Ars Technica has a review of Android Auto.
While we love the interface, we just wish there was more of it. Android Auto only covers a subset of the things you would want to do on an infotainment system. The result is an interface that – depending on what you want to do – will have you bouncing back and forth between two different interfaces. It’s almost like installing Windows 8 in your car – you’ve got one modern, incomplete interface paired with a more comprehensive legacy interface. Android Auto can’t control the AM/FM radio, CD player, or satellite radio. You also can’t adjust the screen brightness, pair a device with the car, or mess with any other settings. Every time you start the car, it launches the ugly stock infotainment system, and you’ve got to plug your phone in and hit the Android Auto icon. Expect to switch from the beautiful-but-limited Android Auto interface to the slow, chuggy, tasteless OEM interface a lot.
Can anyone with knowledge on the matter explain to me why, exactly, car manufacturers have such outdated, crappy in-car software? And why, even when we have something like Android Auto that could power everything, do they insist on only letting it do a subset, dumping you back to their own crap software for everything else? Why is the car itself running Gingerbread (yes, Gingerbread!)?
Why are they so incompetent?
My understanding is that Android Auto can’t control everything yet (like climate control or general vehicle settings). Even if Android Auto/Apple CarPlay did have these functions, the manufacturer can’t assume that the driver always has a smart phone with them.
So the manufacture needs to make their own infotainment system. Why is it so old and crappy? I would say because:
– Car infotainment systems are expected to be stable and robust. They have to go through more rigorous testing than a smart phone. Development is much slower and the manufacturer isn’t going to switch to something new (and repeat a lot of development and testing) without a compelling reason.
– The manufacture has less resources to dedicate to the infotainment system (and are less willing to dedicate the resources they have). Car manufacturing is less profitable (bigger profit margin but far less sales), and the infotainment is, at least traditionally, not a major selling point for the car.
There’s a shitload of bugs in the infotainment system of my Toyota. Most I discovered the first day of use. My negative experiences are not limited to Toyota though. And let’s not get started about the horrible usability and inconsistencies in the interface of most systems…
Don’t forget MSFT Sync.
Now unwelcome in Fords everywhere!
– Because, the development cycles of cars is different than phones.
– Because security mandates limiting the kind of things one should be able to do. (It would be cool to display a movie on the dash or a space invaders on HUD, right ?)
– Because the “smart car” concept is as broken as a “smart TV”.
– Because car manufacturers don’t want to make iPhone cars, Android cars, Windows cars variants.
It should be possible to keep one’s car for at least 10 years, and not need internet access for updates.
Well, it is built on hardware that is selected almost 5 years before the first car with that system is released, on hardware that they can guarantee will be available for 10+ years after the last model that uses it is released.
That means, your brand new 2015 car may be using a platform that is 7+ years old, and is built from the limited set of hardware that will be available 10 years from now.
And, there is some incompetence – these companies aren’t software houses, and software isn’t their business. Long development lead times mean that it can take years to start getting feedback, and several more years before they can make changes based on the feedback.
Edited 2015-07-25 00:41 UTC
Computers in cars is not even remotely close to a new thing. Ever since car makers started using computers in car design they have needed software. Car makers are absolutely software houses in part, and they tend to be good at it due to how tightly regulated little things like safety are. The big factors, as previously mentioned, are the long lead times, the cost of development & regulation, and the vehicles lifespan. Cars are nothing like disposable 2-year cycle cellphones.
Aside of that, the primary function of a car is not to entertain the occupants — especially the driver. To some, a car capable of playing movies/videos/music/tv, running apps, connected to the internet, etc. may sound convenient and cool. But, it’s a huge safety hazard. If people want their car to become their home theater/pc/internet portal then they should push for self-driving cars. Then they can be distracted all they want and not be a threat to everyone else on the road.
What I meant was, cars don’t live or die in the market based on their software (the software necessary to tell a transmission to change gears, for example, is pretty simple to implement)
Especially with the infotainment software – people will put up with lousy infotainment stuff if they rest of the car is good. Because that type of software is a fairly minor consideration when buying a car, that type of software isn’t central to their business, in the same way that Apple or Google or Oracle or any other software company needs their software to be top notch in comparison to their competitors.
this. my guess is that the safety-certification process alone takes long enough to ensure that the hardware and software is outdated by the time it’s actually released.
might be reality but that’s still pure excuses if the case. (from car industry not yourself)
i guess while engine control chips etc and systems operating driving functions (and even the climate control etc) might be yonks old and thoroughly tested for all the obvious reasons.
i can’t think of any good reasons why the infotainment module/system can’t be pretty much up to the minute (or maybe 1 generation old – with a solid firmware upgrade plan to latest)
and have whatever they need from the other relevant systems exposed in software and ready to plug in as it were.
Every update may need extensive testing – every update would need to be tested to make sure it works, or, more specifically, fail safely. Your stereo controls can’t crash and get stuck at max volume, your climate controls can’t crash, making the heater inoperable or the A/C stuck on.
Also, the latest Android probably doesn’t run on the hardware that was available 7 years ago – the fact that they needed to find electronics that could be sourced for the next 10+ years already put limitations on what they could use.
I can’t agree with that reality being immutable – even if it meant creating a car with a standard usb/ docking interface and gap/window in the console area where they could literally plug a current gen tablet directly into. it’s not running safety relevant systems – should be totally fine to do this
ie – you can easily design a system “now” to plug a “future” processor/screen/etc into.
I still maintain any other position is pure excuses and surmountable
Greedy and Controlling. Just Emulating Apple…
It’s not incompetence as much as it’s, by design, an attempt to own their customers, keeping all potential future revenue paths for themselves. To accept either/or Google’s, Apple’s solutions (whole cloth) would cede control to them.
Auto companies hope that vehicle data will one day generate billions of dollars in e-commerce.
Car makers are limiting the data they share with technology partners Apple Inc and Google Inc through new systems that link smartphones to vehicle infotainment systems, defending access to information about what drivers do in their cars.
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2015/07/10/374674.htm
Also, in a bid to emulate Apple’s success at locking down and controlling all the products they sell, in perpetuity:
General Motors, John Deere want to make tinkering, self-repair illegal.
http://www.wired.com/2015/04/dmca-ownership-john-deere/
GM says you don’t own your car, you just license it.
http://boingboing.net/2015/05/21/gm-says-you-dont-own-your-ca.html
Brave New Tractor: John Deere And General Motors Pretty Sure They Own All Your Stuff.
http://wonkette.com/583917/brave-new-tractor-john-deere-and-general…
Do you all see where this is going?
I’m fairly confident patent law bullshit** makes it difficult to get too good. All these obscure features that everyone wants has to be cleared by legal. It explains why the basis OS version is four years obsolete already.
It wouldn’t take much more power than a typical $10 mobile CPU to power a car infotainment. It’s not like it has to run games.
It used to piss me off that I couldnn’t launch a movie for kids in the back seat from the passenger seat. Apparently that was too close to distracting the driver. Now the kids all play on their own individual iPads and launch their own entertainment.
So, really, it’s got to run a touchscreen menu. It has to accept USB-connected media. It has to tune into FM radio, preferably XM and AM available to those that want it. And it has to take virtually no brain power to run the menu. It could run OS2/WARP for all I care.
A friend and I were discussing the fact that the Toyota Camery 2005 had over 10 000 global variables in the code (http://www.safetyresearch.net/blog/articles/toyota-unintended-accel…) and his answer was that as a coder in uni he had design patterns subject on top of coding and the engineering students did the same coding course but not the design pattern subject so they could hack code together but it was pretty crap.
Not true for all engineers of course but for quite a few of them I’m sure.
Car designs are a compromise between the engineering, marketing and accounting divisions. The conservative design (mechanical) engineers want as few electronic devices as possible because they create safety, weight, cost and reliability issues. The marketing people want as many electronics as possible because they consider them to be sales “features”. The accountants love electronic devices because they cost very little but add thousands to the final price.
To put it bluntly the modern control centres in cars are dangerous distractions. Properly designed vehicle controls should be 100% tactile (eg rotary knobs, rocker switches and sliders) that don’t require any visual input whatsoever.
Because chrysler-style hacks suck.
Personally, i’m really happy with my non-internet enabled, non-infotainment having, plain as day traditional alpine radio rocking car.
To control my HVAC, there are KNOBS i need to TURN!
OHMAGAHD!
I also have a KEY that i need to put into a IGNITION SWITCH and TURN!
FML!
I use my phone (and my smart watch) for navigation, BT streaming, etc etc.
My phone does everything i want, and when it breaks or gets outdated, or gets pwned, or whatever, it does not affect the rest of my car.
IMHO, manufacturers would be best off to refine screen sharing for smartphones/tablets onto a head unit and have a dedicated interface for your car controls.
Always as up to date as your phone, has the latest apps, etc etc, and a LOT cheaper to develop/produce.
Anyway, i’m probably too old for this shit.
I don’t want my car to beep, bong, boot up, ask me anything, tell me to do anything, tweet, post on fb, make a selfie, etc.
I think the idea of a friggin touch screen in a car is a BAD idea.
My jeep has one, and it’s just annoying.
I want to get in my car and drive it.
I want it to play my tunes.
I want it to show me where to go when i’m lost (which is ALL THE TIME).
It has to tell me when something is wrong with itself, how much fuel i have left, engine temp, mileage, etc, etc.
Beyond that, it just has to STFU and get on with it’s job.
Anyway, that being said …
For all the criticisms on the old idrive, i still think they got it right, EVEN on the first gen.
Sure, it’s slow, and it has some really weird UI designs sometimes, but …
You can use it on the go, without having to look at the dash, or trying to stab a quarter sized UI element while doing 130 on the highway.
Once you get used to idrive, you can operate it purely on muscle memory.
Try THAT with a touch screen.
Maybe we should be less concerned with updating the OS, and more concerned with why we are playing with a screen in the car instead of DRIVING! It was safer when the controls were analog for things such as the AC, stereo, et al. You know people messed with these things even when it was a button or knob you adjusted. Now, with flipping through screens, the visual distractions are even worse. Let’s concentrate less on the bells and whistles, and more on safely moving two tons of steel and glass along a highway at 100 kmph!
If a new car is developed, it takes on average 3 years between the conceptual design of the car and the start of the mass production. Given that a single car model is produced for 3 to 5 years, you can buy a new car with an infosystem that is designed 8 years ago. 8 years ago there were no iPhones or Android smartphones. And that is the issue. Electronics and the related software evolve much faster than the car manufacturors can cope with. It is not that they don’t have the skills to make better electronics and software, these fast turn around times are not compatible with the mass production process of cars
I don’t care what excuses anyone gives car companies for their behind the times tech for car entertainment systems. I feels there are 0 excuses why they suck still. Yeah, they are designing on older tech when they start. Yeah, car computer systems need to be rock solid. Yeah, to this point. Yeah, to that point.
The aftermarket manufacturers of car stereos are woefully behind the times too. And they interact with the car in no meaningful way other than get power and dimmer status. And they suck. They’ve sucked for years. The functionality for even a $1200 aftermarket head unit from the major electronic makers SUCKS. I spent $600 on a Sony head unit a few years ago and it has resistive touchscreen, HORRIBLE layout efficiency of the interface, 2 of the 4 physical buttons do the same thing, and it’s so underpowered (the audio visualizer couldn’t even keep up with the current sound). Even with the new Pioneer (I think) head units for Android, you need to pay $1200 for a capacitive touchscreen. THE HELL?!?
I get that maybe fully integrated systems might be behind the times, but even aftermarket systems stink.
Tech on the dashboard will always be a mess. I personally hate most of it, and am really hesitant to buy a new car because of the ridiculous computer screens on all dashboards now.
Those long lead times, those safety regulations, those pesky environmental conditions, that little thing called distraction that all computers UI’s are when inside a car…. the list goes on and on. I am glad I don’t program for the insides of auto.
You can’t just give the dashboard over to Apple or Goog-droid or MS – unless those companies make the rest of the car. I think Apple might be going that way, competing with Tesla and BMW for the 21st century trendsetter car.
I want my Ford to have Ford-designed controls and dash environment. Designed for driving and safety. Even aftermarket stereos annoy me (I’ve had a few) because they change the color/font/theme of the dashboard and ultimately distract me from driving more than a stock stereo.
All I want from a car dashboard :
1- full gauges on the motor backed up by warning lights for all important mechanicals and pressures
2- an odometer with the little TripA TripB storage
3- a serious sound system that can mount a MicroSD card or PonoPlayer directly, or line in miniplug
4- easy to reach controls for lights, wipers, and mirrors
5- simple climate control area (like stock Toyota)
6- the bluetooth interface to handle voice stuff with phone
The GPS, the screens, the blinking this and that, all useless or worse than useless, dangerous.
I rented an expensive BMW last year that had the most complex system I’ve ever seen in a car. It was a nightmare to use, like a late 80’s video game control panel with multiple dials, wheels, and methods. Between it and an iPhone, driving was very stressful and full of hi-tech confusion.
I’ve been shopping for a new vehicle recently and know exactly what you mean. You feel like you actually need to read the owners manual or watch videos to learn how to do/use everything. It’s felt a little overwhelming. I enjoy luxury vehicles but I don’t like feeling like I have to study to do more than unlock and open the door.
And I’m not psyched about my vehicle getting wirelessly hacked or infected with spyware/crapware/*ware.
Edited 2015-07-27 18:52 UTC
Why cars have outdated software:
1. Because cars are cars and they are not smartphones.
2. Car’s software is not outdated at all, it is the latest as of the time the car was released. Program your mind _not_ to compare car’s infotainment features to that of Smartphone, in order to grasp the reality of it.
3. Safety – Users should not install and should _NOT_ install any additional apps like COC and other malware infested apps.(I don’t know if this is true? I do not have a car to test)
4. Safety – Again, make the thing as simple as possible and as few features as possible for security reasons.