GM To Offer Apple CarPlay and Android Auto API In Most 2016 Vehicles

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GM To Offer Apple CarPlay and Android Auto API In Most 2016 Vehicles

Posted by samzenpus on Wednesday May 27, 2015 @11:00AM from the don't-forget-the-undercoat dept.

Lucas123 writes: GM today announced it will offer Apple CarPlay and Android Auto mirroring APIs on 14 of its 2016 vehicles. GM's announcement follows one earlier this week by Hyundai, which said it would offer Android Auto in its Sonata Sedan this year. Some of GM's Chevrolet vehicles — such as the Malibu, Camaro and Silverado truck — use a seven-inch MyLink infotainment system; those systems will be compatible with both Android Auto and Apple CarPlay in the beginning of 2016. Those models offering the smartphone mirroring apps include the all-new 2016 Cruze compact, which will debut on June 24. Other GM vehicles use an eight-inch version of MyLink that will only be compatible with Apple CarPlay at the beginning of the new model year. While development and testing is not yet complete, Android Auto compatibility may be available on the eight-inch version of MyLink later in the 2016 model year, GM said.

52 of 76 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Pist frost by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · 2015-05-27 11:03 · Score: 4, Informative

1) "infotainment" is not a word.
2) People need to pay attention to what they're doing on the road and quit fucking around with cell phones and other cool whizzo shit on the dashboard.
1. Re:Pist frost by Anonymous Coward · 2015-05-27 11:35 · Score: 1
  
  Don't worry. Most of it will be controlled by someone else. Either by AutoAds Inc or by AutoHacker and his friends. And do you think this will be updated two years after the car has been released? Not likely. Fun times for car buyers. Or not.
2. Re:Pist frost by drinkypoo · 2015-05-27 11:51 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  1) Give this battle up now. The industry has moved on into the world of cutesy names long since, and you have no chance to win. Infotainment is the official, accepted term.
  2) Better infotainment systems means less fucking around with the gadgets, because the systems make it easier.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
3. Re:Pist frost by ShanghaiBill · 2015-05-27 12:32 · Score: 1
  
  1) "infotainment" is not a word.
  Yes it is. It has been a word for at least a decade. Just because you don't like the concept, doesn't mean the word describing it is uncromulent.
  
  2) People need to pay attention to what they're doing on the road and quit fucking around with cell phones and other cool whizzo shit on the dashboard.
  That is one of the problems these systems help solve. They are built into the dash, and integrated with the cars computers. So they know when you are moving, and if you are not moving, they know whether you are in "park" or just stopped at a light. They can also detect the weight in the passenger seat, so they know a second person may be using the system. It can be integrated with lane control, and adaptive cruise control, so those functions can be somewhat more responsive if the driver appears to be distracted.
4. Re:Pist frost by mjwx · 2015-05-27 13:02 · Score: 2
  
  1) Give this battle up now. The industry has moved on into the world of cutesy names long since, and you have no chance to win. Infotainment is the official, accepted term.
  2) Better infotainment systems means less fucking around with the gadgets, because the systems make it easier.
  I accept 1, but 2 is debatable, we need to encourage people to NOT fuck around with gadgets in the car at all.
  
  However vendor locked "infotainment" systems need to die and die a horrible death in a fire. In car nav systems are almost always inferior to third party, updates are difficult and in many cases, expensive. Manufacturers have made a system that is obsolete in 2 years max which cannot be replaced in a vehicle that has a serviceable life of 10+ years. This needs to change.
  
  I cant imagine how bad my current car, a 2002 Nissan Silvia would be if I couldn't swap out the stereo with something that knew what an MP3 was. I'd still be forced to burn music CD's like a Neanderthal. Fortunately it was a standard double DIN with standard Nissan connectors, so putting in a new Alpine head unit was easy. However this wont be the case with most 2012 cars in 2025.
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
5. Re:Pist frost by drinkypoo · 2015-05-27 16:39 · Score: 1
  
  I accept 1, but 2 is debatable, we need to encourage people to NOT fuck around with gadgets in the car at all.
  Not gonna happen.
  
  I cant imagine how bad my current car, a 2002 Nissan Silvia would be if I couldn't swap out the stereo with something that knew what an MP3 was.
  That depends on whether it has a changer interface, and whether you have a changer. I have a 1997 Audi A8 with a Bose stereo with no aux input, but I can get one by slicing into the CD changer wiring and using a switch and/or relays (I have the 12V audio signal relays already, have been too busy to make the mod though) to insert my own audio source in between. Or an el cheapo (~$10) panel-mount mp3 player/bluetooth receiver from dealextreme has a line input, so it's just a matter of finding some connectors which fit the board or soldering on some leads, and making a quick splice. Got a voltage regulator so it can run on 5-32V or something ridiculous like that. I might just go that route because there will be no relays to go bad ever. If the thing goes tits up it'll be easy to splice it away.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
6. Re:Pist frost by mjwx · 2015-05-27 16:52 · Score: 1
  
  I accept 1, but 2 is debatable, we need to encourage people to NOT fuck around with gadgets in the car at all.
  Not gonna happen.
  It will if we start taking licenses off of serial phone users.
  
  I'm sure 30 or 40 odd years ago they said we'd never all wear seatbelts. Now we all wear seatbelts. The same with drink driving. Some people will need to be pushed to make a change, but they'll make it.
  
  I cant imagine how bad my current car, a 2002 Nissan Silvia would be if I couldn't swap out the stereo with something that knew what an MP3 was.
  That depends on whether it has a changer interface, and whether you have a changer. I have a 1997 Audi A8 with a Bose stereo with no aux input, but I can get one by slicing into the CD changer wiring and using a switch and/or relays (I have the 12V audio signal relays already, have been too busy to make the mod though) to insert my own audio source in between. Or an el cheapo (~$10) panel-mount mp3 player/bluetooth receiver from dealextreme has a line input, so it's just a matter of finding some connectors which fit the board or soldering on some leads, and making a quick splice. Got a voltage regulator so it can run on 5-32V or something ridiculous like that. I might just go that route because there will be no relays to go bad ever. If the thing goes tits up it'll be easy to splice it away.
  I was mainly talking about the dash space they use. Many manufacturers no longer use the DIN standard. Getting a wiring loom/adapter is easy, you can knock one up yourself easily if you've got even a modicum of skill. The problem is if Audi start using a different shaped hole in the dash compared to VW or even another Audi then you cant simply buy an off the shelf replacement like I did with my Nissan because they'd have to be custom built to fit where the old head unit came from.
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
7. Re:Pist frost by drinkypoo · 2015-05-27 17:17 · Score: 1
  
  I was mainly talking about the dash space they use. Many manufacturers no longer use the DIN standard.
  Yeah, that includes my 1997 Audi. They billed it as an anti-theft feature, ha ha ha. The radio is coded anyway. But I'm not replacing the head unit, just hacking in an aux input. It's an 11-or-so speaker Bose so why would I dick with it?
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
8. Re:Pist frost by Anonymous Coward · 2015-05-27 19:22 · Score: 1
  
  2) Better infotainment systems means less fucking around with the gadgets, because the systems make it easier.
  You mean like moving away from touch screen devices that require all your focus to physical buttons that can be operated without ever looking down?
9. Re:Pist frost by marsu_k · 2015-05-27 23:48 · Score: 1
  
  Voice, rather.
10. Re:Pist frost by defaria · 2015-05-28 01:09 · Score: 1
  
  New words are invented all the time.
11. Re:Pist frost by LWATCDR · 2015-05-28 02:49 · Score: 1
  
  "2) People need to pay attention to what they're doing on the road and quit fucking around with cell phones and other cool whizzo shit on the dashboard."
  Because trying to read a paper map and drive at the same time is so much safer...
  Sure I agree that that playing angry birds while driving is a bad plan but Things like Nav do make driving safer IMHO. For the idiots that follow nav without question and drive into a river.. Well they would have done that sooner or later anyway.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
12. Re:Pist frost by StikyPad · 2015-05-28 04:13 · Score: 1
  
  Right... manufacturers could avoid all of this BS if they just stuck to standard head unit sizes and bezels. For whatever reason, though, they don't want to make it easy to replace a stereo -- probably to make the $5000 upgrade to the "premium" audio more compelling. Of course, once you hear that midrange, it's hard to say no. It sounds like someone's right there in the car, possibly in the trunk, quickly running out of air.
  
  --
  https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
13. Re:Pist frost by KGIII · 2015-05-28 04:57 · Score: 1
  
  Pretty much my thoughts exactly. This means a potential of more distracted drivers on the road. I bought a used Viper, one of the originals, and not only is there no radio, there is no OEM slot to put a radio in. There is, also, a State law that makes distracted driving illegal. Use of this type of technology while driving may provide probable cause for a traffic stop so caution is paramount. The overreach of such laws is absurd though the intent is good (I believe). Recently a driver was stopped for eating a sandwich whilst driving, I think that was unnecessary and using the law for purposes which it was not designed for.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
14. Re:Pist frost by suutar · 2015-05-28 07:02 · Score: 1
  
  I had to get a special shaped adaptor for my 01 civic to replace the head unit. As long as there's a market for aftermarket head units there will be someone molding plastic to fill in the weird panel shapes the manufacturer chose.
touch does not belong in cars! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-05-27 11:09 · Score: 4, Informative

bad bad very friggin bad.
bring back mechanical controls, dials, switches, things that can be operated by feel and by memory, not by look-in-order-to-see-what-your-doing.
1. Re:touch does not belong in cars! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-05-27 11:34 · Score: 1
  
  The intelligence devices work 99% of the time correctly. If you like to come home without an accident 99% of the time, that is the way to go. For most of us who want 100% reliability, mechanical controls are the way to go. What if the volume is high and Amazon Echo cannot hear you say "Amazon volume 4". With touch screen, just when you are about to touch, you hit a bump and will land up touching something else or just when you thought your touch was not registered and you touch again but by that time the screen has changed. I rarely use touch items for critical stuff and wouldn't operate basic vehicle functionality through touch (such as brake, accelerator, turning etc). Non-core things such as A/C, stereo, gps etc are fine.
2. Re:touch does not belong in cars! by 0123456 · 2015-05-27 11:44 · Score: 1
  
  We really don't need many manual controls anymore in most vehicles. When you can simply say things like, "OK Google, navigate to the nearest costco" or "Hey Siri, get me lost with Apple Maps", you don't need to touch the screen or type in stuff.
  That would be true, if the voice recognition actually worked. I typically have to try at least a dozen times to get my car to dial the right number on my Bluetooth phone, and even saying 'Redial' to dial the last number can take four or five tries before it does the right thing.
3. Re:touch does not belong in cars! by 0123456 · 2015-05-27 11:45 · Score: 1
  
  People who think touchscreen controls are a good idea in cars have never tried driving one at forty below zero.
4. Re:touch does not belong in cars! by Martin+Blank · 2015-05-27 11:59 · Score: 1
  
  Or you use the volume control within reach of your thumb and not reach for the radio at all, thereby keeping that hand on the steering wheel and improving your overall control.
  
  --
  You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
5. Re:touch does not belong in cars! by CaptainLugnuts · 2015-05-27 12:05 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Or you use the volume control within reach of your thumb and not reach for the radio at all, thereby keeping that hand on the steering wheel and improving your overall control.
  Put down my burger and phone? NEVER!
6. Re:touch does not belong in cars! by hummassa · 2015-05-28 01:10 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe it's the way you speak.
  Yeah, you are speaking WRONG! :P
  
  --
  It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
7. Re:touch does not belong in cars! by StikyPad · 2015-05-28 04:18 · Score: 1
  
  I know, right? Kids these days don't even know why we call it "rolling down the windows." Give me a GPS where I have to tap in my destination by morse code using a switch from a Model M and I'll be a happy camper.
  
  --
  https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
bells whistles smoke mirrors by turkeydance · 2015-05-27 11:12 · Score: 1

i ran out of analogies, and euphemisms, and things.
Re:why not use a phone? by InvisiBill · 2015-05-27 11:17 · Score: 1

That's essentially what these do. They just display your phone's stuff on the screen built into the car.
Thats it? 14? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-05-27 11:20 · Score: 3, Funny

GM today announced it will offer Apple CarPlay and Android Auto mirroring APIs on 14 of its 2016 vehicles....I really thought GM made a lot more vehicles than that.
1. Re:Thats it? 14? by ArcadeMan · 2015-05-27 11:30 · Score: 1
  
  And they're only adding that stuff in less than 1% of the cars they're planning to make. Pathetic.
  
  --
  Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
CarPlay is a must by Anonymous Coward · 2015-05-27 11:48 · Score: 2

They are doing something. CarPlay is going to make or break car companies, and the auto makers that don't have it in their cars will be out of the market, destroyed by those who do.
Horsepower doesn't mean much in bumper/bumper traffic, so it is something that is losing its luster, especially among 20-somethings. These days, it is about amenities, features, and MPG. No CarPlay? No sale.
CarPlay supports hardware buttons and knobs by Anonymous Coward · 2015-05-27 12:10 · Score: 1

I don't know anything about Android Auto, but CarPlay supports hardware buttons and knobs. Assuming the car manufacturers know what they're doing (hahahaha) there's no reason mechanical controls can't be included in these systems.
1. Re:CarPlay supports hardware buttons and knobs by HAKdragon · 2015-05-28 02:03 · Score: 1
  
  FWIW, I have a '14 Cruze with a touch screen. Every interface element on screen can also be done with physical buttons and knobs.
  
  --
  "Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
related news today re: Apple Car by willworkforbeer · 2015-05-27 12:19 · Score: 1

Apple made some public comment today referencing their own Apple Car ambitions, saying something about how, "cars are the ultimate mobile device"
(something like that, I'm paraquoting.)

Anyway, it's debatable that a platform you may spend a hour or two a day with being the "ultimate mobile device" (whereas my phone moves around with me 24/7/365.25)

Also, what is the likelihood that Apple can out-Tesla Mr. Musk? Isn't it more likely they want to acquire Mr. Musk and his Tesla enterprise, and all the PR around the prospects of an Apple Car are just opening that door?

--
Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
1. Re:related news today re: Apple Car by BasilBrush · 2015-05-27 15:32 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  What makes you imagine Musk can make an electric car company from scratch and Apple can't? Musk is rich, but even so he nearly ran out of money, what with Tesla And SpaceX. He got so near to the brink at one stage he was going to have to pull out of one - but won some space contracts just in time.
  As well as the design chops and the desirable brand, Apple has effectively limitless amounts of money to throw at making a car.
  Yes, buying Tesla is an option, but there have been car related hires at Apple going on for some time now - if they were going to buy Tesla, you'd expect it to be before the hires.
  For the car buying public it is better that they compete. There will be more innovation, quicker that way.
2. Re:related news today re: Apple Car by willworkforbeer · 2015-05-27 15:45 · Score: 1
  
  I was considering the possibility that, as in many corporate acquisitions, there is expediency and value in simply buying a winning team over attempting to build one. Imagine the rapid scale Tesla could reach with an Apple-scale cashpile partner, and the (ahem, please forgive me for this) synergies ( I need a shower now) to be had with Tesla's battery operations.
  
  Maybe Apple is gathering car talent be make themselves pretty for the engagement party. In other words, to have something to bring to the table over just dollars-by-the-dumpsterload. Just a thought.
  
  --
  Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
3. Re:related news today re: Apple Car by BasilBrush · 2015-05-27 22:04 · Score: 1
  
  Well, it's possible. But if they did that they'd need to keep the existing car shipping, and it wouldn't make any sense to rebrand it, so it'd probably be a Beats type arrangement.
  I suspect that rather than wanting to adopt an existing design and approach, they want to start a car design from first principles.
  Big project, necessarily long time scales. But that's the nature of cars. There's no hurry, the market is not going anywhere.
4. Re:related news today re: Apple Car by swb · 2015-05-27 23:17 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think Apple wants to be in the car manufacturing business with a car of their own anymore than they want to be in the PC and smartphone manufacturing business. With consumer electronics, though, you only have to be in the design business (and only partially, since they buy a lot of technology from someone else -- AFAIK, they don't design display panels, radio chipsets, flash memory, RAM, etc).
  With cars, though, there's not really a contract manufacturer who does the assembly, you have to do that yourself although you can buy a lot of parts from OEMs like Bosch and others.
  I think Apple sees a way to become a marquis branded supplier to other car makers. Building an "Apple Car" is a design exercise, a way to see how what they do can be applied to electric cars and I'm sure it has a lot to do with dashboard electronics and "user interface" as much as it does with anything else. There may also be less sexy opportunities in terms of what they know about battery management.
This does NOT belong in cars by MpVpRb · 2015-05-27 12:20 · Score: 4, Insightful

Looks to me like marketoids chasing buzzwords
Car companies should concentrate on making cars and leave the fashionable electronics to the fashionable electronic manufacturers
I wonder how many cars still have built-in analog cellphones? or built-in cassette players?
The ONLY thing that should be built-in is a speaker system, tuned to the acoustics of the car, with an amplifier and aux jack
ALL other "infotainment" devices should be separate
1. Re:This does NOT belong in cars by Anonymous Coward · 2015-05-27 13:01 · Score: 1
  
  Car companies should concentrate on making cars and leave the fashionable electronics to the fashionable electronic manufacturers
  So in other words... like Carplay?
  What you describe is exactly what millenials want in their cars, and it's the very reason Carplay exists. It lets them use their own smart devices and interface with the Car's audio and other systems.
  So be happy! What you asked for, exists!
2. Re:This does NOT belong in cars by sociocapitalist · 2015-05-27 20:34 · Score: 1
  
  Looks to me like marketoids chasing buzzwords
  Car companies should concentrate on making cars and leave the fashionable electronics to the fashionable electronic manufacturers
  I wonder how many cars still have built-in analog cellphones? or built-in cassette players?
  The ONLY thing that should be built-in is a speaker system, tuned to the acoustics of the car, with an amplifier and aux jack
  ALL other "infotainment" devices should be separate
  Except...closed garden = more money = fuck the consumer
  
  --
  blindly antisocialist = antisocial
3. Re:This does NOT belong in cars by JBMcB · 2015-05-28 01:07 · Score: 1
  
  ALL other "infotainment" devices should be separate
  You don't want this. Ever see what the warranty is on aftermarket head units? One year - two years tops. That's because they aren't built to last, they are built to be as cheap as possible.
  OEM head units go through, minimum, one full year of electronic and environmental testing. If it's a completely new design they'll do two years of testing. These are covered by the car's warranty - which usually lasts at least three or four years, five years on some makes.
  Source - I designed test software for aftermarket and OEM head units for three years.
  
  --
  My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
4. Re:This does NOT belong in cars by messymerry · 2015-05-28 03:11 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, and a car uint costs $1200 while a good aftermarket head unit costs about $200. That's equal to a six year warranty... ;-D
  
  --
  Dear Microlimp: I give you 2 valid product keys for win7 and you reject both of them. Piss off you wankers!!!
This is exactly what belongs in cars by drinkypoo · 2015-05-27 12:30 · Score: 2

The ONLY thing that should be built-in is a speaker system, tuned to the acoustics of the car, with an amplifier and aux jack
What you don't seem to realize is that this is the equivalent of that for connecting your smartphone to your car. If only you knew anything about the subject at hand, like about cars or automotive infotainment, you would know that these are technologies for interfacing to your phone while in your car — and that these are both major standards. That means that virtually all smartphone owners will be able to use the interface in the car, designed for automotive use, instead of the interface on their phone which isn't.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
1. Re:This is exactly what belongs in cars by chihowa · 2015-05-27 14:45 · Score: 1
  
  What you don't seem to realize is that this is the equivalent of that for connecting your smartphone to your car.
  These are the equivalent of cars with built-in iPod docks, not aux jacks. Both of these standards are incompatible with each other, brand new, and controlled by companies that change/drop their old "standards" at the drop of a hat. In five to ten years, these systems will be just as obsolete as the cars with slots to fit a first-gen iPod, 30-pin connectors, and firewire level power output.
  Not to mention the privacy aspects of this. The sheer amount of data that Android Auto shares with apps is a creepy stalker/advertiser wet dream (in-car microphones, GPS, car telemetry, etc).
  
  --
  If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
2. Re:This is exactly what belongs in cars by R3d+M3rcury · 2015-05-27 16:23 · Score: 1
  
  [...] controlled by companies that change/drop their old "standards" at the drop of a hat.
  Yeah, but Apple makes the coolest adapters....
3. Re:This is exactly what belongs in cars by tlhIngan · 2015-05-28 04:35 · Score: 1
  
  These are the equivalent of cars with built-in iPod docks, not aux jacks. Both of these standards are incompatible with each other, brand new, and controlled by companies that change/drop their old "standards" at the drop of a hat. In five to ten years, these systems will be just as obsolete as the cars with slots to fit a first-gen iPod, 30-pin connectors, and firewire level power output.
  Cars provided USB power only recently, say 10 years ago.
  Apple introduced the 30 pin dock connector 12 years ago, in 2003, which supported USB charging AND Firewire charging. The iPod was only 2 years old at this point. Incidentally, the 3rd gen iPod is the first million unit iPod model shipped, so the Firewire iPods were a curiosity (the 3rd Gen iPod was also the first to support Windows directly).
  The 30 pin connector lasted 11 years. In the same time, USB changed from B ports to mini B ports to the current micro B ports. Since few cars used specific iPod cables (most were USB to iPod), the situation is just the same as USB plugs changing.
  Android Auto and Apple CarPlay also connect to your phone using USB - the same standard USB plug. So when Android phones move to USB C, and Apple still uses Lightning (oh - USB C's coming, time to buy new sets of cables over the next couple of years), it will still all work. Will Apple support USB C? Maybe - Apple gave the USB-IF guys the design for USB C gratis in an effort to make the USB plug more useful for everyone (because it was obvious they were just going to stick with micro USB rather than try to incorporate any useful consumer-friendly things like the ability to not worry which end you plug in which way).
  The bigger worry in the end is there aren't many platforms that last over 10 years - PalmOS started in the mid 90s and was wiped out in the mid 2000's, Windows Mobile started late 90s and was wiped out in the mid 2000's. Symbian started in the 80s as EPOC and probably lasted the longest, but again, dead. Ditto say, Blackberry. There's a good possibility that say, 2020 would bring about a new platform or innovation that renders iOS and Android both obsolete.
4. Re:This is exactly what belongs in cars by chihowa · 2015-05-28 06:22 · Score: 1
  
  The bigger worry in the end is there aren't many platforms that last over 10 years - PalmOS started in the mid 90s and was wiped out in the mid 2000's, Windows Mobile started late 90s and was wiped out in the mid 2000's. Symbian started in the 80s as EPOC and probably lasted the longest, but again, dead. Ditto say, Blackberry. There's a good possibility that say, 2020 would bring about a new platform or innovation that renders iOS and Android both obsolete.
  That was my point, though my example was subpar. The iPod dock connector lasted a while, but there were fairly new cars still sporting it when Apple switched connectors. These are very fluid "standards".
  These auto systems will likely never be updated, either, so they will work at whatever level the API was at when the car's development cycle stopped... even while Apply and Google keep the API churn going and possibly depreciate old versions of it. This is a recipe for constantly obsoleted car interfaces, just as these companies' phones are constantly obsoleted (some more than others).
  
  --
  If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
Save this crap for rentals by Snotnose · 2015-05-27 13:34 · Score: 2

90% of the cars on the road are single drivers, whom I really don't want to be "infotained". Especially when it's the drive they do every day while eating an egg mcmuffin and shaving.

The only time I can see this being A Good Thing (tm) is when you and your family fly into a vacation destination, rent a car, and need to drive for an hour or 3 (my typical vacation).

If you can't keep your SO/kids entertained for the typical 20 minute drive, then keep your distracted ass off the road I'm using to get somewhere safely.
1. Re:Save this crap for rentals by BasilBrush · 2015-05-27 15:35 · Score: 1
  
  There's nothing wrong with "infotainment" as long as it's audio. People have been listening to car radios without problems for many decades.
2. Re:Save this crap for rentals by hummassa · 2015-05-28 01:47 · Score: 1
  
  There's nothing wrong with "infotainment" as long as it's audio. People have been listening to car radios without problems for many decades.
  Well, actually, EVERYTHING increases the risk of accidents. And "without problems" is really an euphemism for "cars already kill thousands of people per year, so we really don't want to think real hard about what causes those >"... http://www.monash.edu.au/miri/...
  
  --
  It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Re:They're going to have to improve something. by amRadioHed · 2015-05-27 14:56 · Score: 1

The 2014 Cruz didn't have Android Auto, so I don't see how that's relevant at all.

--
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
Bluetooth by DogDude · 2015-05-27 15:35 · Score: 1

Bluetooth is a perfectly usable universal standard. I have a car with generic bluetooth, and everything (except for stupid Apple phones) works fine with it.

--
I don't respond to AC's.
"No problem" by ThatsNotPudding · 2015-05-27 23:32 · Score: 1

"We have a spare channel on the braking CANbus; we'll just patch it into that."
Re:They're going to have to improve something. by jrumney · 2015-05-29 00:11 · Score: 1

I just bought a Korean car. Better luck next time, GM!
You do know the 2014 Cruz is also a Korean car, don't you?