APPLE

Got a Recall? There’s an App for That.

August 31, 2020 by admin Leave a Comment

Consumers have heard plenty these past few years about automotive recalls, especially those involving airbags supplied by Takata. Tens of millions of cars are currently affected by airbags that may release dangerous projectiles on deployment.

But the Takata mess is just the tip of a recall iceberg involving vehicles, car seats, tires, and other equipment. With as many as thousands of parts and accessories present in many modern vehicles, something is bound to go wrong. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) tracks this information and now supplies a tool to help vehicle owners stay on top of it all.

That tool is none other than a new SaferCar app that’s easily downloadable to most any cell phone. So, why this app? Because as important as it is to stay on top of recalls, many are going unheeded. Notably, the NHTSA says that one in four vehicles currently in use has a safety recall. That’s a risk to the driver, passengers, other vehicles, and pedestrians, and is something that can and should be tracked and fixed as soon as possible.

How well does this app work? Well, we headed to the Apple App Store (Google Play Store for Android) and downloaded a copy to our iPhone and found the process straightforward. Once downloaded, you’ll be prompted to respond to a request to expedite notifications. If you “allow” notifications, then you may receive alerts, sounds, and icon badges for notifying a recall. You can control these requests in your cell phone’s settings.

Registering your vehicle is as easy as identifying it by its make, model, and year. You may find various versions of your vehicle listed, depending on the body style and drivetrain. Choose the one that most accurately describes your vehicle.

The app makes it easy to identify your vehicle. To help the app “understand” what you own, either scan or input the 17 alphanumeric sequence that represents your ride. I would love to say it scanned mine, but it did not. Instead, I took a photo of the VIN and then inputted the information to the app. The easiest way, of course, would have been to simply add that sequence while standing in front of the VIN.

Once the app has your information, it’ll issue you an update for your car. Mine returned the following statement: “This vehicle has no unrepaired recalls.”

What’s especially helpful about the app is what it can do. You can enter as many vehicles you like, thereby setting up your “virtual garage” for tracking those details. Besides your vehicles, there’s room to add tire, car seat, and information about the many accessories you may have. If there is a recall notification for anything listed, it will appear. Importantly, the NHTSA issues prompt notifications once it publishes its findings. This means that allowing notifications may be the best way to go. Otherwise, you’ll need to check your app regularly for updates.

What the app cannot do is arrange a recall fix. Instead, once you discover your vehicle is under recall, reach out to your local dealer’s repair shop for guidance. If a part must be replaced, the shop will tell you whether it is in stock or not. Moreover, you’ll need to make an appointment to have the recall handled.

The good news about a recall, is that they’re typically covered by the manufacturer. This means the repairs are made at the dealership level and the dealer bills the manufacturer. The same goes for recalls covering tires, car seats, and vehicle accessories. If you’re not sure a cost is involved, just ask.

We haven’t used the app much since its launch. There are bound to be some bugs present early on, so expect updates along the way. With this in mind, respond accordingly to keep the app current to ensure all recall notifications are delivered immediately.

Photo copyright NHTSA.

Apple’s Project Titan Autonomous Car

August 19, 2015 by admin 1 Comment

From the rumor files.

Computer and consumer electronics authority Apple Inc. has its eyes intently focused on the automotive industry. And not just through its Apple CarPlay initiative, what works with the telematics systems found in select new cars.

Automobile by Apple: iCar?

No, Apple wants to manufacture the car itself and those rumors are hardly new. Indeed, earlier this year the scuttlebutt had Apple purchasing Tesla Motors, a report that has since been dismissed. At the same time Tesla’s CEO Elon Musk has said that he welcomes the competition, believing that Apple’s entry would provide a “broader consumer acceptance of electric vehicles.”

Why would Apple manifest interest in building cars, especially since it would enter an industry where it has no experience? There are a few reasons for this, including two that should be examined.

First, Google is jumping in. Google and Apple are arch rivals and are currently battling each other to gain access to influence in-cabin telematics systems. Just as Apple’s CarPlay is rolling out throughout the auto industry, Google’s Android Auto is doing likewise. There’s a lot be gained by banding together with car manufacturers. And, by the way, Google is already working on its own autonomous vehicle. Apple wants in and they are not about to allow Google to win the day without putting up a valiant effort.

Second, market convergence is here. Cars are computers and computers are in cars. The marriage of cars and computers has been underway for two decades now as in-car computers essentially control your vehicle. Car manufacturers need technology to help them build autonomous vehicles, something Apple, Google and others are flaunting their expertise. If you want vehicles to talk with each other, then a system has to be in place that permits this. Once driverless vehicles are approved for everyday use, the market convergence will be complete. Complete, but still in its infancy.

Let’s Call it Project Titan

Project Titan will go far beyond Apple CarPlay.

Apple’s new car initiative has a name, dubbed Project Titan. AppleInsider reported on the project this past March, uncovering a secret facility just minutes away from the company’s Cupertino, California, headquarters. That news followed earlier reports that Apple was luring engineers from Tesla Motors and other manufacturers to launch the project. Furthermore, a Sunnyvale location was identified and a sprawling “repair garage” is just one component in that complex.

Project Titan is an appropriate name, but it should not be confused with the Nissan pickup truck bearing the Titan name. But just as Titan in Greek mythology represented one of a family of giants, the Apple car is an enormous initiative much in the same way that the first Mac and iPhones also were. Steve Jobs may have died, but the desire to innovate lives on in Apple Inc.

California Track Time

Project Titan, however, appears much larger than the Sunnyvale location. Just this week, The Guardian (UK) newspaper claimed that it obtained correspondence confirming Apple’s agendum. The periodical says that Apple’s engineers recently met with officials from GoMentum Station, what composes a 2,100-acre former naval weapons base near San Francisco.

That garrison may be leased by Apple and used as the proving ground for an autonomous vehicle. It would be the ideal place too as it is composed of some 20 miles of urban streets and highways, an ideal arrangement for testing driverless cars. The Guardian noted that both Honda and Mercedes-Benz have tested their own self-driving vehicles, a secured facility surrounded by barbed wire and patrolled by security teams.

Automotive Manufacturers and Driverless Technology

While Project Titan may be what Apple has in mind, it still might want to consider what other manufacturers are doing. The Volkswagen Group, Tesla, BMW, Mercedes-Benz and a handful of undisclosed manufacturers are heavily invested in autonomous technology and could assist Apple in its endeavor.

Then again, Apple is used to hatching its products in house and delivering them to customers with overwhelming acclaim. That’s a tall order for Project Titan, but it appears that Apple isn’t shrinking from this titanic enterprise.

Photo copyright Apple Inc.

Apples In-Car iOS7 Foray Is Fraught With Peril

August 27, 2013 by Jason Lancaster 1 Comment

At the annual Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) in June 2013, Apple announced that their new iOS7 operating system will be available in many 2014 vehicle models. In-car iOS7 promises some exciting features – all of which are powered by Siri – including:

Drivers will be able to begin and end calls while driving (without taking their eyes off the road)
Drivers will also be able to listen and reply to text messages while driving (again without distraction)
Integration of iPhone apps like maps and navigation, reminders, etc.

Whoa, powered by Siri? The same Siri that makes wild mistakes transcribing even the simplest of text messages? That Siri? Samuel L. Jackson TV commercials aside, Siri is still a work in progress. While consumers seem to like using Siri to look up information (77% of Siri-capable iPhone owners use Siri for this task, according to Parks Associates), most find Siri inferior to old-fashioned touch screen typing for more complex actions like texting.

Please don’t misunderstand my reservations with in-car iOS7 as simple Siri bashing. As problematic as Siri is, it is great compared to the status quo. It’s just that there’s a big difference between “better than the status quo” and good. It is hard to believe that Apple has convinced Honda, Mercedes-Benz, Nissan, Ferrari, Chevy, Infiniti, Kia, Hyundai, Volvo, Acura, Opel and Jaguar to make iOS7 available in some of their 2014 models. In my opinion, this integration will hurt everyone involved.

Here’s Why iOS7 Is A Lose-Lose-Lose Proposition

There are three obvious and difficult to fix problems with integrating iOS7 into the average vehicle:

Some consumers are brain-dead when it comes to technology. These people don’t know how it works, and cant or wont bother to learn. These technophobes can be expected to complain bitterly about the fact that their new $120,000 Jaguar cant understand a simple text message.

Automakers are in charge of the hardware! Guess what makes an iPhone so awesome? The perfect integration of hardware and software. Do you think Chevy (or Kia or Nissan) is going to build a touch-screen dash unit that seamlessly works with iOS7? Me neither.

Some consumers won’t know or care about who’s to blame. Whether its bad hardware or bad software, consumers aren’t going to differentiate.

The result here is what I like to call a lose-lose-lose proposition.

Losing Across the Board

Automakers will lose because they’ve integrated iOS7 into their products too quickly. Consumers are going to complain about iOS7s inadequacies, and these complaints are going to hurt each automakers rankings with Consumer Reports, JD Power, etc. These rankings in turn affect sales and revenue.

Apple will lose because consumers wont be able to completely differentiate between bad design and bad software. Even if Chevys hardware is terrible (and Im all but certain it will be), Apple is going to get at least some of the blame from the consumer. Apples reputation for awesome user interfaces is almost certainly going to suffer.

Finally, consumers will lose because they are being promised a system that cant possibly meet their expectations. This isn’t a reflection on Apple or the automakers involved so much as its a reflection on the technological challenge. In-car systems are still in their infancy – no one knows how they are supposed to work.

Put the Brakes on It

The concept of outsourcing in-car operating system design to an expert like Apple is a good one, especially for automakers who already have a lot on their plates. However, its too soon for Apple to get involved. In another couple of years, consumers and automakers will both have a much greater understanding of the problem. Then – and only then – should Apples foray into vehicle operating systems begin.

Author Information

Jason Lancaster is a long-time auto industry observer who has used many in-car operating systems, from Fords MyTouch to Toyota’s Entune to Cadillacs CUE. When Jason isn’t critiquing touch screens, he’s working with Olathe Toyota Parts Center, who sells OEM Toyota parts online.

Cars and iPods Are Different – Tesla’s Retail Strategy Is Flawed…and Arrogant

July 31, 2010 by Jason Lancaster Leave a Comment

Based on an article from the July 26th edition of Automotive News, it seems that start-up automaker Tesla plans is to sell cars the same way that Apple sells iPods. Tesla won’t have dealer showrooms – they’ll have manufacturer-owned “galleries.” Tesla won’t have service departments – they have field technicians called “Tesla Rangers.” Tesla’s stores won’t have a lot full of new cars to choose from – they’ll have a couple of floor models to sit in, a demo unit for test drives, and a website to visit when it’s time to buy.

Unfortunately, all of this means that Tesla won’t have much success with sales, especially once big automakers bring out their own electric cars. Until they recognize the limitations of their strategy, they will be nothing more than a small, niche manufacturer that will probably be swallowed up by a larger automaker down the road. Here’s why:

1. Instant gratification can’t be ignored, and no inventory means no urgency. Ask any auto dealer and they’ll tell you that people don’t like to wait for their car. Because Tesla dealerships won’t have any cars in-stock, there is a real risk that some consumers will opt to buy a competing vehicle rather than wait for their Tesla to arrive.

There’s also the fact that a lack of inventory means there’s no urgency – if a consumer is told “this is the last red one on the lot,” they feel some pressure to consummate a transaction right away. If they’re told “sign here and your car will arrive in 6 months,” they’re much more likely to investigate alternatives. The bottom line is that dealers need inventory to maximize sales, and without ready-to-buy inventory Tesla dealers will be at a disadvantage compared to the local Ford, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan dealers with in-stock inventory.

2. Larger dealers are more effective. Tesla’s plan centers around small little dealers in select markets. However, larger dealers are more capable of selling and marketing vehicles. Specifically, larger dealers can:

Justify larger marketing and advertising budgets, including brand-level ads
Afford to invest in long-term marketing strategies
Expend the resources to be active and visible in the local community (things like baseball team uniforms and sponsoring local events)
Offer consumers more on trade-in (more on that below)

3. Apple doesn’t sell used iPods, but Tesla will sell used cars. Trade-ins are an especially important aspect of the retail automotive business, and represent a significant flaw in Tesla’s strategy. Since many consumers aren’t able to buy a new car without getting rid of their old one, the average Tesla dealer is going to have to take trade-ins. These dealers can either try to market these trades to the limited number of visitors they get, or they can auction these trades off to other dealers. Auctioning off trades (which will mostly be gas powered) seems like the most likely option for Tesla dealers specializing in electric cars.

Of course, if Tesla dealers are going to the auction, they’ll be forced to offer customers auction value. Large dealers, with thousands of visitors and a wide variety of cars, rarely auction off trade-ins because they can usually sell anything they get. As a result, large dealers can afford to offer a consumer more than auction value for their trade to facilitate a transaction…and that gives them a financial, transactional advantage over Tesla’s small dealers. What if Tesla dealers, as a result of this fundamental disadvantage, gain a national reputation for under-valuing trade-ins? That’s not going to do much for the brand.

4. Manufacturers probably can’t sell cars. In the late 1990’s Ford conducted a dealership experiment. Beginning in 1997, Ford bought back all of their franchises in five markets – San Diego, Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Rochester, NY, and Salt Lake City. These franchises were formed into “auto collections,” and once these dealers were all under Ford’s control, they began to “fix” all the problems that consumers had with dealers.

A little less than three years later, Ford’s auto collection experiment was deemed a failure. According to an Automotive News article from 2002, one of the stores that Ford “fixed” saw a sales decline somewhere between 75-90% over the three years that Ford ran the show, forcing Ford to give up or lose their presence in these vital markets.

While it could be argued that Ford’s factory-owned dealership failures were a result of poor management or a poor market, consider this: The only remaining independent Ford dealer in Salt Lake – Butterfield Ford – saw tremendous sales increases every month while Ford’s Salt Lake Auto Collection suffered. Ford’s corporate stores sank while a local independent in the exact same market thrived. Is a large corporation like Tesla really going to be better at selling cars than a local franchise with ties to the community and very little overhead?

According to Tesla, one of their advantages over bigger automakers is their small size. If Tesla really does understand the value that a small company with low overhead can bring to the table, why do they reject a franchise strategy?

The other irony here is that Tesla has promised to “revolutionize” the auto industry before. Tesla claimed that they could shorten the development cycle of the automobile and bring technology to the consumer faster than their bigger rivals. When they launched the Tesla Roadster in 2006, it was supposed to be the beginning of a new era. Four years later, Tesla has squandered much of their technological advantage, failed to produce more than about 1,000 vehicles, and lost buckets of money. Yet despite this humbling experience, Tesla remains arrogant, assuming that they can re-invent the auto industry in every respect. Good luck.

Author Information

Jason Lancaster is a nine-year veteran of the car business and the president of Spork Marketing, a dealership Internet marketing firm.