The World of Consumer Electronics

[skylark68]

Originally Posted by bone

Am I the only one here who wants to keep consumer gadgetry to a minimum in my vehicles. I don't want Bluetooth, GPS,Sync,adaptive cruise control,self-parking,6 disc AM-Fm radios,Bose Sound,etc.,period. I absolutely loved the sleepers from the 50s and 60s such as the 409,427 Biscaynes,426 Road Runners,and 427,428 custom 500s. The radio and heater delete models command huge prices today. Don't get me wrong, I want the best safety equipment in my new vehicle but that is it. Is there such a thing as a sleeper today? Perhaps a Hemi Charger with no frills or an Impala SS. My favourite recent sleeper was the Holden GTO. I'm envious of everyone that is lucky enough to own one.

You're not the only one. How many early '90s luxury cars do you see and laugh at the built in phone? Lexus LS400 rings a bell. What a joke. We will see and do the same in cars with all of these "high tech" devices today. If they last that long.

All I need/want in a modern car is a V-8, 5 or 6 speed manual transmission, 4 wheel disc brakes and a nice RWD chassis. Then I'm good to go.

[PA Dweller]

Originally Posted by skylark68

You're not the only one. How many early '90s luxury cars do you see and laugh at the built in phone? Lexus LS400 rings a bell. What a joke. We will see and do the same in cars with all of these "high tech" devices today. If they last that long.

Who are you kidding? How many 20 year old LS400's do you see around? People who want these options don't care if 10 years from now the options are outdated since most people would have moved onto another car.

What I can't understand about people like you is why they are so resistive to these options? I mean if you didn't want a cell phone in this car I bet all you had to do was not select the option. Ever hear of the term "to each his own"? I mean I don't want or have the use for a manual transmission or RWD but I don't go criticizing someone for wanting these options. I mean are you old and your afraid of change or something similar?

For example I bet you if someone got an in dash navigation system now and still had the same vehicle 10 years from now the thing would still be able to get you accurate directions. Who cares if it’s outdated as long as it does what it is intended? One of the cars I drive has a tape deck in it but the car still works and the radio still works even after this technology has become outdated. Resale value maybe? If you want the best resale value buy a Honda or Toyota.

[CobaltSScrazy]

congrats on 20k, thats amazing! I dont know how you do it.

Gm should swallow their pride with Onstar and put technology in all cars, not just Cadillac's. Lord knows I'd pay for some quality stuff in a Cobalt!

CobaltSS

[F14CRAZY]

I'm not a fan of integrated "infortainment" systems. I agree that they look more finished off but I prefer a regular DIN sized head unit that can be swapped out for a newer OEM or aftermarket unit

[2002 Caddy]

Originally Posted by PA Dweller

On Star charges customers a recurring fee right now because they offer their customers a service, they have an operator at the other end to give you directions, send you help, etc.

If On Star offered Infotainment features I don't see how they can charge you for it. Say for example if On Star in the future offers you Bluetooth built in, and a MP3 interface that would have to be free once the car is purchased while On Star's telemetric service is all you pay for. Telemetric service might include something similar to the IPhone concept if it works through On Star cellular system, so you could be charged.

OnStar, IMO has two MAJOR problems today
1) as we witnessed with 1996-2002/3/4/5 cars OnStar is so tightly integrated into the Car, the wiring harness and the BCM that it is un-upgradable. I think somewhere in GM they think this encourages people to trade in their car and get a new one (with the new upgraded OnStar system). The REALITY is that NOONE likes a forced upgrade. If you are going to install gear like this in a car you need to make it modular enough that you can offer easy and cost efficient upgrades for the next 20+ years. When I factory order my next new car, I will seriously consider "de-optioning" Onstar to avoid the disappointment when we have the next bunch of "not upgradable" cars.

2) OnStar's Pricing model is NUTS. I don't mind paying for a service that I use, or even prepaying for a service that I might (or can) use. But I HATE paying for a service that I didn't use. OnStar should charge on a per call basis or a per minute basis. As Sync expands into other Makes and grows into version 2.0 -> 3.0 etc. And the car uses BlueTooth to text messages you service needs, or you can text message a password to your car and it opens the doors etc... In the next 2-3 years, you will find that Sync will provides 90+% of what OnStar does and will do it for free. If/When this happens OnStar is dead! GM got into OnStar in 1996 and then basically "coasted" with this revolutionary product for over 10 years. Rather then leverage and expand this tool, they eliminated functionality like Onstar reading you your Email etc. Shoot they were still installing Analog phones as late as 2005! OMG! I work in Telecom, lets get real here, the life span of most products in this space is measured in MONTHS not YEARS... OnStar had a FULL DECADE head start... And now they are scrambling...

[King Riffle]

Originally Posted by Ytriox

I thought it was interesting that Ford is pushing Microsoft Sync and they also just announced that they would be switching over to Sony branded audio systems, what with Sony and Microsoft being arch enemies these days in the home entertainment market. Corporate culture makes for strange bedfellows.

Not really. They may be enemies in the video game industry, but everywhere else they don't really compete.

Heck, Sony's Vaio computers use Windows.

[PA Dweller]

Originally Posted by 2002 Caddy

OnStar, IMO has two MAJOR problems today
1) as we witnessed with 1996-2002/3/4/5 cars OnStar is so tightly integrated into the Car, the wiring harness and the BCM that it is un-upgradable. I think somewhere in GM they think this encourages people to trade in their car and get a new one (with the new upgraded OnStar system). The REALITY is that NOONE likes a forced upgrade. If you are going to install gear like this in a car you need to make it modular enough that you can offer easy and cost efficient upgrades for the next 20+ years. When I factory order my next new car, I will seriously consider "de-optioning" Onstar to avoid the disappointment when we have the next bunch of "not upgradable" cars.

2) OnStar's Pricing model is NUTS. I don't mind paying for a service that I use, or even prepaying for a service that I might (or can) use. But I HATE paying for a service that I didn't use. OnStar should charge on a per call basis or a per minute basis. As Sync expands into other Makes and grows into version 2.0 -> 3.0 etc. And the car uses BlueTooth to text messages you service needs, or you can text message a password to your car and it opens the doors etc... In the next 2-3 years, you will find that Sync will provides 90+% of what OnStar does and will do it for free. If/When this happens OnStar is dead! GM got into OnStar in 1996 and then basically "coasted" with this revolutionary product for over 10 years. Rather then leverage and expand this tool, they eliminated functionality like Onstar reading you your Email etc. Shoot they were still installing Analog phones as late as 2005! OMG! I work in Telecom, lets get real here, the life span of most products in this space is measured in MONTHS not YEARS... OnStar had a FULL DECADE head start... And now they are scrambling...

I have to agree with you. The next generation of On Star should be more upgradeable. They should make it like a module which you can just disconnect and replace with a newer one. I know someone who has a GMC Envoy (I think it is a 2002) and he took it in and got On Star upgraded to digital. I got no idea how On Star's payment works. I thought you pay a flat fee for the year. I don't know if Sync can totally replace On Star because it seems if Sync will have any communication ability it will need your cell phone to open the doors for example. So you would need Sync connected to your cell phone.

Again I do agree On Star needs some added functionality now. GM is probably working on it now. The On Star technology can't be that dead anyway since some European makes offer Telemetric service and Toyota is working with Verizon to create their own version of On Star.

[AndrewGS]

Originally Posted by PA Dweller

I have to agree with you. The next generation of On Star should be more upgradeable. They should make it like a module which you can just disconnect and replace with a newer one. I know someone who has a GMC Envoy (I think it is a 2002) and he took it in and got On Star upgraded to digital. I got no idea how On Star's payment works. I thought you pay a flat fee for the year. I don't know if Sync can totally replace On Star because it seems if Sync will have any communication ability it will need your cell phone to open the doors for example. So you would need Sync connected to your cell phone.

Again I do agree On Star needs some added functionality now. GM is probably working on it now. The On Star technology can't be that dead anyway since some European makes offer Telemetric service and Toyota is working with Verizon to create their own version of On Star.

OnStar automatically sends you an eMail every month covering a full systems check, tire pressure check, oil life monitor and odometer reading. With Verizon you can add your vehicle to a family share plan and make all the calls you want (plan limited, of course) from the built-in voice-activated cell phone that has an external antenna. You also get stolen vehicle tracking, concierge service, remote door unlocking, directions or Turn-By-Turn navigation as well as full emergency assistance including access to GM's 5-year/Unlimited mile Roadside Assistance, all without without needing a portable cell phone.

With SYNC you have to have your cell phone connected via Bluetooth, so there goes about 98% of the telematics service you get with OnStar, and that's why OnStar is subscription-based.

I agree that GM needs to add Bluetooth, and they are starting in 2009. I also would like to see a voice-command function to control the audio system like SYNC offers, but at least GM offers steering wheel controls that you don't have to talk to on almost every model.

[PA Dweller]

Originally Posted by AndrewGS

OnStar automatically sends you an eMail every month covering a full systems check, tire pressure check, oil life monitor and odometer reading. With Verizon you can add your vehicle to a family share plan and make all the calls you want (plan limited, of course) from the built-in voice-activated cell phone that has an external antenna. You also get stolen vehicle tracking, concierge service, remote door unlocking, directions or Turn-By-Turn navigation as well as full emergency assistance including access to GM's 5-year/Unlimited mile Roadside Assistance, all without without needing a portable cell phone.

With SYNC you have to have your cell phone connected via Bluetooth, so there goes about 98% of the telematics service you get with OnStar, and that's why OnStar is subscription-based.

I agree that GM needs to add Bluetooth, and they are starting in 2009. I also would like to see a voice-command function to control the audio system like SYNC offers, but at least GM offers steering wheel controls that you don't have to talk to on almost every model.

Thank you; your first two paragraphs explained perfectly why On Star is superior to Sync (In certain aspects). On Star has a built in cellular transmitter and GPS so it can do all it does now. Sync requires your cell phone to communicate to the outside world. So if you’re locked out of your car for example and the cell phone isn't linked with Sync it’s useless.

I am glad to hear GM is adding Bluetooth, but do you have a link? I believe in what you are saying but I would like to read more about it. I also really want to see them go the whole 9 yards with On Star upgrades. I want to see full voice recognition of most of the vehicles equipment (Radio, HVAC Controls, all navigation (In dash and On Star), and total control of your phone and MP3 player through such a system.

One day I would like to see an advanced remote start system like the one shown at this conference, where the vehicles systems can be controlled from anywhere, not just 400' away with a key fob remote starter.

[AndrewGS]

Originally Posted by PA Dweller

Thank you; your first two paragraphs explained perfectly why On Star is superior to Sync (In certain aspects). On Star has a built in cellular transmitter and GPS so it can do all it does now. Sync requires your cell phone to communicate to the outside world. So if you’re locked out of your car for example and the cell phone isn't linked with Sync it’s useless.

I am glad to hear GM is adding Bluetooth, but do you have a link? I believe in what you are saying but I would like to read more about it. I also really want to see them go the whole 9 yards with On Star upgrades. I want to see full voice recognition of most of the vehicles equipment (Radio, HVAC Controls, all navigation (In dash and On Star), and total control of your phone and MP3 player through such a system.

One day I would like to see an advanced remote start system like the one shown at this conference, where the vehicles systems can be controlled from anywhere, not just 400' away with a key fob remote starter.

GM to Widely Incorporate Bluetooth by 2009MY

The Traverse press release lists Bluetooth as well.

GM's equipped with the 'black tie' navigation unit have voice command, but not to the extent of most cars like BMW and Acura. I never use it when I'm driving the Acadia.

[PA Dweller]

Originally Posted by AndrewGS

GM to Widely Incorporate Bluetooth by 2009MY

The Traverse press release lists Bluetooth as well.

GM's equipped with the 'black tie' navigation unit have voice command, but not to the extent of most cars like BMW and Acura. I never use it when I'm driving the Acadia.

Thanks for the link, its good to see GM finally sees the need for Bluetooth. Yea but even Honda and Toyota's models have more voice recognition enabled features. I drive a vehicle with such a system and I use it nearly every time I drive the vehicle. The vehicle has over 600 voice commands.