Change.Org infotainment (AA/CP) petition

[MaskedRacerX]

And it's evolving nicely, adding additional interfaces for car integrations, like for example, in a Porsche EV, it can get the SOC, and use that for navigation recommendations.

The new UI is also shaping up nicely, optimizing the space on larger displays, etc.

Does a Rivian support MMS/group messaging? Or is it limited to basic BT phone communication (that's how it is on a Tesla, it's pretty craptacular)

G-Maps, Apple Maps, Waze, Audible, GOOD messaging integration, constant improvements and development from a MASSIVE dev community - just sandbox it, those who want it score, those who don't will never see it.

Sponsored

 

[cjust2006]

Great idea! No way they knew people wanted this before now...

Petitions don't force anyone to do anything.

 

[dleepnw]

if it bothers whoever submitted this petition that much they just should get a different vehicle. its like buying a green apple at the store and asking the grocer to make it red. just go and get a red apple.

 

[gregtay]

I really wish people would understand what is REALLY going on here. This is not Rivian simply deciding they do not want their cars and customers to have CP/AA. Google and Apple are not playing around... the requirements they would put in front of Rivian to license CP/AA would be significantly detrimental to Rivian and the Rivian experience. The Fords and Honda's of the world have leverage with their contracts to they haven't had to fully give in yet(although there are rumors that even the large manufacturers are now getting pressure from Apple/Google to meet their demands/requirements.) Unfortunately, AA/CP are a bit of a trojan horse that the car manufactures let into their cars and now they are stuck because people want the features. So Apple and Google can now require an OEM to use their automotive platforms for everything and give Apple/Google endless data streams from the cars that have AA/CP. They will require them to use Google or Apple's platforms for all screens and car functions (Apple and Google want to control the main dashboard screens all up.. and they want it running their software.) Essentially Apple doesn't have to build a car, but they can run all the software in a car, all the way down to self-driving tech/software. This is a financial gold mind for Apple and Google and they are going to find a way to win. GM is already fully committed to Googles platform. Volvo/polestar is also running on Google's automotive stack. Amazon being a backer of Rivian also creates additional conflict between Alexa and Apple/Google... as they would only want Siri or Hey Google as the available assistant in Rivians.

Rivian would have to give up everything that is unique about a Rivian. They are smart (much like Tesla) and said no. We say GM try to say "no" earlier this year... but I am not sure if they will stick to that after all the pushback.

I am sure RJ would LOVE to give his customers AA/CP functionality and cross off the biggest negative he hears about. But... he is smarter that that and he isn't going to let the trojan horse into his kingdom. The issue is that Apple and Google have a ton of money and resources and they are going to keep pushing car manufactures to their platform. I don't know how long RJ can resist. Apple and Google can ensure their Rivian's software can't access any Google or Apple services (Apple music, Waze, maps, etc.) Rivian at least has access to Amazon stuff (music, Alexa, etc) At some point a Rivian is stuck with only 3rd party services and customers start to feel the pain. That is what Google and Apple want... they want to force RJ to sign up for their platform (which is the only way he can get CP/AA).

So PLEASE stop asking for AA/CP.

 

[Oldsmobile_Mike]

4g radios in the truck won't last forever

Since we've already had a few threads from people who's communications modules have failed, I'm hoping it's a replaceable component that can be swapped out with 5G at some point. Think it's behind the back seat in the R1T, no idea in the S. ?

 

[1701mpl]

I really wish people would understand what is REALLY going on here. This is not Rivian simply deciding they do not want their cars and customers to have CP/AA. Google and Apple are not playing around... the requirements they would put in front of Rivian to license CP/AA would be significantly detrimental to Rivian and the Rivian experience. The Fords and Honda's of the world have leverage with their contracts to they haven't had to fully give in yet(although there are rumors that even the large manufacturers are now getting pressure from Apple/Google to meet their demands/requirements.) Unfortunately, AA/CP are a bit of a trojan horse that the car manufactures let into their cars and now they are stuck because people want the features. So Apple and Google can now require an OEM to use their automotive platforms for everything and give Apple/Google endless data streams from the cars that have AA/CP. They will require them to use Google or Apple's platforms for all screens and car functions (Apple and Google want to control the main dashboard screens all up.. and they want it running their software.) Essentially Apple doesn't have to build a car, but they can run all the software in a car, all the way down to self-driving tech/software. This is a financial gold mind for Apple and Google and they are going to find a way to win. GM is already fully committed to Googles platform. Volvo/polestar is also running on Google's automotive stack. Amazon being a backer of Rivian also creates additional conflict between Alexa and Apple/Google... as they would only want Siri or Hey Google as the available assistant in Rivians.

Rivian would have to give up everything that is unique about a Rivian. They are smart (much like Tesla) and said no. We say GM try to say "no" earlier this year... but I am not sure if they will stick to that after all the pushback.

I am sure RJ would LOVE to give his customers AA/CP functionality and cross off the biggest negative he hears about. But... he is smarter that that and he isn't going to let the trojan horse into his kingdom. The issue is that Apple and Google have a ton of money and resources and they are going to keep pushing car manufactures to their platform. I don't know how long RJ can resist. Apple and Google can ensure their Rivian's software can't access any Google or Apple services (Apple music, Waze, maps, etc.) Rivian at least has access to Amazon stuff (music, Alexa, etc) At some point a Rivian is stuck with only 3rd party services and customers start to feel the pain. That is what Google and Apple want... they want to force RJ to sign up for their platform (which is the only way he can get CP/AA).

So PLEASE stop asking for AA/CP.

hey bud - quite a long response that is factually inaccurate. Apple charges nothing to license CarPlay. Zero. Manufacturer controls what data car sends to CarPlay - only requirement is that it communicates when the car is in motion.

if having shitty maps/nav makes Rivian special, in your opinion, might want to cut down on the Kool-aid. It is a phone projection option only. It is not a Trojan horse but a safety and convenience feature.

So PLEASE do some research before you make shit up again.

 

[dleepnw]

hey bud - quite a long response that is factually inaccurate. Apple charges nothing to license CarPlay. Zero. Manufacturer controls what data car sends to CarPlay - only requirement is that it communicates when the car is in motion.

if having shitty maps/nav makes Rivian special, in your opinion, might want to cut down on the Kool-aid. It is a phone projection option only. It is not a Trojan horse but a safety and convenience feature.

So PLEASE do some research before you make shit up again.

safety? come on... who's drinking the kool aid now?

 

[Donald Stanfield]

hey bud - quite a long response that is factually inaccurate. Apple charges nothing to license CarPlay. Zero. Manufacturer controls what data car sends to CarPlay - only requirement is that it communicates when the car is in motion.

if having shitty maps/nav makes Rivian special, in your opinion, might want to cut down on the Kool-aid. It is a phone projection option only. It is not a Trojan horse but a safety and convenience feature.

So PLEASE do some research before you make shit up again.

Surely with this flippant response you have a copy of the carplay licensing agreement between Apple and manufactures right? Post it here, I want to read it. Until you do, you don't really know shit about what's required to run Apple software integrated in a vehicle.

 

[Whale Blubber]

I'd prefer CarPlay if for no other reason than to have access to Google Maps over Mapbox. If Rivian wanted to offer a Google Maps (or even Apple Maps) app option that could be set as default then I could get by just fine without Carplay.

Agree -- AA/CP who cares, but it would be nice if the UI better integrated or benefited from the more popular and useful apps and data that's already on your phone, in some form.

Maybe they should add a button marked "Choose your own Adventure" that opens a phone-mirroring section on the screen.

 

[1701mpl]

Surely with this flippant response you have a copy of the carplay licensing agreement between Apple and manufactures right? Post it here, I want to read it. Until you do, you don't really know shit about what's required to run Apple software integrated in a vehicle.

"Apple currently does not charge automakers, developers or users for CarPlay; the business interest is putting Apple at the forefront as cars transform into rolling computers, said Horace Dediu, an analyst with Asymco and founder of Micromobility Industries."

https://www.reuters.com/business/au...dashboard-it-revs-up-car-software-2022-06-30/

 

[gregtay]

"Apple currently does not charge automakers, developers or users for CarPlay; the business interest is putting Apple at the forefront as cars transform into rolling computers, said Horace Dediu, an analyst with Asymco and founder of Micromobility Industries."

https://www.reuters.com/business/au...dashboard-it-revs-up-car-software-2022-06-30/

Correct. Apple and Google do not require a payment or license fee. I never said they make $ from GM or Honda. They are super smart... but they can require manufactures to meet requirements to allow the software to be licensed. Same thing they do with Andoid lighting cables, etc.

 

[dleepnw]

"Apple currently does not charge automakers, developers or users for CarPlay; the business interest is putting Apple at the forefront as cars transform into rolling computers, said Horace Dediu, an analyst with Asymco and founder of Micromobility Industries."

https://www.reuters.com/business/au...dashboard-it-revs-up-car-software-2022-06-30/

not sure we can decipher and understand how an agreement with Apple works based on an article
from Reuters. just because Apple doesn't charge to use it, doesn't mean there's not other mitigating factors that makes manufacturers want to avoid integrating it.

and as RJ stated its about control (and ultimately revenue). when you control certain aspects of the user experience, you will control who the money goes to. why would a car company so easily give up potential revenue streams by letting another company get their foot in the door to customers vehicles and wallets.

 

[Supratachophobia]

Can we stop already with commenting on threads we know we want to go away based on the title?

Seriously, if we don’t like a topic, then the best way to indicate that is to avoid opening the thread, and definitely do NOT give feedback or post a reply. With any luck the thread fades into obscurity quickly and something else which we DO like takes its place.

But I need you know that I disagree and that you are wrong.

 

[1701mpl]

not sure we can decipher and understand how an agreement with Apple works based on an article
from Reuters. just because Apple doesn't charge to use it, doesn't mean there's not other mitigating factors that makes manufacturers want to avoid integrating it.

and as RJ stated its about control (and ultimately revenue). when you control certain aspects of the user experience, you will control who the money goes to. why would a car company so easily give up potential revenue streams by letting another company get their foot in the door to customers wallets.

Wow; that's a lot of helpful speculation. Why don't you tell us what other requirements these are before you talk out of your ass again.

I do not care about revenue streams. It looks like we will have to pay for previous gen 4g service for the truck no matter what, even if we don't use spotify, shit maps, tidal, or Alexa. I just don't want shitty maps. MapBox will never catch up to Waze, Google (which owns Waze), Apple, etc.

People just want the choice; I don't know why so many piece of shit fanboys can't admit that things could be better than how they currently are.

 

[carsly]

not sure we can decipher and understand how an agreement with Apple works based on an article
from Reuters. just because Apple doesn't charge to use it, doesn't mean there's not other mitigating factors that makes manufacturers want to avoid integrating it.

and as RJ stated its about control (and ultimately revenue). when you control certain aspects of the user experience, you will control who the money goes to. why would a car company so easily give up potential revenue streams by letting another company get their foot in the door to customers vehicles and wallets.

Maybe. But Tesla has figured out to invest where they have a chance to excel and created hundreds of billions of dollars of shareholder value in the process. Apple maps didn't exist for a long time either. Both Apple and Tesla were, and Tesla's case still are, using Google Maps.

I previously owned a Polestar 2 and when Carplay launched it was a big deal. So was having Google Maps (though it's Android Automotive already so not a big stretch there). Giving users choice in software is important. No way Rivian is building better maps that Google, sorry. And they aren't even investing here using Mapbox instead. Give it up, integrate Google, and invest in R2 and building more service centers. That's the path to faster, more profitable, growth over trying to own nonsensical pieces of the hardware/software stack.

Does Apple own display plants? No, they buy displays from Samsung. Manufacturing? Not so much, that's where Foxconn comes in. Rivian's Quad motors? Those are from Bosch. No offense to Rivian's strategy team, but they are whiffing badly on this maps call.

Sponsored