undefined | Better HN

0 pointslotsofpulp2y ago0 comments

If that were true, Tesla would have no problem offering CarPlay and Android Auto compatibility.

After all, it’s just a protocol to let your phone use the display (or part of it) as a second monitor.

0 comments

caf2y ago

My theory is that Tesla want to strongly encourage people to use the in-built navigation that works very hard to ensure you don't run out of charge.

hamandcheese2y ago

Or because they want to charge a subscription for "premium data" which nobody would buy if there was CarPlay.

dzhiurgis2y ago

You don't need premium data for online maps. Premium data is for sat maps, music and live camera views. Also at $10 per month it's actually quite cheap.

hnlmorg2y ago

Which is $10 per customer per month more than they’d get if everyone was using CarPlay / Android Auto.

It’s been proven time and time again that vertical integration is a massive money earner and you can bet that if Tesla were to release a smartphone then support for that in their cars would be a software update that follows immediately after. But since there’s no plans for a phone, the next best thing is a subscription-based infotainment system.

1 more reply

hamandcheese2y ago

It's also for live traffic.

prmoustache2y ago

Are you saying you can't listen to music in a Tesla without a subscription?

2 more replies

caf2y ago

Yeah it doesn't seem to be a profit centre, at the moment anyway.

hatsix2y ago

it is not just that, and cheap decks with laggy carplay/AA unfortunately prove that some processing happens external to the phone

lotsofpulpOP2y ago

I assume every touchscreen monitor has its own processor, but that does not mean it is seeing any data other than the video stream. And I imagine that video stream data is not going elsewhere.

dzhiurgis2y ago

Lol. Just a protocol that you need to get a blessing from Apple and pay them dearly.

lotsofpulpOP2y ago

> pay them dearly.

Source? I cannot find a single reference to Apple collecting fees, much less onerous fees, for implementing CarPlay functionality.

Automakers don’t like CarPlay because it makes cars fungible. I like CarPlay because it makes cars fungible. Apple seems like it would give away CarPlay (at least for now) to broaden the reach of its platform.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

caf2y ago

My theory is that Tesla want to strongly encourage people to use the in-built navigation that works very hard to ensure you don't run out of charge.

hamandcheese2y ago

Or because they want to charge a subscription for "premium data" which nobody would buy if there was CarPlay.

dzhiurgis2y ago

You don't need premium data for online maps. Premium data is for sat maps, music and live camera views. Also at $10 per month it's actually quite cheap.

hnlmorg2y ago

Which is $10 per customer per month more than they’d get if everyone was using CarPlay / Android Auto.

1 more reply

hamandcheese2y ago

It's also for live traffic.

prmoustache2y ago

Are you saying you can't listen to music in a Tesla without a subscription?

2 more replies

caf2y ago

Yeah it doesn't seem to be a profit centre, at the moment anyway.

hatsix2y ago

it is not just that, and cheap decks with laggy carplay/AA unfortunately prove that some processing happens external to the phone

lotsofpulpOP2y ago

I assume every touchscreen monitor has its own processor, but that does not mean it is seeing any data other than the video stream. And I imagine that video stream data is not going elsewhere.

dzhiurgis2y ago

Lol. Just a protocol that you need to get a blessing from Apple and pay them dearly.

lotsofpulpOP2y ago

> pay them dearly.

Source? I cannot find a single reference to Apple collecting fees, much less onerous fees, for implementing CarPlay functionality.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse