No CarPlay still? (to the heavens) whyyyy???

[linux-works]

you keep saying 'its easy'.

[citation needed]

put up or shut up, mate.

yes, I'm getting tired of non-software people acting like they know what they are talking about. maybe they installed windows once and now they're a software guru, I don't know. but its amazing how people trivialize a task like this.

 

[linux-works]

that Tesla could include CarPlay very easily if they wanted to but you keep being obtuse and defending their decision not to

in fact, yes, I AM defending their choice not to. I've stated my reasons enough in this thread.

make no mistake, I'm not one of the tesla fanboys. I yell at them and call them out for their crap designs when I see them. I also give credit when they make the right call. its not all black and white.

in this case, I respect their decision not to cozy up with either android or apple.

I do want them to expand their native player, but I'm not hungry for the "phone platforms" to even touch my car, if I can help it.

 

[DelPhonic1]

that Tesla could include CarPlay very easily if they wanted to but you keep being obtuse and defending their decision not to

Even if they didn't include CarPlay, it doesn't have to be groundbreaking. Just not regressive.

 

[_jmk]

Taking Google or Apple systems would be VERY STUPID for Tesla. You DO NOT want to give away the car application ecosystem, you want to build one. Only software losers will adapt G and A systems, the real winners build their own and make it better.

Think of asking Apple to support Android apps. It's really the same thing.

 

[Msjulie]

in this case, I respect their decision not to cozy up with either android or apple.

I do want them to expand their native player, but I'm not hungry for the "phone platforms" to even touch my car, if I can help it.

So don't use it - everyone who doesn't want it seems to think it's ok to say byte-me to the others who do (see what I did there?)

Think of asking Apple to support Android apps. It's really the same thing.

Both want to control their own platforms of course. Notice how Apple TV (the app) runs on other devices as well as Apple Music. When a biz case is made (service $ more important than platform stickiness) then the job gets done, plain and simple.

 

[bob_p]

Years ago Musk stated they would probably not use the Apple/Android products and instead either use a 3rd party or in house smartphone integration solution. And since then, other than the recent addition of text-to-voice and voice-to-text for text messages, Tesla hasn't made any progress and Musk hasn't talked about an alternative to Apple CarPlay and Android Auto (even though EV competitors have these features).

We probably won't purchase the Infotainment Upgrade for our 2017 S because the only current replacement for the loss of the AM/FM/HD/XM radio is to use a combination of smartphone apps, and without a screen mirroring solution, we won't rely on smartphone interactions to control the radio replacement while driving, which is illegal in many areas.

 

[MXLRplus]

Note: Many automakers have 3 infotainment app systems: Their own proprietary one, Apple, and Android.

Why is CP/AA handy? You can get into any car, plug in your phone, and use it's built in microphone, speaker, and controls. Your Recent Destinations, Playlists, and music library comes with you. Rental cars, test drives, spouse cars, everything today but a Tesla.

 

[DoctorVenkman]

The big benefit of using AA/CP instead of Tesla's homegrown system is that they wouldn't have to put in the resources to maintain it once it's developed. They could piggyback off the AA/CP updates and functionality. They wouldn't have to waste time chasing down bugs in Spotify (which they can't even manage as is) or adding new apps to the Tesla OS.

It would be a big lift at first to create a shell that can run AA/CP within the Tesla OS, but after that it would be pretty hands off. Then drivers can choose if they want to use the native Tesla apps or go to AA/CP. I'd guess that most would prefer AA/CP.

 

[Msjulie]

It would be a big lift at first to create a shell that can run AA/CP within the Tesla OS, but after that it would be pretty hands off. Then drivers can choose if they want to use the native Tesla apps or go to AA/CP. I'd guess that most would prefer AA/CP.

I wonder if an Android VM would be quicker (much like the game engine embedded). There's a bucket load of these, of various ratings, to be found for cheap https://www.amazon.com/Carplay-Android-Mirroring-Smartphone-Receiver/dp/B082KWHH2D/

 

[bob_p]

Tesla originally planned to have an Apps store and support 3rd party app - and that was abandoned.

Running an android Virtual Machine (like running an android emulator on a PC), could provide access to the Google Play Store and the huge library of apps that run on smartphones.

But even with a Virtual Machine, running any 3rd party apps on the console processor increases malware risks - something Tesla (and other manufacturers) would want to avoid, since there's a potential that could impact vehicle operations and safety.

Running the apps on smartphones with enhanced smartphone integration or AA/CP isolates the apps from vehicle operations and is a safer solution.

Eventually Tesla will address this - and based on Tesla's track record, we should anticipate this will either be an open source or Tesla solution - not licensing of AA/CP.

 

[_jmk]

I understand it fully why they did not adopt the CP/AA, but what I don’t understand is that why did we get the fart jokes and games before a basic appstore. Platform first, apps second and not the other way around.

 

[ElectricSteve]

To all the folks getting all anal about bitrates and higher being better: It‘s a friggin car. It has the acoustics of a mobile toilet. You won‘t hear the difference between 320 and a bit less so who cares. I see folks getting all worked up that FLAC is sooo much better than 320 mp3. I bet in a real life test, while driving, they would not be able to tell.
And who cares about Carplay. The Tesla Implementation of Spotify and Streaming Radio is very good. Screw CarPlay. It would be like opening up a can of worms

 

[DelPhonic1]

To all the folks getting all anal about bitrates and higher being better: It‘s a friggin car. It has the acoustics of a mobile toilet. You won‘t hear the difference between 320 and a bit less so who cares. I see folks getting all worked up that FLAC is sooo much better than 320 mp3. I bet in a real life test, while driving, they would not be able to tell.
And who cares about Carplay. The Tesla Implementation of Spotify and Streaming Radio is very good. Screw CarPlay. It would be like opening up a can of worms

Then why not just remove all of the speakers in your X to two and downgrade your audio system. You won't be able to tell, right? Don't assume your sensibilities are cookie cutter and everyone else should just accept them with your exact same ears/head. If you are ok with 160kpbs, then good on you. I'm happy for you.

 

[ElectricSteve]

Bit sensitive are you?

I miss an Aux port so I can connect my old trusty cassette player to the car. Ahhh those where the days.

 

[MXLRplus]

I miss my 4 front USB ports from my everything-made-in-the-last-decade. (USB music, radar detector, and passenger cellphone takes 3, the MX has 2 but one is taken by the wireless Qi charger).
I miss searching a USB music stick by voice or having a real shuffle function.

I did an Range Test on the new Long Range Plus car today. First thing I learned was Spotify doesn't work outside urban areas which makes it crippled in the US Western States.

Tesla does many things well. Music and cellphone integration aren't on that list for 2020. A $15k car does it better.

That isn't a slam, it's an observation. The Honda Goldwing Motorcycle has better infotainment.

 

[linux-works]

tesla could use 10x as many software developers.

and you know, they could fill every one of those jobs, since so many people want to work there.

wish they'd put more resources onto - well - EVERYWHERE.

 

[linux-works]

if you could safely containerize the apps that you guys are asking for - in a way way and in a low latency performant way, that would be ideal.

I would shy away from any of those apps (cp/aa) running *on* my own hardware (my, meaning tesla). I don't know what is involved and how much runs on your phone and how much runs on the remote peer (the car side). all along that spectrum, things can get messy and unsecure.

I'm old school and I'm happy to run a dedicated bit of hardware (FIO, to name one) where there are NO root holes, no remote execution, no latency, no crashes, no delays, instant power-on and a very stable UI (never auto-updates itself). there is a simple wired remote control format that it supports (CPIA or something like that) and I've actually used it, reverse engineered it (if you can call it that) and was able to do basic back/pause/resume/skip control on the playlist. that covers 90% of what I'd want from the *player*, other than browsing and choosing PLs. for vol control, I'd want that entirely on the car and tesla did a great job with the thumbwheel on the steering wheel. vol control should always be on the last stage of audio, anyway (long story).

we don't have line-in, on our cars. (maybe there's a hack; I have not spent any time looking, personally). we don't have remote back/pause/resume/skip control, which is the bare bare minimum to get by. and if we had just those 2 things, we could have a 100% safe interface and we can let tesla spend their time on the driving stuff and not on the audio stuff.

come on elon / tesla: give us remote control via some safe serial interface and also good quality digital (and analog) line-in. be a mensch, give us those two things and many of us would be happy to take things from there. I would expect cool 3rd party integrations (also very safe) if they exposed that kind of public 'api', as it were.

 

[_jmk]

if you could safely containerize the apps that you guys are asking for - in a way way and in a low latency performant way, that would be ideal.

I would shy away from any of those apps (cp/aa) running *on* my own hardware (my, meaning tesla).

There is almost no security in the Linux containers, even if you manage to enable user (capability) namespaces. I can hack you box for sure if you let me do this.

 

[bob_p]

One possible reason why we may never get something like AA/CP...

Tesla/Musk's goal is to get FSD working as soon as possible.

Once there's approval for FSD operations without driver monitoring, then everything changes because there won't be a "driver" any more, everyone in the vehicle is a passenger - and would be free to interact with their smart devices while the vehicle is moving.

In this environment, instead of something like AA/CP (which would allow smartphone app interactions through the console), Tesla would be better off adding something like Chromecast, that would allow streaming of smartphone/tablet video/audio to the vehicles display and sound system.

Something similar has already happened to the airline industry. Up until recently, they were installing displays in seatbacks so passengers could watch programs in flight. Now they're shifting to supporting WiFi with power/USB ports, because most passengers are bringing their own smartphones/tablets on flights. So we're likely to see seatback displays disappear in new planes over the next few years.

Of course, we can argue on how long it will take for Tesla to get approval to operate FSD in some areas (such as limited access highways). But as long as Muck believes that's Tesla's goal, implementing something like AA/CP could remain a low priority for Tesla.

 

[linux-works]

There is almost no security in the Linux containers, even if you manage to enable user (capability) namespaces. I can hack you box for sure if you let me do this.

I should not have used that word, you are right. I didn't literally mean 'docker' and things like that. I meant more of something like a bsd jail where its meant to keep things away and have a minimal signaling protocol but never sending direct commands or user strings. a very controlled nearly air-gapped 'containment' (that's why I first used that word).

when I use my DAP (digital audio player, think 'generic ipod') its entirely contained and it cant reach across and do anything bad to the car.

anything that even has a chance of 'remote code execution' is something I would be against, when it comes to talking to car interfaces.