Last week, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Apple accusing the technology company of monopolizing the smartphone market. The antitrust suit alleges Apple illegally cut off competition and seeks, among other things, possible structural changes within the company. Notably, the lawsuit also mentions Apple CarPlay, the company’s popular phone-mirroring service, alleging that the service gives Apple too much power over the auto industry and stifles competition.
On page 49 of the 88-page lawsuit, the DOJ states that “Apple has told automakers that the next generation of Apple CarPlay will take over all of the screens, sensors, and gauges in a car, forcing users to experience driving as an iPhone-centric experience if they want to use any of the features provided by CarPlay.”
The lawsuit continues by asserting that this is an example of the company leveraging its iPhone user base to “exert more power over its trading partners, including American carmakers, in future innovation. By applying the same playbook of restrictions to CarPlay, Apple further locks-in the power of the iPhone by preventing the development of other disintermediating technologies that interoperate with the phone but reside off device.”
Essentially, the allegation is that integration of the next-gen CarPlay system would force the vehicle to cede control over a variety of vehicle systems (screens, sensors, gauges, etc.) to the user’s iPhone. While Apple CarPlay can support instrument panels, forcing control over all of these vehicle systems would be a new development for the phone mirroring service. Rather, the DOJ’s interpretation of how the technology works may be off-base, or at the very least, misleading.
Per a report from The Verge, principal analyst at Guidehouse Insights, Sam Abuelsamid, states that the next-gen Apple CarPlay will not require OEMs to “let Apple take over all the screens.” Rather, automakers “can limit the interface to whichever screens they want.”
For now, Apple CarPlay remains one of the most popular in-vehicle technology features among consumers. Nevertheless, that hasn’t stopped GM from moving away from CarPlay integration in favor of its own system with the new GM Ultium EVs. Now, with this new lawsuit in Apple’s lap, that move may make even more sense.
Do you agree? Should GM continue to phase out Apple CarPlay in light of the new DOJ lawsuit? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below, and remember to subscribe to GM Authority for more GM infotainment news, GM technology news, GM business news, GM legal news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
Apple is in big do-do because the Feds are also going after iPhones. Good.
Apple has the best navigation system period
GM decision not to let owners use it is ridiculous
I have tried all the GM systems and they are horrible. Years behind Apple. Not user friendly.
I have owned nothing but GM for 50 years. But if they don’t allow Apple navigation I am moving on to another car company that does.
Apple has the best navigation system? Google Maps might have alot to say about that.
Or Waze, with maps continually updated by its users
Like reversing the elimination the Bolt EV, GM better wise-up and continue with Apple Play or lose buyers to other makers.
DOJ doesn’t know what it’s talking about.
“Regular” CarPlay would still be a choice, it’s up to the automaker to adopt and integrate to provide the full functionality.
But that’s exactly what I would be looking for. And probably 90% or more of iPhone users.
If it is “next-gen”, I think too early to know what apple will require of automakers. “Regular” may no longer be available after next-gen is released. And given apple’s secretive nature, no one except those under a tight NDA know. Apple makes NSA look leaky. It is possible one of those under NDA contacted DOJ under whistle blower. So maybe DOJ does know what it is talking about.
Why isn’t the DOJ going after GM for partnering with Google and locking owners out of the Navigation system in their vehicle unless they buy an OnStar Subscription?
Our Country is far more vulnerable with Google and their ties to the CCP, than we are with Apple.
Why isn’t DOJ going after GM for forcing users to use their system and pay for data connections, when we already have data connections with iPhone and just want CarPlay? Or same for Tesla and Rivian? The GM system is abased on android automotive, isn’t it anti-competitive not to offer integrated CarPlay then? Why no lawsuit against Google?
CarPlay adds choice, not taking it away.
Android Automotive and Android Auto are two different products. GM moving away from Android Auto and Car Play are because 1) GM doesn’t want to have to constantly iterate it’s software to integrate those two features. 2) GM wants to collect and sell your data instead of giving it to Apple and Google.
Based on Google’s history of abandoning “Do No Evil”, DOJ antitrust suits associated with their search engine and advertising monopolies and Android’s horrible history being a worse malware vector than early MS Windows, I don’t know that GM putting all their eggs in Google’s basket is that great of an idea. That Google pays Apple $12 billion – $18 billion annually (depending on the year) tells me that Google is likely the largest data consolidator/broker out there.
Apple is no saint, either, but having extensively used both sides’ devices and operating systems (+ Microsoft) over the last 20 years, Google was OK but nothing special… None of their hardware or software is in my house other than the 2024 Lyriq running Apple CarPlay on Android Automotive. The iPhones, iPads, iMacs, Studio and other Apple gear in the house run great. And I changed from Google search to another search engine for Safari years ago.
GM is not the only auto manufacturer (for that matter not the only company) that collects and sells data to consolidators and brokers. I just wish they’d all be more open about it and frankly, I’d like to be paid for the data I am supplying.
There’s nothing to iterate. My 2018 Pacifica with CarPlay support hasn’t had an infotainment software update ever. And CarPlay still works fine.
Do I understand this correctly? Part of the DOJ’s lawsuit includes a note on a system that hasn’t even been implemented yet? How can Apple be at fault when it’s not out? Meanwhile GM is selling driving data to insurance companies apparently without consent and the DOJ ignores that altogether.
Your selling your data right now by just being on a computer. everyone does it. Acting like your upset because they are selling is a joke. You can’t use anything without giving your data up. If so then go back to a flip phone and see how much you can do in the digital world.
The issue is Apple is making it harder for OEM’s to write software. GM is smart here doing this. GM can’t be sued for using their own software in their cars. They should not be required to support other software, just makes it easier to hack.
GM has just announced that they have terminated their relationship with two of these data harvesting companies. While data harvesting has become common and egregious, there is still a point to standing up and taking reasonable steps to protect our data as evidenced by GM’s reaction.
You are right GM stopped with the two Data Brokers we heard about, but are they selling data to other Companies not yet revealed?
My bigger problem is the whole Google Built-in platform. Google is so connected to the CCP. I am concerned about what Data they are receiving from our vehicles.
And on top of that GM is locking us out of the built-in Navigation system unless we buy an On-Star subscription.
You consented by signing the OnStar agreement that no one reads.
Ill take an expanded version of Apple Play any way I can get it.
Free CarPlay vs GM’s monthly charge for no better is an easy call!
OnStar is no bargain.
Dixon: Who says the new version of CarPlay will be free? Just asking. You never know.
And what about Google that is now in GM vehicles? They wouldn’t be collecting information would they? That’s what they are all about and GM is all about the money.
Isn’t every company about making money? If you don’t like it please go to a no capitalistic country.
US used to be capitalistic, no so sure anymore. I am all for capitalism but not for being forced to pay for things I don’t need or want. This isn’t about capitalism, enjoy paying a subscription fee for auto accessories soon coming your way.
Brings to mind BMW’s heated seat subscription fiasco
Oh no not Google, the company attached at the hip to the CCP? For that reason I will never have an OnStar subscription.
And because I won’t pay for ONStar and share my life with Google, Chevrolet has decided I can’t use my Giant screen Navigation system in my 2023 Chevrolet High Country.
No where on the Chevrolet build and price website are we told that without having the OnStar programs we are unable to use the Chevrolet Navigation system, or even hands free calling.
No where on the Window sticker is it stated that without the OnStar program you can not access the Chevrolet Navigation system, or even the hands free calling, which in many states means you can not use your phone.
And nowhere during the Sales Process were we told an OnStar plan was required to use the Chevrolet Navigation system.
What would GM be charging the consumer for “their version” of a phone integration system? I was fortunate to avoid the extra $1500 charge for OnStar in my GMC. Not so for those with the 2023 model. I absolutely hate having any “monthly” or “annual” charges added to my vehicle cost.
What a bull$hit lawsuit. If people are choosing to buy vehicles based on support for Apple Carplay, then kudos to Apple for making a user interface that people really like and is super easy to use. The DoJ doesn’t have a leg to stand on, and automakers *cough…GM…cough* choosing to get rid of support for Carplay are putting themselves at a serious competitive disadvantage.
Leave Cap Play alone, it works and if you make a change it will take months of frustrated customers!!!
Apple Play is $0 cost to consumer…..GM wants consumers to pay subscription $$$ to product from google.
Yes – Apple is trying (and doing a pretty good job already) to establish control over everything they can. But isn’t General Motors (and other car manufacturers) doing the same thing.
Examples are pricing a 3 year subscription to OnStar as a mandatory cost inclusion on a new vehicle, and eliminating mapping services within the Infotainment system that forces owners to use Apps on their cellphones for directions.
I honestly can not believe there isn’t a Class Action Lawsuit against GM with the Google Built-in crap.
Chevrolet has created the Google Built-in technology and forced it on buyers without telling them what it was and what it would cost.
No where on the Chevrolet build and price website are we told that without having the OnStar programs we are unable to use the Chevrolet Navigation system, or even hands free calling. But they show us the pretty dashboard with the Navigation system on the big screen.
No where on the Window sticker is it stated that without the OnStar program you can not access the Chevrolet Navigation system, or even the hands free calling, which in many states means you can not use your phone.
And nowhere during the Sales Process were we told an OnStar plan was required to use the Chevrolet Navigation system.
Auto OEMs need to be responsible for ultimate integration of ANY system being installed in a vehicle. They (OEMs) must beheld accountable. There can be occasions where systems need to override based on safety and operation of vehicles ancillary equipment. Displays, air bags, steering, motor operation, are but to name a few that must be overseen by the OEM during vehicle operation.
Suddenly, GM execs look pretty smart with the release of the info by the DOJ! Big tech seizing control with all its tentacles in various areas will suck the life out of the economy to their benefit. We should applaud the DOJ for looking out for the welfare of consumers for both our wallets and privacy.
Michael you clearly didn’t read the NY Times article about GM selling driver data. GM’s sole motivation for this is to keep the cash in their pockets. In fact they are late to the game as usual. Apple and Google have been doing it for years, GM just wants some of that pie
The issue at hand isn’t about Apple dominating the smartphone market, but rather the manner in which Apple safeguards and administers its data. Over the years, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has sought access to data on iPhones, a request consistently denied by Apple. While there have been instances where Apple has provided the DOJ with specific data for particular cases, the DOJ desires unrestricted access to all data, akin to the access it anticipates receiving from entities like GM/Google, which could be utilized for monitoring consumers for purposes such as insurance. Apple CarPlay, a leading force in the automotive sector, faces potential challenges. Should GM decide to discontinue CarPlay, including its latest iteration, it risks alienating a significant portion of its customer base.
Lets just talk about maps. I use Apple Maps to provide driving directions and information on trips. The Maps are always up-to-date and accurate. If I am restricted to GM maps, I will have to pay an annual update. GM is just trying to create an annuity stream for their software.
The latest GM interface (I’m using the generic one across their new EV’s) is essentially like a big phone running Google maps (but with deep connections into the car sensors). The car provides the data connection through the free 8 year subscription, but at any time you can tell the car to use your phone’s hotspot wifi connection and the Google maps will be running on the car interface using your phone’s data connection/plan. So it’s a whole lot like CarPlay using Google maps.
Right, and all of us that use iPhone and Apple apps like Map are just asking for the same option. Do not want to use google maps that sells your
Location data to advertisers.
Given Googles ties to the Chinese Communist Party I have opted not to create a Google account, and not to purchase any OnStar subscription. Signing up for an OnStar subscription means you are authorizing them to collect and share your data.
I think it is borderline criminal that GM advertises their Big Screen and shows you their Navigation system in advertising and the Build and price website without telling you you need to buy an extra cost OnStar subscription to use it.
Geo3……. Super Cruise is also a subscription service. Don’t worry, GM will next charge baggage fees each time its sensors detects cargo.
Let Apple innovate all they want. Let the users have CarPlay if that’s what they like. If the users don’t want CarPlay then offer an alternative. Simply control access and behavior through the settings menu.
You need to let the consumer choose what THEY want. GM will take years to catchup with Apple Technology and I’d GM ca charge for levels of service they see it as another income stream. Just like OnStar Smart Driver is a cool tool they report results to 3rd party where the insurance agencies can get the data. I will bet GM wants to start charging for additional upgrades to Smart Driver. GM leave it alone and be good at building cars!!!
Plain and simple, if it’s not Apple 🍎 it’s crap.
No longer supported usually means no updates only. The APP usually will continue to work. But the bottom line is, “Its all about the money”!