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.
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
Here: http://recode.net/2015/10/06/g...
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.
My information *may* be outdated as I did the work over a year ago.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.
Both the article and summary explicitly state that this is about what data is sent back to the companies, not what data is available to the apps for use in-car. From the article (emphasis mine):
[...] Android Auto tracks variables including vehicle speed, throttle position, fluid temperatures, and engine revs, information that is collated and then sent back to Google. Apple's CarPlay, on the other hand, only checks with the car's powertrain control module to ensure that the vehicle is moving.
That said, the article has been updated with a link to a report on Google's denial of the allegations. Google denies that they collect that information, but they do say that users can opt-in to sharing data. That alone may be what Porsche had an issue with (assuming the original report is to be believed), since they may be concerned that their users will opt-in to sending back information that Porsche would rather keep in-house, instead of allowing a separate company making cars--Google--to get their hands on it.
It's not just Apple doing this. Many car navigation systems prohibit certain functions (such as typing an address or a text message with the fingers) while the car is in motion.
This is not a change from the industry standard for Apple. It is for Google.
Google absolutely did want all the data set back to their data center. Porsche clearly states this.