Android Auto v. Apple CarPlay

[Pete]

This next wave of tech in autos has me very intrigued.

Looks like the strong trend is to take the tech on your phone and run it through your car's controls, audio system, etc.

Makes *so* much sense. Virtually everyone has a smart phone these days (at least everyone buying high-end new cars) and who needs yet another tech device with it's own apps and Internet subscription plan?

Basically the way both these services will work will be to bring your phone screen, apps, functionality and service to the screen(s) in your car and then offer in-car voice and other controls.

I've had an Apple iPhone for a long time but I've always been a PC guy. I know all these things can peacefully coexist but I really like the idea of synching my computer, phone, car and maybe TV through one system.

I'm starting to think I am going to bet on Google/Android over Apple. Can never go wrong with Apple but I like the more open-architecture approach of the PC and Android. Very close to making the leap to the Samsung Galaxy 5 phone.

Should be fun to watch this unfold in the next few years; the first cars will offer one or both of these systems later this year.

Google Challenges Apple's CarPlay With Android Auto | News & Opinion | PCMag.com

[Pete]

Android FTW, for sure.

Why do you say that?

I does seem they have great momentum and that Apple has lost some of it's edge.

[Pete]

It's such an interest contrast in approaches, in that Apple is much more of a hardware/product company and Google is almost all software/services. Really, Google has become what Microsoft once was.

Apple had a big head start and lead in both smartphones and tablets, but Android has come on strong since.

Really, what has Apple done of note after the iPad? Everything since has been very incremental.

[Just the facts]

Really, what has Apple done of note after the iPad? Everything since has been very incremental.

Answer: They made all their devices in 5 colors.

Apple was the counter-culture device of choice and people paid extra to "stick it to the man", then Apple became "the man". Apple has always thrived on mark-up and found enough people to pay more because they thought it was cool (and remember people waiting in line for a week to get a phone upgrade). Now they bought Beats and are going to do away with the headphone jack so Apple users have to buy the more expensive proprietary Beats headphones.

Unless Apple changes their whole corporate philosophy they will be in the dust bin of history in 5 years.

[bradh]

bold prediction, but there are enough fanboys out there that I don't think they'll disappear like that.

i was excited to finally get an iPhone from work and was able to ditch the Blackberry, but honestly I think I would have rather had a Galaxy with Android

[Pete]

I think Apple will always have a core following, as they are so good at marketing and building community with their buyers/users.

I remember it wasn't that long ago that their demise was predicted and they came back with a vengeance.

But it certainly seems like Google is being much more innovative and in all types of directions.

And just like Google came out of nowhere, you can be sure there will be other big players crop up in the next few years. It always happens.

[Just the facts]

Apple's miraculous come back was because Bill Gates and Microsoft bailed them out. Microsoft was under intense pressure from federal regulators to open up the Windows operating system and unconnect all their products that they had to save Apple just so an alternative would be available to stave off the forced break-up of Microsoft.

From 1997:

Aug. 6, 1997: Apple Rescued ? by Microsoft | This Day in Tech | WIRED

Microsoft rescues one-time and future nemesis Apple with a $150 million investment that breathes new life into a struggling Silicon Alley icon.

In a remarkable feat of negotiating legerdemain, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs got needed cash — in return for non-voting shares — and an assurance that Microsoft would support Office for the Mac for five years. Apple agreed to drop a long-running lawsuit in which they alleged Microsoft copied the look and feel of the Mac OS for Windows and to make Internet Explorer the default browser on its computers — but not the only choice.

Microsoft got to look like a noble competitor, for a change, for what amounted to a rounding error on their annual revenues. Timing mattered: The company was in the midst of an image-tarnishing antitrust fight over its heavy-handed promotion of IE during the height of the browser wars with Netscape.

[David]

Scale. Google has figured out how to scale with Android. Their goal is very obviously, for the vast majority of the world to be using an Android device. When they went to auto manufactures, for example, it wasn't hard to convince so many of them because they were able to offer such a substantial representation of the market. A share that is going going to continue to balloon.

The debate, especially among nerds in the US is incorrectly around design. However, Android adoption isn't slowing down and with Android L, Google is improving their design chops even further. We're also seeing a massive improvement with interoperability between apps and device models -- the so called fragmentation problem that plagued the Play store in '12 and early '13.

I'm confident Google will continue to expand its reach and will use the full weight and breadth of its user base to do it. Something Apple just doesn't have. Android is hovering at around 80% of the market share, world-wide. That's not likely to change for a while and until it does, when it comes to TVs, Cars, Refrigerators, etc... Google's going to get more calls answered. At Google I/O we saw good reason to believe that Samsung and Google will be working even closer in the coming years and that Motorola is going to continue to gain relevance. This kind of collaboration with hardware companies will make new use cases into things like home automation and the car easier to pull off -- and most importantly, faster to achieve.

Excellent analysis.

Makes me wish I was more of a Java programmer so I could dip my toes into Android development, but I'm too spoiled by Microsoft IDEs. Every time I work with Eclipse I can barely stand it. I suppose I need to look into Xamarin again, and actually play around with some app development this time.

[kelroy55]

Other than ITunes I've never had an Apple product or device. My phone and tablet run off Android and I've very happy with both.

[FighttheGoodFight]

The only thing I worry about with the new Android TV is how quickly they abandoned the Google TV platform the last time around. I plan on waiting a bit before investing in a new TV box as I already have the Roku and Apple TV. I loved the features they showed but am worried about continued support.

[FighttheGoodFight]

I'm used to having this concern too but with recent acquisitions and just from what we saw from Google I/O, they appear to be more focused on the home than before. The last couple years they've been more distracted with other things (like Google+).

I really hope this is true. I enjoy hardware made by Google. I feel that sometimes the third party manufacturers tend to not update their devices creating fragmentation.

I really would like to see both Car play and Android Auto take off. These would be so much fun to tinker with. I guess we will see how the market responds.

[White Peacock]

While I'd like to see Microsoft make greater strides with Windows Phone, which is possible with the supposed future convergence of WP and WinRT, Android is still my go-to mobile OS. I can't say I like it much for tablet use, unfortunately (I've owned a couple Android tablets and ultimately found I prefer Windows RT, even with the lack of apps), but as a smartphone OS, it's the best.

Android's success lies in its open nature. Namely, any manufacturer can slap Android, with or without a custom UI, on a device and sell it. As long as it's Google approved, thus giving it legit GAPPS access, that phone counts as an Android activation, boosting the numbers of overall Android usage. And this runs the gambit from cheap budget phones to stellar, premium devices. iOS can only be had on an iDevice, which produces a fluid, consistent experience, but it doesn't really provide many options for consumers. Android is huge in third world countries, where their budget Android device may be the only computer they have access to, and so they now have easy and quick access to all the information in the world. iPhones are cost prohibitive for most folks in these areas, so Android saves the day and beefs up its market share.

The Android OS is so customizable that your phone can be as complex, or as minimalist, as you like.

After the first iPhone was released, which introduced multitouch capacitive displays into the market, Apple's innovation has lagged. Even the original iPhone was a 2G only device, whereas most other smartphones were already using 3G. iDevices are a generation behind the remainder of the market with every iteration. They didn't provide LTE until the iPhone 5 was released, while LTE had been available on Android devices for some time. They're doing the same with NFC as well. Essentially, Apple made the first move with the first iPhone, then opted to follow other manufacturers after they saw what did and did not work in the market. Now what they're doing with iOS is implementing innovations that Android made popular, like the notifications shade, live wallpapers, and so forth. That's why the market shifted so heavily in favor of Android; Android manufacturers produced an all-out assault because not only was Google working on it, Samsung, HTC, and all the other manufacturers tinkered with the OS and innovated in so many ways that made their own implementations more impressive than anything Apple was able to come up with.