General Motors’ decision to remove Apple CarPlay and Android Auto from its upcoming electric vehicles has set off a wave of frustration—not only among tech enthusiasts, but increasingly among everyday drivers who expect their phones to “just work” when they get into a car. The move was strongly defended this week by CEO Mary Barra and Chief Product Officer Sterling Anderson in an interview with The Verge, marking a major break from industry convention and a big bet on GM’s ability to deliver a better in-car experience of its own.
Barra defended the choice by saying GM wants to “do it right,” building a unified digital system deeply tied to vehicle functions, safety systems, and voice controls rather than relying on “clunky” phone projection – their characterization of ApplePlay and Android Auto. Anderson compared CarPlay to “mirroring your phone onto your laptop”—a temporary bridge that doesn’t take advantage of what the hardware can really do, a peculiar comparison that misses the functionality of these existing apps.
Instead, GM is building a new Google-based infotainment stack with native apps only available from GM through a subscription. Anderson compared their decision to Steve Job’s contraversial decision to remove the floppy drive from computers. The GM executives avoided any mention of this decision being a way to generate new revenue, but Barra has said to the financial community that this could bring in billions of dollars from new subscriptions.
This seems to me to be a very poor decision that reflects a lack of understand all of the ramifications that will result, particularly in the rental car market.
For example, what happens when someone gets into a new GM car for the first time on a rental lot? CarPlay and Android Auto have become a universal interface; currently your phone connects to the car and your music, messages, and navigation appear instantly. Your podcast or music resumes from the same spot where you were when you got off the plane. You have access to your apps, including those with paid subscriptions to audio books, music, and more.
Consistency and familiarity matters most when you’re on the road in an unfamiliar city. Rent a new GM car without these capabilities and you’ll quickly discover there’s no way to connect your phone the way you’re used to. No Apple or Google Maps, no subscription music through your phone, no messages displayed safely on the screen—just GM’s own system, which may require setting up and subscribing to a new account or using unfamiliar apps.
Does GM expect renters to figure out their new system while rushing to pick up their car or are they prepared for the rental car attendants to explain how to listen to your music? It reminds me of the fiasco when Hertz purchased thousands of Telslas and renters rejected them out of hand because they were unfamiliar with the entirely new interface, and Hertz made no provisions for training. For the customer, it’s a moment of confusion and frustration; for GM, it’s a potential deal-breaker that leaves people walking away thinking, I’ll never rent—or buy—that car again.
Barra and Anderson argue that once people experience GM’s system, they won’t miss CarPlay. And perhaps that’s true—eventually. The problem is the transition. Until GM’s ecosystem of apps, maps, and assistants is as polished, flexible, and familiar as what Apple and Google offer, removing these systems feels like taking away the steering wheel before perfecting self-driving.
GM isn’t all wrong to want tighter integration. Chinese companies have done this quite well. A software-defined car that connects seamlessly to charging, navigation, voice, and safety systems is a logical next step.
But GM is underestimating how much of daily driving now flows through the phone—music, podcasts, calendars, texts, and directions. For many drivers, including me, CarPlay and Android Auto are not luxuries; they’re the connective tissue between our digital lives and our cars.
Here are some of the comments on TheVerge reacting to this interview. Of the close to 200, they were universally negative.:
I got a 2025 GM EV mainly for its accessibility features like adaptive cruise control and lane assist. While I generally enjoy the vehicle, there are several UI and UX choices that make it challenging to operate a car weighing over 5,000 lbs (2300 kg). Google Maps is “integrated,” but it lacks full access to features like Timeline and Notes. The music player interface is terrible, and the Spotify and YouTube Music apps fall well short compared to the versions on the phone sitting just inches away on the wireless charger. Maybe Google Gemini will improve things, but it feels like they’re just removing options of me being a repeat customer.
This is way more GM evil than Google evil (remember – they are blocking Android Auto too). GM wants to sell subscriptions to the customer for in-vehicle internet service. If you are projecting your phone, you have no need of GM’s internet to power your infotainment.
Plunked down in a Toyota Corolla at Heathrow in London two weeks ago. Paired my iPhone to the car before leaving the rental car lot. Apple CarPlay immediately appeared. Drove that car for 8 days. Never could figure out how to make the darn cruise control work in the Corolla. But the familiarity of Apple maps and rest of the interface kept me safe while driving on the other side of the road in a country I had not driven in since 2016.
The section where they were justifying why they are not using CarPlay was cringeworthy to listen to. It was one of those pitches where they thought they could power their way through their talking points despite them not being any good. The audience is not dumb and can see that GM has taken the wrong approach here, despite their poorly communicated insistence.
This is anti-consumer and will only hurt them in the long term. I’m not buying a car that doesn’t have CarPlay. And I’m not paying for an additional data service when I already do for my phone. I doubt this is only about selling subscriptions but also leveraging the data that goes along with connected driving. What music you listen to, how long your average trip is, what average speed you drive, what are your most visited locations, etc, etc. Once they get you to pay for their connected car, you’re essentially paying to send them your data instead of the phones/apps getting all that data. I’d be curious to know their consumer privacy info when it comes to their own connected services.
Phil, once again, you are spot on. I remember the “pre” Carplay days only too well. Hundreds of dollars for a map update that showed a hospital as current that was demolished 15 years before. That would be a bad deal even if it was free. And I surely do not want to pay for services again on a car that I already pay for on a phone. I despise unnecessary subscription plans. My wife wanted a Mini Cooper. We stopped looking at it when we saw that they were charging $100 a year for carplay. I have not been impressed by Mary Barra as the head of GM, and she’s on the wrong track here.
Thanks Bill. I’ve not been impressed either, especially after moving from European cars to the chevy Volt for 10 years. Best car I ever had. Leased them for 6 years and then bought one when they announced they were being discontinued after Barra said people don’t want a plug-in hybrid. That type of car is now Toyota’s most popular and many other companies have introduced models. Then she canceled the Bolt and now they decided to bring it back. The CarPlay decision shows they are ignorant of what the customer wants. It will not end well for them.