well and is generally user friendly? Yes. The same cannot be said for many of the factory systems out there. Confusing menus, flaking out, out of date systems because they stopped supporting them once the car is out of warrantee.
Almost guaranteed, in a few years these GM infotainment systems will be out of date, unsupported and wont want to talk to your latest iPhone 20.
And then you get to buy a new GM product for $100k+ and 500 monthly payments of $55.99. Thus fulfilling their planned obsolescence while offering a “reliable” car.
I just switched from a VW that created its own infotainment, to a Volvo, which uses Google. It is a MASSIVE improvement. I will never buy a car with a native infotainment system again.
But GM says they want to be known now as a tech company, not a car company. They are obviously taking full advantage of the legal pot in Michigan.
That has been the case but it is changing. Historically automakers have left software to suppliers and only dealt with integrating those together. That worked in the early days but as more and more things are software controlled it has turned into a mess. If I’m remembering correctly the vehicles we build have something like 25 different languages that have to be integrated. So often different bits of a system are supplied by different suppliers, coded in different languages, and don’t play nice together. It takes months to years to make simple changes and is very expensive.
Even with CarPlay – that takes work on the part of automakers to make it work and keep it working. Some are better than others. The recent Kia I rented wouldn’t connect about 1/4 of the time I got into the car and started it. In 5 days I had to pair it 3 times.
What companies like GM, Ford, VW have seen is that new companies like Tesla, Rivian, and BYD have a huge big advantage in cost and speed because they write all their own software on their own OS. So they have been making massive investments hiring software engineers to write their own OS and pull software in house. Most have announced dates near the end of this decade to make that switch.
Will it go well? Time will tell but that is the direction the entire industry is going.
I drive an older car so if someone wants to use google maps, they need to now get a phone holder or use what ever GM navigation maps are already installed?
TBF it’s native Google Maps
I am too old to understand your sentence.
Is this about money or control? How much does Apple, for instance, charge GM for each CarPlay seat?
Apple charges zero. It’s all about monetizing driver data and subscriptions. With CarPlay the automaker gets NO data.
Ah, it was Option 3. Thanks for that. I kinda thought there was an angle that I hadn’t thought of.
Apple charges zero to GM. Because it drives sales of iPhones.
Google charges zero to GM. Because it’s more data for them.
GM wants to sell you subscriptions.
We are all just data bags that the Corps are milking. Sad.
Except it *isn’t* entirely the same from car to car. I drive a ton of rental cars annually, and the experience varies wildly. Especially in terms of getting it to work in the first place, or how reliably it stays working. To the point where I often can’t be bothered and just use my phone.
Reality is I don’t want ANY of this crap integrated into the car to start with. Just give me a secure place to put my phone where I can see it, and I am happy.
All that said, given the presumably low cost of offering this option and the modern necessity of having a screen anyway, it does seem like a typically GM catastrophically dumb idea to not offer it. I get that they think they are going to somehow drive revenue though selling subscription services of their own instead – but that seems unlikely to actually work.
The cost is zero. The Android system GM is using already supports both CarPlay and Android Auto from your phone. They’re just turning it off.
There is still some integration cost, I am sure. But it can’t be much. Obviously, they think they will make more money by not having it available. I, and most of the rest of the Internet Peanut Gallery think they are wrong, but what do we know? I wouldn’t buy any of their cars regardless.
The cost is not zero. Every time they update their vehicle architecture they have to do a bunch of work and testing to make CarPlay / Android Auto work with that new software / hardware. Which explains why this change is rolling out gradually and new model are released instead of being dumped across the board with a model year change.