|
|
|
|
|
by beardedscotsman
1164 days ago
|
|
So entirely different experience for me. So 5 years ago I travel to California. Out of all the cars I picked a crappy GM car when there were better cars to pick from the rental lot, why, because I had my iPhone with navigation. Every time I rented cars since I would always make sure it had apple CarPlay so I could drive any with a familiar experience. Now today, my car has wireless CarPlay. My experience goes like this, I get in my car, turn it on, my head unit loads apple CarPlay instantly and I have Waze running which I like for speed camera notifications on new roads and my music and playlists instantly accessible. It’s seamless, instant and I don’t touch my phone it stays in my pocket. I would never consider a car with out either android auto or CarPlay. It’s mandatory for me and yes I miss out of heads up display of directions, but then I don’t have to pay an additional subscription to traffic info, or pay an update fee for new maps. |
|
I won’t buy another car without wireless CarPlay. Or maybe android auto if it’s also good; I haven’t tried it in years. But I want nothing to do with a car manufacturer’s crappy outdated infotainment systems ever again.
Edit: one fundamental problem with what GM is attempting is that the software embedded in a car is on an extremely slow development cycle and is never upgraded in any significant way. If they want to impress me, they need to keep the CarPlay/Android connection technology and then sell me a super slick GM device that connects to that and is better than my phone. I would gladly buy that, and possibly even pay for some subscription services, but it has to be separate from the vehicle that realistically gets upgraded only when I replace my car every 10 years. A 10 year upgrade cycle for the type of software we are talking about is pathetic.