What in the actual F.
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
There are some things I like about the GM infotainment system. Really, there are. Let’s talk about one of them.
The mapping is pretty good. I don’t think it’s overall better, at least visually, than Apple Maps, but its integration with the charging system is pretty useful.
It routes based on charging needs and stations better. It seems to know about more charging stations than Apple Maps. One of my favorite things is how when you plan a route, it tells you how much power your battery will have at the end. That’s pretty neat!
GM touts their mapping as being superior to other systems and in many ways it is, but one might also question the long-term usefulness of these kinds of map integrations. It’s novel. It’s useful. But I think you run into the law of diminishing returns the more you use it.
Example. It’s about 300 miles to Las Vegas from where I live. Our other EV (VW ID.4) can’t make it to Vegas in one shot and the built-in mapping was very useful in finding the best place to charge (Barstow, it turns out.) At least it was useful on the first trip when the car was new. But what about the second trip? Or third? Is the range or ideal charging stop going to change between trips? Not bloody likely. So after the first time we took that car to Vegas, we never used the car’s native mapping again (for that trip.)
A study by AAA (https://newsroom.aaa.com/2015/04/new-study-reveals-much-motorists-drive/) in 2014 found that US motorists drive an average of about 30 miles a day. Another study from 10 years later (https://www.ncesc.com/how-much-does-the-average-american-drive-a-day/) showed that the average had not risen.This is because a vast majority of driving is local; to work, to the store, to the library, going out to eat, etc. People are not using mapping and tracking charging stations for these short trips. And once you take that road trip to Vegas, or to whatever big city is nearest to where you live, you tend to not need mapping any more, save for perhaps looking at traffic. And there’s nothing novel about how the GM infotainment does traffic when compared with the maps in iPhones and Android phones.
While the mapping in GM cars is great and is very useful in certain situations, it’s not the huge selling point GM seems to think it is. We should be allowed to use the mapping we want most of the time and use the GM map when we find it useful.
It’s a royal pain to not have access to the favorites, shortcuts, routes, etc. I’ve built up on my phone for the last couple decades and have to start fresh with a system that might be useful only 5% of the time. Then we’re forced into a split-brain situation where I can’t take note of a destination I want to save or route I want to take on my laptop or phone, then have it appear in my car. It’s a whole other world in there and makes this one aspect of driving inconvenient, inconsistent, annoying, and once in a while infuriating when the car’s search doesn’t understand what I’m looking for.
As is tradition on this site, I’ll also mention that technically, ‘data services’ are a subscription in GM vehicles. They give it to you for free for some number of years, but I can’t find any publication that says what happens at the end of the free period. Since GM is planning on wringing $25 billion out of its customers for software subscriptions and services by 2030, there’s no telling how much they’ll want to squeeze out of you to use the most fundamental app you can have in the car, the mapping.
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) published an article last year about car manufacturers and the data they collect about you (and sell.) It’s worth a read.
They provide links to many car manufacturers’ websites to opt out of certain data collections, but probably not all. It’s still worth doing whatever you can do to opt out of everything you can by following the links:
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
GM likes to try to sell us a fantasy world where their infotainment system is better than the supercomputers we carry in our pockets. This simply is not the case. Most of the design and execution are not up to snuff, though there are a few technical areas that are neat and novel when it comes to integration with the actual vehicle.
But we all chose our ecosystems (iPhone or Android) for a reason. Our lives are in there. Our destinations, our contacts, our favorite music, our lives. Jumping into a GM is like being punched in the face and having our phones stolen. It’s blatantly anti-consumer.
If the GM infotainment system is so superior, GM should put their money where their mouth is. If it’s something people should want to pay for, then drop the free trial for data services, come up with a monthly rate, but add Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. Put your system up head-to-head with the competition and see how it all shakes out.
Better yet, give data services away for free, while allowing Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. When everything is on a level playing field, then you’ll really see what consumers prefer. (Answer, it is not GM’s infotainment ecosystem.)
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
As an iPhone owner I’m used to a certain way of doing messaging. It’s not that different or hard vs an Android phone. But you get into your Chevy, hook up to bluetooth, and suddenly the truck seems to not know what a text is.
My wife texts me almost every time I’m in the truck. I get notifications for about half of them. When trying to read them, I’m told I need to sign into/up for Google Assistant or some garbage like that. So, to message on my phone, one of the most common hands-free things to do in a vehicle, I need to introduce myself into some other ecosystem that I’ve tried to stay out of for a reason (privacy.)
GM’s claim that using their system 100% of the time is safer, even though they have no evidence of it, is dubious at best since this behavior is actively encouraging me to pick up my phone and look at it. This infotainment system is actively making my driving less safe.
As I have in almost every post so far, and probably most posts into the future, I’ll mention that GM wants you to use their infotainment system because they want to gather your personal info and sell it to Google. GM has stated as much, in that they project hitting $25 billion in revenue by 2030 through software subscriptions and other ‘enablements’ through their infotainment system (reaping and selling your data.)
Stop it, GM. We see through you.
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
GM seems to be working under an assumption (assertion) that people want an infotainment system that is highly integrated with the vehicle, understands the battery, can control the climate and do myriad other things that contribute to the comfort and drivability of your vehicle.
This is true to some extent and the built-in systems do serve a purpose, but this is not what Apple CarPlay and Android Auto have ever been.
“In a statement shared with MacRumors last year, GM said its software strategy is ‘driven by the benefits of having a system that allows for greater integration with the larger GM ecosystem and vehicles.’ In other words, the automaker wants to control the entire in-vehicle experience, which is both a reasonable and a risky decision.”
-MacRumors, November 5th, 2024 (Link)
Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are not about integrating with the vehicle, they’re about integrating with your life. People don’t take the decision on what sort of phone they want to carry around lightly. Your phone holds your identity, your calendar, your music, your contacts, everything you need to run your life day-to-day. It might indicate what sort of personality you have. It’s a portal to the Internet at large. It’s a camera. It documents your life. People don’t want to leave that behind when they get behind the wheel of a car.
GM makes a half-assed attempt to connect to ecosystems that are not GM’s. Sure, you can bluetooth your phone and listen to your music, but just try navigating your playlists and albums in a sane way using what looks like an 80’s era WYSE terminal (more on that in a later post.) Try answering a call on an iPhone. How do you even do that? The UX leaves something to be desired. The manual indicates you can have the car read a text to you and respond with voice, but I’ll be damned if I’ve seen it attempt to do that in my EV (2024 Silverado EV. Someone enlighten me.)
GM needs to come to terms with the fact that consumers want it both ways, and many other EV manufacturers have supported this notion. My VW ID.4 has its own infotainment system, and I use it occasionally when I want to plan a trip with charging stops on it. But I use Apple CarPlay most of the time. CarPlay and Android Auto are apps that allow us to bring one of the most fundamental parts of our lifes in 2025 with us when we do one of the other more fundamental parts of our lives: driving.
My phone knows what’s on my calendar on a given day. If I have an appointment outside my house, it tells me when it’s time to leave. When I engage CarPlay, it automatically puts my destination on the map when I get in the car. When I get a call or text I can see the avatar of the person on the screen and instantly decide what to do without having to squint and try to read their name for crying out loud. This is just one example of how a phone integrates with our lives in a way that GM’s software can never do.
GM wants us to leave a little part of our soul behind when we drive one of their EV’s, and replace some of it with a cold, ugly, poorly-designed, impersonal piece of software.
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
GM has tried several different angles to explain their decision to drop CarPlay and Android Auto from all their EV’s going forward.
It’s safer, they say. But wait, no, the experience is more ‘integrated’, whatever that means.
“GM’s chief digital officer, Edward Kummer, told Reuters as much when the decision to drop CarPlay and Android Auto was announced. Automakers see subscriptions as huge new source of income to be tapped, with GM alone hoping to make as much as $25 billion per year just off subscriptions by 2030.”
-Motortrend, December 12, 2023 (Link)
If you own a new Chevy EV like I do, you can create an account and view the subscriptions you currently have associated with your vehicle. They ‘generously’ give you 3-8 years of free subscriptions that cover basic functions of your new EV. What happens when these expire is anyone’s guess, it doesn’t mention how much this will eventually cost you. It also doesn’t guarantee that someone buying a Chevy EV next year will get this same trial period.
APP ACCESS: 3-year plan
“Enjoy streaming content and access maps and traffic updates from your touchscreen – or simply ask Alexa.”
Does this mean I get no maps in three years? Who knows. And since I’m forced to stream Spotify instead of using Apple Music, does that go away? So great, a basic function like listening to music will require an additional subscription (to my car) in addition to Spotify itself. I think I wasted money getting the kick-ass Bose sound system in my new car if it’s going to cost me a subscription fee to listen to music in three years.
NAVIGATION AND VOICE ASSISTANT: 8-year plan
This includes Google Assistant, which allows you to send voice commands to do things like search the map, answer calls, etc. GM talking heads mention ‘safety’ in some of their press releases about dropping CarPlay and Android Auto, but having to resort to pressing buttons on the touchscreen to do these basic things (unless you give them more money!) is the opposite of safer.
Let’s also not forget that GM is ‘partnering’ with Google to provide some of these services. In case you didn’t know, Google is the world’s largest advertising agency, and also the world’s largest privacy invader. GM ‘partnering’ with Google is just another way for them to drive revenue to their business by collecting information about your location, apps you run, how/where you drive, etc. and selling it to Google.Have you read GM’s and OnStar’s privacy policies? I have. They both use the word ‘may’ a lot, but OnStar alone ‘may’ collect:
“When location services are enabled in your vehicle, we collect Geolocation Information while the vehicle is used and upon the occurrence of certain events.”“Can include IP address, browser type, unique device identifier, cookie data, associated identifying and usage information of computers and mobile devices that interact with our products, and information about how you use our products and services, such as infotainment system usage, Wi-Fi data usage, and information about your use of Vehicle Mobile Apps.”
There are a plethora of other things they may collect that are problematic, including images from your vehicle’s cameras. They can essentially do what they want with much of this info, including:
“Identifiers and Digital Activity Information may be disclosed to companies with which GM enters into business or marketing arrangements, such as third-party advertising networks.”“Disclosed” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. What they mean is “sold”. That $25 billion isn’t coming from nowhere.
Regarding images from your cameras, the GM privacy policy states they can provide them to:
“Service providers who work on our behalf and who do not have an independent right to use the vehicle Camera Images, such as companies that help us develop our products and services.”In other words, Google.
Your vehicle says a lot about you, and now GM, Google, and whoever, knows all about you, too. Including where you are, where you’re going, what music you listen to and potentially what you and the surroundings of your vehicle look like.
This is the real reason GM has dropped Apple CarPlay and Android Auto from its EV’s. They want you to have to subscribe to services you already have on the supercomputer in your pocket. CarPlay and Android Auto essentially bypass your car’s system to provide you services on their terms. For those of us with an iPhone, those terms are generally consumer-friendly and often have a ‘privacy first’ component to them. GM instead wants to tap into all that sweet, sweet personal data to sell it to third parties, at their discretion, and charge you for the privilege.
If that’s not blatantly consumer-hostile, I don’t know what is.
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
A website dedicated to restoring CarPlay and Android Auto into GM vehicles.
General Motors Sucks 