A poll conducted by GSMArena suggests that Android Auto is used by 50.1% of car owners, while only 17.4% use Apple CarPlay. No insight into the “I use my phone with a holder” camp is given, as they could be Android or iPhone users.
Other poll results are below:
Considering the website is this really a big surprise? OEM radios are crap so car play and Android auto will always be the clear favorite and a website like that most likely has Android users as the primary user base. Both are solid and leagues better than what car manufacturers provide!
Anybody who cares about their phone is an android user and I’m guessing the people reading GSMArena do care. I could never use an apple. Between the ridiculously small battery and the shitty ux, it just doesn’t make sense.
For an example of what Apple os is like, think of newer EV cars like Tesla or ioniq. Inside of these cars is tons of small features that just make you go, “oh, that’s neat. It’s not the most useful or prominent feature but it is nice to have.” Apple os is the opposite. Everywhere you turn just more things making you go “WHY THE FUCK DOESN’T THIS EXIST??? IT’S SO SIMPLE AND EASY AND MAKES MY LIFE SO MUCH EASIER. WHO THE FUCK THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA??!!”
If you try to use an iPhone like and Android phone yea, that’ll happen. Same goes for using an Android phone like an iPhone.
They’re not really that different. They both have apps which you open and use to do different things. In a car that would likely be to communicate with people, listen to music, or to navigate.
That’s like saying a car and a truck aren’t that different then trying to load up a ton of mulch in the trunk of the car.
What? Cars and trucks are built for different purposes. Do you think Android phones and iPhones are built for different purposes?
If your purpose is to side load apps that aren’t in the official store, customize OS level ui elements, or replace built in features then yes.
Changing the UI elements isn’t the reason why Android exists. The purpose of a phone’s OS is to act like a phone. Both Android and iOS do this perfectly well. If they didn’t, nobody would use them. Everything else they can do is just a nice bonus.
Don’t get me wrong, I much prefer Android because of those features (plus I hate walled gardens), but I think your usage of the word “purpose” might be a bit of a stretch here.
I’d rather have a system that’s compatible with both apple and android phones. A car is supposed to last decades; it’s the absolute last place I want a walled garden.
Does “Android Automotive” count as “Android Auto” or “My car’s built-in infotainment”?
Edit: For those that don’t know, Volvo and Polestar (maybe others), use Android for the native infotainment. This is called “Android Automotive” to distinguish it from the version powered by your phone, called “Android Auto”.
good point, looks like some of the respondents likely thought they were the same
I find it ridiculous to have a car tied to a specific mobile OS
I use Android Auto when it works
Who are these masochists using their cars built-in infotainment system?
People who just want to listen to old school FM radio.
I do if I’m traveling on a road not familiar to me. Built-in has an alert for speed cameras, which does not work if AA has a destination set in navigation.
My cassette deck works perfectly fine. Some day I might invest in a converter to plug into my phone.
I want to have my own FOSS infotainment system, without proprietary garbage shipped with it. Replaced my head unit with an Android based one and don’t ever want to go back.
Am I the only one here, who plans before traveling and reads a digital map before driving
Yep
No. I actually prefer getting familiar with the route prior to traveling. Sometimes I’ll use turn by turn navigation but for the most part just getting familiar with the route is enough. It’s a nice little memory exercise to keep the brain working.
I learn the route for new routes. (Gives me more choice of routes, and an understanding of the area)
I just turn by turn for known routes. (Stops me from always using the same route, defaulting to a non-optimal route, or forgetting about a construction detour)
When buying a new car I can see why you would want a system that can handle the phone you have, but I can’t see it being a show stopper. 20y ago I had a Nokia carkit to be reachable in the car. Now I just use the phone for navigation, fitted next to the radio (not on the window, hindering my view). The OEM radio works perfectly ('03 Volvo S80 with entry model, alas also with the entry speakers).
When buying a used car (The cars here are on average 10y old), entertainment is the last checkbox on the list for most (is it there/replacable). With new cars costing at least a year income, they are seldom bought. The business lease market provides the 4y old second hand cars. ;)
I listen to CDs and place my phone in the dashboard for navigation.
I don’t even understand what Android Auto is.
The family car is a 99 Toyota rav 4. We stick a cassette in the player with a cord attached, and plug that in to the phone for music lol
Android Auto is probably the worst thing to happen to car entairtainment systems.
It’s an AIO phone fire simulator that allows you to optionally run any google approved apps at the risk of igniting your battery.
Doesn’t even come with opengl so any third party nav apps not owned by google are immediately screwed.
Ford’s sketchy Microsoft powered sync 1 was better than whatever I have tried with android auto multiple times with multiple phones over multiple versions.
I got to see the high end entertainment system Lexus made back in 2007 and was so amazed that I thought “damn I can’t wait for this to become standard in a few years”
Instead every OEM just slapped android auto in and called it a day so they don’t have to spend anything on actually making a usable system.
