BMW say no thanks to Apple's 'iOS in the Car'

by Tim Jones on June 12, 2013, 4:53 pm
BMW ConnectedDrive 2014 MY Specs

In a surprising move BMW has passed on Apple's just announced "iOS in the Car" integration. iOS in the Car was unveiled as part of iOS7 which is slated for release this fall. The new feature allows an iPhone to display content on a vehicle screen. BMW, being a long time partner of Apple and having iDrive sceens in most new vehicles standard was a logical partner. However, BMW has choseen to focus on its own new technologies, which include the model year 2014 ConnectedDrive improvements.

Quote:
Due to the architectural changes necessary to bring iOS to the BMW dashboard, the company does not expect that BMW models will see iOS in the Car in the short to mid-term. Instead, the company will be sticking with its iDrive and ConnectedDrive interfaces.
Read more at appleinsider.com

UPDATE: BMW has reached out to clarify its possition on integrating Apple's iOS in the Car. The company says it's in close contact with Apple and currently investigating the technical challenges required to integrate iOS in the Car, but since a final decision had not been made, it was not a part of Apple's announcement. Thus, according to BMW, integration of iOS in the Car in its cars has not been ruled out at all.

Car manufactures that are working on supporting iOS in the Car include:
  • Honda
  • Mercedes-Benz
  • Nissan
  • Ferrari
  • Chevy
  • Infiniti
  • Kia
  • Hyundai
  • Volvo
  • Acura
  • Opel
  • Jaguar

Is BMW missing the boat on this one or will improvements to iDrive make up for it?


Leave a Comment

You must be a registered member to comment on stories. Please take a moment to register for your free account now. If you already have an account, log in using fields below.










146 responses to BMW say no thanks to Apple's 'iOS in the Car'

pilotman commented:
June 12, 2013, 5:03 pm

This is all garbage.

Who cares about linking my iPhone screen into my car. I look at my screen all damn day at work, and my phone is a tether.

Why do I want to use Facebook, Twitter, etc. while I'm driving (not to mention its super dangerous)

I would prefer that BMW focus on performance and reliability instead of loading smartphone apps into my car that do nothing but make the car: a) more expensive; b) more complicated to own, operate and maintain.

Last I checked BMW wasn't exactly knocking it out of hte park on reliability....
bmwpartners commented:
June 12, 2013, 5:23 pm

Very bummed to read the BMW announcement today, here's my message to customer relations@bmwusa.com

---------------------------

Dear BMW,

As a current owner of a 2013 BMW X1 and previous 2011 335i coupe, I was very disheartened to learn that BMW has no future plans to join the 14 other on-board auto-makers in incorporating the newly announced Apple 'iOS in the Car" and instead plans to stick with it's own technology.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/...own-technology

My partner and I both absolutely love of our recent BMW purchases, however the iDrive and ConnectedDrive interfaces are severely lacking and pale in comparison to Apple's proposed iOS integration solutions.

For me personally, being connected to my Apple devices is the single most important interior feature for any vehicle I own, and failure to incorporate Apple's brand new solutions would WITHOUT A DOUBT impact my decision to choose a BMW vehicle again when my lease expires.

Please reconsider this decision.

Best Regards,
Bubbs commented:
June 12, 2013, 5:57 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by pilotman View Post
This is all garbage.

Who cares about linking my iPhone screen into my car. I look at my screen all damn day at work, and my phone is a tether.

Why do I want to use Facebook, Twitter, etc. while I'm driving (not to mention its super dangerous)

I would prefer that BMW focus on performance and reliability instead of loading smartphone apps into my car that do nothing but make the car: a) more expensive; b) more complicated to own, operate and maintain.

Last I checked BMW wasn't exactly knocking it out of hte park on reliability....
What he said!!!!


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
floydarogers commented:
June 12, 2013, 7:35 pm

I agree. After all, iPhone is only 1/3 of the phones out there. Android is over 1/2 the market.

And if BMW did it for Apple, it would have to provide solutions for Android, Android, Windows, Blackberry and anyone else. Don't forget that this type of situation that got Microsoft into big trouble in Europe with IE.
tturedraider commented:
June 12, 2013, 7:49 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by pilotman View Post
This is all garbage.

Who cares about linking my iPhone screen into my car. I look at my screen all damn day at work, and my phone is a tether.

Why do I want to use Facebook, Twitter, etc. while I'm driving (not to mention its super dangerous)

I would prefer that BMW focus on performance and reliability instead of loading smartphone apps into my car that do nothing but make the car: a) more expensive; b) more complicated to own, operate and maintain.

Last I checked BMW wasn't exactly knocking it out of hte park on reliability....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubbs View Post
What he said!!!!


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
What they said!
boltjaM3s commented:
June 12, 2013, 7:55 pm

iOS In The Car is diametrically opposed to BMW's strategy.

They have the best-in-class infotainment system now. They signed a deal 10 months ago with Nokia/Navteq on maps integration for the new gen iDrive for which it's built around. Not to mention that BMW has an app store of sorts, signed a partnership with Dragon voice for an upgraded speech-to-text system.

iOS In The Car is brilliant because it's Apple jumping Google with their own business model. They are giving away free navigation in any car. Google (maps, email, search) is free to the world of the PC, Android (OS) is free to the world of mobile devices. They make boatloads of cash off of ads and search rankings. Apple just trumped Google in the car. These systems will be free of charge from Apple. Nav, voice recognition, specialized app store apps that haven't even been invented yet. Apple wins by selling more iOS devices, selling ads, selling rankings, selling POI's. Consumers win because they'll be buying $500 "integration packages" from auto makers instead of $2,000 nav systems. It's brilliant.

That's why BMW's logo isn't up there. Not going to happen.

BJ
thegandalf commented:
June 12, 2013, 8:15 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by floydarogers View Post
I agree. After all, iPhone is only 1/3 of the phones out there. Android is over 1/2 the market.
This and BJ's comments. If BMW commits to Apple then they are closing the door to Android owners (forget BB owners were are stranded -in my case due to my company's IT policies- to a dying platform), which are growing in numbers... It will be interest to see how each manufacturer executes their integration to iOS in the car.

And, yes BMW needs to push until they become leaders in reliability.
sr5959 commented:
June 12, 2013, 8:25 pm

I guess it depends on how good 'iOS in the Car' turns out to be. If it's very intuitive and far superior to BMW and other manufacturer offerings (just from the screenshots it looks very good), sooner or later BMW will have to roll over and implement it. For me it's not the crucial factor in a vehicle purchase but it is a very important one. If I was choosing between a C Class and a 3 Series, which even now are very close (who knows when the new C is released?) and the Merc offers a much cheaper and better system for Nav, music, radio (via apps), texting, email, etc. that could definitely sway my choice.
boltjaM3s commented:
June 12, 2013, 8:35 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by thegandalf View Post
This and BJ's comments. If BMW commits to Apple then they are closing the door to Android owners (forget BB owners were are stranded -in my case due to my company's IT policies- to a dying platform), which are growing in numbers... It will be interest to see how each manufacturer executes their integration to iOS in the car.

And, yes BMW needs to push until they become leaders in reliability.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sr5959 View Post
I guess it depends on how good 'iOS in the Car' turns out to be. If it's very intuitive and far superior to BMW and other manufacturer offerings (just from the screenshots it looks very good), sooner or later BMW will have to roll over and implement it. For me it's not the crucial factor in a vehicle purchase but it is a very important one. If I was choosing between a C Class and a 3 Series, which even now are very close (who knows when the new C is released?) and the Merc offers a much cheaper and better system for Nav, music, radio (via apps), texting, email, etc. that could definitely sway my choice.
Thing is, the whole issue is resolved if BMW implements voice recognition as strong as Siri is.

With the iPhone and Siri, I can simply say "take me to McDonald's" and without pushing a button the map will come up and just take me to the nearest one. In our cars it's a whole rigmarole, too many button presses, too many ways to structure your speech, it's horrible. BMWs maps are detailed are just fine, and they have many points of interest that rarely let me down. It's just that getting to them is a nightmare and that's what they have to fix and that's what makes Apple and Siri so much superior.

And the more I learn about Eyes Free the more grateful I am that we may not be offered it. Eyes Free Siri integration requires the phone be plugged into the armrest and the screen goes black. Neither of those is an option for me.

BJ
chiefneil commented:
June 12, 2013, 8:49 pm

I'd much rather have my iphone nav displayed on the BMW screen than have to buy BMW's $2000 nav system or $3000 tech package. I'd also rather use the native itunes interface when navigating my playlists than idrive's clunky interface.

Having the car's screen be more like a monitor than a full-on application system with built-in obsolescence makes a lot of sense considering that cars last 15+ years and aren't user-upgradeable while phone operating systems and apps can change monthly/annually.
finaloption commented:
June 12, 2013, 9:03 pm

Hrmm.. no VAG on the list either.. coincidence?
boltjaM3s commented:
June 12, 2013, 9:38 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefneil View Post

I'd much rather have my iphone nav displayed on the BMW screen than have to buy BMW's $2000 nav system or $3000 tech pa
Stop right there.

That's the exact reason why BMW isn't going to give it to you.

BJ
HokieXDriver commented:
June 12, 2013, 10:57 pm

http://www.autoblog.com/2013/06/12/w...os-in-the-car/

Money quote:

UPDATE: BMW has contacted Autoblog to clarify its position. The company says it's in close contact with Apple and currently investigating the technical challenges required to integrate iOS in the Car, but since a final decision had not been made, it was not a part of Apple's announcement. Thus, according to BMW, integration of iOS in the Car in its cars has not been ruled out at all.

But this being the internet and all, let's not allow facts to interfere with our speculation. As you were.
boltjaM3s commented:
June 12, 2013, 11:19 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by HokieXDriver View Post
http://www.autoblog.com/2013/06/12/w...os-in-the-car/

Money quote:

UPDATE: BMW has contacted Autoblog to clarify its position. The company says it's in close contact with Apple and currently investigating the technical challenges required to integrate iOS in the Car, but since a final decision had not been made, it was not a part of Apple's announcement. Thus, according to BMW, integration of iOS in the Car in its cars has not been ruled out at all.

But this being the internet and all, let's not allow facts to interfere with our speculation. As you were.
That isn't a "fact".

That's some PR triage because some lackey made a very terse and loud "no" at the very peak of interest after an Apple keynote. Six months from now when no one remembers the feature or that slide, BMW won't feel the heat and life will go on for them.

Mind you, I want the feature, I think it would be awesome. But it's years away, at best, from being offered by BMW. They're just launching their new OS and their new hardware, they've got a shiny new contract with NAVTEQ that Apple would have to buy them out of, this isn't something that can be patched in with glue and sticky tape.

BJ
HokieXDriver commented:
June 12, 2013, 11:21 pm

It is a fact that BMW has not ruled it out, contrary to the title of this thread.
boltjaM3s commented:
June 12, 2013, 11:23 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by HokieXDriver View Post
It is a fact that BMW has not ruled it out, contrary to the title of this thread.
"I will not rule out the possibility that I will be marrying Kate Upton."

BJ
Pappy Pipes commented:
June 12, 2013, 11:24 pm

BMW will have to adopt iOS and competitive offerings from Android and Windows but must first calculate the point of diminishing return when new buyers will pass on BMWs because iDrive has grown obviously passé. I predict 2016ish.
Fredric commented:
June 13, 2013, 12:09 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pappy Pipes View Post
BMW will have to adopt iOS and competitive offerings from Android and Windows but must first calculate the point of diminishing return when new buyers will pass on BMWs because iDrive has grown obviously passé. I predict 2016ish.
Perhaps by 2016 it will have been established that many of these features (email, voice texting, etc.) are so distracting & dangerous that they will be prohibited from use in a moving vehicle.
Pappy Pipes commented:
June 13, 2013, 1:47 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredric View Post
Perhaps by 2016 it will have been established that many of these features (email, voice texting, etc.) are so distracting & dangerous that they will be prohibited from use in a moving vehicle.
I don't disagree. And I find iDrive in its current state usable and useful. IOS in the car may be overkill!
vwvwvw commented:
June 13, 2013, 3:09 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by pilotman View Post
This is all garbage.

Who cares about linking my iPhone screen into my car. I look at my screen all damn day at work, and my phone is a tether.

Why do I want to use Facebook, Twitter, etc. while I'm driving (not to mention its super dangerous)

I would prefer that BMW focus on performance and reliability instead of loading smartphone apps into my car that do nothing but make the car: a) more expensive; b) more complicated to own, operate and maintain.
Facebook, Twitter and the rest of the crap BMW is integrating into iDrive is completely useless in a car. Why is BMW doing this? And why is it so hard to use?

BMW and the rest of the car companies may have put loads of resources into their user interfaces, but they suck at it. IDrive is one of the better ones but it is still cumbersome. A company who excels at user interface would be welcome.

The car companies will figure out how to monetize ios or android integration. Don't worry about that.
captainaudio commented:
June 13, 2013, 4:02 am

I have two versions of iDrive. The version in the 2007 345i is a bit cumbersome but it has always gotten me where I want to go. I have the BMW Concierge Service so finding a point of interest is not an issue. I call the concierge, tell them what I am looking for and they upload it to the nav system.
Works better than any voice recognition system.

Last year on the way back from Climb to the Clouds as we approached Hartford, CT I called the concierge and said we were looking for an Outback Steak House on our route. They asked if we were going to stay on route 91 or change to route 87 when we got to Hartford. I told them route 87 and they found an Outback a few miles ahead that was right by the highway exit and uploaded it to the nav, The nav system gave me the option of routing to it or calling on the phone. I called ahead for a reservation and then had the nav route me there. During all of this I only had to take my eyes off the road for a few seconds.


The version of iDrive in the 2012 750 is better but still had what I would describe as a "user antagonistic" interface.

We also have nav on our iPhones but I would never use it while driving as I find it distracting and dangerous regardless of whether it is superior toto the iDrive nav or not.

CA


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
Technic commented:
June 13, 2013, 6:01 am

Just yesterday I entered the same exact address in my iDrive (CIC with all the latest updates) and into my iPhone 4S with Google Maps.

The iDrive routing was exact, the Google maps routing was short by more than 1000 feet.

All this talk about integration always hit the same wall: too many companies doing the same but differently. Integration is not easy or cheap to do. And much less a slam dunk for at least a year after release. And then that's only one phone platform to do.

It seems to me that the manufacturers joining this integration effort are the ones with no current brand defined or simply lackluster Nav/GUI systems. I would bet that BMW will do the iOS7 in the car someday, but as an add-on (like the failed iPod Out that nobody cared about before Apple simply removed it from the iPhone 5). What BMW is doing now is to finally fine tune the iDrive usability, speed and response. To me it is the best OEM system out there now.

Which it is what everybody else should be doing as well before jumping again to another integration.
David1 commented:
June 13, 2013, 8:54 am

I will take iDrive over any need to connect a portable device to the car.
vwvwvw commented:
June 13, 2013, 10:08 am

If you try using the voice commands to enter a new destination and then do the same thing with Siri it's clear how far behind systems like iDrive are. IDrive kind of works, but there's no intelligence for some obvious stuff.

Not just the voice recognition part of it, which is surprisingly good. It's stuff like if the current location is in California, it's unlikely this dude wants to go to Omaha. So if it misunderstands you, Omaha shouldn't get equal weight as the addresses in California. Or if you're in the middle of entering an address it's unlikely you want to change the climate settings.

Remember how lousy cell phone software was before ios and Android came in. We were stuck with companies like Motorola doing user interface and it sucked. If you asked someone at Motorola ten years back about it, they'd tell you they put a lot of resources into developing it.
EDF30 commented:
June 13, 2013, 10:23 am

Unless IOS in the car can also project navigation info on the HUD I don't care. I only look at the IDrive display to enter locations, the HUD is why I ordered tech package.
openwheelracing commented:
June 13, 2013, 10:25 am

by Golly, please don't add iOS into the dash.
chris328 commented:
June 13, 2013, 10:31 am

good to hear BMW remains focused on what is important. decisions like this are why the brand actually retains respect...
furby076 commented:
June 13, 2013, 10:59 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by pilotman View Post
This is all garbage.

Who cares about linking my iPhone screen into my car. I look at my screen all damn day at work, and my phone is a tether.

Why do I want to use Facebook, Twitter, etc. while I'm driving (not to mention its super dangerous)

I would prefer that BMW focus on performance and reliability instead of loading smartphone apps into my car that do nothing but make the car: a) more expensive; b) more complicated to own, operate and maintain.

Last I checked BMW wasn't exactly knocking it out of hte park on reliability....
BMW doesn't want to do this because they can't sell you iNav or their Apps package.

Why would YOU want this...how about instead of the crappy navigation BMW produces you can use Apple or Google maps? How about having SIRI integration instead of BMWs crappy voice recognition software? What about having your favorite music app instead of BMWs?

There are many reasons to integrate that would make sense and BMW is choosing to go with their proprietary software so they can charge you the customer for it. Their software, in this case sucks.
furby076 commented:
June 13, 2013, 11:02 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by thegandalf View Post
This and BJ's comments. If BMW commits to Apple then they are closing the door to Android owners (forget BB owners were are stranded -in my case due to my company's IT policies- to a dying platform), which are growing in numbers... It will be interest to see how each manufacturer executes their integration to iOS in the car.

And, yes BMW needs to push until they become leaders in reliability.
Not true. They can sign up for Apple and sign up for android devices. They can put in the contract "we will allow iOS integration, but will allow android integration too". BMW doesn't want to do this, as BJ said, because it will kill the deals they have with other companies. Why would BMW want you to get navigation from someone else when they can have you pay THEM $2000?
openwheelracing commented:
June 13, 2013, 11:18 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by furby076 View Post
BMW doesn't want to do this because they can't sell you iNav or their Apps package.

Why would YOU want this...how about instead of the crappy navigation BMW produces you can use Apple or Google maps? How about having SIRI integration instead of BMWs crappy voice recognition software? What about having your favorite music app instead of BMWs?

There are many reasons to integrate that would make sense and BMW is choosing to go with their proprietary software so they can charge you the customer for it. Their software, in this case sucks.
The reason Apple is so successful, is how they control what goes into their products. I hope BMW does not allow Apple to eat into BMW's pie.

iOS7 integration into so many different brands sounds like a messy campaign to me. Talk about fragmentation. Touch screen or no touch screen? iDrive style control? Different size font, screen resolution, color accuracy...etc. This will dumb down the whole iOS experience. Terrible idea for Apple. The only way Apple can make it work is to produce the hardware and software for all manufacturers. Otherwise it will be a big fail.

All we need is enhanced bluetooth and some way to link Google Map/Google Nav/Google Music onto the screen concurrent with the phone. I hope they ban all useless apps like Facebook and Twitter in vehicles.
ramblinman commented:
June 13, 2013, 11:45 am

BMW correctly see this as a Trojan horse to give Apple control over screen real estate and deprive BMW of revenue from selling its inflated Idrive and navi system. Car companies can't charge $2500 for an LCD screen and a few hand controls. More customer focused companies or companies that want to improve sales to young people will give up trying to develop their interfaces and apps, and yield to the supremacy of handsets to collect and display information. BMW has gone its own iconoclastic, we know better than the customer way. But they'll have to give in eventually. The world is moving to voice activation for handsets, and customers won't want to waste time on someone else's interface whether its hand or voice based.
Technic commented:
June 13, 2013, 12:12 pm

"iOS7 in the car" or not, BMW will still be able to charge their standard $2150 for Navigation just because only the NBT iDrive has the hardware to handle such an integration.

The standard (in the USA) Professional Radio does not have the hardware or the screen size to handle this level of integration: from MY2014-on the external Combox is gone -now built-in into the NBT- so even if you want BMW Apps -forget about iOS7- then you must get Nav.

There is no going back from here.
glennQNYC commented:
June 13, 2013, 12:37 pm

I would think everyone who doesn't prefer using Apple devices (not me mind you) would be applauding BMW's direction!
Beemerup commented:
June 13, 2013, 12:37 pm

meh! don't need anymore iANYTHING. Much prefer anything windows based OR Win8phone based. Much more reliable and secure.
furby076 commented:
June 13, 2013, 12:54 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by openwheelracing View Post
The reason Apple is so successful, is how they control what goes into their products. I hope BMW does not allow Apple to eat into BMW's pie.

iOS7 integration into so many different brands sounds like a messy campaign to me. Talk about fragmentation. Touch screen or no touch screen? iDrive style control? Different size font, screen resolution, color accuracy...etc. This will dumb down the whole iOS experience. Terrible idea for Apple. The only way Apple can make it work is to produce the hardware and software for all manufacturers. Otherwise it will be a big fail.

All we need is enhanced bluetooth and some way to link Google Map/Google Nav/Google Music onto the screen concurrent with the phone. I hope they ban all useless apps like Facebook and Twitter in vehicles.
I don't think the integration would fail. It would still be BMW interface, but if you have iphone you can connect via bluetooth (or the apple cable) and stream the data. Apple may want to get into the hardware aspect of BMW, but I can't imagine BMW would even let them think of that. I doubt Apple would want to get into car electronics other than software. Hardware is expensive
sr5959 commented:
June 13, 2013, 1:03 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by openwheelracing View Post
I hope they ban all useless apps like Facebook and Twitter in vehicles.
sr5959 commented:
June 13, 2013, 1:07 pm

Thinking about this more, I see it going as follows (eventually):

1. Car manufacturers will continue to offer their own Nav system they have spent a lot of money developing and works regardless of whether the driver has their smartphone with them or not.

2. They will offer a cheaper option which is a screen and controls for using iOS7 in the Car via the iPhone, and probably a version for Android too.

3. After a few years the take-up rate for option 1 will be so low they will abandon it.
boltjaM3s commented:
June 13, 2013, 2:50 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Technic View Post
Just yesterday I entered the same exact address in my iDrive (CIC with all the latest updates) and into my iPhone 4S with Google Maps.

The iDrive routing was exact, the Google maps routing was short by more than 1000 feet.

All this talk about integration always hit the same wall: too many companies doing the same but differently. Integration is not easy or cheap to do. And much less a slam dunk for at least a year after release. And then that's only one phone platform to do.

It seems to me that the manufacturers joining this integration effort are the ones with no current brand defined or simply lackluster Nav/GUI systems. I would bet that BMW will do the iOS7 in the car someday, but as an add-on (like the failed iPod Out that nobody cared about before Apple simply removed it from the iPhone 5). What BMW is doing now is to finally fine tune the iDrive usability, speed and response. To me it is the best OEM system out there now.

Which it is what everybody else should be doing as well before jumping again to another integration.
Bingo.

Apple is stealing Google's android strategy but for the car. Give automakers with shabby infotainment systems an impressive OS for free so you can make backend money on ads, POI's, rankings, etc.

BJ
boltjaM3s commented:
June 13, 2013, 2:53 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Technic View Post
"iOS7 in the car" or not, BMW will still be able to charge their standard $2150 for Navigation just because only the NBT iDrive has the hardware to handle such an integration.

The standard (in the USA) Professional Radio does not have the hardware or the screen size to handle this level of integration: from MY2014-on the external Combox is gone -now built-in into the NBT- so even if you want BMW Apps -forget about iOS7- then you must get Nav.

There is no going back from here.
Yup.

ID pay $2,150 for nav + $500 for the iOS integration. BMW knows this, but the downside of being ahead of the curve on iDrive investment is that they can't jump on the freebie iOS ITC opportunity like the rest.

BJ
redbull21 commented:
June 13, 2013, 3:21 pm

This would only be useful for those who have Apple devices, and I am not one of those. I appreciate BMW bringing more focus and configuration to those with Android devices in MY2014 connected drive functionality. Android vastly outnumbers Apple (and growing) in worldwide mobile devices, so this move makes sense for BMW.
kubera commented:
June 13, 2013, 5:17 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by redbull21 View Post
This would only be useful for those who have Apple devices, and I am not one of those. I appreciate BMW bringing more focus and configuration to those with Android devices in MY2014 connected drive functionality. Android vastly outnumbers Apple (and growing) in worldwide mobile devices, so this move makes sense for BMW.
I don't think BMW will be jeopardizing their Android loving customers by doing the iOS integration in the iDrive. They can have the iOS menus pop up on the iDrive when an iPhone or any other iOS device is connected (much like the way iTunes starts up automatically when you connect an iPhone to your PC). For the rest of the non-iOS devices, iDrive menus will remain the same as it is now.
e90im commented:
June 13, 2013, 7:09 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by boltjaM3s View Post
They have the best-in-class infotainment system now.

BJ
No.
BlueF30 commented:
June 13, 2013, 8:47 pm

$2150 for nav?!?! There really is a sucker born every minute!!
boltjaM3s commented:
June 13, 2013, 10:40 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by e90im View Post
No.
Sure they do. Whose is better?

BJ
shag commented:
June 13, 2013, 11:59 pm

The monetary argument is valid, but there might be more to it than we know... here's my take on it: BMW has always refused to integrate touch-screen control panels in its cars for safety reasons. After driving a Ford rental with MyFord Touch, I couldn't agree more. iOS in the Car looks like it needs a touch interface, so this would go directly against BMW's way of doing things. I agree that the CIC iDrive interface is lacking features & is pretty slow/painful to use, but the NBT interface is much, much better. I'd rather be using a click wheel when driving instead of having to look at the screen & be distracted by not knowing where the heck I need to put my finger.

On a more general (read: non-BMW) note, I think iOS in the Car is going to run into multiple issues. Apple is a stickler for precision & cookie-cutter specifications with regards to resolution, DPI, consistency & user experience. How are they going to manage that consistency between 12+ types of Nav screens with different aspect ratios, resolutions & design specifications? Siri Eyes Free is a great idea, but I think iOS in the Car as showcased at the keynote is going to be a dud. There is no way in hell Apple is going to let any car manufacturer tinker with anything related to the UI/UX.

However, I'm excited about the new Bluetooth stack enhancements in iOS 7 (notification center access, etc) - it might finally fix our email/SMS push issues!
pharding commented:
June 14, 2013, 10:41 am

The title is now misleading. It should be "not likely, but maybe".
mpress commented:
June 14, 2013, 11:04 am

IOS in Car would be part of the decision making process for me.....technology has and always will play an important part in my car choice, and apple integration is already such a multi tiered aspect of my days integration it will definitely play a part in future car choices.. As a beta tester for apple i already have found the new iOS 7 well improved in regard to user functionality and the incorporation into 2014 BMWs particulalry now with touch capabilities will be very interesting..
mp
sr5959 commented:
June 14, 2013, 3:29 pm

That's a great point about the Touchpad on the new iDrive. It could be used to control the screen instead of using a touchscreen.


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
cblandin commented:
June 14, 2013, 4:29 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by captainaudio View Post
I have two versions of iDrive. The version in the 2007 345i is a bit cumbersome but it has always gotten me where I want to go. I have the BMW Concierge Service so finding a point of interest is not an issue. I call the concierge, tell them what I am looking for and they upload it to the nav system.
Works better than any voice recognition system.

Last year on the way back from Climb to the Clouds as we approached Hartford, CT I called the concierge and said we were looking for an Outback Steak House on our route. They asked if we were going to stay on route 91 or change to route 87 when we got to Hartford. I told them route 87 and they found an Outback a few miles ahead that was right by the highway exit and uploaded it to the nav, The nav system gave me the option of routing to it or calling on the phone. I called ahead for a reservation and then had the nav route me there. During all of this I only had to take my eyes off the road for a few seconds.


The version of iDrive in the 2012 750 is better but still had what I would describe as a "user antagonistic" interface.

We also have nav on our iPhones but I would never use it while driving as I find it distracting and dangerous regardless of whether it is superior toto the iDrive nav or not.

CA


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
Yep, it's the same with OnStar in my ride...so much better than any voice recognition "attempt". My wife's "Siri" voice texts are always a source of amusement. She always tells me she prefers her phone's navigation WHILE SITTING IN THE PASSENGER SEAT USING IT....I point out to her it is a whole different ball game when you are driving! Heck, I even ponied up for the larger screened Garmin unit (pre in-car Nav a couple of years ago) simply because every Garmin review indicated there was just no substitute for more screen real estate when it comes to navigation (except more accuracy of course).
jusmills commented:
June 18, 2013, 3:14 pm

I agree with BJ that this may be BMW needs to weigh out the pro's/con's on IOS in car, however I'm thinking that they are really looking for a solution that uses BMW approved hardware (input system - iDrive Controller, screen) married to IOS software. Apple/Google/Microsoft/Blackberry have smart people but it will take them time to come up with hardware that is suitable for the permanent in-car environment. Car manufacturers have done this for years, no need to abandon that expertise.

BMW knowing that they can't cut off the smartphone competition (Android/Blackberry/Windows Owners) are likely searching for a happy software solution medium. Something like Airplay which allows you to port your iPhone screen to your dash as well as a similar feature that allows folks to do the same with Android/Blackberry/Windows devices means that they can hit the widest possible market and not upset any particular subset of smartphone users.

We can rest assured though that we'll still be paying at least $1500 for this solution. They may give away basic Nav/iDrive and charge $1500+ for the integrated suite. It will be a win-win for BMW as they don't have to go back on previously negotiated contracts, can increase the base price of cars via "standard equipment" and still tick all the technology boxes.
darwin1984 commented:
March 16, 2014, 10:35 am

Androids market share is irrelevant because by far the majority of Android phones are low end phones that are basically used as feature phones. Their owners don't spend money on apps or anything else. This is why they are last to be included by partner companies whereas iOS user demographics are very different.
Also Android market share numbers are basically Google propaganda as they count all sorts of things as activations such as upgrades, non Google service devices like Kindles and Chinese phones.
Android is not open source by most definitions and is only free if you use no Google services.
boltjaM3s commented:
March 16, 2014, 10:46 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by darwin1984 View Post
Androids market share is irrelevant because by far the majority of Android phones are low end phones that are basically used as feature phones. Their owners don't spend money on apps or anything else. This is why they are last to be included by partner companies whereas iOS user demographics are very different.
Also Android market share numbers are basically Google propaganda as they count all sorts of things as activations such as upgrades, non Google service devices like Kindles and Chinese phones.
Android is not open source by most definitions and is only free if you use no Google services.
Good points, but you bumped an old thread whose title may cause some confusion.

iOS In The Car has been renamed "CarPlay" and BMW has said "yes".

Welcome aboard.

BJ
darwin1984 commented:
March 16, 2014, 10:47 am

Thanks..I saw the date just after I posted..with the latest news about iOS 7 in the car I assumed it was a current topic.
boltjaM3s commented:
March 16, 2014, 10:53 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by darwin1984 View Post
Thanks..I saw the date just after I posted..with the latest news about iOS 7 in the car I assumed it was a current topic.
No worries.

The conversation about Apple's CarPlay integration by BMW is where we're at now, many of us don't like the way it gets implemented (Apple's call, not BMW) requiring docking your iPhone to a Lightning cable. For those of us who take multiple short trips around town it would be a major inconvenience to have to dock/undock/dock/undock all day long just to get Maps up.

I myself am hoping that BMW makes CarPlay an option atop the purchase of a standard iDrive Navigation system for just that reason- I want my nav preloaded and I don't want to be forced to sync my iPhone each time I get in the car, especially since BMW tends to offer docks only in the center console compartment.

BJ
dugbug commented:
March 16, 2014, 12:54 pm

From my gatherings ios in car supports knob input, and ios 7.1 does airplay over bluetooth which could be their approach to wireless ios in car

Would love to see this in my bmw
falar commented:
March 16, 2014, 1:16 pm

This isn't going to affect iDrive functionality is it?

If you don't use Apple products then iDrive will just be the same as ever I'd hope.
CK OSU commented:
March 16, 2014, 2:21 pm

CarPlay doesn't replace the in car infotainment system, it is a mirroring functionality of the phone. The phone proves the horsepower to run the graphics and the car displays (and controls the functions) as if it were an second monitor. It would sort of be like using BMW Apps. If there isn't an iPhone, then it would operate like it does today.
redbull21 commented:
March 16, 2014, 2:32 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by darwin1984 View Post
Androids market share is irrelevant because by far the majority of Android phones are low end phones that are basically used as feature phones. Their owners don't spend money on apps or anything else. This is why they are last to be included by partner companies whereas iOS user demographics are very different.
Also Android market share numbers are basically Google propaganda as they count all sorts of things as activations such as upgrades, non Google service devices like Kindles and Chinese phones.
Android is not open source by most definitions and is only free if you use no Google services.
Let's not turn this into an Apple love fest here, leave that for the tech forums.

I think it's safe to say that the majority of *BMW owners* who have Android phones have full blown smart phones, and there are a lot of us.

It used to be, back in the days of the iPod and early iPhone, that auto manufacturers would focus their phone integrations on IOS, but that is no longer the case. Android is too big to not consider, and most people will not be forced into a phone/entertainment environment that they do not prefer just to own a specific vehicle.

Google has a similar initiative to Apple's CarPlay, and BMW and other car makers will also wisely ensure that their Android-owning customers have the same ease of connectivity.
dugbug commented:
March 16, 2014, 4:52 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by redbull21 View Post
I think it's safe to say that the majority of *BMW owners* who have Android phones have full blown smart phones, and there are a lot of us.
Both of you android users can sit in the corner.
falar commented:
March 16, 2014, 6:13 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by dugbug View Post
Both of you android users can sit in the corner.
Huh? I thought Android was wiping its ass with Apple. I know that virtually ALL of my employees are using it since I've set up their corporate exchange accounts for them.
joedoe commented:
March 16, 2014, 8:53 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by tim330i View Post
BMW ConnectedDrive 2014 MY Specs

In a surprising move BMW has passed on Apple's just announced "iOS in the Car" integration. iOS in the Car was unveiled as part of iOS7 which is slated for release this fall. The new feature allows an iPhone to display content on a vehicle screen. BMW, being a long time partner of Apple and having iDrive sceens in most new vehicles standard was a logical partner. However, BMW has choseen to focus on its own new technologies, which include the model year 2014 ConnectedDrive improvements.



Read more at appleinsider.com

UPDATE: BMW has reached out to clarify its possition on integrating Apple's iOS in the Car. The company says it's in close contact with Apple and currently investigating the technical challenges required to integrate iOS in the Car, but since a final decision had not been made, it was not a part of Apple's announcement. Thus, according to BMW, integration of iOS in the Car in its cars has not been ruled out at all.

Car manufactures that are working on supporting iOS in the Car include:
  • Honda
  • Mercedes-Benz
  • Nissan
  • Ferrari
  • Chevy
  • Infiniti
  • Kia
  • Hyundai
  • Volvo
  • Acura
  • Opel
  • Jaguar

Is BMW missing the boat on this one or will improvements to iDrive make up for it?
This is not completely true. At least Hyundai and Honda from this list are working with Google to bring Android to cars. Check this article.
boltjaM3s commented:
March 16, 2014, 10:40 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by falar View Post
Huh? I thought Android was wiping its ass with Apple. I know that virtually ALL of my employees are using it since I've set up their corporate exchange accounts for them.
Define "wiping its ass" and you learn the following:

1. There are 12,000 different Android devices in existence. Apple sells 2.

2. There are 8 versions of Android operating systems in use. Apple has 2.

3. Android users don't spend any money on apps so developers don't develop for them.

4. Most Android phones are free-on-contract and have merely replaced the good ol' flip phone.

5. Apple makes more money off of iOS and iPhone than Google makes off of Android and all the thousands of different crap phones that run it.

Saying Android is 'better' than iOS is like saying McDonald's is better than The Palm because they sell more hamburgers.

That said, BMW would be smart to offer Android integration if Google ever gets around to stopping the madness and standardizing the operating system.

BJ
MMME30W commented:
March 16, 2014, 10:51 pm

"Drivers will soon be able to control their iPhones by hitting dashboard knobs, tapping a touchscreen or via voice control as part of a system Apple is unveiling to bridge the gap between smartphones and cars.

Called CarPlay, it aims to keep drivers from fumbling with their phones while they're behind the wheel, even as it brings them more options (and potential distractions) in a wider range of apps that drivers can access on the go.

Apple says CarPlay will be available later this year in vehicles made by Honda, Mercedes-Benz, Hyundai, Jaguar, Volvo and Ferrari. The system will be featured in models unveiled later this week at the Geneva International Motor Show by Mercedes-Benz, Volvo and Ferrari.

The company also cites commitments for future collaborations with a dozen other carmakers such as Ford, Toyota, BMW and Nissan."


http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/...a-volvo-others

The picture in this article is from a 2014 Honda Civic EX. BMW is missing the boat big time if they aren't getting CarPlay integrated post haste...
joedoe commented:
March 16, 2014, 11:30 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by boltjaM3s View Post
Define "wiping its ass" and you learn the following:

1. There are 12,000 different Android devices in existence. Apple sells 2.

2. There are 8 versions of Android operating systems in use. Apple has 2.

3. Android users don't spend any money on apps so developers don't develop for them.

4. Most Android phones are free-on-contract and have merely replaced the good ol' flip phone.

5. Apple makes more money off of iOS and iPhone than Google makes off of Android and all the thousands of different crap phones that run it.

Saying Android is 'better' than iOS is like saying McDonald's is better than The Palm because they sell more hamburgers.

That said, BMW would be smart to offer Android integration if Google ever gets around to stopping the madness and standardizing the operating system.

BJ
This is an old song which doesn't sound anymore, LOL
ddeliber commented:
March 16, 2014, 11:47 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by boltjaM3s View Post
Define "wiping its ass" and you learn the following:

1. There are 12,000 different Android devices in existence. Apple sells 2.

2. There are 8 versions of Android operating systems in use. Apple has 2.

3. Android users don't spend any money on apps so developers don't develop for them.

4. Most Android phones are free-on-contract and have merely replaced the good ol' flip phone.

5. Apple makes more money off of iOS and iPhone than Google makes off of Android and all the thousands of different crap phones that run it.

Saying Android is 'better' than iOS is like saying McDonald's is better than The Palm because they sell more hamburgers.

That said, BMW would be smart to offer Android integration if Google ever gets around to stopping the madness and standardizing the operating system.

BJ
1) apple has at least 5 they are selling now
2) In use? Yea, you missed that one as well.
3) You don't own an android phone do you?
4) see #3 above (you must be thinking Nokia in Europe from say 4-5 years ago - Nokia used their own OS, not Android - now they use Windows).
5) The truth here, I simply have no clue how much Google makes "off of Android" and one thing I can say with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY is you don't either.

IMO apple makes the best user friendly OS on the market, but it is also over priced and very closed system. Ever wonder why it costs you $25 for a charger (that works)? It is because apple charges everyone ridiculous licensing fees, same with all accessories. They also won't allow real security to be written for their phones for absolutely no reason I can put my finger on (beyond the less than honest of course). Regarding user-friendliness, Android is very close. For me, I'll take Android, for my 70+ yr old mother, I bought her an iPhone. BTW, the voice recognition on my S4 blows Siri away (but it just isn't as pretty).

BTW, I also think Samsung alone sells more Android phones that Apple sells iPhones. Well, they did last year, I just haven't checked recently.
shazi00 commented:
March 17, 2014, 12:16 am

I think they should just implement the mirroring phone feature and package it with their navigation or tech package. Problem solved.

I like BMWs maps and traffic including all other featured but navigating and voice control r horrendous.

Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
uberspeed commented:
March 17, 2014, 12:49 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by dugbug View Post
Both of you android users can sit in the corner.
I have one of each and android is far and away a more capable OS. Take a device like the HTC One and the industrial design matches and bests the iPhone. BMW should attempt to cater to both. Interesting part is most car systems are based on QNX which is owned by BlackBerry of all companies. Folks really need to shake the notion that android is cheap, it's become a rather polished product offering. All flagship phones are about the same these days in price range on contract and off.
uberspeed commented:
March 17, 2014, 1:01 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by falar View Post
Huh? I thought Android was wiping its ass with Apple. I know that virtually ALL of my employees are using it since I've set up their corporate exchange accounts for them.
Same here, got rid of BES, using gBES during transition period. Mostly issuing android now, it's simply a more full fledged OS from a real IT users perspective. Simpler use cases can make do with iOS.
joedoe commented:
March 17, 2014, 1:02 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by uberspeed View Post
I have one of each and android is far and away a more capable OS. Take a device like the HTC One and the industrial design matches and bests the iPhone. BMW should attempt to cater to both. Interesting part is most car systems are based on QNX which is owned by BlackBerry of all companies. Folks really need to shake the notion that android is cheap, it's become a rather polished product offering. All flagship phones are about the same these days in price range on contract and off.
QNX is a Real Time Operation System and because of that mostly used in industrial embedded systems including cars.
uberspeed commented:
March 17, 2014, 1:26 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeliber View Post
1) apple has at least 5 they are selling now
2) In use? Yea, you missed that one as well.
3) You don't own an android phone do you?
4) see #3 above (you must be thinking Nokia in Europe from say 4-5 years ago - Nokia used their own OS, not Android - now they use Windows).
5) The truth here, I simply have no clue how much Google makes "off of Android" and one thing I can say with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY is you don't either.

IMO apple makes the best user friendly OS on the market, but it is also over priced and very closed system. Ever wonder why it costs you $25 for a charger (that works)? It is because apple charges everyone ridiculous licensing fees, same with all accessories. They also won't allow real security to be written for their phones for absolutely no reason I can put my finger on (beyond the less than honest of course). Regarding user-friendliness, Android is very close. For me, I'll take Android, for my 70+ yr old mother, I bought her an iPhone. BTW, the voice recognition on my S4 blows Siri away (but it just isn't as pretty).

BTW, I also think Samsung alone sells more Android phones that Apple sells iPhones. Well, they did last year, I just haven't checked recently.
Apple should've expanded their product portfolio much sooner. They now offer a 4" screen and still need more after years of staying steadfast to the 3.5" form factor. Some of your other claims of android handsets are way off as well BJ and more your personal perception but they come off rather uninformed to a techie.
uberspeed commented:
March 17, 2014, 1:29 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by joedoe View Post
QNX is a Real Time Operation System and because of that mostly used in industrial embedded systems including cars.
QNX is quite powerful indeed but BB hasn't been able to capitalize on that at all thus far unfortunately. I wish they would as more competition is good for the consumer.
ddeliber commented:
March 17, 2014, 6:43 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by uberspeed View Post
Apple should've expanded their product portfolio much sooner. They now offer a 4" screen and still need more after years of staying steadfast to the 3.5" form factor. Some of your other claims of android handsets are way off as well BJ and more your personal perception but they come off rather uninformed to a techie.
Ok, I'm game, which ones?
Michael Schott commented:
March 17, 2014, 9:31 am

Here's the reality of the smartphone world:

Those who like to tweak their phones prefer the Android OS. Those who like a familiar and easy to use interface prefer the Apple OS and form. In terms of the number of phones out there, Apple owns 40% of that market. The rest are mainly Android phones from various manufacturers and within those brands, various models. So by far the largest selling single brand is Apple. It's also the most desirable brand name out there. And every app developer wants first and foremost to develop for the Apple iOS. All of this is why luxury brands cater to the typical iPhone user.
boltjaM3s commented:
March 17, 2014, 9:39 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeliber View Post

IMO apple makes the best user friendly OS on the market, but it is also over priced and very closed system. Ever wonder why it costs you $25 for a charger (that works)? It is because apple charges everyone ridiculous licensing fees, same with all accessories.
You do realize that you just described BMW to a tee, right?

Best-in-class performance, over priced, closed system, expensive accessories, etc.?

I have family members who have Android's and they are happy, but I have family members who drive Honda's and they are happy too, we're not comparing apples-to-apples here; Apple is a prestige brand that makes luxury items that are best-in-class engineered and cost more. What I don't understand is why those who embrace BMW for all those reasons think Apple is to be eschewed for all those reasons. I use my Smartphone more than I use my car, so I'm not going to drive a BMW and communicate on an Acura.

BJ
Jonkarn commented:
March 17, 2014, 12:07 pm

First statement I agree with. I resemble that remark!

Quote:
Originally Posted by boltjaM3s View Post
You do realize that you just described BMW to a tee, right?

Best-in-class performance, over priced, closed system, expensive accessories, etc.?

I have family members who have Android's and they are happy, but I have family members who drive Honda's and they are happy too, we're not comparing apples-to-apples here; Apple is a prestige brand that makes luxury items that are best-in-class engineered and cost more. What I don't understand is why those who embrace BMW for all those reasons think Apple is to be eschewed for all those reasons. I use my Smartphone more than I use my car, so I'm not going to drive a BMW and communicate on an Acura.

BJ
joedoe commented:
March 17, 2014, 12:34 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Schott View Post
Here's the reality of the smartphone world:

Those who like to tweak their phones prefer the Android OS. Those who like a familiar and easy to use interface prefer the Apple OS and form. In terms of the number of phones out there, Apple owns 40% of that market. The rest are mainly Android phones from various manufacturers and within those brands, various models. So by far the largest selling single brand is Apple. It's also the most desirable brand name out there. And every app developer wants first and foremost to develop for the Apple iOS. All of this is why luxury brands cater to the typical iPhone user.
Actually Samsung oversold Apple in 2013.

uberspeed commented:
March 17, 2014, 12:57 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeliber View Post
Ok, I'm game, which ones?
I quoted your response and added mine, I specifically mentioned BJ as the comment target, sorry for the confusion I should've been clearer.
Jonkarn commented:
March 17, 2014, 1:15 pm

This is mainly due to Chinese usage of Samsung products. A company based in a country with the worlds largest population can sway the vote a bit. iPhones are too expensive in China.

Quote:
Originally Posted by joedoe View Post
Actually Samsung oversold Apple in 2013.

uberspeed commented:
March 17, 2014, 1:33 pm

Samsung is a Korean company. Amazing internals with imho subpar industrial design.
gkr778 commented:
March 17, 2014, 1:38 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by boltjaM3s View Post
Apple is a prestige brand that makes luxury items that are best-in-class engineered and cost more. What I don't understand is why those who embrace BMW for all those reasons think Apple is to be eschewed for all those reasons. I use my Smartphone more than I use my car, so I'm not going to drive a BMW and communicate on an Acura.
Because the notion that "Apple is a prestige brand that makes luxury items that are best-in-class engineered" is very droll indeed.
joedoe commented:
March 17, 2014, 1:41 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonkarn View Post
This is mainly due to Chinese usage of Samsung products. A company based in a country with the worlds largest population can sway the vote a bit. iPhones are too expensive in China.
ddeliber commented:
March 17, 2014, 1:45 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by uberspeed View Post
I quoted your response and added mine, I specifically mentioned BJ as the comment target, sorry for the confusion I should've been clearer.
no problem, I misread your response.
ddeliber commented:
March 17, 2014, 2:14 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by boltjaM3s View Post
You do realize that you just described BMW to a tee, right?

Best-in-class performance, over priced, closed system, expensive accessories, etc.?

I have family members who have Android's and they are happy, but I have family members who drive Honda's and they are happy too, we're not comparing apples-to-apples here; Apple is a prestige brand that makes luxury items that are best-in-class engineered and cost more. What I don't understand is why those who embrace BMW for all those reasons think Apple is to be eschewed for all those reasons. I use my Smartphone more than I use my car, so I'm not going to drive a BMW and communicate on an Acura.

BJ
Not really. I said iOS had the best UI, I didn't say it was the best which it isn't IMO. Recent sales trends seem to indicate that I am not the only one that feels this way.

Your argument is like saying I bought my BMW because it "looked the best" or had the best seats, doors, and steering wheel etc.

The car I chose offered me the best for what I was looking for, it is absolutely world class and I was willing to pay extra for it. Apple OToH doesn't even come close. It is not like I sacrificed to save money on my phone, Android is better for me and the fact that it was cheaper is just an added bonus. I would have paid more. Plus, phones are not cars and shouldn't be compared as such.
furby076 commented:
March 17, 2014, 2:40 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by boltjaM3s View Post
You do realize that you just described BMW to a tee, right?

Best-in-class performance, over priced, closed system, expensive accessories, etc.?

I have family members who have Android's and they are happy, but I have family members who drive Honda's and they are happy too, we're not comparing apples-to-apples here; Apple is a prestige brand that makes luxury items that are best-in-class engineered and cost more. What I don't understand is why those who embrace BMW for all those reasons think Apple is to be eschewed for all those reasons. I use my Smartphone more than I use my car, so I'm not going to drive a BMW and communicate on an Acura.

BJ
I have to disagree with you. Just because Android software is open-source does not make it non-prestigious. Closed source is always considered to be a hindrance. Now if you want to say iPhone vs cheapy android phone sure, but iPhone and say Samsung S4 are on par with each other (plenty of articles saying one is better than the other). Someone who can afford an S4 (or equiv Android) can afford an iPhone. In fact, they are the same price range (same price if you get them from the phone carriers...200 plus two years).

I avoid Apple because I dislike the iOS. I think the hardware is great, but the software (in my opinion) blows. I also don't like Apple telling me I can't download certain apps because it doesn't agree with their culture. Cost is absolutely not the issue (considering I own an S4 on the most expensive carrier on the market)
gkr778 commented:
March 17, 2014, 3:01 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Schott View Post
And every app developer wants first and foremost to develop for the Apple iOS.
That's contrary to what the [Mobile] Developer Economics Report indicates

joedoe commented:
March 17, 2014, 3:04 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by furby076 View Post
I have to disagree with you. Just because Android software is open-source does not make it non-prestigious. Closed source is always considered to be a hindrance. Now if you want to say iPhone vs cheapy android phone sure, but iPhone and say Samsung S4 are on par with each other (plenty of articles saying one is better than the other). Someone who can afford an S4 (or equiv Android) can afford an iPhone. In fact, they are the same price range (same price if you get them from the phone carriers...200 plus two years).

I avoid Apple because I dislike the iOS. I think the hardware is great, but the software (in my opinion) blows. I also don't like Apple telling me I can't download certain apps because it doesn't agree with their culture. Cost is absolutely not the issue (considering I own an S4 on the most expensive carrier on the market)
And actually iPhone is heavely subsidized on most providers so the price to own is much less then for high end Android phones.
furby076 commented:
March 17, 2014, 4:38 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Schott View Post
Here's the reality of the smartphone world:

Those who like to tweak their phones prefer the Android OS. Those who like a familiar and easy to use interface prefer the Apple OS and form. In terms of the number of phones out there, Apple owns 40% of that market. The rest are mainly Android phones from various manufacturers and within those brands, various models. So by far the largest selling single brand is Apple. It's also the most desirable brand name out there. And every app developer wants first and foremost to develop for the Apple iOS. All of this is why luxury brands cater to the typical iPhone user.
I'll disagree. Android is much easier to work with than Apple. Apple charges a premium, has a strict scrutiny process (meaning your work can get rejected), and takes 33% of the profits right off the top. Remember when Angry birds came out? Free on Android, cost on Apple. The charge on Apple is because Apple was not giving it away for free.

Quote:
Originally Posted by joedoe View Post
And actually iPhone is heavely subsidized on most providers so the price to own is much less then for high end Android phones.
32 GB iPhone 4s (unlocked) = 749 from Apple
Samsung S4 (unsubsidized) = 649.

$100 is not much less.
NOTE: I used 32 gb iphone, and not the 64 gb iphone, since samsung does not have a 64 gb version. Though you could stick in a 64 gb micro-sd card in the samsung.
joedoe commented:
March 17, 2014, 4:53 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by furby076 View Post

...

32 GB iPhone 4s (unlocked) = 749 from Apple
Samsung S4 (unsubsidized) = 649.

$100 is not much less.
NOTE: I used 32 gb iphone, and not the 64 gb iphone, since samsung does not have a 64 gb version. Though you could stick in a 64 gb micro-sd card in the samsung.
The keyword here is subsidized:

Apple® iPhone® 4s 16Gb is just $49 on AT&T with 2yr contract and can be upgraded twice as often as any Android phone.
JREinATL commented:
March 17, 2014, 5:14 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by furby076 View Post
Remember when Angry birds came out? Free on Android, cost on Apple. The charge on Apple is because Apple was not giving it away for free.
That's an odd example. Angry Birds had been out for iOS for almost a year before the Android version was released, and the Android version was loaded up with advertising because the Android Marketplace wasn't very functional in 2010. In short, in iOS, Rovio had a market it could sell it's work; for Android, it didn't.
Carnook commented:
March 17, 2014, 11:52 pm

People who quote Android shipment volumes as evidence of addressable market are really just demonstrating that they don't understand the smartphone market.
joedoe commented:
March 18, 2014, 12:16 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnook View Post
People who quote Android shipment volumes as evidence of addressable market are really just demonstrating that they don't understand the smartphone market.
And you do, LOL
uberspeed commented:
March 18, 2014, 12:51 am

You can attempt to negate the android uprising any which way that makes you feel better, but it's here. Shipments are not actual customer sales, granted, not sure who actually said that in this thread though. That said not everyone wants small screens and $100 for every 16GB or proprietary connectors. Even an iPhone fan should be appreciative of android for introducing competition, if it's not for you that's fine but why snub is so snootily?
Carnook commented:
March 18, 2014, 12:52 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by joedoe View Post
And you do, LOL
Yes, clearly.

By their own admission, only about 1/3 of Samsung smartphone shipments are "premium" models, meaning Galaxy and Note branded. The rest are budget throw-away phones that are barely smartphones at all. Other Android OEMs likely have the same or worse stats, and certainly no better. So if we discount the marketshare of the Android OEMs by 2/3 then the pie chart you posted quickly becomes:

Apple 38%
Samsung 25%
Other 27%
ZTE 3%
Huawei 4%
LG 4%

Thus, Apple has the single largest share of addressable market among premium smartphone sales.

Now, consider that Android is a fragmented ecosystem and that its not really possible to design universally for Android and it quickly becomes obvious that Apple and Samsung are the only hardware makers that matter for car integration, and Apple is currently the larger of the two. Therefore it makes sense to design for Apple first.

OEMs can flood the market with cheap non-Google-branded Android handsets all they want. Those phones aren't getting plugged into BMWs so the sales of those phones don't matter to BMW.
uberspeed commented:
March 18, 2014, 1:10 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnook View Post
Yes, clearly.

By their own admission, only about 1/3 of Samsung smartphone shipments are "premium" models, meaning Galaxy and Note branded. The rest are budget throw-away phones that are barely smartphones at all. Other Android OEMs likely have the same or worse stats, and certainly no better. So if we discount the marketshare of the Android OEMs by 2/3 then the pie chart you posted quickly becomes:

Apple 38%
Samsung 25%
Other 27%
ZTE 3%
Huawei 4%
LG 4%

Thus, Apple has the single largest share of addressable market among premium smartphone sales.

Now, consider that Android is a fragmented ecosystem and that its not really possible to design universally for Android and it quickly becomes obvious that Apple and Samsung are the only hardware makers that matter for car integration, and Apple is currently the larger of the two. Therefore it makes sense to design for Apple first.

OEMs can flood the market with cheap non-Google-branded Android handsets all they want. Those phones aren't getting plugged into BMWs so the sales of those phones don't matter to BMW.
Logical fallacy to simply discount a large swath because you think they're not looking for phone integration in their vehicles. There are users that carry two phones, such as myself, that would love to have integration for both platforms. Another market segment that doesn't really care too much about what they're carrying in their pocket are older folks. They still want at least simple phone integration for calls and such. Think BMW wants to turn away the older buyers or tech buyers that are more likely to be carrying an Android handset?
Carnook commented:
March 18, 2014, 1:20 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by uberspeed View Post
Logical fallacy to simply discount a large swath because you think they're not looking for phone integration in their vehicles. There are users that carry two phones, such as myself, that would love to have integration for both platforms. Another market segment that doesn't really care too much about what they're carrying in their pocket are older folks. They still want at least simple phone integration for calls and such. Think BMW wants to turn away the older buyers or tech buyers that are more likely to be carrying an Android handset?
Basic integration can be achieved via bluetooth. Easy peasy. Advanced integration requires a lot of effort so it makes sense to start with the market segment that will provide the greatest returns: iPhone users. Next up: Galaxy users. "Android" is not a market. BMW can't design integration for "Android" because its fragmented and as I've shown its not entirely relevant.

If I manufacture lipstick I'm not concerned with everybody that has a pair of lips. I'm concerned with people who buy or want to buy lipstick. If I'm BMW I'm not concerned with global smartphone market share. I'm concerned with what phones are most likely going to be plugged into a BMW.
uberspeed commented:
March 18, 2014, 2:08 am

BMW wants more market and they're catering to more folks. It's a numbers game, Android has numbers so it would be foolish to ignore them. Android is the market, Galaxy happens to be a tent pole of the market with brand recognition right now. Samsung is a huge company with major manufacturing capabilities, enough to even manufacture for Apple which happens to be one of their biggest customers. Apple hasn't been able to shake them either since no one else thus far has proven they can handle the scale. With all their upcoming 1 and 2 series there will be a much broader range of handsets connecting, at the very least they should cater to the top two OS's.
joedoe commented:
March 18, 2014, 2:31 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnook View Post
Yes, clearly.

By their own admission, only about 1/3 of Samsung smartphone shipments are "premium" models, meaning Galaxy and Note branded. The rest are budget throw-away phones that are barely smartphones at all. Other Android OEMs likely have the same or worse stats, and certainly no better. So if we discount the marketshare of the Android OEMs by 2/3 then the pie chart you posted quickly becomes:

Apple 38%
Samsung 25%
Other 27%
ZTE 3%
Huawei 4%
LG 4%

Thus, Apple has the single largest share of addressable market among premium smartphone sales.

Now, consider that Android is a fragmented ecosystem and that its not really possible to design universally for Android and it quickly becomes obvious that Apple and Samsung are the only hardware makers that matter for car integration, and Apple is currently the larger of the two. Therefore it makes sense to design for Apple first.

OEMs can flood the market with cheap non-Google-branded Android handsets all they want. Those phones aren't getting plugged into BMWs so the sales of those phones don't matter to BMW.
What you are calling a barely smartphones are still more flexible and capable then Apple phines

BTW Apple is now losing the tablet market and well.
joedoe commented:
March 18, 2014, 2:37 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnook View Post
Basic integration can be achieved via bluetooth. Easy peasy. Advanced integration requires a lot of effort so it makes sense to start with the market segment that will provide the greatest returns: iPhone users. Next up: Galaxy users. "Android" is not a market. BMW can't design integration for "Android" because its fragmented and as I've shown its not entirely relevant.

If I manufacture lipstick I'm not concerned with everybody that has a pair of lips. I'm concerned with people who buy or want to buy lipstick. If I'm BMW I'm not concerned with global smartphone market share. I'm concerned with what phones are most likely going to be plugged into a BMW.
And it definitely will be Android phone
3284me commented:
March 18, 2014, 5:45 am

Getting back to the original topic, BMW will be supporting car play. They never intended to forsake IOS, and never will.
boltjaM3s commented:
March 18, 2014, 6:19 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by joedoe View Post
What you are calling a barely smartphones are still more flexible and capable then Apple phines

BTW Apple is now losing the tablet market and well.
Apple is selling record numbers of iOS devices, their financials are just fine thank you.

Cheap knockoffs made by hundreds of manufacturers hasn't hurt their business one bit. If Apple wanted the low-end market by working at low margins they could take it.

BJ
uberspeed commented:
March 18, 2014, 10:50 am

The 5c was aimed at the lower end market as well as keeping previous models around and lowering up front costs. They want more people in their ecosystem. BMW is taking a similar approach with Mini, 1 and 2 series.
ddeliber commented:
March 18, 2014, 11:11 am

The issue here is not which OS to support, but rather how long can a leading car manufacturer delay someone else's display on their screen's acceptance. BMW, being well, BMW will only come to the table kicking and screaming. Simply put, car play and its counterparts de-values iDrive and all the work BMW has put into it, not to mention the deals that they have in place with their software vendors/partners. BJ is often wrong about his methods and usually way off on his justifications, but I agree with him on this. Users will want this and BMW does not.

We are talking big money here so the leaders will drag their feet, lobby whoever will listen that it doesn't work "to their standards", and probably even break things if they can.

The technology to mirror a screen is actually pretty old so this is not difficult to do. The hardest parts probably being the input device as many cars don't have touch screens, and deciding if/how they would share the screen real-estate (iDrive over here and iOS over there or only one or the other). Edit: add security in here... Those non-scrupulous app vendors can very easily put up anything on the screen like: "your car is malfunctioning, go to "fixyourcarnoworitwillblowup.com immediately".

This is all about timing for the phone OS guys as they probably had this capability in version 1.01 of their products. They needed to get a few relevant adopters and then get the users excited about it and see if the market will drive the adoption.

Just think about it, BMWAps will no longer be relevant (not that it really is right now); Millions of dollars in speech recognition/TTS/etc licensing and integration won't be worth much anymore; not to mention totally eliminating the need for upgrades to below average quality and immediately out of date maps and routing tech. The big ones to BMW IMO is the fact that their iDrive screens will be advertising Apple and Google/Samsung/HTC/LG/etc products, and in many cases making the awesomeness of iDrive less meaningful.

Suzuki's and Hyundai's will be as good as BMWs in this respect. Good for Hyundai, not so much for BMW.
MMME30W commented:
March 18, 2014, 11:32 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeliber View Post
The issue here is not which OS to support, but rather how long can a leading car manufacturer delay someone else's display on their screen's acceptance. BMW, being well, BMW will only come to the table kicking and screaming. Simply put, car play and its counterparts de-values iDrive and all the work BMW has put into it, not to mention the deals that they have in place with their software vendors/partners. BJ is often wrong about his methods and usually way off on his justifications, but I agree with him on this. Users will want this and BMW does not.

We are talking big money here so the leaders will drag their feet, lobby whoever will listen that it doesn't work "to their standards", and probably even break things if they can.

The technology to mirror a screen is actually pretty old so this is not difficult to do. The hardest parts probably being the input device as many cars don't have touch screens, and deciding if/how they would share the screen real-estate (iDrive over here and iOS over there or only one or the other). Edit: add security in here... Those non-scrupulous app vendors can very easily put up anything on the screen like: "your car is malfunctioning, go to "fixyourcarnoworitwillblowup.com immediately".

This is all about timing for the phone OS guys as they probably had this capability in version 1.01 of their products. They needed to get a few relevant adopters and then get the users excited about it and see if the market will drive the adoption.

Just think about it, BMWAps will no longer be relevant (not that it really is right now); Millions of dollars in speech recognition/TTS/etc licensing and integration won't be worth much anymore; not to mention totally eliminating the need for upgrades to below average quality and immediately out of date maps and routing tech. The big ones to BMW IMO is the fact that their iDrive screens will be advertising Apple and Google/Samsung/HTC/LG/etc products, and in many cases making the awesomeness of iDrive less meaningful.

Suzuki's and Hyundai's will be as good as BMWs in this respect. Good for Hyundai, not so much for BMW.
Abso friggin' lutely.

PS Don't forget Honda.
uberspeed commented:
March 18, 2014, 1:05 pm

Adapt and go down stream: http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/18/55...e-release-date
I understand the up-sell and BMW's unwillingness to give up charging 2k+ but times are simply changing...
Carnook commented:
March 18, 2014, 1:27 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by uberspeed View Post
Adapt and go down stream: http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/18/55...e-release-date
I understand the up-sell and BMW's unwillingness to give up charging 2k+ but times are simply changing...
Knowing BMW, they will just charge extra for CarPlay integration.
uberspeed commented:
March 18, 2014, 1:29 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnook View Post
Knowing BMW, they will just charge extra for CarPlay integration.
That's probably a happy medium if they price it well, here's to hoping.
Sophisto commented:
March 18, 2014, 4:20 pm

So how do I get my Galaxy S4 screen and sound on my BMW screen and speakers and maybe the antenna, no other connected drive features from BMW please!
falar commented:
March 18, 2014, 4:43 pm

Why on earth does anyone think Apple is a "premium brand"??

Talk about good marketing on their part.
Michael Schott commented:
March 18, 2014, 4:46 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by falar View Post
Why on earth does anyone think Apple is a "premium brand"??

Talk about good marketing on their part.
Tell me how they are not a premium brand and leave dislike for their policies out of your answer as this is bias.
falar commented:
March 18, 2014, 4:51 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Schott View Post
Tell me how they are not a premium brand and leave dislike for their policies out of your answer as this is bias.
We're talking about electronics here, phones specifically. They are all made in Asia for the most part and I would rate Samsung and Motorola above them in build quality.

What in the world is "premium" about them?
uberspeed commented:
March 18, 2014, 4:57 pm

Good marketing, absolutely. Do they have well designed products? Absolutely. Jony Ive subscribed to the Dieter Rams school of Bauhaus design and Apple in general puts together things quite well. Did Xerox PARC have a GUI? Yes, but Lisa and NeXt took it, ran with it and commercialized it very well. "Premium" is relative, ask someone carrying a Vertu and they'll say that's a premium handset. I see them as gaudy and horribly overpriced pieces of garbage though ornate they may be (technologically ass backwards). On brand recognition alone you'd have to tip your hat and most folks would lump Apple in with premium when doing word association, it would be disingenuous to say otherwise.
uberspeed commented:
March 18, 2014, 5:00 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by falar View Post
We're talking about electronics here, phones specifically. They are all made in Asia for the most part and I would rate Samsung and Motorola above them in build quality.

What in the world is "premium" about them?
Choice of materials is one area they excel. Recently especially Sony and HTC have a lot to say, Moto X as well but to compare the plasticky stuff Samsung uses to Apple is a stretch. I'm with Android on the OS side, but materials Apple excels at. Hence why I carry an iPhone 5 and an HTC One.
joedoe commented:
March 18, 2014, 8:22 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3284me View Post
Getting back to the original topic, BMW will be supporting car play. They never intended to forsake IOS, and never will.
I hope they will choose Mirrorlink instead.
hellosopo commented:
March 18, 2014, 10:13 pm

What do people need this for? Am I supposed to upgrade my car every 24 months now like I am expected to upgrade my phone? My E90 non-iDrive with the Bluetooth module works just fine. The only thing I wish it would do is scroll the display of long titles of tracks when playing MP3 files from the USB drive.

I dunno why car companies think I want to drive a tablet computer. I want to drive a car.
uberspeed commented:
March 18, 2014, 11:41 pm

These communication/integration protocols are not developed overnight. You should at least expect future proofing to some extent.
JREinATL commented:
March 19, 2014, 8:48 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by hellosopo View Post
Am I supposed to upgrade my car every 24 months now like I am expected to upgrade my phone?
CAR COMPANY EXECUTIVE: Yes! Yes you are!
mcy03970 commented:
March 20, 2014, 7:05 pm

My biggest complaint is that my new '14 isn't more integrated with my Apple phone. SMH! Oh well. Too bad!
boltjaM3s commented:
March 20, 2014, 10:59 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by hellosopo View Post
What do people need this for? Am I supposed to upgrade my car every 24 months now like I am expected to upgrade my phone? My E90 non-iDrive with the Bluetooth module works just fine. The only thing I wish it would do is scroll the display of long titles of tracks when playing MP3 files from the USB drive.

I dunno why car companies think I want to drive a tablet computer. I want to drive a car.
Thing is, it's one of those situations where you don't know what you're missing until you've experienced it.

Now that I've gotten full access to Playlists, Genres, full song titles, album art, split screen, shortcut buttons, head-up display to scroll, I could never go back. And the key here isn't for car makers to have meticulously synchronized update schedules; the typical car is leased for 3 years or bought for 4 years so they just need to make sure they have enough functionality to last the gap between truly new model cycles.

BJ
ddeliber commented:
March 20, 2014, 11:36 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by hellosopo View Post
What do people need this for? Am I supposed to upgrade my car every 24 months now like I am expected to upgrade my phone? My E90 non-iDrive with the Bluetooth module works just fine. The only thing I wish it would do is scroll the display of long titles of tracks when playing MP3 files from the USB drive.

I dunno why car companies think I want to drive a tablet computer. I want to drive a car.
I think the one of the main points of Car Play is that with it, you won't need to upgrade your car. Your phone upgrades itself, or is replaced every few years or so. Everything in the car stays the same but you still have the latest and greatest content displayed on your nav/idrive screen.

Whether or not to get the big screen in your car is a subject for a different thread. However, if you have it, I can't come up with a realistic reason not to want this. Smart phone companies are essentially software companies (with a little hardware) and they (well, the good ones of course) will always be better at this stuff than any car company.

I just don't think that the car companies think that they can come up with a way to make "enough" money on it.
nsfw commented:
March 21, 2014, 5:22 pm

The BMW nav in my previous gen idrive 2012 x5 is so crappy and wrong that I just end up putting my iphone on mounted vent louvers. Then I can use a quality nav app like Waze.
I will never order navigation or 6nr smart apps again. What a waste of thousands of dollars.
BMW wants to charge hundres of dollars for map updates too. What 1990's economic model are they using for that?
gkr778 commented:
March 21, 2014, 11:45 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by boltjaM3s View Post
And the key here isn't for car makers to have meticulously synchronized update schedules; the typical car is leased for 3 years or bought for 4 years so they just need to make sure they have enough functionality to last the gap between truly new model cycles.
I can't comment about leased cars, but "bought" cars are generally kept much longer than 4 years. The average age of passengers cars in the U.S. is nearly three times that, 11.4 years.

This fact alone tempers the popularity of Apple CarPlay, unless the company partners with aftermarket automobile A/V manufacturers to devise solutions for older cars.
ddeliber commented:
March 22, 2014, 8:26 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by gkr778 View Post
I can't comment about leased cars, but "bought" cars are generally kept much longer than 4 years. The average age of passengers cars in the U.S. is nearly three times that, 11.4 years.

This fact alone tempers the popularity of Apple CarPlay, unless the company partners with aftermarket automobile A/V manufacturers to devise solutions for older cars.
I don't think the point was that cars last only 4 or 5 years, but rather people that buy new cars only keep them for so many years (not sure it is 4 though) and then sell or trade them. The average age of a passenger doesn't mean anything about who is buying new.

The goal of any manufacturer is to get people to buy new. Sure resale value has a lot to do with this, but features do as well. I would think that the fact that only new cars have a certain feature would increase the popularity of one of those new cars.
gkr778 commented:
March 22, 2014, 11:44 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeliber View Post
I don't think the point was that cars last only 4 or 5 years, but rather people that buy new cars only keep them for so many years (not sure it is 4 though) and then sell or trade them. The average age of a passenger doesn't mean anything about who is buying new.
Excellent point, and thank you for the clarification ddeliber. I looked up "average length of vehicle ownership" (as opposed to average age of vehicles in operation), and R.L. Polk reported in 2012 that "the average length of ownership of vehicles that were purchased new has risen to a record 71.4 months." For cars purchased used, the figure was 49.9 months.

Since many consumer electronics products - including smartphones and automotive infotainment and A/V systems - typically reach obsolescence long before 71 months, aftermarket CarPlay-like solutions for older vehicles that don't have such capabilities built-in will comprise an important market.
ddeliber commented:
March 22, 2014, 1:19 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by gkr778 View Post
Excellent point, and thank you for the clarification ddeliber. I looked up "average length of vehicle ownership" (as opposed to average age of vehicles in operation), and R.L. Polk reported in 2012 that "the average length of ownership of vehicles that were purchased new has risen to a record 71.4 months." For cars purchased used, the figure was 49.9 months.

Since many consumer electronics products - including smartphones and automotive infotainment and A/V systems - typically reach obsolescence long before 71 months, aftermarket CarPlay-like solutions for older vehicles that don't have such capabilities built-in will comprise an important market.
Good stuff.

I do think that an aftermarket product would be great, but I see it as a tough nut to crack especially for systems that don't have touch screens. Plus, car touch screens are designed to work in a car (many not very well of course) which is not the case for phones. Without work from the manufacturer (for which they would have little to no incentive - actually I think there is value to them to fight it), I'll bet that you would see an increase in accidents leading to some regulation. Just like with texting while driving.
joedoe commented:
March 24, 2014, 2:18 am

Apple's CarPlay vs. MirrorLink: Is there a need for both?
Carnook commented:
March 24, 2014, 2:23 am

MirrorlLink is a consortium so it is bound to suck. If you want anything better than lowest common denominator then MirrorLink isn't going to cut it.
joedoe commented:
March 24, 2014, 2:30 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnook View Post
MirrorlLink is a consortium so it is bound to suck. If you want anything better than lowest common denominator then MirrorLink isn't going to cut it.
At the Geneva International Motor Show this week, PSA Peugeot Citroën unveiled two new MirrorLink-enabled vehicles, among the world's first.

At the World Mobile Congress conference last week, Volkswagen, Honda and Toyota also showed factory prototype consoles with MirrorLink capability.
Carnook commented:
March 24, 2014, 2:39 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by joedoe View Post
At the Geneva International Motor Show this week, PSA Peugeot Citroën unveiled two new MirrorLink-enabled vehicles, among the world's first.

At the World Mobile Congress conference last week, Volkswagen, Honda and Toyota also showed factory prototype consoles with MirrorLink capability.
That's great, but here is the problem:

Quote:
MirrorLink is the leading industry standard for car-smartphone connectivity and is designed for maximum interoperability between a wide range of smartphones and cars. It’s also the only OS- and OEM-agnostic standard for car-smartphone connectivity. Ultimately MirrorLink gives consumers freedom of choice and peace of mind when it comes to using their favorite devices in their favorite cars.
Translation: MirrorLink will work with the maximum number of combinations by delivering the minimum customer experience. It's the same reason Apple doesn't allow apps that are ported from muti-platform authoring tools. Accommodating everyone means many stand-out capabilities can't be leveraged.

MirrorLink may work for basic stuff, but it will struggle to offer the seamless and robust experience that Apple will be able to accomplish with CarPlay. So yes I think there is a need for both.
joedoe commented:
March 24, 2014, 2:54 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnook View Post
That's great, but here is the problem:



Translation: MirrorLink will work with the maximum number of combinations by delivering the minimum customer experience. It's the same reason Apple doesn't allow apps that are ported from muti-platform authoring tools. Accommodating everyone means many stand-out capabilities can't be leveraged.

MirrorLink may work for basic stuff, but it will struggle to offer the seamless and robust experience that Apple will be able to accomplish with CarPlay. So yes I think there is a need for both.
It's just your speculation on the subject. Apple devices have never been the best techologicaly. They just products of genius marketer Steve Jobs. And Apple doesn't have somebody even close to him now.
smub99 commented:
April 15, 2014, 4:41 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by joedoe View Post
It's just your speculation on the subject. Apple devices have never been the best techologicaly. They just products of genius marketer Steve Jobs. And Apple doesn't have somebody even close to him now.
That's not speculation - it's a well known fact that apple products integrate almost seamlessly with other apple products.

I fail to understand why people like yourself are almost offended by the fact that many people own and enjoy apple products because they are very good products, not just because it's marketing.

There is no question there is a place for CarPlay - current iOS integration with idrive is substandard, so if apple can provide a more usable solution then of course it will be welcomed by iOS users. Why this upsets non-iphone users like yourself, I don't know? From the demos it's quite clear it's a skin, and the stock idrive will still be available to those without an iphone.
dugbug commented:
April 15, 2014, 4:59 pm

Im sure we will see some form of carplay support. I for one would love to see it. And if it sucks, turn it off and use pure idrive.

What is interesting about carplay is that apple can control the display / UI and update it at their cadence.
joedoe commented:
April 16, 2014, 1:38 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by smub99 View Post
That's not speculation - it's a well known fact that apple products integrate almost seamlessly with other apple products.

...
"with other apple products" is a keyword here.Think twice what you just said.
Carnook commented:
April 16, 2014, 3:11 pm

Several major car manufacturers are launching CarPlay in 2014. Pioneer and Apline are both launching head units with CarPlay in 2014. The question of whether CarPlay is needed has been answered. Now its a question of whether MirrorLink and/or Android's Open Automotive Alliance will gain any meaningful traction.
gkr778 commented:
April 16, 2014, 4:42 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnook View Post
Pioneer and Apline are both launching head units with CarPlay in 2014.
Thanks for the info Carnook! I knew it would not be long before aftermarket automobile A/V suppliers announced CarPlay compatible units, as limiting the CarPlay platform to OE installations in new cars dramatically constrains the market for that technology.

Here's more info on Pioneer's CarPlay compatiable NEX line:

http://www.pioneer-carglobal.com/CarPlay/
vw2bmw commented:
April 16, 2014, 11:43 pm

Interesting thread, thanks for a good read. I think the infotainment system is secondary thought for most BMW enthusiasts.

The iDrive has worked well for me, a few minor glitches, but really don't care, because the car makes up for it in other more important aspects.

IMO, it would be nice to have iPhone/e-mail linked into the system, but not having that option would not affect in any way my purchase decision, because not answering e-mail while driving is probably a good thing.
Kafkaesque320 commented:
April 17, 2014, 11:42 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by pilotman View Post
This is all garbage.

Who cares about linking my iPhone screen into my car. I look at my screen all damn day at work, and my phone is a tether.

Why do I want to use Facebook, Twitter, etc. while I'm driving (not to mention its super dangerous)

I would prefer that BMW focus on performance and reliability instead of loading smartphone apps into my car that do nothing but make the car: a) more expensive; b) more complicated to own, operate and maintain.

Last I checked BMW wasn't exactly knocking it out of hte park on reliability....
I know I'm late to the party and that this thread is getting epic in proportion but I couldn't agree more. Why do people want this crap in their cars? I don't even care about Nav. The Nav on my iPhone5 works fine and honestly, driving is one of the few times during the day that I don't have some kind of screen in front of my face. Why do people feel the need to be 'connected' at all times to their vacuous social networking feeds and whatever else? 90% of the time, my control display is shut off in the car because I find the screen distracting. Driving is my time to clear my mind, think, listen to NPR or music or whatever and if I MUST take a call, I've got the button on my steering wheel. Bluetooth phone pairing is the extent of the 'tech' I want in my car. My phone stays in my backpack or briefcase or whatever, OFF my person. When I see people texting and driving or holding their phones while driving I seriously want to drive them off the road. NOTHING that is happening via that device is that important. 30min - an hour without being able to immediately access the content of your iPhone, apps etc. will not kill you. If it's an emergency, someone can call you.

How is it that there are people who don't want a vacation from this crap?

Let it go. It's good for you. Just get in the car, put on your sunglasses, crank the stereo and f*@king drive. DRIVE.

Quote:
Originally Posted by falar View Post
Why on earth does anyone think Apple is a "premium brand"??

Talk about good marketing on their part.
It's considered premium because it is expensive. Cars, computers, vodka, whatever.. If it costs more, it's considered 'premium'. Many people would argue that Grey Goose is no 'better' than Absolut and I know many people who think BMWs are overpriced crap with sales fueled by pretentious badge whores looking for a status symbol or the 'ultimate driving machine'. It's premium because it's expensive. Why do people consider my car 'premium' when a fully loaded Chevy Cruz has more technology and comfort features in it than my car?

I have used Apple products for so long I would never go back. Apple products look nice and people like nice things to look at. As far as the visual design elements of Apple products, no one comes close IMO. My computer savvy grew mainly due to years spent in recording studios where Apple computers and products are the standard. You will almost NEVER find a PC computer in a recording studio, nor will you find it in an editing bay etc.. Entertainment industry uses Apple almost exclusively. I don't know if it's "BETTER", it's just what I buy and I'll pay a premium for it because I think their OS has always been seamless and easy to use and their integration across multiple devices is seamless if you have all Apple stuff.
gkr778 commented:
April 17, 2014, 12:41 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kafkaesque320 View Post
I see people texting and driving or holding their phones while driving...
Ah yes, the "driverless car". Sadly, it's not just an R&D endeavor at Google and at automotive OEMs.

Here's one reason the problem will continue:

Kafkaesque320 commented:
April 17, 2014, 2:27 pm

^ Haha. I practice what I preach. Phone is integrated in case I need to make or take a call. I like that my basic iDrive has my phone book etc. which is the extent of what I need. Otherwise it can wait.
dugbug commented:
April 17, 2014, 3:02 pm

10 points for gkr778
gkr778 commented:
April 17, 2014, 3:09 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kafkaesque320 View Post
^ Haha. I practice what I preach. Phone is integrated in case I need to make or take a call. I like that my basic iDrive has my phone book etc. which is the extent of what I need. Otherwise it can wait.
sean.miamiheat commented:
April 17, 2014, 3:56 pm

Good for BMW. The only think I use my iPhone for in the car is audio streaming or handsfree calling. I don't care if the display has an Apple look or something like that. Besides, with BMW focusing more on ConnectedDrive, they can finally make a decent MyBMWRemote App because the current one is just not cutting it.
minn19 commented:
April 17, 2014, 6:07 pm

I guess I look at it a bit differently. While I agree with the hang up drive aspect for obvious safety reasons. I am not going to call somebody out for loading their car up with tons of options. Everybody has their different idea of what makes their car cool to them. If you are the buy the stripper and just get sports pack for the driving experience person, more power to you. But, some people love the gadgets as well, why look down at them for liking what they like?

For example, I don't use my Nav hardly ever and didn't really want it, but as everybody here knows you have to get Nav to get some of the goodies that I do want. I also think the HUD is distracting and don't like it, but I can understand how some people love it and can't live without it.

Besides, the cat is out of the bag and unfortunately talking on the phone in the car is part of our culture and a necessary evil for some people. The faster they can smoothly integrate communication and entertainment options in the car the safer it will become. Except for a few of you hardcore ones, all of us from time to time look at a text or an e-mail while driving. I hate to admit it, but I do it every so often. The faster they can integrate everything on the main screen and get everything as hands free as possible, the better for every body.
uberspeed commented:
April 18, 2014, 1:54 am

http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/17/56...-benz-hands-on

You can fight technology or get run over by it...
gkr778 commented:
April 18, 2014, 9:21 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by uberspeed View Post
http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/17/56...-benz-hands-on

You can fight technology or get run over by it...
Based on that article, no one is going to "get run over" by CarPlay anytime soon.
dugbug commented:
April 18, 2014, 9:32 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by gkr778 View Post
Based on that article, no one is going to "get run over" by CarPlay anytime soon.
Looked damn cool to me. I love the idea that cars in the future can as an option pick up their GUI from my phone, be they rentals or two cars from different manufacturers
uberspeed commented:
April 18, 2014, 10:42 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by gkr778 View Post
Based on that article, no one is going to "get run over" by CarPlay anytime soon.
Eventually, it happens, let's not be so short sighted.