车载信息娱乐系统为什么搞得这么复杂

    等到2015款梅塞德斯奔驰C级轿车于今年秋天发布时，与它一同面世的将还有苹果的CarPlay车内科技系统。这套系统使用了一个模仿智能手机的界面，还包括一块触屏，一眼看去，和人们每天都使用的智能手机相差无几。

    从几个方面看，苹果进军汽车界都非常值得注意。每当苹果谨慎而无情地杀入一个新市场，基本上意味着这个市场就要重新洗牌。汽车行业是一个规模庞大、利润丰厚的市场，这个行业的主宰者的地位基本都很稳固，有些公司主导汽车行业的历史甚至比泰坦尼克号还悠久。但更重要的是，汽车行业的消费技术在体验上一直是一块短板。与此同时，智能手机在汽车导航和回复信息等方面的简洁性却深得消费者的欢心，因此他们自然会抱怨汽车在执行同样任务时的复杂。可以想见，在消费技术被整合进这个一吨多重的大铁块的过程中，一定是缺失了点什么东西。

    汽车业并不缺少这样的尝试。通用汽车公司（General Motors）在2012年的车型上就推出了它的MyLink车载信息系统；福特（Ford）更是在之前一年就推出了MyFordTouch系统，另外它早在2007年（也就是iPhone问世的同年）就推出了自己的Sync系统。奥迪（Audi）有自己的Connect系统，丰田（Toyota）也有自家的Entune系统。起亚用的是基于微软的Uvo系统，它的大哥现代则有一个叫做Blue Link的系统。

    但是似乎没有哪一家汽车厂商的车内系统拥有自己的粉丝。这些系统都很复杂，好像只是一堆硬件按钮的堆砌，它们的界面连最会玩智能手机的用户都觉得头痛。这些系统都处在各自的雏型阶段，还很不完美，经常挑战用户的耐心。而且它们还给驾驶这样一项单纯的工作增加了一项新的工作量——光为给软件升级值不值得跑一趟4S店？

    从事车内科技研究的高德纳咨询公司（Gartner）分析师蒂洛•科斯洛夫斯基说：“它还没有优化好，还没有真正捕捉到它应有的体验。”

    通用汽车的子公司安吉星公司负责产品和应用研发的工程组经理马克•斯卡夫认为，这种局面有一部分原因是汽车的工程周期造成的。一辆今天在市面上销售的汽车，它的车内技术都是三到五年前研制成的。这就意味着今天的工程师们都在为2018年、2019年甚至2020年才能上市的汽车“打包整合规格和设计”。

    但这并不是说这些系统的唯一问题就是它们的年龄。

    通用汽车全球顾客互联集团（Global Connected Customer Group）信息娱乐系统总监菲尔•艾布拉姆指出：“我们目前的集成水平还比较原始，剩下的技术已经达到了即将可以整合到汽车里的临界点，要靠苹果、谷歌和移动运营商们推出行得通的系统和标准。我们现在才刚刚进入这个阶段。”

    换句话说，车内科技系统本身并不是特别复杂的东西，只不过他们还没有领会到应该为驾驶员提供什么样的技术体验，因为工程师甚至包括驾驶员自己现在都还没有搞清楚那种体验应该是什么样的。高德纳公司的科斯洛夫斯基也认为，今天的车内科技系统之所以很不好用，部分原因就是由于汽车厂商误解了什么是消费者想要的东西。

    他说：“对于消费者来说，车内科技应该能帮助他们把数字化的生活方式扩展到汽车里。而汽车公司并不是非常了解数码世界。”

    When the 2015 Mercedes-Benz C-Class is unveiled this fall, making its proper debut with it will be Apple's CarPlay, an in-car technology system that will mimic the smartphone interface -- including the touch-screen, if present -- that legions of people carry in their pockets every day.

    Apple's (AAPL) entry into the world of automobiles is noteworthy for several reasons. The company enters markets deliberately and ruthlessly, for one, rarely doing so without readjusting the playing field. The automotive industry is large and lucrative, dominated by players so established that some predate the sinking of the Titanic. And above all, the application of consumer technology to the automotive industry has been sorely and frustratingly lacking in terms of the experience to which drivers and passengers are subject. As consumers marvel at the phone's simplicity in summoning driving directions or responding to a friend's message, they scowl at the car's complexity in doing the same. Something is surely lost in translation with the addition of 3,000 lbs. of steel in motion.

    It's not for lack of trying. General Motors (GM) introduced its MyLink telematics system in its 2012 models; Ford (F) rolled out its MyFordTouch system the year prior and its Sync system in 2007, the same year that the iPhone was introduced. Audi has its Connect system. Toyota (TM) has its Entune. Kia has its Microsoft-powered Uvo (MSFT) and big brother Hyundai its Blue Link.

    What none of these carmakers seem to have is fans of their in-car technology. The systems are complex, a nest of hardware buttons and interface flows that confound even the savviest of smartphone users. They can be imperfect in their relative infancy, challenging the patience of drivers who know better than to look away from the road. And they add a new dynamic -- does a software update warrant a dealer visit? -- to the relatively straightforward driving experience.

    "It's not optimal," says Thilo Koslowski, a Gartner analyst who studies in-car technology. "It hasn't really captured the experience that it should look like."

    Part of this has to do with the engineering cycle of cars, says Mark Scalf, the OnStar engineering group manager for developer products and applications at General Motors. The technology available in cars today was finished in production three to five years ago, he says. That means that engineers today are "wrapping up specifications and designs" for technology in vehicles scheduled to hit showrooms in 2018, 2019, and 2020.

    Not that frustration with these systems is derived solely from their age.

    "The level of integration we have right now is rather primitive," says Phil Abram, chief infotainment officer for GM's Global Connected Customer Group. "The rest of the technology is getting to the point where it's ready to be integrated into a car. That's on Apple and Google and ... the [wireless] carriers to bring forth systems and standards that make sense. We're just entering that phase right now."

    In other words, it isn't so much that in-car technology systems are especially complicated; they just haven't captured what a technology experience for a driver ought to look like because engineers and drivers alike are still learning what that experience should be. Gartner's Koslowski partly attributes the unwieldy experience of today's in-car tech to automakers' misunderstandings of what consumers want.

    "[In-car technology] should be for consumers to extend their digital lifestyle into an automobile," he says. "Car companies are not understanding this digital world really well."