Submitted 9 months ago by L4s@lemmy.world [bot] to technology@lemmy.world
Apple’s next generation CarPlay allows auto manufacturers to license the OS | Don’t look now but Apple is back to licensing an operating system after decades::undefined
I just want to use navigation and listen to music. That’s all I need carplay to be.
Hot take, most car UIs are designed by manufacturers that have very little expertise in software design and development, or they’re often farmed out to companies like Harman.
I’m all for manufacturers partnering with good software companies instead.
I don’t see an actual source for this claim. There’s no leak or press release or documentation or extracted resources from an IOS build.
The “source” article is just making unsubstantiated claims.
Yes, first you have to license it, then you can setup the subscription model.
Car infotainment systems are pretty much the only thing I am a Luddite about. I am fine with a normal car radio and a aux cord for my phone.
Driving already sucks without having to deal with yet another screen fighting for my attention.
Does this generation of CarPlay still run on an iPhone with the screen essentially just displaying an AirPlay stream, or does (partially) run on the car itself, possibly requiring Apple hardware integrated into the car?
It would make more sense to just have the display mirroring but who knows
If it’s a licensed OS it would be something running on the car itself, but not necessarily on Apple hardware.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Hijacking this somewhat related topic:
There needs to be a standardised set of APIs that automakers comply to for smartphone-powered infotainment.
Right now you have zero choice. iPhone: you can use carplay and nothing else. Android: you can use Android Auto and nothing else.
There can’t be any competition because it’s locked down.
Can infotainment needs an open protocol for display, sending touch/control knob information back to the phone, sending other info back from the car, like mic audio for voice assistants/calls, whether the headlights are on to switch between light/dark mode, etc.
Corngood@lemmy.ml 9 months ago
That would be awesome, but who’s going to push for it?
It’s easy for the opponents to use safety as a case for why users shouldn’t have control of the software in their car.
The manufacturers already want to get rid of ODB because they’d rather control that data themselves.
At least android auto has been reverse engineered, and doesn’t currently require any sort of difficult-to-bypass hardware attestation.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Honestly, it’s probably not happening unless the EU forces it :/
BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 9 months ago
Exactly.
The path forward with this kind of thing is for a defacto standard to emerge from out of left field, which is ever more challenging today, since auto manufacturers began integrating the head unit 2 decades ago (they saw what was coming, and took the opportunity to lock out third party stereo systems by integrating everything). Basically a push for vertical integration.
I don’t know how to accomplish this given the vertical integration the manufacturers have developed. I do know regulation is the worst possible way, and should only be used as a last-ditch effort, because that’s when you get malicious compliance and basically garbage results.
Seems CANBUS and OBDII provide an opening to these systems - for years I’ve wanted to utilize this connection to modify some car behaviour. Like the remote start on one car will only run for 7 minutes. That’s a joke, it takes 30 minutes to get the half inch of ice off, and that’s with me out there chipping at it too. Or how the heat/ac controls are fixed on remote start, and I’d like it to go max defrost/max fan immediately, and turn on the rear defroster. If we knew the signaling of this vehicle’s CANBUS for these things, seems we could build a plugin module with wifi/Bluetooth and control it from a phone.
cryptix@discuss.tchncs.de 9 months ago
Yep , auto manufacturers needs incentive to develop a open protocol such as this. Its not a easy task as this would need to be complaint with many regulations and safety standards. I have some hope for the SDV (software defined vehicle) future like COVESA where the industry is moving towards an opensource architecture but for user softwares you’re right its totally with the manufacturer to allow such open api to users.
FoxBJK@midwest.social 9 months ago
Isn’t this just QNX?
friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 9 months ago
QNX is a real-time operating system, and it is not open. QNX is not a network accessible API.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 9 months ago
I don’t know what you’re referring to.
But no, I don’t see an open protocol for car infotainment that any 3rd party dev can utilise to make an alternative to Android Auto/CarPlay