5 ms·

"But you also have to open up all the car's sensor data [to Google], and when I say all, it really is all sensor data" This is revealing. I'm glad my tractor G

by chicob 7y ago

"But you also have to open up all the car's sensor data [to Google], and when I say all, it really is all sensor data" This is revealing. I'm glad my tractor GPS/guiding system does not run Android.

Zhenya 7y ago
Android and Google services are 2 different things. 1 is an opensource OS, the other is proprietary services.
- incanus77 7y ago
  Want to run Google Maps on this system? You must use Google services as a whole. Don’t want to? Look up the numbers on how many global providers of maps data there are...
  - magduf 7y ago
    Not only that, the other providers are extremely deficient compared to Google Maps, from an end-user perspective. My 4-year-old car came with an infotainment system using HERE maps. It's laughably bad compared to Google Maps, and here's why: 1) The HERE maps aren't auto-updated. You have to go to some trouble to download updates twice a year, and then install them on the car with a USB stick. You only get 3 updates for free, and after that you have to pay a huge price for each update. Google Maps is updated constantly with new roads, construction outages, even when a street is going to be blocked for a parade. 2) The business data on the built-in system is sparse. With Google Maps, pretty much any brick-and-mortar business that exists is on there. And I can easily see the business's operating hours too, and it'll warn me if I'm going to get there too close to closing time. 3) Searching is far easier. Finding a destination on the built-in system is like something from the 90s, and you generally need to start with a state, city, etc. With Google Maps, you just start typing a name and it pops up suggestions, which usually gets you the place you want very quickly. 4) No traffic updates on the built-in system. It has no way to get traffic data; Google Maps has this by default unless you're in a "dead zone". I could go on and on.
    - cpeterso 7y ago
      For anyone interested in mapping technology, check out the book "Never Lost Again: The Google Mapping Revolution That Sparked New Industries and Augmented Our Reality". Written by one of the founders of Keyhole, the CIA-funded (In-Q-Tel) company that created the technology that became Google Earth, the book describes the creation of Google Maps, Google Earth, and the political machinations of different Google departments vying to own "geo". https://www.amazon.com/dp/0062673041 https://www.amazon.com/dp/0062673041
    - blub 7y ago
      You've discovered how nearly infinite ad dollars and leveraging a near monopoly in mobile has allowed Google to destroy competition.
      - chungus_khan 7y ago
        Google gives me AT&T/Bell System flashbacks.
      - magduf 7y ago
        What competition? There was never anything on that level before Google Maps came around. It's not like Mapquest ever offered similar functionality. Google didn't invent GPS mapping, but they did seem to invent combining it with a bunch of really useful other information like business addresses, hours, reviews, photos, easy searching, etc. And that doesn't even include stuff that isn't useful in cars, like walking/biking directions, public transit directions/hours/etc. Would we have gotten all this without a near monopoly like Google? The only thing I've seen that comes close is Apple Maps, and that too is backed by a gigantic company with its tentacles in many things. Some company that only does maps isn't going to have access to all that data, so you'll just get a program that makes pretty maps that's only useful if you know the GPS coordinates for something, which of course no one does.
        blub 7y ago
        The competition which couldn't improve their products as fast or as well because they did not get free money from their ad business and now had to compete with gratis good quality maps to boot. For a long time after Google Maps entered the market there were better products available from various providers.
  - detaro 7y ago
    Buying map data is not a problem for a big car manufacturer. They already have their partners for that, they sometimes partially own those partners, and they will port to whatever platform chosen. Google is the weird one in that case, who insist on selling online services, is from what I've heard generally unwilling to commit to long-term setups, ...
  - Zhenya 7y ago
    Correct. VW is talking about the platform, not Google maps.
- chicob 7y ago
  The VW guy was talking about the handing over of sensor data to Google in the context of "how much Android" is acceptable, since apparently in his opinion opening up for the MIB is as far as he'd go. The square brackets are Ars Technica's.
qznc 7y ago
Working at a major OEM, I heard the interaction with Google was like: "We would like to buy/licence your maps" "We will give them to you for free, but you have to install our software" "k thx bye"

by chicob 7y ago

"But you also have to open up all the car's sensor data [to Google], and when I say all, it really is all sensor data" This is revealing. I'm glad my tractor GPS/guiding system does not run Android.

Zhenya 7y ago

Android and Google services are 2 different things. 1 is an opensource OS, the other is proprietary services.

incanus77 7y ago
Want to run Google Maps on this system? You must use Google services as a whole. Don’t want to? Look up the numbers on how many global providers of maps data there are...
- magduf 7y ago
  Not only that, the other providers are extremely deficient compared to Google Maps, from an end-user perspective. My 4-year-old car came with an infotainment system using HERE maps. It's laughably bad compared to Google Maps, and here's why: 1) The HERE maps aren't auto-updated. You have to go to some trouble to download updates twice a year, and then install them on the car with a USB stick. You only get 3 updates for free, and after that you have to pay a huge price for each update. Google Maps is updated constantly with new roads, construction outages, even when a street is going to be blocked for a parade. 2) The business data on the built-in system is sparse. With Google Maps, pretty much any brick-and-mortar business that exists is on there. And I can easily see the business's operating hours too, and it'll warn me if I'm going to get there too close to closing time. 3) Searching is far easier. Finding a destination on the built-in system is like something from the 90s, and you generally need to start with a state, city, etc. With Google Maps, you just start typing a name and it pops up suggestions, which usually gets you the place you want very quickly. 4) No traffic updates on the built-in system. It has no way to get traffic data; Google Maps has this by default unless you're in a "dead zone". I could go on and on.
  - cpeterso 7y ago
    For anyone interested in mapping technology, check out the book "Never Lost Again: The Google Mapping Revolution That Sparked New Industries and Augmented Our Reality". Written by one of the founders of Keyhole, the CIA-funded (In-Q-Tel) company that created the technology that became Google Earth, the book describes the creation of Google Maps, Google Earth, and the political machinations of different Google departments vying to own "geo". https://www.amazon.com/dp/0062673041 https://www.amazon.com/dp/0062673041
  - blub 7y ago
    You've discovered how nearly infinite ad dollars and leveraging a near monopoly in mobile has allowed Google to destroy competition.
    - chungus_khan 7y ago
      Google gives me AT&T/Bell System flashbacks.
    - magduf 7y ago
      What competition? There was never anything on that level before Google Maps came around. It's not like Mapquest ever offered similar functionality. Google didn't invent GPS mapping, but they did seem to invent combining it with a bunch of really useful other information like business addresses, hours, reviews, photos, easy searching, etc. And that doesn't even include stuff that isn't useful in cars, like walking/biking directions, public transit directions/hours/etc. Would we have gotten all this without a near monopoly like Google? The only thing I've seen that comes close is Apple Maps, and that too is backed by a gigantic company with its tentacles in many things. Some company that only does maps isn't going to have access to all that data, so you'll just get a program that makes pretty maps that's only useful if you know the GPS coordinates for something, which of course no one does.
      - blub 7y ago
        The competition which couldn't improve their products as fast or as well because they did not get free money from their ad business and now had to compete with gratis good quality maps to boot. For a long time after Google Maps entered the market there were better products available from various providers.
- detaro 7y ago
  Buying map data is not a problem for a big car manufacturer. They already have their partners for that, they sometimes partially own those partners, and they will port to whatever platform chosen. Google is the weird one in that case, who insist on selling online services, is from what I've heard generally unwilling to commit to long-term setups, ...
- Zhenya 7y ago
  Correct. VW is talking about the platform, not Google maps.
chicob 7y ago
The VW guy was talking about the handing over of sensor data to Google in the context of "how much Android" is acceptable, since apparently in his opinion opening up for the MIB is as far as he'd go. The square brackets are Ars Technica's.

qznc 7y ago

Working at a major OEM, I heard the interaction with Google was like: "We would like to buy/licence your maps" "We will give them to you for free, but you have to install our software" "k thx bye"