Oh I know exactly the problem they're trying to solve. It's the same problem most auto manufacturers solve by making sure their car stereos are absolutely nothing like DIN-sized: "you will pay through the fucking nose for something you don't want because swapping it out for something that doesn't suck atrocious balls will cost you thousands and thousands of dollars, pay up fuckball." See, I stopped using Google maps cold when it started telling me "hey get off at this exit now get right the fuck back on again theoretically you'll save 31 seconds which we'll round up to a minute." Apple maps and Google maps suck equally hard in Seattle so there's no performance penalty there, but Apple doesn't try to "optimize" down to 30 seconds by rerouting you for no good goddamn reason. So I give no fux how beautiful Google Maps is on my truck, I ain't gonna use it because it's a wretched piece of shit that I hate. It's the archetypal GM/Ford/Stellantis hubris: "we know cars better than you, otherwise you wouldn't have bought our product. Therefore, we know better about absolutely everything between the tires and the sunroof, pay us $400 a year for OnStar." And they do it because Recurring Monthly Revenue counts for oh so very much more than non-recurring revenue under GATT accounting rules so they're not selling cars, they're selling mobile subscription generators. Li'l story. My wife drives a 2009 Honda Fit with like 150k miles on it. It's fine. The steering wheel looks like foam now because the outer layer has rubbed off? And there will come a time when it needs to be replaced? So I said "you know, the Mazda EV would be great if it weren't such a piece of shit but believe it or not, the 'Ford Mustang' is kind of compelling...?" So we watched a review and got to this: "No. Never. Not in a million years." _________________________ People used to ask me all the time "what car should I buy?" I would tell them "decide what features matter to you and buy on those features. I don't care if it's cupholders, just know what you want and shop for it." There was a time I did eight engine swaps in a week? And I could not tell you the difference between an F150 and a Silverado these days. If I needed one? "fuckin' $30 a month to use directions" is really fucking compelling. That's the thing American auto manufacturers don't fucking get - the dipshit who puts a giant "MOPAR" sticker on a Mexican-built Italian design is a tiny portion of the market. It's mostly normies, women and people buying on value and appeal and "we can out-phone your phone" is the most arrogant, tedious bullshit an auto manufacturer can pull. GM feels deeply entitled to their business. They always have. This is a decision that comes from a place of "people will never stop buying GM products for any reason" and they're mistaken. It's fucking amazing that they're looking at a demographic that's ambivalent about driver's licenses and going "you know what? Yeah they're totally paying for OnStar."It will probably cost the same to consumers, but if it comes down to an F-150 vs. a Silverado, and you have to pay $30/mo to access Maps in the Silverado while the F-150 is free all but the most dedicated GM fans, a vanishingly small group of people, are going to go F-150.
The thing about GM that many people don't understand is that while it's very modern and cool for Tesla to say, "We're a tech company who makes cars," GM is and has been since the days of Alfred P. Sloan a finance company who makes cars. Ford's essential business since Henry Ford founded it was to make money by making cars. Ostensibly that's how GM's forerunners thought, too, but Sloan came in as a guy who knew next to nothing about the car business but had ideas about management and finance in the days when that was cutting edge, and he convinced the board to hire him on the theory that he would turn GM into a financial giant first and foremost. And he did. "What's good for GM..." and all that nonsense. That ethos has never really left, as evidenced by the fact that the GMAC sub-prime debacle was what really fucked them in 08 (Ford never took a bailout because they had mortgaged their corporate logo and Chrysler is just a shitty company who makes shitty cars, but the Feds couldn't justify saving GM while fucking Chrysler, I guess). So if I had to guess I'd assume they've focused grouped, forecasted and modeled this move every which way they can think of and are still left thinking it's a good idea. But I don't see how. Fun fact I just got done having lunch with 4 car GM designers, 3 of whom are late millenial to early gen Y, and one of whom I'm married to. I asked if they were aware of GM killing CarPlay, and my wife, the dinosaur of the group had not heard that, while the other 3 said, "Yes, what the fuck do they think they're doing?" We'll see. At least for now my Sierra still has buttons and dials (the screen is for nav and radio and nothing else). I will never drive an iPad on wheels or whatever.
The thing That blows MY FUCKING MIND Is from the get-go, any goddamn speed part you want from Chevy they'll sell you. You want a crate motor? No problem. Transmission upgrade? gonutz. A hood scoop for a nine-year-old Camaro? Get down with your bad self. ...a better stereo for your Chevy Bolt? crickets General Motors has always been a company that will cheerfully encourage you to change your cam timing but will stop at nothing to keep you from adding an aftermarket bluetooth receiver for your fucking phone. It's unreal. "Whatever you do, make sure a double-DIN will never fit" is Detroit's whole thing and I don't fucking get it. It's clearly a choice. Clearly, the gearheads will protect goddamn camshafts with their lives but "protect the dealerships against the aftermarket at all costs" has been the driving force of "infotainment" since the dawn of the CD player. It has nothing to do with the finance arm. It's entirely about the fact that if I wanna put an Alpine in my hot rod? That hot rod better be fuckin' German or Japanese.