[NXM]

I'm not convinced by it.

I find that most of the time I press "IPod" rather than "Apple Car Play" when I get given the option.

With car play you lose the full phone sync with the car and on the dash display as you make calls through car play not through the PCM. I prefer to have the visual display on the pcm and dash and I can still make calls using voice control through the car without Apple car play so I cant see any advantage of car play for phone calls.

I dont use Apple Maps. Waze is in a different league to any other satnav system. I can have my phone mounted next to the window on a very unobtrusive magnetic holder that attaches to the air vent as per pic attached if I want access to Waze rather than the satnav in the car or apple maps.

If I want to send a message or whats app I can still do that using siri without car play.

Podcasts or Spotify can still be played over bluetooth or ipod and I can skip tracks using the multi function steering wheel which I cannot do with car play. Plus the porsche myscreen set up works much better with the music coming through the phone with ipod setting rather than car play.

The only advantage I can find with car play is the ability to read out messages that you receive whilst driving and tbh, that's not a big deal for me. I can wait.

Is there anything I'm missing?

 

[lajoiedp]

I'm not convinced by it.

I find that most of the time I press "IPod" rather than "Apple Car Play" when I get given the option.

With car play you lose the full phone sync with the car and on the dash display as you make calls through car play not through the PCM. I prefer to have the visual display on the pcm and dash and I can still make calls using voice control through the car without Apple car play so I cant see any advantage of car play for phone calls.

I dont use Apple Maps. Waze is in a different league to any other satnav system. I can have my phone mounted next to the window on a very unobtrusive magnetic holder that attaches to the air vent as per pic attached if I want access to Waze rather than the satnav in the car or apple maps.

If I want to send a message or whats app I can still do that using siri without car play.

Podcasts or Spotify can still be played over bluetooth or ipod and I can skip tracks using the multi function steering wheel which I cannot do with car play. Plus the porsche myscreen set up works much better with the music coming through the phone with ipod setting rather than car play.

The only advantage I can find with car play is the ability to read out messages that you receive whilst driving and tbh, that's not a big deal for me. I can wait.

Is there anything I'm missing?

Sounds like a great ad for a magnetic phone holder!


BTW, what interior is that? It looks like all leather in Black/Bordeaux, which is what I ordered. If so, nice choice!

 

[NXM]

Sounds like a great ad for a magnetic phone holder!


BTW, what interior is that? It looks like all leather in Black/Bordeaux, which is what I ordered. If so, nice choice!

Interior is the GTS interior pack with carmine red stitching.

 

[Viffermike]

I find that most of the time I press "IPod" rather than "Apple Car Play" when I get given the option.

Is this because you're using your smartphone for music? There's a better option: the SD card slots.

With car play you lose the full phone sync with the car and on the dash display as you make calls through car play not through the PCM. I prefer to have the visual display on the pcm and dash and I can still make calls using voice control through the car without Apple car play so I cant see any advantage of car play for phone calls.

You don't lose phone display on the PCM screen when using CarPlay; it's just not the PCM interface. Besides: Unless you have Porsche Car Connect Plus with the proprietary SIM card, you're not using the car's telephonics; you're using your smartphone's via Bluetooth.

Do you have PCC+? It matters regarding your feedback for the reasons above.

I dont use Apple Maps. Waze is in a different league to any other satnav system. I can have my phone mounted next to the window on a very unobtrusive magnetic holder that attaches to the air vent as per pic attached if I want access to Waze rather than the satnav in the car or apple maps.

That's your preference, but not everyone's. All phone-based Nav apps have strengths and weaknesses, and Waze has its share that have been itemized on other threads. Personally, I prefer Google Maps -- but Apple Maps is sufficient.

Podcasts or Spotify can still be played over bluetooth or ipod and I can skip tracks using the multi function steering wheel which I cannot do with car play. Plus the porsche myscreen set up works much better with the music coming through the phone with ipod setting rather than car play.

No argument here, except to say that Bluetooth 4.0 audio quality is not quite as good as wired, even on Spotify Extreme. Also: Keep in mind that VW AG/Porsche developed PCM for Porsche cars; Apple developed CarPlay for all cars. There are going to be design and functionality compromises in a platform meant to be implemented universally through 'handshake' OSs like PCM.

Is there anything I'm missing?

Yes: Not having the eyesore/theft bait of a vent smartphone mount on the dash. After many years of doing just that in other cars, I'm personally quite happy not to have ergonomic acne like that in my 718.

No, CarPlay isn't seamless; it's got its share of niggles. But it solves the most important issue with using smartphones in vehicles: keeping the thing hidden and (mostly) use-able while minimizing the risks associated with operating one as part of your infotainment suite while in motion.

(Note: The above is stated out of Moderation Mode, as it were. > )

 

[JakiChan]

So, I like CarPlay as a UI. I haven't seen a music/nav/etc interface I like more. I've used it on rental Audis and MBs and in my truck via a top-of-the-line Kenwood deck.

Using Apple Maps via CarPlay as one epic integration - your Apple Watch will tap your wrist when a turn is coming up. That's pretty cool.

Also, jumping from car-to-car you can have UI parity. And as Apple updates CarPlay or new apps gain new CarPlay functions it's like your car gains new functions in an almost Tesla-like OTA update fashion.

But that being said, since I have PCC+ coming, if it uses Google Maps + their traffic data for nav I think that gives a better route/experience. I dunno, we'll see.

 

[Yipekiye]

I paid up for CarPlay integration and rarely use it for all the reasons you noted. When I am doing a longer trip, a wired connection provides significantly improved sound over Bluetooth. But most of my daily trips are 10-15 minutes long and if I plug in my phone, I forget it EVERY TIME!!!!.... (deep breathing...). So I normally connect via Bluetooth and accept those compromises.

 

[GregW]

I rarely use any of the navigation stuff--I prefer to consult a map before I take off. If I do use it the on-board works fine in conjunction with the preview.

I also try not to use any of the 'phone features while driving because studies show it's more dangerous than drunk driving, and my life and my car are worth much more than a call or a text.

 

[JakiChan]

I also try not to use any of the 'phone features while driving because studies show it's more dangerous than drunk driving, and my life and my car are worth much more than a call or a text.

The idea behind CarPlay is to minimize distraction, unless you're saying you don't listen to any music while driving, don't use any navigation, etc.

 

[GregW]

The idea behind CarPlay is to minimize distraction, unless you're saying you don't listen to any music while driving, don't use any navigation, etc.

Governments basically try to legislate on what you do (and that they can see), so the 'phone rules are usually about holding the 'phone when driving.

The studies show that it's the thinking about what you are saying and to what you are listening that causes the accidents. Many, if not most people visualise either consciously or unconsciously while thinking and these visualisations can overwhelm the information coming from the eyes. This means they are effectively driving blind part of the time.

For me, both Nav and music don't require much thought.

 

[JakiChan]

The studies show that it's the thinking about what you are saying and to what you are listening that causes the accidents. Many, if not most people visualise either consciously or unconsciously while thinking and these visualisations can overwhelm the information coming from the eyes. This means they are effectively driving blind part of the time.

Well, one study. Wth 41 people. So while it sounds great, I'm not sure I buy that. However, the NHSTA says any distracted driving is dangerous, and they include radio and nav in that. (And, I suppose, other people in the car.) So for maxium safety you should buy a GT3 with radio delete.

 

[GregW]

Well, one study. Wth 41 people. So while it sounds great, I'm not sure I buy that. However, the NHSTA says any distracted driving is dangerous, and they include radio and nav in that. (And, I suppose, other people in the car.) So for maxium safety you should buy a GT3 with radio delete.

I've been a specialist in cognitive processing for more than 40 years so it wasn't that one study that convinced me. I've also seen people walk into walls, closed doors, and holes while conversing, and much more.

At the same time, I wouldn't want to do without my car stereo or other creature comforts. That's why the Porsche rather than one of the 'bare naked' sports cars.:x

 

[JakiChan]

I've been a specialist in cognitive processing for more than 40 years so it wasn't that one study that convinced me. I've also seen people walk into walls, closed doors, and holes while conversing, and much more.

If you're seen more than one study, then by all means present them. The one that calls it worse than drunk driving had 41 subjects. And by that logic, all cars should be single seaters, like the F1. Passengers are distracting. (I wouldn't mind an F1, really..)

At the same time, I wouldn't want to do without my car stereo or other creature comforts. That's why the Porsche rather than one of the 'bare naked' sports cars.:x

Just looking for some logical consistency. I'll state it again: The purpose of CarPlay is to increase safety by providing an interface that reduces distraction while keeping the features folks have come to depend on, like music and navigation. It does so better than any native UI I've spent time with. And it integrates nicely with the Apple ecosystem (especially the Watch). Additionally, if you have multiple vehicles you don't have to worry about multiple confusing UIs, which is a huge benefit.

 

[GregW]

If you're seen more than one study, then by all means present them.<snip>

Just looking for some logical consistency.<snip>

I'm retired now and no longer have access to my previous resources, and I'm not willing to detail 40 years of experience, so no presentation.

If I was to be totally logical I wouldn't drive at all. It's far more dangerous than walking or staying at home. For me, fun and convenience are also factors. YMMV.

 

[NXM]

To answer a number of points raised above -

1. I do most of my driving in London and the heavy city traffic that goes with it. If you want a sat nav that can help you beat the traffic with up to date accurate traffic info and find routes that you didn't even know yourself then Waze is the only way to go. If real time traffic info is not a big issue where you live/drive then I'm sure the Porsche sat nav or apple maps are perfectly good enough.

2. I completely agree about the purpose of car play being to minimise distraction while driving. Even if I am using my phone for music and not running it through car play I wouldnt dream of trying to change music on my phone whilst on the move. Frankly, anyone that does that is a risk to themselves and others. I have a variety of playlists that are plenty long enough that once I press play I dont need to worry about changing the music until I have come to a stop somewhere and it is safe to do so. In fact, if I want to skip to the next track, which is pretty much all I do once I have selected the playlist when I set off, it's far easier and less dangerous to do that with the press of one button on the steering wheel (which i cannot do with car play) rather than leaning over to click one very small button below the PCM screen (which I have to do with car play).

3. I actually find myself plugging in the phone with the usb cable but still opting for ipod option rather than car play because I just dont like the car play interface and I don't find it offers me anything that I need and I like having the full interaction with phone and music on the PCM and the screen on the dash. I really like the ability to customise the "MyScreen" options on the PCM and with car play the phone options do not work on My Screen and the music loses the album art on the screen.

4. The magnetic mount I use is so unobtrusive and it also just slots in and out with no screws. Just push in and pull out so when I leave the car there is no sign it was ever there. So, for me, no eye sore or theft bait.

So, all in all, I get car play. I understand what it does and why. I just dont think it offers me anything that I need that I cannot do without it and the PCM and dash screen interface is better without it. I think this is especially true if you have the multi function steering wheel. Frankly the wheel is pretty pointless for me if you are using car play.

 

[Viffermike]

To answer a number of points raised above -

1. I do most of my driving in London and the heavy city traffic that goes with it. If you want a sat nav that can help you beat the traffic with up to date accurate traffic info and find routes that you didn't even know yourself then Waze is the only way to go. If real time traffic info is not a big issue where you live/drive then I'm sure the Porsche sat nav or apple maps are perfectly good enough.

Please note that I am not in Moderation Mode:

I'm just going to address this one since the other points are fair for your particular use:

To use an absolute by saying that "Waze is the only way to go" is misleading and inaccurate. (I want to use a stronger word, but I will not based on past oversensitivity). Waze gets its information from two main sources: crowdsourcing and Google. The latter certainly has given Waze's map data a boost since Waze woke up and dumped TomTom (or, more accurately: could afford to dump TomTom). But the rest of Waze's data is crowdsourced, which makes that only as good as the people who use it. It may work very well for London, but it does not work well everywhere for that very reason -- and it's only really useful in urban areas for that very reason, as well.

I place trust in crowdsourcing for things like business reviews -- but even then there's chaff to wade through, and sometimes considerable amounts of chaff. Waze is no different. I personally wouldn't trust crowdsourcing completely for things like real-time navigation unless it is curated and filtered, and Waze itself has not offered a solution to that self-admitted issue.

As for the map UI: Waze is borderline cartoonish, and there's no way that I know of to turn off promoted location icons. I don't know about others, but I really don't want to see the Golden Arches of McDonald's every time I look at my Nav screen. And as for traffic data: Traffic remains one of Apple Maps' weaknesses, but it is much better than it used to be -- and in areas it is better than Google.

See, that's the thing: location matters. For London? Great: Waze it is. But for my city (Dallas, Texas, U.S.A.)? Perhaps its not. Please keep that in mind before declaring something an absolute.

 

[NXM]

Please note that I am not in Moderation Mode:

I'm just going to address this one since the other points are fair for your particular use:

To use an absolute by saying that "Waze is the only way to go" is misleading and inaccurate. (I want to use a stronger word, but I will not based on past oversensitivity). Waze gets its information from two main sources: crowdsourcing and Google. The latter certainly has given Waze's map data a boost since Waze woke up and dumped TomTom (or, more accurately: could afford to dump TomTom). But the rest of Waze's data is crowdsourced, which makes that only as good as the people who use it. It may work very well for London, but it does not work well everywhere for that very reason -- and it's only really useful in urban areas for that very reason, as well.

I place trust in crowdsourcing for things like business reviews -- but even then there's chaff to wade through, and sometimes considerable amounts of chaff. Waze is no different. I personally wouldn't trust crowdsourcing completely for things like real-time navigation unless it is curated and filtered, and Waze itself has not offered a solution to that self-admitted issue.

As for the map UI: Waze is borderline cartoonish, and there's no way that I know of to turn off promoted location icons. I don't know about others, but I really don't want to see the Golden Arches of McDonald's every time I look at my Nav screen. And as for traffic data: Traffic remains one of Apple Maps' weaknesses, but it is much better than it used to be -- and in areas it is better than Google.

See, that's the thing: location matters. For London? Great: Waze it is. But for my city (Dallas, Texas, U.S.A.)? Perhaps its not. Please keep that in mind before declaring something an absolute.

We've veered slightly off topic! I don't disagree with any of that.

To navigate around London Waze is the absolute best sat nav (IMHO of course!). The traffic and routing updates are incredibly accurate. So much so that it has become almost ubiquitous in every car and Uber that you see. It's almost cult like adoration here as it is so good to get through the traffic. I've yet to meet anyone who uses something else once they have tried waze.

But maybe that is because London is such a big city with so many people (almost 9 times as many people as Dallas from a quick online look) and the information that waze can gather is therefore more accurate than in smaller cities like Dallas.

 

[Viffermike]

We've veered slightly off topic! I don't disagree with any of that.

To navigate around London Waze is the absolute best sat nav (IMHO of course!). The traffic and routing updates are incredibly accurate. So much so that it has become almost ubiquitous in every car and Uber that you see. It's almost cult like adoration here as it is so good to get through the traffic. I've yet to meet anyone who uses something else once they have tried waze.

But maybe that is because London is such a big city with so many people (almost 9 times as many people as Dallas from a quick online look) and the information that waze can gather is therefore more accurate than in smaller cities like Dallas.

Well, Dallas 'proper' has a million. The Dallas-Fort Worth Metro area, however, has about 7.5 million; it's the country's fourth-largest Metro area, behind New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago (which DFW will pass soon) -- still smaller than Greater London (13.6 million; Europe's largest), but somewhat comparable.

In any case: I'm just playing devil's advocate. >

 

[NXM]

Well, Dallas 'proper' has a million. The Dallas-Fort Worth Metro area, however, has about 7.5 million; it's the country's fourth-largest Metro area, behind New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago (which DFW will pass soon) -- still smaller than Greater London (13.6 million; Europe's largest), but somewhat comparable.

In any case: I'm just playing devil's advocate. >

Maybe we just have more people in London using waze, therefore, making it more accurate.

It seems like we have at least 3 million uber drivers alone all using waze!

 

[JakiChan]

I'm retired now and no longer have access to my previous resources, and I'm not willing to detail 40 years of experience, so no presentation.

If I was to be totally logical I wouldn't drive at all. It's far more dangerous than walking or staying at home. For me, fun and convenience are also factors. YMMV.

It's a matter of personal choice. I don't find talking on the phone distracting, and at times for me is necessary. CarPlay/Siri makes that safer than anything out there. It's all about harm reduction. Their UI team is better than any auto manufacturer can afford, plain and simple.

 

[JakiChan]

To answer a number of points raised above -

1. I do most of my driving in London and the heavy city traffic that goes with it. If you want a sat nav that can help you beat the traffic with up to date accurate traffic info and find routes that you didn't even know yourself then Waze is the only way to go. If real time traffic info is not a big issue where you live/drive then I'm sure the Porsche sat nav or apple maps are perfectly good enough.

Waze was bought by Google, and they have some level of integration with Google Maps, but it's one way. Waze's traffic data is being plugged in to GM, but Waze isn't getting the more accurate mapping/routing from Google at this time. So, if your car has PCC+ I think you're going to get the best experience with PCM Nav using Google data. Additionally, to get the most out of Waze it requires drivers to interact with their phones more than I am comfortable with. Reporting/validating incidents, etc. Not a big fan.