[ra7]

> Instead of CarPlay or Android Auto, drivers will instead rely on the Escalade IQ’s included Google built-in infotainment software.

It's called Android Automotive OS (not to be confused with Android Auto). Many OEMs are now using Android Automotive for infotainment, but also support CarPlay/AA. This is a terrible move, but GM is just trying to copy Tesla by controlling the entire UX and putting it some of it behind a subscription (like Tesla's Premium Connectivity).

[JohnFen]

Darn. I got excited for a moment thinking that a major car manufacturer was selling a car that didn't have any infotainment features at all. Oh well.

[brewdad]

With backup camera being mandatory, all cars are going to have a screen. If you have to have a screen anyway, might as well load it up with infotainment from strategic partners.

[JohnFen]

> If you have to have a screen anyway, might as well load it up with infotainment from strategic partners.

I understand this from the carmakers point of view. They want to extract every dime from my pocket that they can. But I don't want it. Having a screen for the backup camera is fine, but I don't want any ongoing services connected to it.

[renewiltord]

It's quite possible to do. Get a new Subaru, then get a double DIN dash kit https://www.crutchfield.com/p_003SBK931B/American-Internatio... and then you can ask your car stereo guy for a blank Double DIN plate. It's not out of the box, but you'll block off the screen entirely and you won't have audio or screen or anything except your HUD.

[solarmist]

That might make your vehicle not Street Legal soon since backup cameras are required equipment going forward. Not sure how after-market factors in though.

[JohnFen]

In the US, backup cameras are required to be included with the car to be sold. There is no law that I'm aware of that prevents people from disabling or removing them after the sale.

EDIT: I think I was incorrect. The law says "an altered vehicle that was completed on or after this date that was equipped with a rearview camera that already meets the new rearview requirements must continue to meet these requirements after the alterations."

https://www.camerasource.com/industry-news/understanding-new...

But I'm not sure how broadly that actually applies. So I don't know.

[solarmist]

It hasn't been tested to my knowledge, but at a minimum you will need to “restore” your car’s functionality to sell it legally.

It sounds like installers won't be able to do this modification moving forward either, so you would have to do it DIY.

[JohnFen]

Yes, that's the part I'm unclear about. And, honestly, backup cameras aren't a thing that I'm bothered by. It'd be interesting to know what the law actually means, though!

[gopher2000]

Why wouldn't you want any infotainment features? Surely it's a positive if done well.

[Zandikar]

I can't speak for who you're asking but personally, there's an important nuance here:

I want (some) infotainment features. I do NOT want them baked into the car. Some of my main reasons:

1. Honestly, the reasons are long (I'm a gearhead, I know cars better than I know code, and I've been coding for 20 years), and largely centers around the idea that in my opinion, EVERY single modern automotive manufacture is terrible at UX in their infotainment. Tesla's UI (not UX) is okay. It doesn't deserve the praise it gets imo but at least it's usable, but that's a pretty low bar imo, but the fact that Tesla wants the touchscreen to be the primary interface ruins anything they have going for it.

2. Additionally, one of the beautiful things about Android Auto/Apply CarPlay is that you bring your accounts and media with you in your pocket. When your car is a separate device as opposed to something you just stream to like with Carplay/Auto, that's another thing to trying to sync accounts/creds and manage data, and I refer you to my above complaint on why I have an issue with that. I mean, it could literally INSTANTLY sync the things that I want flawlessly, and that still doesn't actually add any value to me. It at best reaches parity with the phone that's already in my pocket with android auto, and that's assuming the entire rest of the infotainment functions well.

3. I quite simply don't trust ANY automotive manufacturer to do competent user facing software, and I can't think of a single automotive manufacturer I would trust personal data/credentials to (yes I'm already aware they do that to extent, it's why I'm against it, they already suck at it, last thing I want to do is hand over more data into yet another walled garden).

4. Walled garden's suck, and as this is a value add service with no announcements yet (that I'm aware of) of any other manufacturer working with GM's initiative to establish/adhere to standards/specs or facilitate any sort of portability or openness or flexibility. If it's not a walled garden, great, but I'm assuming it will be, and I don't want it.

[JohnFen]

It's not something I would ever use, so I don't want to have to pay for it. Its presence also implies that there are other things present that I actively object to, such as a touch screen interface and internet connectivity.

[solarmist]

Where do you draw the line? I don't know anyone that wants to go back to paper maps for navigation. And backup cameras are unambiguously good for everyone.

[JohnFen]

Going back to paper maps isn't the alternative. I already have a device with me that can do all of the navigation, etc., that I'd need. None of that needs to be built into the car. Backup cameras are fine.

The only fancy thing I would like to have in my car is the ability to connect the sound system in it to my phone or computer via bluetooth as if it were headphones -- but I can add that easily as an aftermarket thing with the bonus of having actual knobs on it.

I really only have two reasonably hard lines. I don't want my car to be able to talk with any external servers (it's a car, not a smartphone on wheels), and I don't want a touch screen interface instead of physical knobs and buttons.

The presence of infotainment systems is a pretty solid indication that the car won't satisfy either of those things.

[solarmist]

I very much agree with your two hard lines.

[Zetice]

Why wouldn’t you want a cleaner UI and larger screen to show you the contents of that device?

Also why do you care if your car has a computer on it or not? Seems overly paranoid, bordering on luddite…

[solarmist]

I’m guessing it's the -tainmnet aspect of it. If we're purely weather, traffic, maps it'd be fine but the entire focus is on how they automakers can make more money, now longer about providing objectively valuable services.

[csdvrx]

Same :(