My List of Desired Changes

[R1T-USN]

@Phrogz

Can you add to your list -

Towing - extend blind spot to auto detect trailer and extend coverage area. I’m assuming the radar is powerful enough. THE only thing I really miss from my lemon 2019 Ram Limited was this feature. It auto detected perfectly.

Does the rear camera auto zoom as you back up to the trailer a-frame to help get aligned?

Thank you

Sponsored

 

[jpal]

Porsche, BMW, Mercedes, hell even Ferrari and Lamborghini... these aren't commodities either, and they all support CarPlay.

There are other ways to monetize the in-car experience with ongoing revenue than trying to reinvent the wheel that was solved by deep phone integration. It's not "giving up" to leave the things Apple and Google do best to them. It allows the Rivian team to focus on the elements that make a Rivian special and unique rather than having to spend time and development resources attempting to recreate what's already been solved.

I mostly like CarPlay in my wife's Tahoe, but I really hope Rivian never adds it. If Rivian caves, the pressure to make their native system a one-stop solution is dramatically reduced. I don't want to use a half CarPlay, half Rivian system. I want to use a single system that does everything. I think Rivian will get there eventually, but not if they cave on CarPlay/AA.

 

[astonius]

I mostly like CarPlay in my wife's Tahoe, but I really hope Rivian never adds it. If Rivian caves, the pressure to make their native system a one-stop solution is dramatically reduced. I don't want to use a half CarPlay, half Rivian system. I want to use a single system that does everything. I think Rivian will get there eventually, but not if they cave on CarPlay/AA.

This is silly. It does not prevent them from continuing to build out their system, and it could easily fit nicely in the existing "app" space dedicated to each of the individual applications already included in the system. It also is not a huge lift to implement and maintain CarPlay relative to the lift of attempting to include all of the relevant navigation/media applications and service integrations which are all included in CarPlay. If anything, CarPlay allows Rivian to focus their efforts on things that will make significantly more impact that cherrypicking a handful of CarPlay apps to rebuild.

Also, I would never go around hoping Rivian didn't offer a feature just because I don't want it. That's a pretty selfish position to hold. So many here are all about the transition to sustainability and making EVs more appealing. I am in the process of exploring trading my R1T for an ICE SUV solely because of the lack of CarPlay. This goes against the proposed goal of increasing EV adoption.

 

[jpal]

This is silly. It does not prevent them from continuing to build out their system, and it could easily fit nicely in the existing "app" space dedicated to each of the individual applications already included in the system. It also is not a huge lift to implement and maintain CarPlay relative to the lift of attempting to include all of the relevant navigation/media applications and service integrations which are all included in CarPlay. If anything, CarPlay allows Rivian to focus their efforts on things that will make significantly more impact that cherrypicking a handful of CarPlay apps to rebuild.

Also, I would never go around hoping Rivian didn't offer a feature just because I don't want it. That's a pretty selfish position to hold. So many here are all about the transition to sustainability and making EVs more appealing. I am in the process of exploring trading my R1T for an ICE SUV solely because of the lack of CarPlay. This goes against the proposed goal of increasing EV adoption.

It doesn't prevent them, but it 100% does reduce the pressure on Rivian to deliver in their own system, and it also changes Rivian's cost/benefit analysis to add these features.

Take full in-system implementation of text messages, for example. If Rivian caves on CarPlay/AA and suddenly 85% of Rivian drivers are using this feature in CarPlay/AA, Rivian's incentive to commit a bunch of resources to make this happen natively goes way down. I don't want that - I want the masses to keep clamoring for these improvements in the native system so they get added as expeditiously as possible.

I just fundamentally disagree with the argument that no one should be against Rivian adding CarPlay/AA, and that they just don't have to use it if they don't want to. It changes things forever if they go down this path, and quite negatively for those of us who don't want to use a half-and-half system.

Don't want to further hijack this thread with yet another CarPlay argument, so I'll stop here.

 

[astonius]

Take full in-system implementation of text messages, for example. If Rivian caves on CarPlay/AA and suddenly 85% of Rivian drivers are using this feature in CarPlay/AA, Rivian's incentive to commit a bunch of resources to make this happen natively goes way down. I don't want that - I want the masses to keep clamoring for these improvements in the native system so they get added as expeditiously as possible.

What advantage would Rivian's approach to text messages have over CP/AA? If anything it's a worse experience. It's not as integrated with the rest of the phone.

Instead of wasting that time and effort they could improve Driver+, add more drive modes, improve efficiency, add entertainment apps like Netflix and Hulu for charging sessions, optimize the user experience for the holistic system, add new driver information displays, improve ingress/egress, etc. Attempting to reinvent already solved problems is a waste of everyone's time.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

What advantage would Rivian's approach to text messages have over CP/AA? If anything it's a worse experience. It's not as integrated with the rest of the phone.

Instead of wasting that time and effort they could improve Driver+, add more drive modes, improve efficiency, optimize the user experience for the holistic system, add new driver information displays, improve ingress/egress, etc. Attempting to reinvent already solved problems is a waste of everyone's time.

The point the other person is trying to make is then you are still using a half and half system. If I was a manufacturer I'm not sure I would want to rely on 3rd party software that can be turned off at any time. What if apple decides it's good for business that all cars with CarPlay now need to pay 10 bucks per month for a subscription, and every manufacturer didn't bother to make their own native systems functional because "those problems have already been solved". Now you have no choice and you're going to blame Apple AND the car manufacturer.

In my Audi CarPlay is a must because the native system doesn't work that well, but I'm hoping the Rivian system works better eventually because it makes no sense for them to turn off their own UI in their vehicles or switch to charging a monthly fee.

 

[astonius]

The point the other person is trying to make is then you are still using a half and half system. If I was a manufacturer I'm not sure I would want to rely on 3rd party software that can be turned off at any time. What if apple decides it's good for business that all cars with CarPlay now need to pay 10 bucks per month for a subscription, and every manufacturer didn't bother to make their own native systems functional because "those problems have already been solved". Now you have no choice and you're going to blame Apple AND the car manufacturer.

In my Audi CarPlay is a must because the native system doesn't work that well, but I'm hoping the Rivian system works better eventually because it makes no sense for them to turn off their own UI in their vehicles or switch to charging a monthly fee.

Quite the opposite. Modern implementations integrate alongside the native system. If anything the lack of CarPlay is the half and half system. I'm using my phone while driving. That's not good and exactly why CarPlay was created, not as a stop-gap for poorly designed native systems.

 

[jpal]

What advantage would Rivian's approach to text messages have over CP/AA? If anything it's a worse experience. It's not as integrated with the rest of the phone.

Instead of wasting that time and effort they could improve Driver+, add more drive modes, improve efficiency, optimize the user experience for the holistic system, add new driver information displays, improve ingress/egress, etc. Attempting to reinvent already solved problems is a waste of everyone's time.

Rivian has the ability to more seamlessly integrate these features in their system than CarPlay could ever hope for. I could potentially use it while on the Drive Mode screen, for example, rather than having to hop around and go back to the CarPlay app to use it. I don't think anyone questions the fact that one system, if designed well, is a much better user experience than two systems awkwardly sewn together.

If you are still using a phone while driving, then that's evidence that the system isn't there yet (which I think everyone already knows given how new the software is). Again, that's kind of the point. Let's keep the pressure on and hold them to it to get there.

But seriously, let's not act like caving to CarPlay/AA is objectively the right answer. That's your opinion, but it's not a fact. I disagree, and have valid reasons for doing so. What I value is different than what you value, which is why we are going to continue to disagree.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

Quite the opposite. Modern implementations integrate alongside the native system. If anything the lack of CarPlay is the half and half system. I'm using my phone while driving. That's not good and exactly why CarPlay was created, not as a stop-gap for poorly designed native systems.

I suppose, I just would worry that Apple is going to flip the subscription switch and we will suddenly all be paying to use our own vehicles.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

I don't think anyone questions the fact that one system, if designed well, is a much better user experience than two systems awkwardly sewn together.

Yes. I've learned this the hard way in my professional life with trying to stitch together multiple systems. When there's something wrong with either one, and it's an integration issue, both sides point the finger at the other and both offer a different solution. This leads to tons of labor by the end user switching between systems. For example in my Audi, if I have CarPlay up and running and I want the Nav to pop up on the HUD too bad, it doesn't work. I can use the Audi native navigation but not at the same time as using CarPlay.

So now I've run up against something that could be avoided if I had a single system. I know that most people want CarPlay because it works better than what Rivian has today, but third party software is never going to be seamless with a car software unless the manufacturer surrenders their own programming to apple entirely and lets them run the whole thing. I don't want an Apple vehicle, as I type this out on my MacBook Air. I have no problem with Apple products, but I keep their reach limited as possible.

 

[astonius]

Rivian has the ability to more seamlessly integrate these features in their system than CarPlay could ever hope for. I could potentially use it while on the Drive Mode screen, for example, rather than having to hop around and go back to the CarPlay app to use it. I don't think anyone questions the fact that one system, if designed well, is a much better user experience than two systems awkwardly sewn together.

If you are still using a phone while driving, then that's evidence that the system isn't there yet (which I think everyone already knows given how new the software is). Again, that's kind of the point. Let's keep the pressure on and hold them to it to get there.

I absolutely question your assertion because a vehicle-dependent system will never support all of the apps and integrations enabled by CarPlay.

And what a contrived example... texting from the drive mode screen? If you're doing that you're using voice controls, which would be supported by CarPlay. Rivian's system today doesn't even allow using multiple apps from the same view, something CarPlay does support with its dashboard view, and it's incredibly smart about the cards it displays on that view. Apple has this shit figured out. Rivian does not and does not have the resources to compete.

I suppose, I just would worry that Apple is going to flip the subscription switch and we will suddenly all be paying to use our own vehicles.

Based on what evidence? There's zero indication Apple intends to make CarPlay a subscription feature. This is an entirely imagined fear. You know what we know for sure will become a monthly fee? Rivian's system.

 

[jpal]

I absolutely question your assertion because a vehicle-dependent system will never support all of the apps and integrations enabled by CarPlay.

And what a contrived example... texting from the drive mode screen? If you're doing that you're using voice controls, which would be supported by CarPlay. Rivian's system today doesn't even allow using multiple apps from the same view, something CarPlay does support with its dashboard view, and it's incredibly smart about the cards it displays on that view. Apple has this shit figured out. Rivian does not and does not have the resources to compete.

I'm done arguing with you, as you clearly have no interest in actually listening to other opinions before immediately responding and trying to trash them. I should have known better. The internet wins again.

 

[astonius]

I'm done arguing with you, as you clearly have no interest in actually listening to other opinions before immediately responding and trying to trash them. I should have known better. The internet wins again.

I hear your opinion, and I'm countering your points.

Do you not find it ironic that you went out of your way to revive a thread by directly replying to my feature suggestion with the assertion that it should be disregarded outright and get upset when your assertion is challenged?

 

[R1T-USN]

@Phrogz

Back on topic-

I would fine tune your list and I’d mail it to Normal - seriously

 

[jpal]

I hear your opinion, and I'm countering your points.

Do you not find it ironic that you went out of your way to revive a thread by directly replying to my feature suggestion with the assertion that it should be disregarded outright and get upset when your assertion is challenged?

DM me if you want to continue, please. Happy to address each and every one of your points, but this is not the place.

Sponsored