GM sparked outrage earlier this year when it announced intentions to phase out Apple CarPlay and Android Auto in future vehicles in favor of an in-house system built in collaboration with Google.
Naturally, this did not go down well with iPhone users and Apple CarPlay aficionados in general, as GM indicated that the new system would rely on Google apps for voice instructions, such as Google Maps and Google Assistant.
In an interview with MotorTrend, GM’s head of product for infotainment, Tim Babbitt, suggested that the decision to discontinue both Apple CarPlay and Android Auto screen mirroring services was influenced by driver safety concerns.
According to Babbitt, “CarPlay and Android Auto have stability issues that manifest as bad connections, poor rendering, slow responses, and dropped connections.” When CarPlay or Android Auto encounter problems, drivers pick up their phones again, taking their eyes off the road and completely negating the objective of these phone-mirroring technologies.”
GM’s solution for persuading drivers to install and log into all of their favorite apps on the automaker’s Ultifi infotainment operating system would eliminate the need to physically pick up a phone, whereas Google’s Voice Assistant is a powerful tool for enabling app interaction without taking your hands off the wheel.
Several industry observers, however, have quickly pointed out that this argument is severely incorrect. Ford CEO Jim Farley stated on social media (below) that his company is still working “closely with Apple and Google to create a very high-quality experience for customers” because they “help keep their eyes on the road and hands on the wheel.”
Even GM’s communications director, Anna Yu, soon chimed in to declare that these safety-related comments were inaccurate.
“GM’s embedded infotainment strategy is driven by the benefits of having a system that allows for greater integration with the larger GM ecosystem and vehicles,” Yu wrote in an email to The Verge and others.
If you read between the lines, you’ll notice that a lot of the debate is around data, specifically the capacity to monetize the massive amounts of data that in-car apps are capable of collecting. If General Motors permits Apple CarPlay and Android Auto to handle infotainment, it is effectively squandering a revenue potential.
In fact, GM’s chief digital officer, Edward Kummer, confirmed as much in an interview with Reuters earlier this year. “We do believe there are subscription revenue opportunities for us,” he said. According to Reuters, GM CEO Mary Barra is looking for $20 billion to $25 billion in yearly subscription income by 2030.
The paradox of connected cars
Customers value the option to upgrade and increase their electric vehicles’ capabilities over-the-air, which is becoming increasingly common. This raises a more sophisticated debate about infotainment.
On the one hand, GM has a compelling justification for retaining customers within its own infotainment environment, as Tesla, which has never officially offered Apple CarPlay or Android Auto, has demonstrated.
Thanks to reams of data collected about where Tesla’s cars are, when they need to charge, and the chance that they will have to stop to top-up batteries, Tesla’s navigation system, for example, can estimate Supercharger capacity and improve the flow across its charging network.
In an interview with Reuters, GM’s chief of digital cockpit experience remarked, “We have a lot of new driver assistance features coming that are more tightly coupled with navigation.” We don’t want to design these functions in such a way that they are reliant on the user owning a cellphone.”
It’s a valid point, but GM’s contradictory message on the matter of discontinuing Apple CarPlay and Android Auto won’t help consumer confidence.
It also needs to be extremely transparent about how much and what kind of driver data it is gathering, as well as how many of its new and exciting features will require a paid subscription.
