Rivian should focus on features that set them apart from the rest of the industry, not AA/CP.

[staytuned]

This argument only makes sense if 1) CarPlay/AA was time or resource-consuming to implement (it isn’t) or 2) CarPlay/AA prevented Rivian from continuing to develop its own ecosystem (it doesn’t).

#2 is an assumption that's a bit unprecedented in the industry, no?

Sponsored

 

[mabowden]

That "IMHO" on the end just sent it, thank you

I took a minute before posting the reply and added it at the last second. Glad someone appreciated it

 

[astonius]

#2 is an assumption that's a bit unprecedented in the industry, no?

How so? Plenty of examples of in-car platforms continuing to evolve post CarPlay/AA implementation. The obvious recent example is Volvo/Polestar and now GM with their Android Automotive systems. BMW and Audi are still adding new apps and services to their native platforms. Porsche and Mercedes recently added Apple Music to their native systems. Ford is releasing regular updates to Sync 4. Loads of precedent that Rivian could support both.

 

[Dark-Fx]

This argument only makes sense if 1) CarPlay/AA was time or resource-consuming to implement (it isn’t) or 2) CarPlay/AA prevented Rivian from continuing to develop its own ecosystem (it doesn’t).

I'm interested to know how many vehicles you have done the implementation of AA and CP for since it's so not time or resource consuming to implement? Or are you just talking out of your ass like usual?

If it really truly was just a matter of flipping a flag in their software (it isn't) they would have done it. I used AA enough with my Bolt to know that occasionally Google releases a bad update that makes AA completely unusable until they issue a new update. I don't think any auto manufacturer should put themselves in a situation where they have to support another company's mistakes.

 

[astonius]

I'm interested to know how many vehicles you have done the implementation of AA and CP for since it's so not time or resource consuming to implement? Or are you just talking out of your ass like usual?

One constant I've always been able to count on with this forum is your constant and intentional antagonizing and insulting of others, which I'm sure was your entire intent with this thread. Congratulations on your success.

No, I personally have not implemented these systems, but I do have a background in software development and have read up a lot on car infotainment and screen projection in part due to Rivian's refusal to add them up to this point. I know that Rivian is running a hybrid of QNX and Android Automotive, both of which have embedded APIs for enabling these systems with relative ease. It's undoubtedly easier than developing a ground-up navigation or media app. We've also seen car manufacturers and aftermarket providers with much lower technical prowess than Rivian implement these systems.

 

[DuoRivians]

100% Agree. Things all more important and priority over CP/AA:

- More efficiency: get more range per charge, less vampire loss
- Heat pump
- Next gen architecture on 800v system
- Improved adas
- Factory car manufacturing quality consistency
- Quad motor + max pack
- More car controls via app
- Software bugs
- Apple Music (as standalone)

 

[Dark-Fx]

One constant I've always been able to count on with this forum is your constant and intentional antagonizing and insulting of others, which I'm sure was your entire intent with this thread. Congratulations on your success.

Based on the fact that you're posting in this thread, well, some people clearly just want to be antagonized.

 

[DuoRivians]

CP/AA is a Trojan horse play by Apple and Google to try to own the front end of the car experience, such that all hardware oems (ie car manufacturers) become commoditized and lowest to cost.

Clearly, Rivian and even Tesla are aware of this. They are not going to subject themselves to this. They want to be directly connected to their users via their own hardware and software package.

Traditional oems like Ford aren’t valued as or consider themselves as growth companies. And their strength is nowhere near software.

In short, Rivian is not going to implement CP/AA, for good reasons (even if you might disagree). Save your energy

 

[astonius]

Based on the fact that you're posting in this thread, well, some people clearly just want to be antagonized.

I'm fine with a lively debate on the merits, but when you push a falsehood that somehow adding support for one highly-demanded feature precludes Rivian from developing additional features it needs to be called out so others don't fall for it.

 

[Zoidz]

Meh. I'm indifferent. I don't own a vehicle now with CP/AA. I've used it in rental cars, it's nice but not a must have for me. As long as my iPhone links via Bluetooth and I can stream podcasts from it, I'm fine with Spotify for music via the Rivian interface.

 

[Dark-Fx]

I'm fine with a lively debate on the merits, but when you push a falsehood that somehow adding support for one highly-demanded feature precludes Rivian from developing additional features it needs to be called out so others don't fall for it.

It does because it's not as straightforward to integrate it as it seems like it is at first glance. There's a difference between just activating the systems to support it and having to support everyone who uses it in the future. Unless you can actually provide a case study about how much effort it requires to integrate it into an existing system and how much support it requires for the future, you're just blowing as much smoke as you think I am.

I got away from the apple ecosystem of stuff because I dislike their walled garden approach. I've written a basic application for AA but google has a huge amount of limitations on what a developer is able to do in it, and any of things that can actually integrate into a vehicles systems is quite protected.

Most people clamoring for AA/CP just want to be able to mirror their screen onto the big screen and now you're relying on two separate systems to function together when it could just be one. There are enough people that complain about how much you have to click around to do things in the basic Rivian UI. If you have another separate system on top of it to do navigation and stuff in the vehicle, it's going to be really cumbersome. Rivian has a lot more buttons and switches to pull that affect what the vehicle does than typical.

 

[SoCal Rob]

I'll try to keep my whining about your whining about no AA/CP to this thread moving forward. I'll link in threads that annoy me to not clutter the other threads. Other people are welcome to do the same thing and additionally clutter this thread.

If you don't want to see this thread pop up in your feed, hitting the big compass yellow ignore button on the top right of this post should do it.

I almost completely agree with you. Here’s my take:

Rivian should focus on features that set them apart from the rest of the industry by implementing AA/CP.


I don’t see any manufacturer differentiating themselves so much in infotainment that people say they’ll buy a vehicle because of it. As demonstrated by Subaru, Lucid, and others you can implement screen projection within the existing UI to keep the Rivian feel intact outside the on-screen window. All people notice with Rivian’s early efforts are what’s missing / doesn’t work right and many people notice those things because they’re coming from a vehicle with screen projection.

Develop the quad motor torque management, regen, and drive modes to deliver best in class performance in snow/winter driving, off-road, etc. and people will notice. Take full advantage of the suspension hardware unique to Rivian and people will notice. Get the climate control, Gear Guard, dash cam and other features people expect in this space up to par and people will notice.

That’s my take.

 

[astonius]

It does because it's not as straightforward to integrate it as it seems like it is at first glance. There's a difference between just activating the systems to support it and having to support everyone who uses it in the future. Unless you can actually provide a case study about how much effort it requires to integrate it into an existing system and how much support it requires for the future, you're just blowing as much smoke as you think I am.

I got away from the apple ecosystem of stuff because I dislike their walled garden approach. I've written a basic application for AA but google has a huge amount of limitations on what a developer is able to do in it, and any of things that can actually integrate into a vehicles systems is quite protected.

Most people clamoring for AA/CP just want to be able to mirror their screen onto the big screen and now you're relying on two separate systems to function together when it could just be one. There are enough people that complain about how much you have to click around to do things in the basic Rivian UI. If you have another separate system on top of it to do navigation and stuff in the vehicle, it's going to be really cumbersome. Rivian has a lot more buttons and switches to pull that affect what the vehicle does than typical.

Of course there's going to be some ongoing support and integration concerns, but that doesn't explain how managing a projection interface which is a near-universal standard backed by two of the largest tech companies in the world is somehow more difficult than developing your own bespoke media and navigation experiences from the ground-up.

 

[moosehead]

Has Rivian issued their updated highly-valued differentiation paid Membership subscription note yet today?

Asking for a friend.

 

[astonius]

I almost completely agree with you. Here’s my take:

Rivian should focus on features that set them apart from the rest of the industry by implementing AA/CP.


I don’t see any manufacturer differentiating themselves so much in infotainment that people say they’ll buy a vehicle because of it. As demonstrated by Subaru, Lucid, and others you can implement screen projection within the existing UI to keep the Rivian feel intact outside the on-screen window. All people notice with Rivian’s early efforts are what’s missing / doesn’t work right and many people notice those things because they’re coming from a vehicle with screen projection.

Develop the quad motor torque management, regen, and drive modes to deliver best in class performance in snow/winter driving, off-road, etc. and people will notice. Take full advantage of the suspension hardware unique to Rivian and people will notice. Get the climate control, Gear Guard, dash cam and other features people expect in this space up to par and people will notice.

That’s my take.

Rivian's current differentiating infotainment feature is the lack of CP/AA. It's the one thing nearly every review knocks them on, and according to multiple guides and customer support agents is the single-most requested feature.

Sponsored