[Sledgehammer70]

Originally Posted by joemosfet

So a quick word about Android Auto (I'm not sure if Apple Car Play is identical, but fellow developers say it's essentially the same).

Apps that utilize Android Auto don't get full control over the screen in your car. Apps on your phone can choose to utilize an interface provided by Android Auto - this interface is a template that very tightly limits the way an app can present information - such as button placement, number of buttons, an area where static images can be displayed. (this ensures a common look-and-feel among all apps that utilize Android Auto, so drivers aren't distracted by trying to find a button that isn't in the 'normal' spot, or buried in a sea of 20 other buttons)

However, Google apps for Android Auto, such as the Maps app, get more control over what can be displayed on the car's screen - such as maps, the placement and number of buttons. But this special control is reserved, immediately, for Google apps.

If you really liked Bob's Map App and wanted to use it instead, you wouldn't be able to, on your car's dash. At least until Bob gets blessing from Google and probably the auto manufacturers. Same thing goes for any app that wouldn't fit in the Android Auto app paradigm - no using a media app to watch movies from your phone on your dash, for instance.

So don't think of Android Auto as seeing being able to see your phone screen on your car, and being able to do everything you can do on your phone from your dash - this is certainly not the case.

Instead, think of Android Auto as an app that runs in your car that apps can utilize, if they've been programmed to do so.

Don't get me wrong, Google Maps even in it's Android Auto form is way better than anything that OEMs have released, and I did not get nav on my order because even if Android Auto won't be available on the 2016 models, I would still use my phone.

On a side note, I think Dodge did it right by working with Garmin to use their software on their in-dash systems, but even Garmin - who are experts at GPS devices and interfaces - pales in comparison to what Google has done with Maps.

It's a good thing Google owns Waze

[Snoman]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Multiple reasons.

First, the hardware is usually 2 or 3 years old by the time a new car hits the street. For a smartphone, the design time is around 6 months. Even the most top of the line components from just a couple years ago can still feel old & outdated today.

Second, the hardware needs to operate in a wider range of environments than typical consumer electronics. That ruggedness/hardening makes it all the more expensive to get a fast/responsive system. To cite an old example, remember when you still listened to CD's? And how if you turn it up loud enough, your home stereo would cause itself to skip? But in the car it almost never happened -even with all the bumps & such in the road. And its not just vibrations, it also needs to work well (if not perfectly) at 40 below & well over 100 degrees.

Third, the software coding requirements in automotive are much more stringent than in typical consumer devices. Its one thing push a patch or do a hot-fix on the day something goes live for a phone or a web service, then keep tweaking it for weeks or months after launch. But in the car world, buying a brand new car & having glitches & bugs in the software is simply unacceptable. A partial consequence of this required reliability is that the code itself might not be as quick or efficient as what could otherwise be possible.


Put it all together & its actually kindof impressive that the systems are as capable as they are

You forgot licensing (mapping data is not free), proprietary greed and that the fact the auto industry business model is incompatible (2-5+ yrs development) with that of the computer industry model (measured in months). So much so even, manufactures went out of their way to design the user interface nearly impossible to prevent aftermarket upgrades. Only in the last 8-10 years was this trend broken, due to pressure from the general public and electronics leaders (Alpine, HK, Pioneer to name a few) reverse engineering cars to make their products work...and work well.

More importantly, GM choose not to join the International Navigation Data System in 2008 and still relies on their own coders to offer limited mapping systems. The members and board consist of proven leaders in this area (most with half a century of experience), which effectively created a bridge and partnership between the electronics and auto industries for the benefit of all involved. This was not a bad thing ultimately, as the INDS was limited to mapping only, while the public is more familiar with Google maps, but is why GM does not have a good system today.

GM chose the alternative as a broader, more open source platform many are familiar with, Android. GM is a part of the OAA membership, so we'll see Google maps eventually, once a software version is approved by DOT and NHTSA. The final Android Car system however, has not completed by the Open Automotive Alliance (this is not led or remotely controlled by GM). The technology currently has many bugs to work out and other concerns; internet access, tethering, lollipop, OS security, hacking vehicle systems and voice recognition just to name a few.