Is General Motors Working With Apple On Integrating iOS 7 Into Its Vehicles?
27
Sponsored Links
Monday June 10th, 2013 will mark the beginning of the 2013 Apple World Wide Developers Conference (WWDC) — an event that brings together Apple software and hardware developers to mostly learn and discover how to write better apps and create better products for Apple’s ecosystem of devices. This year, the conference sold out in a record two minutes (flat) — and just like every year before it, the event — or rather, the kick-off keynote — is to Apple enthusiasts what the 2014 Corvette C7 Stingray announcement was to GM, Chevrolet, and Corvette fans all over the world. While Apple’s secrecy surrounding future products is anything but new, we’re going to take this opportunity to present an educated guess about how tomorrow’s event might affect General Motors enthusiasts, as well as automotive fans in general.
What’s Definitely Coming
It’s almost fact that Apple will announce the next-generation of its mobile operating system — iOS 7 — at WWDC 2013. More important for the automotive industry, however, is the incessant rumor that the updated mobile software will deliver new ways for users to interact with their cars — a turn of evens that just might become a bombshell for automakers.
Some of you may also remember that one year ago, when Apple debuted iOS 6, it mentioned that General Motors was among a number of automotive partners that planned to integrate Siri Eyes Free functionality into its vehicles. As it turned out, General Motors was the very first automaker to bring Siri Eyes Free to market in the 2013 Chevy Sonic and Spark thanks to the integration with the MyLink infotainment system.
As a reminder, Siri Eyes Free allows drivers to activate Apple’s Siri automated assistant by pressing a button on the steering wheel, and then being able to ask the assistant questions, receive answers, and even perform commands without taking eyes off the road or hands off the wheel. The integration promised to minimize distractions by preventing the iOS device’s screen from lighting up, and users could ask Siri to call people, select and play music, hear and compose text messages, use Maps and get directions, read notifications, find calendar information, add reminders, and more — all with Siri Eyes Free.
So, how might Apple be planning to take this one step further?
The Rumor
According to Apple enthusiast website 9to5Mac, Apple has been working with automakers to make a special version of iOS that will function on the infotainment screens of vehicles. Users would connect the iOS device (iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch) to the infotainment system using either a wired USB connection or wireless Bluetooth, and would them be able to use a modified version of the iPhone user interface built right into the car.
So, part of Apple’s 2013 WWDC announcement could be a version of iOS built directly into and optimized for the vehicle. Notably, we’re not talking about mirroring the user interface onto the vehicle’s built-in screen. Instead, the (unconfirmed) newfound functionality in iOS 7 would use Apple software in the vehicle, and only be activated when paired with an iOS device.
GM’s Possible Involvement
Since GM was first to integrate Siri Eyes Free functionality, could it be that the automaker would be Apple’s closest partner in building the new car-centric iOS goodness directly into its own vehicles and/of infotainment systems?
The use case for doing something like this is rather straightforward:
- It would present users with an already-familiar user interface for drivers, as users are probably much more familiar with their smartphone (iPhone) than their car’s infotainment systems.
- It would allow users to utilize apps that are already on the their phone in their vehicle in a safe manner.
- It would still contain Siri Eyes Free functionality as seen today, and maybe even improved.
Coincidentally, GM rival Volkswagen is already offering something similar in a special edition Beetle it introduced earlier this year. Called the iBeetle, the vehicle is equipped with a dock for the iPhone and allows drivers to use the handset as a second screen for infotainment purposes.
When To Expect It
The 2013 WWDC keynote address — the opening event where Apple announces the new stuff relevant to both consumers and developers alike — will take place on June 10th, 2013 10 a.m. Pacific Standard Time. However, if any of our guesses turn out to be true, the actual software and vehicle integration will likely arrive in actual GM vehicles months later.
Even though this is what one would call “rampant speculation”, it is worth mentioning that the proof might be in the the fact that we haven’t heard a peep about this from GM or any of its brands — which would be in great alignment with Apple’s own notoriously-secretive nature and the secrecy it swears upon its partners. Even so, it wouldn’t surprise us to see GM on the leading edge of the in-vehicle integration with Apple devices… if Apple is indeed working on the in-car functionality for iOS 7 in the first place. However, it is worth mentioning that GM has its own app-related efforts in the works, with the very first fruits of the undertaking due to launch at the end of this year.
Sponsored Links
I would love to see CUE go to an Apple based program rather than Linux. Think of how good this could be for Cadillac, partnering with the one of the most recognizable and used brands in the world. Consumers would quickly love CUE and when young buyers hear Apple is in Cadillacs it can only help Cadillacs brand image and attract new buyers. I hope this GM Apple partnership is true.
Not just in Cadillac’s (on a side note Caddy’s are becoming more appealing) however put it in all GM vehicles please I have a Apple IPhone & when my contract ends in the not too distant future I will replace it with another upgraded one as I’m more than happy with it.
Given that Android makes up almost 50% of the market, I’m not sure this will happen. You’d alienate half your customers before they even walk in the door.
Why not Android? If GM is going to put Apple products in their car, get ready for a $2000 option for over priced proprietary hardware technology made by a company that avoids taxes, price fixes and severely underpays Chinese kids.
“get ready for a $2000 option for over priced proprietary hardware technology”
Nothing wrong with proprietary technology for the sake of providing a better user experience. And last I checked, the price of Apple technology is right in line with that of its closes competitors. Ironically, Apple’s products are often of a much-higher quality both in hardware and software.
“…made by a company that avoids taxes, price fixes and severely underpays Chinese kids.”
You should follow Apple’s efforts to correct the poor working conditions fostered by its contractors more closely. Apple is the only technology company that has taken an initiative here.
As for avoiding taxes — it’s nothing that any other large multinational doesn’t already do. Heck, even GM is a Delaware company.
And as far as price fixing is concerned… puh-lease. One could just as easily accuse Google of dumping Android on the market, or of engaging in anti-trust-like behavior with its “acquisition” of Motorola. Oh heck, let’s just throw in the manufacturing conditions of Samsung and HTC, to name a few.
“Nothing wrong with proprietary technology for the sake of providing a better user experience. ”
I suppose this is true for the purpose of integrating a system into a car, but Apple for the power computer user (I make my own computers) is crap unless your goal is to edit video, audio or images, but even then there are Windows PCs that can do that for half the price. I know, I’ve worked for a video editing company and recorded, mixed and mastered a few albums in my time. But that’s besides the point when it comes to cars.
“Apple technology is right in line with that of its closes competitors. Ironically, Apple’s products are often of a much-higher quality both in hardware and software.”
I would dispute that, but it really depends on what product you compare it to. If you spend $50 on an Android phone, you’re going to get what you pay for as compared to the Samsung S4 or (although a bit dated) my RAZR MAXX. As far as their technology being superior, it does run well and provide a very user-friendly experience, but is at the same time extremely restrictive.
“You should follow Apple’s efforts to correct the poor working conditions fostered by its contractors more closely. Apple is the only technology company that has taken an initiative here.”
Sure, after Jobs though, and after they knew about it for how long? Also, Motorola is going to start making their phones in Texas. They’ll be the first smartphone manufacture to make their phones in the US. That’s a selling point (at least for me) in and of itself.
“As for avoiding taxes — it’s nothing that any other large multinational doesn’t already do.”
That doesn’t make it right. Anyway, is Google the perfect company? Heck no. But they are definitely the better of two evils when it comes to Android vs. iOS. Android is much more flexible, not to mention Google seems to be more willing to innovate instead of just churning out the same thing every year. I think if GM wants to show that they are serious, Google would be the company to partner with. Apple is loosing money left and right and their stocks are plummeting because they’re getting lazy and assuming people are just going to keep buying rehashed models. It can only work for so long.
Well, here goes:
“I suppose this is true for the purpose of integrating a system into a car, but Apple for the power computer user (I make my own computers) is crap…”
Apple’s goal has never been to serve the minuscule percent of the market that builds its own — so why is it being treated like it is?
As for serving the “power user”, the needs of that kind of customer are very broad. There are all kinds of different “power users”, many of whom find Macs to serve their needs perfectly, whether it is with a MacBook, iMac, Mac Mini, or Mac Pro. I happen to be one of those people… and I’m also someone who got his A+ certification nearly a decade ago, built several Windows-based machines of my own, and served in a high-level tech position… before I saw the light that is Apple 🙂
Nevertheless, that’s neither here nor there.
“I would dispute that, but it really depends on what product you compare it to. If you spend $50 on an Android phone, you’re going to get what you pay for as compared to the Samsung S4 or (although a bit dated) my RAZR MAXX. As far as their technology being superior, it does run well and provide a very user-friendly experience, but is at the same time extremely restrictive.”
Agreed — it does depend on what you’re talking about. And I’d also dispute the “restrictive” bit. It’s restrictive for the very small percentage of potential users who want to outfit their phones with purple LEDs that light up whenever they get an email, or “root it” to do all kinds of other things that can usually be described as “luddite” in nature… although one could argue that after “rooting” an iOS device, one could do all of those things as well.
By contrast, Apple makes products for the general public; the mainstream, if you will. And by far and large, that market overwhelmingly loves those products.
“Sure, after Jobs though, and after they knew about it for how long? Also, Motorola is going to start making their phones in Texas. They’ll be the first smartphone manufacture to make their phones in the US. That’s a selling point (at least for me) in and of itself.”
I don’t know… did they know about it? And if they did, they ultimately chose to fix it at the root.
And with yesterday’s announcement to build the Mac Pro in the U.S., perhaps phones and tablets will be next for Apple.
Nevertheless, I do commend Motorola for its efforts to make some of its devices in the U.S. of A.
“That doesn’t make it right.”
In the world of publicly-traded companies and shareholders and the associated pressures, avoiding taxes in any which way has become the norm. Is it right? Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t, but it provides a common ground on which organizations compete. But that’s a whole different topic than the one we’re discussing here.
“Anyway, is Google the perfect company? Heck no. But they are definitely the better of two evils when it comes to Android vs. iOS. Android is much more flexible, not to mention Google seems to be more willing to innovate instead of just churning out the same thing every year.”
Does Google’s supposed “flexibility” result in a better product or a better user experience? Unless you’re talking about the “luddite” consumer I described above, the answer is a resounding “no” — with all kinds of issues still plaguing Android-powered devices left and right.
“I think if GM wants to show that they are serious, Google would be the company to partner with.”
When a single device holds the #1 or #2 spot in market share, being “serious’ is partnering with whatever company is behind that device. Google should focus on improving and furthering the UX of its devices by partnering with automakers in the way that Apple did. Again, a car’s infotainment system should be open and be able to integrate with as many devices as possible. And that’s precisely what Apple announced yesterday.
“Apple is loosing money left and right and their stocks are plummeting because they’re getting lazy and assuming people are just going to keep buying rehashed models. It can only work for so long.”
Apple earns billions of dollars in revenue and income every quarter, and regularly beats its earnings on a YOY basis. It hasn’t “lost” money in years, and, ironically, makes more money (revenue and income) than Google. A quick look at a few recent financial statements will demonstrate just that.
Regarding the stock price: please tell me we’re not judging a company or the quality of its products by stock price. In that regard, we can say that Apple is nearly “twice as big” as Google (by Market Cap), and that it’s growing faster than Google (on a 90-day rolling average). Since investment cycles tend to move independently of a company’s actual performance, they are almost always irrelevant in determining a company’s true performance.
Ultimately, all one needs to do is look at Apple’s announcements yesterday, and see clear evidence of a company that cares about its users, is full of innovation and creativity… disproving the “lazy” assumption. And that’s without the upcoming phone models expected later this year.
As I alluded to previously, the best approach for a car’s infotainment system is to be flexible and work with any device the user brings into it (to a limit, of course). Coincidentally, that’s exactly what Apple announced yesterday.
A much, much, better move would be to integrate Android and Google products into vehicles. For Search, Google Now, and Google Maps alone it would trump Apple’s offerings.
Alex, I know you’re an Apple [nut-hugger] fan boy so you’ll likely disagree, but Android is superior (especially for this application) and would be a much better choice of system for people to have in their cars.
Andrew — you’ve got it all wrong, bud.
I’m a technology fan. I do like Apple products because I prize quality, innovation that improves people’s lives, and respect Apple as a company. In fact, Apple is — in many ways — similar to GM: both are American companies that rose to greatness, fell, and then rose again — to even newer heights.
I’m sure we can go back-and-forth all day long on whether Android or iOS are superior, but as I stated in my reply to Andy, iOS devices trump those that run Android when it comes to the vast majority of technology users, and by association, people.
I’m also apprehensive about Eric Schmidt’s presence on Apple’s board of directors while Apple was developing iOS and the iPhone, only for Google to release something that’s so similar under Schmidt’s direction. The scenario reeks of intellectual property theft… although an an Android fan boy like yourself will probably call it “inspiration”.
More on topic: the best approach for a car’s infotainment system is to be flexible and work with any device the user brings into it (to a limit, of course). Coincidentally, that’s exactly what Apple announced yesterday.
The answer to the article’s question is yes.
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2013/06/apple-officially-announces-ios-in-the-car-lists-gms-chevy-opel-as-partners/
While android may have a roughly 50% market share, the problem with integrating google into vehicles vs apple is the fragmentation of android. They may have 50% of the market, but more than half of those (as highlighted in today’s WWDC keynote), are running a an old version of android from 2010. On the other hand, look at the percentage if iPhone users running the most current version of iOS– it’s close to 95% (correct me if I’m wrong). Therefore, even if gm were to integrate ONLY iOS 7 into its vehicles, it could reach a much larger user base than the most recent version of android, and you can guarantee that the user experience would be better, more reliable, and bug-free. Because of Apple’s level of integration, consistency, and quality in iOS, not only would it be a win to integrate it into the world’s best brand of vehicles, every gm owner who also owned an iPhone would be using all the in-car capability, whereas a good portion of android owners wouldn’t, even if they were able to.
Android fragmentation is dropping at increasingly high rates every quarter. And would the current level even matter for the amount of phone-to-car integration required? Having the actual vehicle’s infotainment running Android is the main point to be made as an advantage over Apple’s iOS
To have the actual vehicle’ infotainment completely running on ANY mobile OS is a bad idea, android or iOS. That would certainly alienate users! No, auto manufacturers should keep it simple, allow the mobile device to take over the infotainment when connected, nothing more. What would be ideal is to make it so that if a mobile device is connected, all the processing and output is done on THAT device and the infotainment serves only as an external screen displaying a video signal. That way, it’s left up to the device manufacturers to build this capability into their devices, it would be easy for car manufacturers to add to their vehicles, the user experience would be COMPLETELY dependent on the device and its OS, and most importantly, the consumer can integrate whatever device they have into their vehicles as long as their device supports that capability.
That’s actually another valid point against Apple. Google is very open to sharing, for free, it’s services. When Apple closes off Google products for Apple handset (prime, and recent example is Google Maps), Google steps up and offers it free so people aren’t stuck with the pure-shit Apple Maps. Same with Google Now.
If Google worked to implement Android into vehicles, you can bet it would be very Apple friendly. Vise-versa? Not so much.
Your last comment has zero relevance to vehicle integration
When it comes to pairing an iPhone to an iOS based infotainment; an Android phone to an Android based infotainment; an Android phone to an iOS based infotainment; and an iPhone to an Android based infotainment, yes, it certainly does.
Google doesn’t look to alienate people to their products, where as that is what Apple continually does.
You misunderstood my comment about allowing the vehicle to act ONLY as a display, NOT to run one mobile OS or another. I’m not going to waste any more time on this because the rest of the people in the thread perfectly understand what I was trying to say, whether they agree with it or not.
No I got that, I was referring to the main article at hand and playing off of what you said. Don’t assume what I, or anyone else here, understands in regard to what it is you’re saying. Especially when you make such humorous ‘kool-aid’ comments.
And as I already said, if it were an android phone running in the vehicle, that user would be free to use google’s services, ie. maps, and if they were using an iOS device, they would be free to use apple’s services. And about apple dropping google maps for their own mapping solution?? That’s been good for consumers as it gives them more choice. By the sounds of it you’re an android user so don’t act like you we’re affected in any way by Apple’s move to in-house maps, which I might add, have hardly any more inaccuracies than google maps.
Andrew — allow me to address the following, for starters:
“That’s actually another valid point against Apple. Google is very open to sharing, for free, it’s services. ”
And yet Apple just beat Google to the punch in integrating iOS into the car. When it comes to these very important and very “tight” examples of integration, open-ness could be a detriment, rather than a benefit/value-add.
“When Apple closes off Google products for Apple handset (prime, and recent example is Google Maps), Google steps up and offers it free so people aren’t stuck with the pure-shit Apple Maps. Same with Google Now.”
The Maps were never “pure shit”… have you ever used them? The problems (reported over a year ago were) have all been fixed, and only affected a very small portion of the user base. Meanwhile, Google Maps has a tremendous amount of inaccuracies in its locations/listings thanks to the sometimes-difficult process to get a place or a change to an existing place approved — but you seldom hear about them because Google Maps is rarely in the spotlight the way Apple’s Maps was.
Apple had the spotlight a year ago since all the attention was on its “brand new” Maps product. If it were announced as a “beta” for the first year, you wouldn’t even have known there were a few issues affecting a few users.
And to clarify your original statement: Apple didn’t “close off” Google products; it simply replaced Maps with a version of its own. We can argue all day long whether that was a good move or not, but I’d be willing to be that for the majority of users, it resulted in an improved experience. But that’s not the point, which is that Google was free to introduce Maps (or the YouTube app) as an iOS app, which it did. So much for being “closed”.
Ironically, one could say that Google’s decision to impress the WebM video format upon everyone and anyone using the web is a very “closed” move, one that’s not representative of a company that set out to “do no evil”. So much for being all “free” and all “open”.
“If Google worked to implement Android into vehicles, you can bet it would be very Apple friendly. Vise-versa? Not so much.”
Not sure how that’s even relevant. The purpose of the integration announced yesterday is for iOS users to use their products in vehicles. Apple isn’t taking over the vehicle’s infotainment system to be the one and only game in town (or in the car, so to speak); it’s just providing an extension of the device. Google is welcome to do its own… so is Microsoft and BlackBerry. It just so happens that Apple prides itself on UX and UI and in this case was the first to improve the experience for its users in the car.
All good points. Interesting how its the people not even using apple products complain the loudest about apple’s “closed” nature. As you noted in a previous comment, iOS integration into the car is targeted not at the power user minority, but the general public, who only care about a reliable, consistent, and high quality experience.
I don’t like the company, but I own a few Apple products. The iPod classics are great (though, I liked my Creative Zen Vision M much better until I shattered the screen on a guitar pedal while rocking out a bit too hard and wearing headphones :D). I just don’t like anything else they make. Especially the new iTunes… >_<
“Apple’s move to in-house maps, which I might add, have hardly any more inaccuracies than google maps.”
Hahaha-ha that is too damn funny
It’s been a year buddy….most errors are now fixed, bringing apple maps much closer to google
And just as Apple starts to catch up, Google makes another big jump ahead with their Maps a couple weeks ago.
This isn’t iOS versus Android, not for me at least, it is the fact that Android would be a much better and versatile software to have in cars.
Imagine if MyLink ran a unique version of Andriod OS. Widgets in your car!!!
Please let me know if I shall send over some amazing topic ideas?