Slashdot Mirror
Porsche Chooses Apple Over Google Because Google Wants Too Much Data
countach44 writes: As reported in number 5 of this list from Motor Trend, Porsche went with Apple over Google for the infotainment system in its new 911. Apparently, Android Auto wants vehicle data (throttle position, speed, coolant temp, etc.) whereas Apple Play only needs to know if the car is in motion. Naturally, people are curious what Google, as a company building its own car, wants that data for.
They're creating a walled garden around my data! How dare they!
/duck
/run
Delete App.
You want to offer voice command only if you give microphone access? Fine. But to demand it is not acceptable.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Information about the car is what CONSUMERS want. Google is asking for it because we are asking for it.
If Google wants the data, it's probably because the NSA wants the data.
Google isn't making a car, iirc they've said they're going to license the technology. On the other hand Apple does seem to be seriously interested in make its own cars and is hiring people. The information isn't that interesting either, the most likely use would be applications to help people, but invariably car makers feel that the vehicles are appliances and that they should be able to charge customers for information about their own vehicle.
Ultimately however Porsche's strategy doesn't work, if their customers use Android having CarPlay isn't a vehicle feature and they'll eventually be forced to support Android Auto or a third party (e.g. Pioneer) will make one.
They can use the same VW in-house software that generates the diesel emissions numbers, to provide the metrics that Google wants
Isn't all that information readily available via OBDII anyway? What's the issue with getting a direct feed of it?
Google Dashboard:
Throttle position
Speed
Coolant temp
Fuel Consumption
etc.
Apple Dashboard:
The car is moving.
Really apple was willing to pay more.
For some values, it would make sense for Google to not just collect, but also use it. Google Maps is commonly used for navigation. One of its useful features is its predictive ETA based on live traffic data. Collecting speed and location gives data to feed that model and give better accuracy on current traffic conditions in a given area. I'd say that's a good use of it, as long as it's anonymized.
Don't worry guys, I'm sure Google just wants to Do The Right Thing.
A dashboard app showing that data would be incredible!
Fuck Porsche , fuck Google and fuck apple.
Bad haiku (5 syllable on line 1, 7 on line 2, and 5 on the last) and a terrible thought.
Proof of idiocy!
My biggest fear is that Google and Apple will merge or that one will buy the other.
Think about that for a moment.
If that doesn't make the hair on the back of your neck stand up, nothing will.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Did you mix up your tumblr and slashdot windows again?
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
There is good damn reason, driven (hah!) by _consumers_ to have car data piped to the system that has a nice big display on it and multi function controls...
I'll give you one guess...
...thinks it's indistinguishable from God.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
is things do one thing well. You know, that old UNIX tenet. It nicely extrapolates to life as well.
I'd really like to see a mobile device that is not tied to any ecosystem. I've rather grown tired of Apple, Google, and Microsoft sticking their noses where they don't belong. I really do hope Blackberry can make a comeback. I miss the relative privacy of a Blackberry.
Here: http://recode.net/2015/10/06/g...
Anybody can get that kind of info by just plugging into the standard OBD-II port. Several aftermarket solutions provide that.
cops let's get away with 70 in a 55 in Chicago land.
It's seems like posted 55 (few areas at 60-65) have a real speed limit of 70-75
Why would a company that is large enough to be able to MAKE CARS, have to choose any worthless-piece-of-shit "infotainment" system over a different worthless-piece-of-shit one?
Joe Random User can build better stuff using off-the-"shelf" commodity software, and once you're as big as Porche (or VW or Toyota or fucking Yugo) you can hire an employee for 6 months and have a very nice one.
For consumers, these embedded trap systems are typically a horror, but for a car manufacturer, it should be a horror that works for the manufacturer, and they should be (by FAR) the strongest party in a negotiation with Google/Apple/Microsoft. The question to Google/Apple/Microsoft should be: "how much money will you pay me, to lock my hardware customers into your shitty stores, instead of allowing my users to have access to a free market (or locking them into my own store)?"
Even the very tinyiest car manufacturers should be able to totally dominate someone like Google in a situation like this, and get every damn thing they want, plus a pile of cash too.
http://www.theverge.com/2015/1...
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
I could see a lot of useful apps being created with the diagnostic info that Google wants. With the data that Apple wants, it sounds like the difference between Google vs Apple is a computer VS an abacus.
All of my car stereos so far, have never had to have any connection to car info to play my songs as I barrel down the road. On custom installs, I've never hooked to any of the car data, etc.
Why would an entertainment system need to know any of that information at all?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
In 10 years, it will still be a fine car but the dash computer will be an antique. My car has bluetooth and a phone jack, and that will allow me to hook up the latest equipment to navigate and entertain me, for a long time, and replace it on my own schedule.
Bruce Perens.
"You're driving it wrong!"
You are welcome on my lawn.
I would love to have an in-car system that collects all kinds of telemetry and every bit of data you can think of for me to use to know what's going on in my car.
I would HATE to have it submit all that data to a third party. It's my car. It's my data. I want my car to tell me all the info. I don't want it to tell google (or apple or anybody else for that matter).
All I want is tell the automakers that I'm not changing my phone for my car to work correctly. That should be the case for anyone, especially for those in the tech community. All features/interactions between phone and car computer need to work regardless of the vendor. If not, I don't want your car.
Apple is notoriously poor at this. Just look at the Apple Watch, or unreleased APIs of iOS working with OSX for chat and phone calls.
Google is only marginally better. They're usually late with iOS support and it can be incomplete. It took how long to release iOS support for android wear? Plus, if I don't have a google account, I want to still get maps and services.
I don't want vendor lock-in is the point here. Amazing though that we don't have some sort of standards body out there that could help with these sorts of things.
Google disagrees with the article.
http://techcrunch.com/2015/10/...
Google’s official statement:
"Steering this story straight – we take privacy very seriously and do not collect the data the Motor Trend article claims such as throttle position, oil temp and coolant temp. Users opt in to share information with Android Auto that improves their experience, so the system can be hands-free when in Drive, and provide more accurate navigation through the car’s GPS."
My information *may* be outdated as I did the work over a year ago.
Google and Apple both *want* a similar (small) set of data, neither actually *require* much of the data to operate. Car companies are really weird about providing the access (although the Head Unit either as a vendor, the common case, or the company itself, need the data anyway).
IIRC Google's version wants to know if you are in reverse, and compass heading. Apple will infer.
The biggest difference as an integrator for the systems is that Apple call audio used the same USB channel as entertainment / navigation audio.
Google's call audio requires the Bluetooth HFP 1.5 which most head units already support.
Each solution had it's own challenges, Apple with it's USB wackiness that severely the hardware options[1] and Google with the Bluetooth adding to the audio mux logic.
Personally I find it *MUCH* more likely that Porsche vendor has CarPlay(tm) working and has a USB hardware issue with using the same port for both systems and/or dropped the Bluetooth from the CarPlay(tm) head unit to save cost.
Basically most vendors had over a year longer to get CarPlay(tm) working before they had access to AndroidAuto but getting AndroidAuto working once you have done the work to get CarPlay(tm) to work was pretty trivial. As always getting things into production quality takes time and effort and for many of these head units it may only require a software update to get either/both systems working. In my initial prototype I supported the use case of AA for navigation and ACP for playing music handling phone calls [in part because my initial HFP work kinda stank, damn you Broadcom :-)].
[1] Original described as variation of USB-OTG but it really isn't ... any chip with hardware/firmware OTG is unlikely to work.
... you don't do business with what is essentially your competitor. Of course Google is going to want data on something that's not theirs.
So Porsche is so concerned about our privacy that they refused to enable Android Auto? Why don't they let us choose? GM's MyLink supports both...
cops let's get away with 70 in a 55 in Chicago land.
It's seems like posted 55 (few areas at 60-65) have a real speed limit of 70-75
Wow, what slowpokes!
Down here in Indianapolis, the Cops routinely go at LEAST 90 in a 55. Seriously.
This wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that iPhones are just cooler than android and perhaps more appropriate for a high-end marque.
*In version 0.1
Subject to terms changing further at Googles discretion. Just because they are so nice we should trust that they always will be when they have control over market and are in hard need to monetize it.
Weren't the founders worried about Russia and data collection from the government? They've created away of collecting data about you across multiple devices and environments that the CIA/NSA/KGB/The Stasi do/would dream about. As indicated by the NSA trying to use Google cookies to track users. The additional irony of Google then being pissed that the NSA using those cookies to track. Hey only WE can track people across everything, not agents of an elected government.
(The last sentence is not saying NSA are choir boys in this, just that Google a company that 99.999999% of humans have no control over is tracking me with much greater efficiency than a government that i can conceivably vote out of office).
Android Auto has, as part of it's protocol, OBD2 access. It's in the Wikipedia entry. It's been there for over a year.
This is useful. This is already available. This interface has been mandated by the government on cars since 1996.
If you only want access to phone calls and your OEM infotainment option, then don't connect via Android Auto. Connect via Bluetooth. Bluetooth handles making and receiving calls, it lets you play music through your stereo, and it lets the car request your address book. If you are happy with that functionality, then by all means, DO NOT USE Android Auto!
They ask for this stream of data to make it available to apps running on Android Auto. There are a number of apps on the market that do exactly this RIGHT NOW. And people buy bluetooth OBD2 adapters on Amazon to complete the circle. I do this to check and clear codes on my family's cars. And btw ... the access is opt-in.
And PS> auto companies have already pretty much admitted that they don't want connected devices collecting this data because they want to monetize it themselves with insurance companies.
...emissions data. Snicker snicker. You knew this comment was coming.
It's not just the cops they also let people go way over the limit as well.
A bit to much traffic to do 90 much at times in chicagoland some times going 15-20 is good.
Having worked on early GPS navigation in the PocketPC days, I would have killed for speed and direction (i.e. forward or reverse gear). It might seem like a simple thing, but it can make a huge difference in initial prompting for navigation cues.
As for the rest, why *not* give access? Fast and Furious fans would get a kick out of it, and surely it opens up opportunities for things like, say, notifying central dispatch when one of the rental cars begins overheating. Instead, people will have to plug in a Bluetooth OBDII reader to get the same information, but with less standardization.
If this becomes the norm, I think I'll find the last decent car which doesn't have any of this data mining crap masquerading as an infotainment system, buy a few of them, and rotate among them as cars, hopefully to last until I can't drive anymore. It's good to see that Porsche didn't get suckered in, but seriously, this is getting ridiculous with the amount of data they want to know.
As for the connected car, well, I think the concept of a car has worked reasonably well for the last 100 years, maybe people can make apps for cars or something which is google's excuse for the data, but seriously, this 'innovation' is the google equivalent of razor blades; add more blades. I can't see much of an advantage just throwing 'smarts' into everything.
This trope really needs to die. If people were treated like products they wouldn't use Google services.
Since people ARE treated as products by Google today, you are plainly wrong.
A hard fact is not a "trope" as much as you wish it might be.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Exactly - people want to see all this data
Yes (well, some).
and have Google log/display it.
HELL NO.
Why do you think we (or anyone) want Google to log it? That is not needed, if I want it logged I would GREATLY prefer that be done by a local app of some kind, where I control the data from it directly.
I can imagine future politicians, where it's leaked exactly how many times the driver of his car went over 75MPH... as just one example why not everyone wants Google to log it.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
True, this "middle class joe" doesn't have a porsche or a smart phone, nor am I interested in what data my car can provide. However my mechanic is interested and it would be neat if he could pull my car's diagnostics with an off the shelf device rather than have to pay the manufacturer thru the nose for proprietary equipment and certifications. My car even has a sticker behind the visor proudly boasting that only approved Mazda dealers can install upgrades for the car's software, for my safety of course, nothing to do with their after market sales figures...
Google are also interested in monetising my car's data but in a different way, the people who buy my data cannot link it to me, selling it to a third party has no direct/indirect impact on me other than dictating who pays for the adverts I see, it doesn't add to the cost of maintaining my car, in fact it could help to reduce servicing costs.
Data (information) has intrinsic value, it is the fuel that has driven the technological explosion over the last century, it can be traded for cash or used as a tool for 'good' or 'evil'. When everybody has access to it, technological and cultural progress goes into hyperdrive and everyone has a better chance of "keeping the bastards honest". When it is in the hands of a few, human nature dictates it will be used to extract/deny resources from/to those who don't have access.
Disclaimer: If I swapped my Mazda 6 'Sports model' for a real sports car, I would definitely want it to have a geeky performance display on the dash. If the car had an open API, it might even inspire my artistic side to write my own display layer.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
It uploads stuff like oil pressure and engine temperature to Googles servers.
Which has nothing to do with "vehicle distraction" and everything to do with Google surveillance.
"The publication says that Android Auto tracks variables including vehicle speed, throttle position, fluid temperatures, and engine revs, information that is collated and then sent back to Google."
Abour 15 years ago I had a camper -an average European camper, based on a very robust Ford base, the only issue was the noise when driving.
I bought, at that time 15 years ago, a radio that simply detected the speed based on the variations in the 12V mains line, that visibly is modulated by the engine rate.
I thought there would be some settings to adjust, at least.
It worked out of the box. 15 years ago.
Without GPS, numeric car speed indication, or 'engine fluid temperature'.
That we need a numeric connection to the car to perform this is a lie. I know it. Not sure I convinced you, since I sold the camper since then and forgot the radioset name...
But I know it.
Herve S.
Ideally, what it should do if you say 'no' is proposing to download Openstreetmap instead;-)
Preferably from the F-Droid repository.
But now, now. You get what you want...
Herve S.
Put it on it's own separate Canbus and feed it crap data... it should never be connected directly to the real bus.
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Take a look at Google Earth, it already shows the speed of the cars on highways determined by the android phones of the drivers, this would just make it more precise and perhaps predict blockages.
Apple is said to start their production line in 3-4 years. Is Google starting one earlier?
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
"Naturally, people are curious what Google, as a company building its own car, wants that data for." -> Google want to use machine learning algorithms on customer data to make their premium self-driven car better.
How about Porsche being Apple only because that is what some brain dead "beautiful person" wants to do to keep the cool factor in their cars?
After all, if Android devices were allowed near their new baby, it would loose dome of its exclusivity now that 90% of new phones would work in it instead of 10 and falling, People who have an iThing because it shows that they are potential executives would shun this as would anyone who felt that appearance was more important than capability.
If you want to lower your sales, an easier answer is to raise your price.
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
Hint: You are NOT a Google customer. You are Google's PRODUCT.
Not quite. Information about me is the product. If I were the product then that would be called slavery. I am the vendor and sole distributor of information about me. In a sense I am "selling" said data to Google in exchange for online services. Arguably this is a rather bad deal for me but I'm not the product - I'm the one selling the product. It just is that most people don't value data about themselves very highly.
Google's CUSTOMERS are INTERNET ADVERTISERS looking to strip mine your life for data.
Exactly. Google's customers want DATA about me. The data is the product. I just happen to be the source of said data and the only one that can "manufacture" actual true data about me.
I can totally relate to the invasions by Google! And other apps! I went to install GasBuddy on my Droid, and it wanted access to GPS. Okay, that is fine; it makes sense - you need to know where I am to see what gas stations are nearby. Yet, when you also want access to my contacts, camera, and local files (like pics and audio), I DEFINITELY draw the line! WHY do you need that? How about installing an option to enable/disable any of those things. And, let us know what will not work if we disable anything.
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.