mobile-menu-icon
GM Authority

About One-Third Of Car Buyers Insist On Apple CarPlay Or Android Auto: Study

A recent survey shows that about one-third of car buyers insist on Apple CarPlay or Android Auto smartphone integration in their next car. In addition, the survey shows that some drivers would even be willing to pay extra for the systems. The survey results follow trends among some automakers, including GM, towards phasing out Apple CarPlay and Android Auto in favor of native phone integration systems.

Apple CarPlay running in a Cadillac infotainment screen.

The recent consumer survey was conducted by McKinsey & Co., with results highlighted in a recent report from Automotive News. According to the survey, 30 percent of global EV buyers reported Apple CarPlay and Android Auto as a requirement for their next vehicle, with 35 percent of global ICE buyers, 25 percent of U.S. EV buyers, and 38 percent of U.S. ICE buyers reporting the same.

The survey also reveals that some consumers are willing to pay extra for smartphone integration, including almost 30 percent of EV buyers and 17 percent of gasoline-powered vehicle buyers.

Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, which mirror mobile phone interfaces on infotainment screens, boast installation rates above 90 percent in 2023 model-year vehicles, per Automotive News, which cites a survey from Wards Intelligence.

However, automakers should be cautious when it comes to relinquishing control to tech companies, as infotainment is crucial for brand differentiation and serves as a potential revenue stream from subscription services.

The U.S. Department of Justice recently filed a lawsuit against Apple alleging that the company’s CarPlay system has too much power over the auto industry and stifles competition. Despite this, some automakers are embracing the next generation of Apple CarPlay, which extends across multiple displays. Aston Martin and Porsche plan to incorporate it into upcoming models, while others like Rivian and Tesla, which do not support Apple CarPlay or Android Auto, are betting on their native systems.

Apple CarPlay

GM is also moving towards native systems, aiming for a custom infotainment experience that syncs seamlessly with users’ phones and integrates deeply with vehicle controls.

Although native systems have improved, convincing consumers to adopt them remains challenging. Per the recent survey, only 35 percent of global respondents and 28 percent of U.S. respondents would switch to native systems if smartphone integration were unavailable.

In a recent GM Authority poll, 87 percent of poll respondents said that the lack of Apple CarPlay and Android Auto was a dealbreaker.

Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM technology news, GM business news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.

Jonathan is an automotive journalist based out of Southern California. He loves anything and everything on four wheels.

Subscribe to GM Authority

For around-the-clock GM news coverage

We'll send you one email per day with the latest GM news. It's totally free.

Comments

  1. What people really want is standardization. They know their phones and so they’re accustomed to the overall experience. Forcing people to adapt to something that they’re unfamiliar with is not going to be popular. To make matters worse, GM already admitted that the whole point in switching is because they believe they can make billions in digital sales. Unless it’s miles ahead of CarPlay and Android Auto, it’s not going to work.

    Reply
    1. The system runs Android Automotive. Anything Android Auto can do Android Automotive can do natively. Spotify, Waze, Google Maps, etc. run in Android Automotive. The Google Store is also there for even more apps. You log into Android Automotive with you Google account.

      Now if you’re a Apple CarPlay user the situation is different. Granted all Apple has to do is create a Android Auto or Automotive Apple Music app.

      Reply
      1. Android Automotive does not have the same app support as Android Auto. The other issue is it allows manufacturers to offer a different UI experience per manufacturer, so a Chevrolet using Automotive and a GMC using it will look different. Ironically, Automotive actually does support Apple CarPlay out of the box, so GM is unnecessarily going out of its way to shut down features and force users to learn its system rather than let them choose what they are comfortable with. It’s absurd that this is even an issue.

        Reply
        1. I own a Cadillac Lyriq and I know it supports AA/CarPlay. Thing is most people that have the Lyriq like it’s native interface. Not some weird screen protection of AA/CarPlay.

          Reply
          1. You said it yourself. The Lyriq is able to offer all three. There is no reason to remove AA and CarPlay.

            Reply
            1. Apparently none of you have read why GM eliminated CarPlay and Android Auto. It is for charging and route planning. Proper battery conditioning and being able to find a charger easily is not possible with phone based apps, you need a native auto system that talks to the car so you don’t run out of juice or have to take longer than planned to charge because the battery wasn’t properly pre-conditioned.

              Reply
              1. Google Maps has some such features. But even assuming you’re right, why would I not want to have AA or CP in order for my car to have a feature that could be available without running AA or CP, when 99.9% of the time I’d be using the car where I’d have zero use for such a feature?

                Assuming that is a feature, it’s largely for the folks who don’t have at home charging and mistakenly have bought an EV.

                Reply
      2. Do you happen to know if it supports the Rocket Player music player?

        Reply
    2. Yeah, the comment in the article about “brand differentiation” made me cringe. No one buys a car because the display is different than what they’re used to. And personally I don’t want to make a mid-five figure purchase not being familiar with the system used, or at least having the option to use something else.

      What’s missing from this article is what it would cost to offer all three: AA, CP and whatever crap the car manufacturer wants to push out there. I’m sure it’s peanuts compared to the profit lost on each sale because the vehicle does not have AA and CP.

      Reply
  2. GM has thought they know better a number of times and this has backfired. This is another instance.

    Reply
  3. Buyers are being gouged left and right these days and requiring a manufacturer-specific operating system with subscription fees is more of that. It will force buyers to other brands and fall flat on its face. But GM is being too arrogant to listen.

    Reply
    1. Yeah, I don’t even want Super Cruise due to concern over the future fees. Currently it has too few roads covered to make it very useful to me, and my fear is by the time it has more useful roads I’ll be paying through the nose for the functionality. And what that means is Super Cruise will be yet another feature I don’t want that will push me to a lower trim level. Great for GM profits. /sarc

      Reply
  4. GM might want to take that study seriously. 33% of buyers is not a small number.

    Reply
    1. Even worse, this will affect iPhone users more, since more Android users would more likely be comfortable with just having Google Automotive. Just a guess, but I’d imagine that iPhone users would be more likely to buy higher, more profitable trim levels.

      But even 5% is a huge number when you’re talking about lost sales. For a company like GM that tends to have high per model sales, that could be 5,000 vehicles per year per model. And those marginal sales contribute to maintaining MSRP, and also come at a point where R&D has been fully recovered. GM is making a huge mistake.

      Reply
  5. I’m shocked it’s as low as 33%. I buy GM’s highest profit vehicles and when CarPlay goes so do I. GM’s software, and most can manufacturers for that matter, is legitimately terrible, slow, and buggy.

    Reply
    1. Well I can’t speak for everyone else but I have been driving since the days of MapQuest as the standard navigation system. While I do love Android Auto (CarPlay is nice too but I have Samsung phones), just having Google Maps and Waze is a massive upgrade to how I managed back then. Also, only my XT5 has it, my Rav get’s the cradle and the phone. So while yes its annoying not having the feature, its not a dealbreaker for me. More of a dealbreaker for me would be a car that eliminated the off switch for the stupid Auto Stop/Start system. And it had me stay away from GM products when they had eliminated the off button a few years ago. Not until they re-added the switch did I look at their products again.

      But I still think its stupid to remove the feature. I still recognize that 1/3rd is a large number to ignore. I suspect, like the off switch for the Stop/Start system, GM will cave and put it back in their cars once they see enough people walk out from the dealers.

      Reply
      1. I was driving before GPS was a thing (or even cell phones). My first was a Garmin i2, if I recall the model correctly. It had something like a 1.5″ screen and a dial to enter the addresses. Took about 3 minutes to find satellites after landing at an airport if you took it with you on a trip. Worked reasonably well after you got everything entered–better than the TomTom systems I’ve used.

        Reply
        1. Yeah I had the Garmins. My SX4 had one that was semi built-in and the bluetooth stopped working on it. I remember Jeep for some time would use and integrated Garmin system in their Uconnect systems.

          Reply
  6. Apple Car Play and Android Auto are only gimmicks to collect more of our personal information. Thus, giving auto companies another avenue of collect more revenue from our data. My vehicle has both services; I use neither. However, I connect my phone through bluetooth, but I disable Android Auto and say no to sharing contacts.

    Reply
    1. And do you wear a tinfoil hat too? Newsflash, you won’t be able to not use the new GM system, and it will undoubtedly collect data too. Even my 2019 GM vehicle sends data back to GM.

      Reply
  7. I don’t understand the big deal here, talk about the tail wagging the dog. I use google maps on my iPhone since Apple Maps sucks. Now google maps will be built in on GM EV’s, literally no change for me. As long as I can still access my music on my phone, I don’t really care if I have Apple Carplay.

    Reply
    1. Well note no one has answered my questions about being able to use the Rocket Player music player, so don’t assume you can access your music from an iPhone. And if you can it might not be the app you want to use.

      But there are apps you might want to use besides Google Maps and playing your own music, and as someone noted, the apps in Google Automotive are not as extensive as the apps in Android Auto. Probably even fewer apps if you use an iPhone.

      Reply
  8. GM or at least Chevy is doing a terrible job with “support” for CarPlay. Dealers don’t know what’s wrong. iPhone won’t connect wirelessly. They say things like you need a new phone!!! I think they are already focused on proprietary stuff instead of making what they have work. Chevy Trax is one example. Look at the forums. So many problems. Dealers say need to buy a data subscription which is not true.

    Reply
  9. New 24 Terrain, embedded Nav, Samsung connected for calls, $10/ mo for XM. All I need.
    But I actually have a life .

    Reply
  10. …and will GM continue to support and fix bugs on vehicles as they age. My 8 year old Samsung smart TV isn’t as smart as it was, and sometimes apps are removed because they are no longfer supported. To keep up with the times, you need a Roku, Chromecast, or Firestick. No such option will exist on veihicles.

    Reply
    1. You could mount a smartphone on your dash. Or a tablet and make your dash look like a Tesla. 😉 (But yeah, you’re 100% right.)

      Reply
  11. Mary knows best. If it doesn’t further the goal of complete electrification, it gets tossed. Central planning brought to you by corporate Amerika.

    Reply
  12. I like not being forced to connect a phone in order to get my maps & music. Sometimes, I don’t even have my phone on me, but I need maps and want music. Using the built-in is the best solution. The apps sign into my accounts so all my stuff is there, no need to bother with phone.

    Reply
    1. You’re assuming some sort of a data service for those features. I doubt that exists without a monthly fee.

      Reply
      1. I’m not assuming anything. If they require a data service, then I get a data service. It’s no different than me paying for Spotify, Sirius, 5 streaming services, etc. Not everything is about money, often it’s about convenience. My time is worth more to me than the hassle or cost; the experience is more important than saving $10

        Reply
        1. Now you’re assuming the data service will only be $10 a month, and that it will not rise a great deal in price during the time you own the car. I’m not willing to make such assumptions, which is one reason why I’m not that interested in Super Cruise.

          Much better to just stick with what is known than to assume. But somewhat irrelevant to this discussion since presumably this GM Google Automotive system will allow you to use your smartphone for its data needs. My point was simply that your assumption you don’t need your phone is false, unless of course you don’t care about money. I pointed out that you could probably buy data from them.

          Reply
          1. Again, NOT assuming. Yes everything always goes up.. you completely missed the point. A few dollars is worth time and convenience. I’ll stick with what is known,… I don’t need a phone in order to get my maps & music.

            Reply
            1. Maybe we need to back up. You said you didn’t need a phone. I responded saying: “You’re assuming some sort of a data service for those features. I doubt that exists without a monthly fee.” You responded saying you’re okay getting a data service if necessary, and being okay with $10 a month. You’re still assuming there will be a data service, but my response was you’re still assuming it will only be $10 a month.

              You’re really bad about making assumptions and then denying you’re making assumptions! I’m just pointing out that you’re making the assumptions. You’re denying that your assumptions are assumptions! Denial is a bad way of making decisions.

              And I haven’t even hit on your biggest assumption. That built in navigation will be as good as the navigation options from your phone. It could be, I’m not going to make the assumption that it won’t be, but historically that has been far from that case. And if it isn’t, you’re stuck.

              I’m in the Android camp, so I’m getting a bit more comfortable with the idea of only having Google Automotive. But it’s hardly a selling point, and if I get a GM EV despite that it will be because the other EV offerings continue to suck.

              Reply
              1. You’re really bad at comprehension.

                I am assuming nothing. I dont’ assume $10.. I don’t care what the price is, double itt if that helps your comprehension. I’m stating FACT that a phone isn’t necessary if you use the built in. I don’t Care if you need a data service for it. There is no way a data service won’t be available, any more than I’m sure taxes aren’t going away (not an assumption). If data is needed to function, it will be available. You just don’t want to pay, which is your whole argument.

                Not everyone puts money before function and time.

                Reply
        2. Except if you use CarPlay or Android Auto, there should be no extra fee. It will mirror your phone and you can still use Google Maps instead of Apple Maps. Why don’t you always have your phone. With wireless play, it connects automatically if the phone is at least in your pocket. So easy and no extra cost.

          Reply
          1. Because it’s one more piece of equipment I have to track.. I can be working in the yard or down by the docks then need go get something and dont’ want to have to go back into the house or just to get a phone, or I could be swimming in the lake and nobody brings their phones becuase what’s the point… , when the truck has built in maps & music.. .it’s that simple.. one less point of failure.

            It boggles my mind that people care so much about forcing an additional piece of hardware for no reason.. it’s just EASY with no phone.,

            Reply

Leave a comment

Cancel