Ondrej Holzman The future of the automotive industry lies not only in electric cars, but also in so-called "connected cars", which are connected to modern technologies and can better communicate with the driver. Two tech giants - Apple and Google - have their irons in the fire in this field, and the German carmaker Porsche has now pointed out the most fundamental difference between them.
In September, Porsche introduced new models of its iconic 911 Carrera and 911 Carrera S cars for 2016 with the designation 991.2, which, among many other things, also feature a modern on-board computer. In it, however, we only find support for CarPlay, Android Auto is unlucky.
The reason is simple, ethical, how informs magazine Motor Trend. In the case of cooperation and deployment of Android Auto in Porsche cars, Google would require a large amount of data, which the German automaker did not want to do.
Google wants to get information about speed, gas position, coolant, oil temperature or revs - this way, practically complete diagnostics of the car would flow to Mountain View as soon as Android Auto was launched.
That was according to Motor Trend unthinkable for Porsche for two reasons: on the one hand, they feel that these very things are the secret ingredient that makes their cars exclusive, and on the other hand, the Germans were not too fond of providing such crucial data to a company that is actively developing its own car.
Therefore, in the latest Porsche Carrera 911 model, we only find support for CarPlay, because Apple only needs to know one thing - whether the car is moving. It is not clear if the conditions that Porsche received from Google are also received by all other car manufacturers, however, it will certainly raise questions about how much data and what exactly Google collects it for.
The fact that CarPlay does not collect any data is not too surprising. On the contrary, it only corresponds with Apple's latest steps in privacy protection, which is absolutely key for Apple.
[to action=”update” date=”7. 10. 2015 13.30″/] Magazine TechCrunch se managed to get an official statement from Google, which denied that it would demand complete data from car manufacturers such as car speed, gas position or fluid temperature, as it claimed Motor Trend.
To put this report into perspective - we take privacy very seriously and do not collect data like the Motor Trend article claims, such as throttle position, oil temperature and coolant. Users can choose to share information with Android Auto that enhances their experience so that the system can be operated hands-free while the car is driving and can provide more accurate navigation data through the car's GPS.
Google's claim contradicts the report Motor Trend, who claimed that Porsche rejected Android Auto on ethical grounds because "Google wanted virtually complete OB2D information once Android Auto was activated". Google denied this, but refused to comment on why Porsche rejected its solution, unlike CarPlay. Other brands from the Volkswagen group, to which Porsche belongs, use Android Auto.
According to TechCrunch conditions were different at the beginning when Google started approaching car companies than they are now, and it really required more data. Thus, Porsche could have decided earlier not to deploy Android Auto, and now it has not changed its decision. Porsche declined to comment on the matter.
So I have quite mixed feelings. On the one hand, a car company in the VW concern has decided on CarPlay, which could have interesting developments for the other associated car companies that VW associates, because if I'm not mistaken, Skoda and VW themselves use MirrorLink.
But on the other hand, I don't understand why Porsche considers this information "critical". If I'm not mistaken, cars have had a port for diagnostics (OBD) since about a certain year, and it connects to the phone using a bluetooth/wifi dongle. Subsequently, this information can go anywhere. The only thing that comes to my mind is the fact that not everyone will do this, on the other hand, if I were a competitor and considered this data to be critical, then buying a competitor's car and then connecting it would not be such a problem.
PS: I do not approve my driving information to be on the Google cloud! I'm just amazed that this information can be obtained in a different way and if Google wants it, it has a chance to get it in a different way...
I think that the quantity plays a big role here. Yes, the diagnostics can be pulled from every new car. But this way they would have it in Google about all the cars that were sold and 24/7.
See, I didn't think of it that way. That will probably be it.
On the other hand, maybe it would be better if they said they don't like snooping on their customers, it would make a better impression on people than "we want to keep our know-how"…
Of course! But even that can be twisted and admitted that they basically said it. Porsche has a stamp of exclusivity and prestige. The customer buys it (not always only) because of the stamp of exclusivity and prestige. And he won't buy something that isn't so exceptional because it needs to be "greatly handled by the Chinese/Google not only on the outside but also under the hood". I know it's crazy to think like that. :o) But that's how I feel.
And if we put aside the functions of different operating systems, etc., I am of the opinion that Porsche drivers who use iPhones prevail in the company. I don't want to judge anything or anyone, but the iPhone is simply a social symbol, just like a Porsche. And the crow sits next to the crow.
"I am of the opinion that Porsche drivers who use iPhones prevail in society"
Hmm… any relevant data? Or personal experience with the corresponding sample?
"I don't want to judge anything or anyone, but the iPhone is simply a social symbol, just like a Porsche."
Oh, that's news. And in what sense, please?
You must have gone completely crazy!
May I ask what I've gone completely crazy about? :)
Opinion is not fact and I think it does not necessarily have to be supported by data. It can be discussed about it. So yes, I have personal experience with the corresponding sample. how is yours We need to get our average to 50:50 :)
And what about the "symbol" - in the sense that (and we can't get into our pockets) a very large variety of people who buy an iPhone buy it mainly because "because iPhone". I didn't write that the iPhone is the same social symbol as Porsche, but people make a symbol out of it in the same way. Some consumer electronics have simply become something with the stamp of a sperk in society. A fashion thing. With Porsche, you don't care about the fact that it has such an engine and a poppy chassis, and that caste is the last. But it is possible that you (and others) are wrong. :)
In the US, everyone has an iPhone cleaner, because it costs a few dollars to add to the plan, so I have no idea what kind of stamp you're talking about here. So maybe from the point of view of Eastern European asshatness it is some kind of hallmark, because it is bought here at full fire. A bit of Russia presented in Czech. Especially in the US, the iPhone is mainly considered the best thing you can buy, because Apple is the darling of the audience there... nothing wrong with that, but the punch? WTF? Yes, it will probably work on a disco before 15, I agree.
I don't live in the US, so I don't have experience with cleaning ladies there like you. I live in CR. And I describe my own opinion on the European society that I know and also on the countries of the world about which information can be found out in connection with Apple. (Just by the way, in CR every (maybe second) bricklayer also has one. But I think that creating a norm depending on the profession is nonsense.) So if we meet all the cleaners in the USA + the entire audience there who consider it the best + let's say this audience elsewhere in the world + let's add a large number of "Eastern European assholes" from discotheques + a great Russian fondness for the color gold + every Japanese on a trip in the world + ...
= I come to the opinion that most Porsche drivers use iPhones
It is quite possible that I am mistaken and the class that buys Porsche cars is an exception to the global society and iPhones are not so popular with them. :)
PS: It's safer to write on Apple's website that the iPhone has a "sperk mark" than to write that "it's a completely useless smartphone". Maybe more people would agree with that. :)
That anyone in CR would have an iPhone (i.e. mostly lower middle class) is not quite true. Sometimes older second-hand models can be seen. It is indeed quite an expensive phone, and that's what lends it a false "mark of exclusivity". In any case, I will also have to travel between the Czech Republic to clean up, so that we can complete it ;) I should be surprised, but I don't think so.
To stick to your example, the point of my post above was that if someone in CR bleeds for Porsche, they probably also have the iPhone. It is a question of the smallness of relatively (RELATIVELY) poor people who need to show that they have what it takes. Normal intelligent and really successful, or if you want rich people, will buy what they want (i.e. even the iPhone), but they won't buy it to blow someone's breath away.
I understand you and basically agree. But it is not only in the Czech Republic. And the successful/rich Guild doesn't buy it to blow off steam, but to maintain a certain standard with its surroundings. And the same trifle can be called distinguishing between a new model and an "older, second-hand one".
But it's totally bullshit... ;o)
You are simply out of your mind in your opinion - that the "iPhone is just a social symbol"...
And "I didn't write that iPhone is the same social symbol as Porsche" is enough for me.
So you are clearly lying to yourself because this is exactly what you wrote. Dot.
Basically, I agree with colleague Dalibor. The fact that someone buys an iPhone, in your words, "because an iPhone" does not at all create some kind of social symbol. This is precisely the "national" depravity that many "little" people think. Mind you we're not talking about anything bigger than a PHONE, yes.
And if the brand/type of phone and I don't know what else is so important to you as you present here, then I am honestly very sorry for you.
I would recommend you to read an interesting book or a similar cultural experience, maybe you will be struck by what you wrote, not only in my opinion, for nonsense, maybe you will pick your nose.
A hallmark of excellence? Please don't be laughed at. As a colleague writes below… it is a false hallmark of exceptionality. An exceptional person is someone who has accomplished something, who has accomplished something that benefits all/most of society. And as you know, owning an iPhone is somehow not the case.
So to put it straight. Please let me explain what I tried to write here. I don't really make an icon out of the iPhone. On the contrary, I will state the opinion here that the company created the icon from it. If someone buys it "because of the iPhone" and not because of the features, it is, in my opinion, the symbol I am writing about. I am very well aware that we are talking only about the phone. I'm not one of those you describe as "young". I find this whole phenomenon around a piece of consumer electronics and especially the fight of dedicated fans discussing funny. I feel sorry for you, but believe me, you really don't have to feel sorry for me. I look for exceptionality completely elsewhere ;o)
So that we understand each other: for me, the iPhone is simply a fine-tuned but otherwise completely useless smartphone.
Do we agree? :O)
I know a total of 5 Porsche owners, 5 have iPhones. But it may be an exception.
Google is a data collector. Here is to see what kind of organization it is. Android is tracking your entire life. Google is developing the car itself, and in this way, without development, it would have access to data that would help it in its own development. Hejzlici one.
"To put this message into perspective - we take privacy very seriously and do not collect data"
"Users can choose to share information with Android Auto"
WHAT? That's a rather speculative answer. I understood that by default it does not collect AA, but the user can turn it on - it will certainly be turned on by default with some app, as I know android. So, after all, Google's statement is that YES we collect it all :D Their "non-data collection" is laughable
Exactly, that expression means: Yes, we collect it by default, but the user can turn it off somewhere deep in the menu.