Infotainment system developer here, A number of people have mentioned preferring/wanting Android Auto/CarPlay in their infotainment systems, and that it would be preferable to many of the systems that exist in current vehicles. I have a couple of thoughts.
The Infotainment system is one of the most user-facing components of the vehicle. It's something that can reflect the brand identity of the vehicle, and most OEMs are not eager to cede that space to Apple or Google. Google and (especially) Apple certainly aren't interested in mixing their branding with a manufacturers.
The utilization of AGL doesn't necessarily mean CarPlay or Android Auto are out. AGL is a system, and CP/AA are applications.
While I certainly believe there are a lot of terrible systems out there, I also think there are a lot of systems that people don't like because they never took the time to figure out how to use them. Cars aren't like phones. When you're in them, you're most likely driving and you don't have the bandwidth to figure out how to do something as well as drive. A while back I saw a study that concluded if you didn't learn something about your infotainment system in the first 3 days, you never do.
I encourage you to actually identify the things you find confusing/frustrating/difficult about your vehicle and write a letter to the manufacturer. Customer input makes a big difference. And no, "It's not CarPlay" doesn't help. That's kind of like sitting down to Windows and complaining to Microsoft that they didn't give you macOS.
I think you're missing the point of people saying that they want CarPlay/Android Auto. People don't want another system, they want another set of controls, screen, speakers and charging dock for their smartphone. They already have an intimate relationship with their phone. Phones are addictive. It's where people get their dopamine rushes from social media, sms and games. You can't compete with that. Even if someone is driving many, many hours per day, their relationship with their car will never be as strong as it is with their phone, despite the fact that they've paid more than 20x for the car. The more you try to compete with those systems on a feature-by-feature basis and try to impose your brand, the more you're going to lose. The more you design your system to be a natural extension of their phone, with as much looking and feeling like the phone's interface as possible, the more well received it will be. CarPlay and Android Auto are the easy answer to making it as similar as possible.
Trying to understand the issue from a technical or UX perspective is going to lead to a whole lot of failure. You need to understand the psychology. And what auto manufacturers resisting CarPlay and Android Auto are doing is akin to hitting on people in a committed relationship. It makes them angry and want to reject you, not dump their significant other. Accept that you'll never be more than friends and build the best platonic relationship you can, no matter how much you want them to love you.
>Even if someone is driving many, many hours per day, their relationship with their car will never be as strong as it is with their phone, despite the fact that they've paid more than 20x for the car.
I have paid much less than 20x more for my car and I care about it significantly more than my phone. If I had to choose between the two it would easily be my car. I also enjoy operating my vehicle much more than my phone. I think most would agree, although maybe not in the niche audience of HN comments.
I have similar affiliations with my car for which I paid far less than 10K. I can feel the horsepower in my car, but I can't feel the horsepower in my phone.
Most might agree, but you still need it to work without a phone with good interface and all the desired features.
Still not everybody has a smartphone. Or you have an older one and whatever software you need for the car isn't supported. Or you give the phone to the kid in the backseat to play a game...
And then having two very different ways to control stuff increases complexity. For developers and user.
No offense, but I have yet to find a infotainment system that I liked. They reflect the brand identity of the vehicle, yes, but badly. The majority of in-car-entertainment systems are clunky, slow, and look outdated. The hardware is already at release a few years behind, and you can't easily replace it. (This also applied to smart TVs, and to some extent to in-flight-entertainment).
What I would love is a simple standard for aftermarket radios, like you used to have. One connector, and it wires up to the speakers, a display (that you can replace), and all the hardware buttons e.g. in the steering wheel. You'd have a one-way connection from the car to the device for information like speed.
When I buy a car, I don't want an integrated entertainment system. I want to buy a system from a stereo manufacturer that integrates with the card.
And I want the option to buy an "in-car-ITX" barebone from NewEgg, pop in an SD card with a LibreICE distribution or whatever, and roll my own entertainment system if I like.
I want things like changeable themes, Spotify support, information about the currently playing radio song (even if not supported by the station), and so on. I want fluid animations and no latency, readable text, and idiot-proof usage. That really shouldn't be so hard.
> What I would love is a simple standard for aftermarket radios, like you used to have. One connector, and it wires up to the speakers, a display (that you can replace), and all the hardware buttons e.g. in the steering wheel. You'd have a one-way connection from the car to the device for information like speed.
That would be nice, but unfortunately it has a number of drawbacks:
1) "one connector" does not work well with today's 20+ speakers
2) display interface? Either you do it using DSI as interface (which is fucked up so bad that a Raspberry Pi supports exactly one specific type of display - and when even the Pi hackers can't get it done, I seriously doubt car makers can), or you use HDMI which will lead to vibration issues. Furthermore, the range of display resolutions, aspect ratios etc (you can have anything from 320x240 to retina FHD)... no way ever that radio/car makers will implement this.
3) Interface to rest of car (HW buttons, speed feedback, and maybe even GPS/IMU for navigation): no standard for this except CAN-bus, which is a security hellhole itself...
I agree that having the option would be nice but it's a real niche market.
I don't think it is that unrealistic. It seems that for 1), aftermarket radios are available for most cars and can utilize the speakers. There are various adapters available. For 2) I can imagine HDMI or DVI, if necessary with a more sturdy connector. Stock monitors have supported multiple resolutions for 20 years.
For 3), it seems there is information available to access this from CAN or LIN buses or ODB. Lots of hobbyists do this. I can imagine you could buy an adapter for, say, "Ford 2010-2014", like you can do with various aftermarket parts.
It might be a niche market, but so are all kinds of aftermarket mods for cars. And I think if somebody did to car stereos what Nest did to thermostats, it would be phenomenal.
FYI, HDMI has an automotive connector (type E) as part of the specification, which is available from a range of manufacturers already and has a retention clip to avoid vibration issues.
Sidenote: Some cars still use composite interfaces, because with a reasonable comb filter it doesn't look too bad, and it only takes one wire and ground.
Thieves have largely stopped breaking into cars to steal car radios because, without a simple standard for aftermarket radios, the market for stolen radios shrunk and has almost disappeared.
They could advertise support for the Bose/Sony/Apple/whatever premium entertainment system; a standard - even a very basic one - might also reduce development work, as you can use preexisting connectors etc.
And, at least for me, if I would buy a new car, repairability and replaceability or parts is a consideration. And if I had $1000 to spare, I'd buy a hifi unit from a dedicated manufacturer - and would prefer a car vendor that makes that easy. I've never heard the entertainment system be the decisive factor in choosing a car - but I know people who put off buying an e-mobile because they usually have annoying computers built in.
Finally, I don't think the car vendors would neccessarily do this. You'd probably have third party vendors selling adapters. Crazy cable tree in, nice plug out.
It just feels like nobody uses these things (or they're so resource constrained their first iteration made it into production). I bought a 2015 Honda Fit knowing it'd been out awhile and there was no change for 2016 (I hoped this meant many things, including their infotainment system had things ironed out). I also got the lowest-end infotainment system because I wanted a volume knob instead of soft buttons. It's funny how with professional cameras the high end have more physical buttons, while it's the opposite for car stereos. I'd rather turn a knob than grope the dash to mash down on a touchscreen while driving.
I've tried to "learn" the system.
* there's a mess of apps to download and it's unclear which work with the tier of sound system I got and they completely oversell what they do.
* there's no way they're going to do a better job at GPS and directions (my tier wasn't supported, but I didn't know that until I downloaded their app and figured it out myself)
* it makes no sense to have a separate voice dialing from Siri (it's unclear that it's separate, it's just terrible at it, and it's unclear on how to train new names)
* it auto-connects known phones and starts playing random songs. I know that's part of Bluetooth, but if the wrong device connects they bury device swapping multiple menus deep and you have to "disconnect" the old devices and "connect" the correct one instead of just connecting to the phone you want
* they separate bluetooth phone and audio--you have to connect your phone to each one. I get this is a "feature" but it just confuses things. I doubt most people know there's a distinction
* plugging into USB (to charge) does not mean I want to switch audio over--I use a cigarette lighter USB adapter to get rid of this confusion
* features differ between USB attached device and Bluetooth even for things that they both could technically support (i.e. album artwork doesn't show up over Bluetooth but does over USB). I would forget which is attached--I doubt most people understand the distinction. Again, not using USB solved this.
* and really, most importantly, don't crash. If you do (which happens at least monthly), don't make me turn the car off to restart it.
I'm not intending to rant at you. I've told my dealer about the crashing issue and asked if there were any updates (there weren't), the rest I've learned to live with since I don't plan on buying a new car for 10+ years. I now plan to write a letter.
> * plugging into USB (to charge) does not mean I want to switch audio over--I use a cigarette lighter USB adapter to get rid of this confusion
This is the biggest issue for me with so many cars. Why can't I just deactivate USB interfaces? I use USB to charge but only use Bluetooth for audio (tends to work much better for Spotify). Bluetooth is very reliable in most cars but whenever I start charging I have to switch back. A simple setting to set USB to charge-only mode wouldn't be hard to implement and a great win.
“It’s not CarPlay” absolutely helps. I don’t care if Toyota makes a decent infotainment system. I will not buy a Toyota or Lexus until they come with a CarPlay option. Period. It’s a waste of time to elaborate on that (for free). I would rather save my breath and vote with my money by supporting a car company that does understand my needs (e.g. Honda/Acura).
Have you or your employer ever had a customer say "oh thank goodness, I really needed BRAND's tech in here instead of just a convenient way to access the same software I already use for hours every day?" In any sort of user study or feed back? Or really ANY indication that NIH for infotainment systems is a good investment?
I don't think those... um, infotainment systems are a differentiator other than the ones that are so bad as to rule out the car entirely. I've never heard anyone, anyone say they liked their car infotainment system. Ever.
To be honest, I really hope they don't actually think of those systems as an important extension of their brand. Or if they do, they realize that Android or iOS are much better user facing tech companies and brands than any car manufacturer...
Think he's right. We're used to not having manuals but that doesn't count for driving. You really should understand your car before you drive, figuring out the system while driving is very dangerous. We're just not used to that anymore.
And it's not that figuring out an iPhone is that much easier. But you can click around until you found the right setting without endangering others.
> The Infotainment system is one of the most user-facing components of the vehicle. It's something that can reflect the brand identity of the vehicle, and most OEMs are not eager to cede that space to Apple or Google. Google and (especially) Apple certainly aren't interested in mixing their branding with a manufacturers.
It actually seems like most manufacturers are including CarPlay and Android Auto in new cars. In terms of CarPlay, Toyota is one of the notable holdouts. Mazda, the other notable holdout, is going to offer CarPlay in newer models and upgrade older models to support it. Jaguar was the other major holdout, and it seems like they will also support it in the future. I can't think of any other car brands sold in America that don't offer it except Tesla.
> there are a lot of systems that people don't like because they never took the time to figure out how to use them. Cars aren't like phones. When you're in them, you're most likely driving and you don't have the bandwidth to figure out how to do something as well as drive.
Yes, it takes time to get used to the dash and this is why I dread car rentals.
I have to rent cars regularly and each one is a chore to figure out, especially at night after a flight when I just want to get moving with headlights on and a little music. Sometimes I feel like taking a picture of the damn things because they're so comically counter-intuitive.
Checked the software stack, it's basically: Yocto(OS framework) + Tizen(application framework) + Genivi(infotainment). Yocto is totally over-engineered and only RTOS vendors really enjoy it as they can sell services on top of that, it's a nightmare for small players, they should just use Buildroot the alternative to save money and time. Tizen has never reached what it wanted to be, partially because of Android. Genivi has been around for a few years but I have yet to see it took any market share on the infotainment side, many infotainment systems are just using Android instead as well.
Actually because Camry is using this stack, my next car will certainly not be it. How am I going to upgrade the kernel with patches every few weeks?
Absolutely... Yocto is definitely massively complex compared to BuildRoot.
Yocto is difficult to maintain and inflexible despite attempting to be exactly those things. A prime example of over-engineering.
In comparison, BuildRoot uses well-known mechanisms and is much simpler to use as a result.
GENIVI is an industry consortium to generate software standards. As a group, it does produce the GDP (GENIVI Development Platform, née GENIVI Demo Platform) but it doesn't produce software that actually gets deployed to production vehicles. Software produced by OEMs and vendors may be GENIVI compliant, but it's not a product that would have market share.
Well this is interesting. I purchased a 2018 Toyota Camry in August (first ever car purchase), and I absolutely love everything about it except the Toyota Entune 3.0 system. Lack of apps, useless Scout GPS navigation gimmick, and it doesn't even show album cover art while you're driving.
When I was comparing cars, the lack of CarPlay was the only (massive) downside with the Camry, but the other features of the car were so good that I went with it in spite of it.
I wonder what AGL means for the driver. I would love to tweak the OS myself, but I doubt Toyota would let a customer flash their own version of the code (at least not without violating the warranty). I suppose it could mean more frequent updates with better features. Curious to see how this plays out.
I'm a happy Prius owner, but I bought mine before CarPlay existed. I'm not sure I would buy another Prius to replace my current one, primarily because of the lack of CarPlay and Android Auto.
The Entune interface just isn't very good, and it's not going to get better. This isn't unique to Toyota -- no matter how good the system in your car is, it will seem very outdated after 5 years. In contrast, CarPlay and Android auto are great now and will improve with software updates over time.
I've been a loyal toyota buyer for over 30 years. But I will not buy another car, unless it has first class CarPlay support. (and it should support the android equivalent as well) Having to interact with the phone while driving is a safety problem and Apple (and presumably android too) delivered a great solution several years ago-- no excuse for not implementing it.
Especially given that auto makers really suck at this kind of software. My car has navigation and all the bells and whistles (was not a choice when buying) and I ONLY use it as a bluetooth audio receiver, effectively. IT's just terrible for everything else.
I'm drawing a line in the sand here. I will buy a 10 year old used something if I have to and put in an aftermarket CarPlay system. (They're also making it harder to put in aftermarket systems..... ok you going to do that, then you better make yours first class.)
I love that with my current toyota when I get in my phone hooks back up and starts playing music, but I hate having to use the phone screen for navigation and the like, since there are no good auto mounts I can find. [1]
[1] I have a vent based magnetic one. The magnetic attachment is great, but the vent vanes swing back and forth and its never been quite satisfying... right now if I turn at the right speed the phone swings over and turns off the radio by hitting its button. annoying.
Be careful what you wish for, I heard that Google is aggressively gathering information about ones driving through Android auto.
My car has pretty basic integration: calls, music. I have access to the phone book and playlists on the car display and I don't need nor want more integration.
May be off topic but it's funny to see complaints regarding infotainment systems when all I've done is driven 10 year old toyotas without infotainment systemsfor the past decade. "More money, more problems."
Why do I even need this? Just give me a bluetooth receiver and a usb outlet for the phone. You set up the navi before driving off, just like you would in the built-in systems. I don't understand why carplay is such a big deal tbh.
Bigger screen in a better place; it uses your car mic instead of the phone mic; it uses your steering wheel buttons instead of needing to touch the phone; when you get a call or want to talk to the system, the A/C turns down the blower setting. Probably some others.
I agree, my family has a long history of buying Toyotas. I really, really dislike their usage of entune at the expense of just integrating CarPlay + Android Auto. This is an issue that also will cause me to shop non-Toyota.
Tangential, but if Pro Fit International make a 'vehicle specific mount' for your model I highly recommend them. They require partial disassembly of your dash trim, which a car stereo installer can do for you. They bolt very solidly to the frame behind your dash and provide a mounting plate angled facing you, which you attach your phone/GPS/whatever to.
I found the best way to attach a phone to the mount was to buy a phone 'holster' - the belt clip type. Break the clip part off and grid down the back so it's flat, then use a 3M adhesive pad to attach the phone holder to the mount. Then you can easily snap the phone into place and see the screen while driving. It's more work than a cheap vent-clip type, but absolutely worth it.
No affiliation with the company, I just think they have the best product and I found them very helpful.
Almost flippant based on the issue with the car mount, I have a 2013 Infiniti g37x, and where the gps/ touch screen is they have a circular dial. If I put my phone over the built in screen, the dial holds it in place perfectly. Better then any mount I’ve owned. Funny how that works out.
(I’m agreeing that car mounts suck, and car play is amazing in the cars I’ve been in that have it )
Our in-laws car has a screen that flips down to let you put a minidisc(!) in or replace the navigation DVD. That flip-down tray makes for a perfect phone stand.
I don't trust car manufacturers to implement anything more complex than a Bluetooth module that has only power and analog audio integration. I don't want all this stuff. I love my old land cruiser because it's well designed in almost all aspects, which cannot be said for any infotainment system.
Based on everything I've read about automotive software development, I'm impressed they've managed to degrade the Linux kernel enough to call it Automotive Grade.
I found out my car's infotainment system can run HTML/Js/CSS apps. The performance guidelines give you a great hint about the hardware (or lack thereof), they discourage using percentages for example. And have strict versions of Angular 1 and jQuery you're allowed to use
Mazda by chance(?) - I've worked in this space, they're interesting systems. A number of OEMs have explored web stacks as an option for applications. It's very accessible for vendors to work with. Dealing with the system resource limitations is a huge deal.
>> Based on everything I've read about automotive software development, I'm impressed they've managed to degrade the Linux kernel enough to call it Automotive Grade.
It's a different set of people with different constraints.
They've been making a serious attempt for the last decade or so, Toyota has been doing especially well. The UI is one thing, and it may be a bit gaudy, but the systems have been getting much better.
The thing I hated most about my automotive purchase was the nav. I'm not sure any built-in, eventual bit-rotten nav would be any better though.
On the one hand, we can't even get manufacturers of our phones to keep the software on their devices up to date past a couple years and somehow they're our last hope for your in-dash media player? I guess some people jump to a new lease every couple years, but I don't see the mobile model being the future of car ownership.
On the other hand, cars have mostly avoided the security disasters of other embedded devices so it might be fine. Unless of course, we make them into the eventual IoT device everyone wants them to be. I mean these software-controlled navs now need to both downloads updated maps and show you engine diagnostics. Doesn't this seem like a bad idea waiting to happen?
It sucks that only the low-quality models can escape these devices. Soon it'll be like Smart TVs where your choices are 480x600 or 4K Samsung SpywarePro.patchfix-m2015.
Toyota's previous generation of head units (all Entune-branded, started rolling out in 2013/2014) used different hardware platforms and OSes, depending on the supplier. But they all ran a UI that was virtually identical, although there were some very minor differences.
The Panasonic-made units ran QNX, Pioneer and Fujitsu Ten units ran Linux. Presumably this means no more QNX.
This just reminded me of my personal pet "first world problem."
The move from hardware based interfaces to touch screen interfaces is an astonishing regression in usability.
Older car "audio" systems could be controlled with simple knob and button interfaces. This would allow the user to fine tune the audio playback, as well as find radio stations, without having to look at the device.
Asside from picking the music, and adjusting the volume, my most desired adjustments are to: bass, treble, L/R balance, front/back balance.
In my current run of the mill, screen based, "infotainment" system, doing this without endanger myself and others, requires stopping the vehicle, and undertaking a series of awkward and unresponsive controls, none of which are accessed on the same screen!
The whole concept of a "touch screen" interface in a car is dubious. Ironically, touch screens require visual attention, due to lack of haptic feedback, and inconsistent UI patterns.
If I ever"upgrade" my car audio, I'm going back to an old-school style unit, with an aux plugin.
Most of my rental cars now use touch screen interface. Elsewhere in this page, a developer complained that we "just don't take the time to learn what we need to."
No.
Just ... no.
A critical control system should be simple, able to be used without taking one's eyes off the wheel/road.
Any control system (atmosphere, lights, defroster, wipers, ...) that requires you to remove your attention from the road in order to operate a touch screen interface with a generally terrible UI/UX is BROKEN. And dangerous to boot.
This is what I find now in many (not all, but the majority) of my rentals.
Want to turn on defroster (which is usually a snap decision as the rear window is getting foggy/frosty)? You have to navigate a screen. Not push a single button.
Want to turn down the radio? Now you have to navigate MULTIPLE screens to find the O(&^*&^$^$&^& control pane for the radio, and shut it off.
And so on.
This is not progress.
This is risk.
Pardon my pun, but someone is asleep at the wheel here. These control and interface systems are inherently broken, by not being as simple as possible.
I agree somewhat here. My car has volume controls and station changer on the backside of the wheel, along with knobs for the volume. I have knobs and or an up/down arrow for temperature adjustment.(Depending on the car I'm driving.) Ironically Navigation is completely touch screen, which is dangerous. I tend to use my phone if I need directions, because the car system is cumbersom.
In general I'm frustrated by the loss of consistency in operating cars. A couple years ago I volunteered to help valet cars at a charity dinner for a university. Someone asked me because they knew that I drove manual so I'd be able to "drive anything." It was quite comical to discover how untrue this was, particularly since the event tended to attract people with luxury cars...
A lot of luxury cars no longer have a conventional key but some kind of electronic system. Sometimes it is proximity based, so you simply have to have the key and push a button on the steering column or dashboard or maybe center console. Other cars have a key that has some kind of electrical connector and must be inserted into the side of the steering column and then you push a button, and still another one I drove seemed to have a proximity key but you had to stick it into the side of the steering column and turn to start the engine.
Then you have to figure out the parking brake... Used to be that it was a ratchet pedal, or a handle in the center console, or one of those pull-and-twist deals in some 4x4s. This was already a little annoying, but now there's a huge diversity of buttons and toggles in non-obvious places. At least the electrical ones usually disengage if you hit the gas.
Now for the automatic gear selector...
One guy somewhat sheepishly apologizes that his car was hard to drive... but it was an old stick-shift 4runner with a strange feeling clutch. That one I was actually able to work out!
> If I ever"upgrade" my car audio, I'm going back to an old-school style unit, with an aux plugin.
Last week at lunch, we were lamenting the disappearance of headphone jacks from phones. We speculated that a Bluetooth-to-jack adapter would be a popular accessory, letting people keep their old headphones for use with their latest media players. I'd wager there's a whole class of products that might fit here, for example a set of old-fashioned analog knobs backed by Bluetooth or some other interface to the players, as an alternative for those who feel more comfortable - or safer - with the old gear.
It's the same in smartphones but it's less critical. New tech teams forgot the 50 years of stupid tactile interfaces and how much people enjoy and get efficient with touch.
> In my current run of the mill, screen based, "infotainment" system, doing this without endanger myself and others, requires stopping the vehicle, and undertaking a series of awkward and unresponsive controls, none of which are accessed on the same screen!
Toyota, the automaker under discussion here, offers steering wheel controls that are pretty decent. The main weakness of such systems is that the interface between stereo and phone has such little functionality, and that is where many people will be playing their music. Eventually you're going to be poking at a phone and a badly-designed app unless you're happy to simply play everything from a long playlist.
I own GM products and an Audi. My GM vehicles have Apple Carplay integrated, the only catch is I need to plug my iPhone in via the USB on the car and that menu shows up. Even with just Bluetooth, I have decent control, via stearing wheel and touch screen.
How sophisticated are the things you can do to control the stereo and song selection without taking your eyes off the road? I have to admit that for me, that's pretty much the whole ballgame. I can see how something like Siri might aid that, potentially.
The fan and AC on a touch screen is an immense failure. Here in Norway there are many tunnels on the motorway and in some conditions this leads to the windscreen steaming up a few seconds after entering the tunnel. Imagine not being able to see out of the car until you fiddle with a touch screen at 120 km/h. Hire cars, where you aren't familiar with the layout are going to be a lot of 'fun'.
To be fair, on a Jeep the screen is probably easier to seal against dust/dirt intrusion. But otherwise, I agree and much prefer buttons/knobs. Also - heated seats? On a Jeep? Being uncomfortable is part of what you're paying for...
"If I ever"upgrade" my car audio, I'm going back to an old-school style unit, with an aux plugin."
I ended up splitting the difference, going for a modern Bluetooth equipped radio with old-school physical buttons and a knob. I play music through my phone over Bluetooth and control playback with the phone's voice control. My eyes never leave the road, and my right hand never leaves the steering wheel except to change volume, which is easy with the huge knob and muscle memory.
Totally agree. My car radio still has 10 station preset buttons that are very easy to access along with next/prev buttons on the steering wheel. My wife care has a touch screen where only 4 stations are shown at a time and you need to push/touch extra to scroll through the list. None of it has dedicated buttons, so it's a lot of looking and poking around. Not appropriate at all for a driver.
The worst I've seen for presets is in GM's implementation. You first have to touch a tiny "up" arrow in the bottom right of the screen, and then you have five touch presets along the bottom. Madness!
For some reason most people like bad user interfaces by default. They randomly decide on a layout and are immediately too proud to consider anything else.
I disagree somewhat, the issue isn't that the infotainment system is a touch screen based series of menus, the problem is they are almost universally shit. They often use resistive screens which have been utter shit since the day they were invented, and only support single touch, making them useless for gestures. The software is slow, the refresh rate of the screen/GPU is brutally slow and primitive, etc.
I don't know if capacitive screens and proper GPUs are just somehow incompatible with cars, or what the engineering problem is to get solid framerates with solid responsive time in a good looking screen, but no car manufacturer other than Tesla seems to have been able to solve this problem.
Now that doesn't address everything you're pointing out here, which several of these are legit points. I'm just saying if my car's touch screen felt more like an iPad and less like an Android tablet from 2006, it would be a metric fuckton easier for me to use.
A neighbor lab did some works about haptic feedback design for automotive touchscreens [1]. They worked on user comfort using fuzzy models. This could be implemented right now but it seems it's not automotive makers (thus casual customers) first priority. Why would we need good UI when driving is all autonomous.. [1]https//www.researchgate.net/publication/280047157_A_Fuzzy_Expert_Model_of_Haptic_Perception_for_Automobile_Touch-Screen_Displays
The steering wheel controls in my Volvo (from 2006!) are excellent. I have an aftermarket Bluetooth device from Grom Audio which allows me to control playback on my phone from the controls on my steering wheel. It really is the best of both worlds.
Yes, older cars are so much better in this way. These interfaces are garbage, the hardware is laggy and the whole thing is ugly and filled with latency, but it hardly matters because physical controls will always be better.
Can someone explain to me, honestly, why I would want an 'entertainmaint' system built into my car? I do long commutes, I drive a lot, I am an occasional truck driver, I have crossed Australia east to west more than once - and I still don't get it. My car is the one place in the world where I stand a decent chance of escaping the all-pervading goddamn film and music industry.
> My car is the one place in the world where I stand a decent chance of escaping the all-pervading goddamn film and music industry.
That's a very odd way of putting it. You do realise that music is not just a marketing platform, but also a very common form of entertainment and medium for artistic expression, right?
I'm not sure if you're saying that you don't listen to music at all while you're driving, but if you are, I think you have a very uncommon experience. When I ride in other people's cars, there is almost always music playing, either from a phone connected over bluetooth, a stack of CDs in a CD changer, or just a music radio station. Driving in silence is so uncommon that I'd consider it strange. When I am driving my own car, I often use my long Australian commute as an opportunity to listen to a full album.
Given that people do listen to music in cars, and that against better advice, they often fiddle with their non-built-in music playback devices while the car is in motion, an in-car entertainment system with a proper interface goes a long way to prevent distracted driving.
Podcasts? Audiobooks? I've had some really great experiences on long drives listening to thought-provoking non-fiction audiobooks. Recommend it highly. (Of course a pair of headphones and your device of choice can probably do just as well if not better.)
I don't get it either. I'm a huge music lover, I have other 4000 albums, but I am an active listener only. I only listen to music when I listen to music, not while doing something else. In a car, music is annoying, not to mention the poor experience from the car noise.
I don't use active GPSes, although I do use electronic maps for plotting my route beforehand. I prefer to know where I am going, and I hate the GPSs that try to talk to my with the force of a thousand suns.
It's the only time I can have a coherent conversation without being interrupted (married with children), alone, in a car.
I'm soon to be audio free, no auxiliary input on the car's system and FM is being turned off this month in Norway. So, silence from now on aside from the gibbering emanating from my very own pie-hole.
Isn't there also something nice about driving along with only the faint glow of green or blue from the dashboard, not the 46" screen that Tesla have 'tastefully' mounted in the dash?
They all suck. BMW, Ford, Honda, Infiniti are all ones I've had ample experience with over the past year and they're all horrible. I've gone back to headphones and it's glorious (I use maps very rarely, just audio content)
I absolutely love our 2017 Mini Infotainment system. It's not perfect by any means (It's BMWs), but I find that it meets all my needs, is very fast and responsive.
Not sure where you are, but here it's illegal to drive with headphones.
As a non-car road user, I'm with you. mark212, please don't do this. You're making the world a more dangerous place for everyone, with (extremely limited) benefits only to yourself.
Ford supports both Android auto and apple carplay with the latest generation of sync. The interface is extremely responsive to boot. I'm not sure I'd call that horrible.
Yeah we've got two fords with Sync 3 and it's fantastic. The fact that I can use my android and gf can use iPhone is amazing. Ford did it right by saying, you want Nav? We've got it but you can also use your phone if you want.
Personally, the last thing I want is Silicon Valley engineering at work on my car: I'm happy with the built-in console of my RAV4. It's the most reliable piece of software I've ever ran.
I think why Toyota is spearheading this AGL is related to its prior software failure related deaths[1], considering broad the scope of AGl: "..advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) and autonomous driving.."
Got a prius with touch and go, I connect my phone with bluetooth and I can control all my music and phone calls from the steering wheel without having to look to anything. Good job Toyota for supporting open innovation and sharing code with other car manufacturers! I enjoy the way you design car for ecology. Supporting linux is top. I hope they will support userspace apps so end user can also be part of the car innovation!
How are these infortainment systems rated for Functional System? Last time I looked (about 7 years ago), Linux was only suitable for QM rated systems, and that was questionable already.
There's an increasing amount of people that won't buy a new car unless it has Android Auto/CarPlay compatibility. To ignore these consumers and think that you have a better solution is ignorant to what's happening around you.
Exactly. I think this will be Toyota’s last generation of head units without CarPlay/Android Auto, simply because all the competitors now have it, and the complaints will only get louder from here.
In particular, when every Toyota reviewed by Consumer Reports lists “no CarPlay” as a negative, and every competitor uses it against them, their current position will become untenable
Automotive makers like FCA is still sticking with QNX and Harman made headunits hardware for many years. Having programmed on them, it was a pain with so many constraints while we have watches 100x more powerful than them. While the UI/UX and performance of headunit telematics apps are not the forte of automotive manufacturers, they need to change with times. Headunits are still marketed as an add-on with which the manufacturers can up the price by several thousands. While too much of an entertainment system on a car is a distraction even though they have speed lockouts, a little bit of improvement will be a welcome change. Its not that they should have APIs for CAN Bus access, but can piggy back on CarPlay for a good music & nav system.
The Infotainment system is one of the most user-facing components of the vehicle. It's something that can reflect the brand identity of the vehicle, and most OEMs are not eager to cede that space to Apple or Google. Google and (especially) Apple certainly aren't interested in mixing their branding with a manufacturers.
The utilization of AGL doesn't necessarily mean CarPlay or Android Auto are out. AGL is a system, and CP/AA are applications.
While I certainly believe there are a lot of terrible systems out there, I also think there are a lot of systems that people don't like because they never took the time to figure out how to use them. Cars aren't like phones. When you're in them, you're most likely driving and you don't have the bandwidth to figure out how to do something as well as drive. A while back I saw a study that concluded if you didn't learn something about your infotainment system in the first 3 days, you never do.
I encourage you to actually identify the things you find confusing/frustrating/difficult about your vehicle and write a letter to the manufacturer. Customer input makes a big difference. And no, "It's not CarPlay" doesn't help. That's kind of like sitting down to Windows and complaining to Microsoft that they didn't give you macOS.
(Thoughts are my own, of course)