Earlier this year, GM announced that it would be dropping CarPlay in its new EV lineup. This was the latest salvo in the ongoing battle between GM and Apple that we’ve been documenting on our blog.
I think GM’s incentive to oust Apple was in part driven by Apple’s rather surprising move to take over the instrument cluster. Another contributing factor is likely because this conflicts with their ultimate goals for in-vehicle software. At the time, I felt that it was going to be hard to determine whether this was going to be a game changer or risky gamble on GM’s part.
It’s a complex issue, but here are some of the main details.
- Apple moving into the instrument cluster provides one more additional way for them to take over the interior and sell additional features to car owners.
- As an OEM, letting Apple control the cluster is part and parcel of the new CarPlay API. Perhaps unsurprisingly many OEMs are opting this route, including Acura, Audi, Ford, Honda, Infiniti, Jaguar, Land Rover, Lincoln, Mercedes-Benz, Nissan, Polestar, Porsche, Renault, and Volvo.
- GM is using the new Ultifi software platform for its EVs.
- Perhaps pre-emptively, GM isn’t going to be just ditching Apple CarPlay but Android Auto (the other projection mode technology), as well.
- The Ultifi software stack is broader than just the infotainment system – it includes Android Automotive (the OS stack, not the projection technology) as well as portions built on RedHat Linux.
Hot Takes
What to make of this situation?
- Apple’s move into the cluster is a definite shot across the bow and no doubt feels more than a bit presumptuous to the OEMs, perhaps even demeaning.
- That said, many OEMs are wrestling with the decision and ultimately staying with Apple. Ford/Lincoln are going in as well as Honda/Acura and the leading edge of the VW group with Audi and Porsche. (I think we can expect VW to follow after Audi tests it out.)
- For now, BMW, Hyundai, Stellantis, and Toyota are choosing to either wait it out or follow GM in rejecting Apple. It’ll be interesting to see how and/or if this list changes.
- The software-defined car is the gateway to the customer experience. So even if Apple allows OEMs to contribute to the UX, OEMs will be compelled to defend their turf.
- If it seems like GM is late to the software game, realize that they could have owned the in-vehicle software as early as 2004. That’s years before the iPhone even existed, let alone CarPlay coming along in 2014. The metal bending execs at the time didn’t fully comprehend the value of software, and unfortunately, software geeks inside the company like me weren’t able to make a compelling enough case for it.
- Looking at the Ultifi interface preview, there are a few interesting observations. One is that it is demoed using CarPlay. Presumably that was in the original requirements before Apple announced the cluster-centric CarPlay that forced GM’s hand. The second interesting observation in that video is that the interface shows Google Assistant and Google Play. That means the infotainment portion at least is likely to use the full GAS stack.
Who wins?
Is the ultimate success of Ultifi based on what features it enables? Is the latest move for Apple the logical next step to owning the vehicle software?
I’ll admit that I’m an Apple fanboy: I’ve bought into their ecosystem. I love how Apple stuff works and how well it works together. This industry really abuses the word “seamless”, but if anybody gets it, it’s Apple.
And that’s probably the meat of this question because I think – once again – this is going to come down to brand loyalty. Recent studies of phones say that Apple has 92% brand loyalty. Certainly, some car owners are superfans of their automotive brand. (Witness the existence of “Calvin pissing on OEM brand-name” decals.) But in 2021, we may have passed the point where phones trump cars in importance in people’s lives.
Will people give up their favorite brand of car (and all the amenities that it offers) because of their phone? We’ll need to see the marketplace in action to be sure. But based on current consumer trends, I think this might be a dangerous gamble on GM’s part.
About the author
