Apple announced two new partners for its next-generation CarPlay platform this week — Porsche and Aston Martin. The latter, a storied but historically technology-challenged (remember the Lagonda?) sports car brand that would greatly benefit from using someone else’s software, makes sense. But Porsche? That was more than a bit of a surprise to me — especially given the company’s storied reputation for engineering its own solutions and recently announced Android-based Macan. But I believe Porsche knows something much of the industry isn’t yet ready to accept: That Apple’s software can create far more value for Porsche’s cars than Porsche could ever create on its own. Other automakers should start living in this reality instead of chasing the fantasy that they’re software companies, if only we’d give them 10 or 20 years to figure it out.
The rise of CarPlay and Android Auto
First, let’s set some historical context — I think it’s essential for this discussion. Android Auto and Apple CarPlay are roughly contemporaneous, with Auto launching on Hyundai, GM, and Honda beginning in 2015. CarPlay technically predated this, launching on the Ferrari FF in 2014 (yes, CarPlay debuted on a Ferrari), but it too saw wide adoption start in 2015 with major car manufacturers. Slowly but surely, even notoriously recalcitrant luxury marks like BMW and Mercedes came on board with these projected smartphone interfaces — almost assuredly because their customers demanded it, lest they jump ship to someone else who would give them what they wanted. Today, it’s difficult to find a new car (at least, in North America or Western Europe) without support for CarPlay and Android Auto that isn’t a Tesla or Rivian.
CarPlay and Android Auto always amounted to an exchange of value for automakers. Google and Apple would learn a lot about how people behave when interacting with in-vehicle infotainment systems (touchpoints, navigation routing, voice commands, and more). At the same time, carmakers would receive bleeding-edge connectivity and integration with popular mapping and audio services. This was a nominally equitable arrangement, especially given how far behind many OEMs were on their in-vehicle software in the mid-2010s. Projection’s only major downside, for users, was the lag, which especially when connected in the more convenient wireless fashion, is palpable.
That some manufacturers like GM are now rebuffing their tech titan partners isn’t surprising; projected modes were always a trade-off, one whose business impact was foreseeable. It would be much harder to convince customers to pay for things (e.g., a mobile data connection, mapping, streaming) they once received for free via these projected interfaces, and taking something away from people — even something they’d possibly be content without — always goes down badly. Put another way: Google and Apple had their feet in the door (connectors in the USB port?), and it would be hard to kick them out.
By 2018, though, most OEMs had signed on to the smartphone projection compromise, seeing no better solution (and a real risk of lost sales if they didn’t hop on the bandwagon). This gets us to the present day.
A new era: Projection rejection
Today, automakers face a choice: Forge ahead with projection integration and forego some maybe-there, maybe-not revenue, or take a page from GM’s (wildly unpopular) book and create their own walled garden ecosystem, albeit one built on top of Google’s Android OS for cars. But from the consumer perspective, this choice feels exceedingly arbitrary.
Broadly speaking, smartphone integration in the car isn’t any less desirable today than it was eight years ago when CarPlay and Android Auto launched (unless you drive a Tesla or a Rivian). Smartphones remain ubiquitous and become more capable with each passing year. And while the rate of innovation has stagnated, the average age of the smartphone in someone’s pocket is far lower than the car they drive. There is no reason to believe that will change in the coming decade. The technology we carry will, for the foreseeable future, be more capable than the technology that carries us. This is at the core of the in-car projection issue, and it’s a fight the carmakers can’t win. But some seem intent on fighting anyway.
GM’s Android Automotive-based software debuted on the Hummer EV. Source: GMC
GM’s decision to drop CarPlay is saying out loud what many carmakers are quietly thinking: “We should never have let these tech companies into our software stack. Tesla had the right idea all along.” In broad strokes, there’s an excellent argument to be made here, because software defined vehicle (SDV) architecture like Tesla’s is plainly the wave of the future. But the argument GM is making now — that developing an SDV platform is an excellent opportunity to kick Google and Apple off its cars, ripping off the proverbial “band-aid”— is being made far too late and with far too little conviction. The only way forward is for carmakers to take a “best of both worlds” approach: SDV architecture that is highly integrated with projected user interfaces.
The Tesla mirage
I am no Tesla apologist, and I think Tesla gets far too much credit for some things. But it gets far too little credit in the media for birthing revolutionary software technology that leapfrogged an entire industry (i.e., the world’s first software-defined vehicles).
Even without Android Auto or CarPlay, Tesla is still generally recognized as the world leader in vehicle software — rightly so. No one has ever really caught up, and it’s been over a decade. Rivian is always a step or two behind and the rest of the industry is a distant third. Still, everyone wants to be Tesla. This much is evident when you look at GM’s software strategy in its Ultium vehicles, Mercedes-Benz’s MB OS, or even the ongoing slow-motion train wreck that is Volkswagen’s Cariad division. There’s a race to be the “next” Tesla of car software, and it appears that… no one is winning. Or even driving on the course.
But using a platform like Android Automotive to build a closed SDV ecosystem like Tesla’s and hoping to replicate its success is, to put it bluntly, incredibly arrogant. These carmakers are chasing a mirage. Tesla is far more than an SDV platform; it’s a lifestyle brand, a charging network, an app developer, and a lightning-in-a-bottle marketing engine with an incredible first-mover advantage. Much as Samsung was never the “next” iPhone, but the counterpoint to the iPhone, other carmakers must become the counterpoint to Tesla in this new SDV world — not try to become it. And that means embracing technology partnerships (i.e., projection interfaces), not eschewing them.
The Faustian bargain (of the century)
Apple builds the world’s most loved consumer software. And it’s aggressively courting manufacturers to put that software on their vehicles. It feels like this should be a no-brainer, and for some companies, it clearly is. That campaign is yielding tangible results, with brands like Mercedes-Benz, Jaguar-Land Rover, Audi, Porsche, Ford, Volvo, Honda, and the Nissan-Renault Alliance on board as partners for the next generation of CarPlay. We don’t know to what degree these manufacturers will embrace that software (for example, if they’ll use Apple’s full instrument cluster overlay). Still, if the mockups released as part of the Porsche and Aston Martin announcements this week are any indicator, it seems clear that Apple is the guiding hand in this relationship. And that’s how it should be.
Legacy carmakers have proven utterly incapable of designing performant, usable software. They have proven incapable of iterating that software in a timely manner. They have proven incapable of developing it without significant bugs. And they have proven incapable of delivering value above and beyond that which a company like Apple (or Google) does via its ecosystem — and they almost certainly will never develop such capability.
As much as the vision of a software-defined vehicle future holds great promise, that promise will only be successfully realized by companies that partner broadly to integrate those platforms with outside technology partners. Tesla is a one-off — and an incredible one at that — but it shouldn’t serve as the model. The sooner carmakers realize this and stop chasing phantom revenue for subscriptions that nobody wants, the sooner we can all stop avoiding otherwise decent cars ruined by terrible, self-inflicted software faults.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
Construction and mining giant Caterpillar has reached a major milestone for its autonomous haulage system (AHS), reaching one million tons (!) of aggregate hauled by the company’s massive self-driving trucks.
The milestone was reached as part of an ongoing collaboration between Cat and Luck Stone’s Bull Run Quarry in Chantilly, Virginia to help demonstrate the worth of Caterpillar’s in-house AHS solution, and goes a long way towards proving to doubters of autonomous technology that AHS has what it takes to safely and dependably operate in a working quarry.
Reaching the one million tons hauled autonomously milestone confirms that autonomous haulage can deliver consistent, repeatable performance. It also signals how autonomous solutions will address skilled labor shortages, improve site safety, increase operational efficiency, and upskill quarry employees to run autonomy.
With the success of the Luck Stone pilot at Bull Run, however, that mining/quarry imbalance may not be the status quo for much longer.
“This milestone is a powerful demonstration of what’s possible when we collaborate with our customers to deliver solutions for their critical needs,” explains Denise Johnson, Caterpillar Group President, Resource Industries. “Reaching one million tons hauled autonomously at Bull Run shows that autonomy isn’t just for mining – it’s scalable, reliable, and ready to transform the aggregates industry. We’re proud to collaborate with Luck Stone to lead that transformation.”
Caterpillar hopes the Bull Run project sets a precedent for the broader aggregates industry, and they continue to explore opportunities to expand autonomy across additional Luck Stone sites and operations.
The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
The Northwest Seaport Alliance has announced the recipients of its inaugural incentive program for zero emission drayage trucks – and they’ve turned to the logistics experts at Zeem to deploy 19 battery electric semi trucks to serve the Seattle-Tacoma gateway.
The Northwest Seaport Alliance incentive program is funded by a $6.2 million grant from the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and will see bring 19 zero emission Class 8 semi trucks (like the Kenworth T680, shown) and their associated charging infrastructure to the Puget Sound region.
“We are thankful to the Northwest Seaport Alliance for helping the region adopt electric trucks, and we invite truck operators to experience how well they are matched to the job of hauling drayage,” says Paul Gioupis, CEO of Zeem Solutions. “We have served truck fleets for several years, and our goal is to make it a compelling business decision for fleets, that is both economically and environmentally sustainable.”
19 trucks, hundreds of charging customers
NWSA announcement event, via Zeem.
In a bid to help make electrification an even more compelling option for PNW truck fleets, the new Zeem facility won’t just serve its fleet of 19 electric semi trucks – the project also includes a charging depot that will be able to serve up to 250 electric vehicles per day, with overnight parking capacity for up to 70 vehicles, including heavy-, medium-, and light-duty vehicles.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
“Nearly 4,000 short-haul trucks serve the ports of Seattle and Tacoma, traveling to nearby distribution centers and warehouses,” reads the official press release. “… operators will be able to switch to electric trucks and charging without the large amount of upfront capital typically needed for heavy-duty EVs and charging infrastructure.”
The charging site will be located near the new I-5 exit ramp just south of SeaTac Airport, along SR-99 (International Blvd./Pacific Hwy.), convenient for nearby warehouse and distribution centers that see a large volume of truck deliveries.
Electrek’s Take
Drayage trucks are typically heavy-duty Class 8 trucks that work short haul routes from ports to warehouses or loading facilities. They frequently travel back and forth along local roadways, meaning they have a high impact on air quality in a given area. And, depending on who you believe, truck emissions represent about 6% of all seaport-related diesel pollution and about 30% of all seaport-related climate pollution in the Puget Sound region – emissions that disproportionately impact communities living near port operations and along freight corridors.
As such: more electric drayage is more good news.
We had a chance to talk to Zeem CEO, Paul Gioupis, as one of our guests on Quick Charge last summer, and a lot of that discussion is still relevant today. Give it a listen (above), then let us know what you think of all this in the comments.
SOURCE | IMAGES: Zeem Solutions.
BLUETTI portable power stations offer enough capacity to run power tools, appliances, or even serve as a full-home backup during outages. For extended outages, BLUETTI offers modular systems can keep your fridge, lights, or Wi-Fi going for days. And, if you’re traveling light, the new Handsfree line of backpack power stations offer plug-and-play energy on the go — perfect for remote work, camping, or emergencies.
The California Senate dropped a controversial provision of an upcoming solar law which would have broken long-standing solar contracts with California homeowners after significant public backlash over the state’s plans to do so.
For several months now, AB 942 has been working its way through the California legislature, with big changes to the way that California treats contracts for residential solar.
The state has long allowed for “net metering,” the concept that if you sell your excess solar power to the grid, it gives you a credit that you can use to draw from the grid when your solar isn’t producing.
Some 2 million homeowners in California signed contracts with 20-year terms when they purchased their solar systems, figuring that the solar panels would pay off their significant investment over the coming decades by allowing them to sell power to the grid that they generated from their rooftops.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
But this has long been a sticking point for the state’s regulated private utilities. They are in the business of selling power, so they tend to have little interest in buying it from the people they’re supposed to be selling it to.
As a result, utilities have consistently tried to get language watering down net metering contracts inserted into bills considered by the CA legislature, and the most recent one was a bit of a doozy.
The most controversial point of AB 942 was that it would break rooftop solar contracts early. At first, it was going to break all existing contracts, then was limited to only break contracts if a homeowner sells their home. The ability to transfer these contracts was key to the buying decision for many homeowners who installed solar, as the ability to generate your own power and lower your electricity bills adds to a home’s value.
This brought anger from several rooftop solar owners and organizations associated with the industry. 100 organizations signed onto an effort to stop blaming consumers who are doing their best to reduce emissions and instead focus on the real causes of higher electricity, which the groups said are associated with high utility spending and profits.
It also resulted in several protests outside CA assemblymembers’ offices, opposing the bill. And California representatives received a high volume of comments opposing the plan to break solar contracts.
But, as of Tuesday, the language which would break rooftop solar contracts has been removed by the CA Senate’s Energy Committee, chaired by Senator Josh Becker, who led the effort. Language which blamed consumers for utility rate-hikes was also removed from the bill, according to the Solar Rights Alliance.
The bill is still not law, it has only moved out of the Energy Committee. But bills that advance through committee in California do not usually meet a significant amount of debate when they come to a floor vote, due to the Democratic supermajority in the state. It seems likely that if this bill advances to a vote, it will pass.
Electrek’s Take
The bill is still not perfect for solar homeowners. It disallows anyone with a yearly electricity bill of under $300 from getting the “California Climate Credit,” which is a refund to state utility customers paid for by California’s carbon fee on polluting industry.
The justification is thin for removing this credit from homeowners who are doing even more for the climate by installing solar… but it turns out that limitation probably won’t affect many customers, because most solar customers will still pay a yearly grid connection tax of around $300/year, and most solar customers still have a small electricity bill anyway at the end of the year.
Now, the question of a grid connection fee is another point of possible contention. This has been referred to as a “tax on the sun” in some jurisdictions, and it does feel like an attempt to nickel-and-dime customers who are contributing to climate reductions and should not be penalized for doing so. However, there is at least some rationality in the concept that they should pay to use infrastructure (but then… isn’t that the point of taxes, to build infrastructure for people to use?).
In short, even if it’s not perfect for every solar homeowner, we can consider this a win, and an example of how, at least with functional governments (unlike the US’ one), the public can and should be able to stop bad laws, or bad portions of laws, with enough public effort.
The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.