How Google and Apple Are Going to Take Over Your Car

BY CADIE THOMPSON

Is this an Apple or an Android car? That may be the question you find yourself asking in the not-so-distant future.

Just like Apple and Google continue to battle for market share in the smartphone and tablet space, they are also going to be increasingly fighting for dominance in the auto space, experts say.

"I think the two tech behemoths, Apple and Google, are moving quickly into position. There is a major battle starting to brew over who will take control," said Bryan Reimer, a research scientist at MIT AgeLab and the associate director of the New England University Transportation Center.

"They own the tablet and smartphone space, but the car is an environment that a lot of us spend a lot of time in and they have a strong desire to own that relationship," he added.

While only about 10 percent of automobiles have built-in connectivity today, the number is expected to grow to 90 percent by 2020, according to the consulting group Machina Research. And tech firms are looking to cash in.

But these companies want to do more than just put apps in a car's dashboard, they want to reinvent the entire driving experience—starting by personalizing it.

The personalized 'computer' car

Tech companies will use a passenger's personal information to make their drive time a lot more customized, said Gary Silberg, an analyst at KPMG.

"If you think about the personalization of cars in the future, in 20 years or less, the car will be able to tell if you own it or not, it will know your traits and attributes and will do things that will help make you a better, smarter, more productive person," he said.

"The car will be this intelligent computer that provides you mobility," he added.

The software in cars will enable it to do things like make music recommendations for your ride depending on your mood and even sync with your calendar and monitor traffic so that it can alert you when to leave for your next appointment, Silberg said.

Because software will play such an important role in the future car experience, Apple and Google are already pushing to get their operating systems in vehicles.

Apple's CarPlay, which was announced in March, basically brings the interface of a person's iPhone to the car's infotainment center, allowing a driver to control things like music, messages and calls from their phone via voice or a built-in display. It can also predict where a user most likely wants to go based on addresses from your email, text messages, contacts and calendars.

Google announced a similar system in June called Android Auto. Both companies' auto platforms are expected to become available on select vehicles before the end of this year.

In fact, the technology in cars is already becoming the most important determining factor for consumers when it comes to which car to buy.

"The interface is now the reason a car is selling or not selling. It's not about things like horsepower anymore," Reimer said.

However, the user-interface will get an even bigger makeover when self-driving technology goes mainstream because it will allow for the physical space in the car to be used in new ways.

Autonomous reality

For tech companies, time spent driving is time wasted, said Thilo Kosowski, a vice president and automotive analyst at Gartner.

"Tech companies look at the car as something they need to deal with," Kosowski said. "They see manual driving as a bug, not as a value proposition."

Tech firms view autonomous vehicles as the solution to a number of problems that plague the streets, including traffic, car accidents and parking. Self-driving tech could also enable vehicles to become more productive tools for passengers.

For example, the windshield could be transformed into an augmented reality platform, or a screen for the passenger to project content from their mobile device onto, Koslowski said.

Google is leading the charge amongst its tech peers in the autonomous space and is also putting pressure on traditional automakers to catch-up.

"Google is the big elephant in the room," said Koslowski. "It was really a wake-up call for the auto industry when it unveiled its self-driving car capabilities."

The company has been developing self-driving car technology since 2009. And in May the company revealed a new model of its autonomous car that has no brake or steering wheel. It plans to manufacture 200 of these new models to test and predicts its version of the self-driving car will hit the mass market sometime between 2017 to 2020.

While the world's traditional automakers are hurrying to develop their own autonomous vehicles, their efforts may be too late.

According to a KPMG study published last year, consumers are more likely to buy a self-driving car from a tech firm like Apple or Google than they are from a carmaker like Nissan, Mercedes-Benz or General Motors.

But consumers' trust in tech companies may be somewhat misguided, experts say.

"The tech companies are pushing the traditional auto industry, which to some extent is good, but if you push too fast they are going to make mistakes," Reimer said.

Deadly risks

While people may like a high-tech car, they still have some concerns about how safe a self-driving vehicle would be.

According to KPMG's Global Executive Survey 2014, safety is the biggest concern over self-driving cars and privacy and data security are also high on consumers' agenda.

And the reality is, traditional automakers and suppliers have more experience in auto safety than the new tech companies entering the space, Silberg said.

"They may have great technology, but that doesn't mean they know how to make it work in a car," he said.

"There are parts of a vehicle that if caused to malfunction, people could die. You can't just reboot your car at 60 mph. There is a safety tolerance in the auto industry that is just not known in the tech industry."

While Google's self-driving cars have gone more than 700,000 miles without being faulted for an accident, its cars still can't endure all weather conditions.

And all it takes is just one accident for progress to be halted, Reimer said.

"There's a major push by Google and other tech companies to automate the world, but the reality is a failure could mean big changes," Reimer said.

"Fear could not only slow adoption down, but could also mean more regulations. And hasty regulation and more regulation is not necessarily the best regulation."

Poll: How far should U.S. go in Iraq?

(Photo: Ahmad Al-Rubaye, AFP/Getty Images)

Americans are increasingly inclined to say the United States has a responsibility to respond to rising violence in Iraq, a USA TODAY/Pew Research Center Poll finds, although most also express fears about getting pulled back into a extended conflict there.

In a shift of opinion in recent weeks, those surveyed by 44%-41% say the U.S. bears a responsibility to "do something" about the violence. That's a shift from last month, when by 55%-39% a majority saw no U.S. responsibility to act.

That change could reflect news coverage of the plight of thousands of Yazidi refugees who fled advancing Islamic State forces only to become trapped on Mount Sinjar, at risk of dying from exposure, hunger and thirst. On Thursday from Martha's Vineyard, President Obama announced that U.S. airstrikes and humanitarian aid had succeeded in easing that crisis.

"It's interesting that this long after we've been involved in a country like Iraq that is so controversial, we still find people changing their minds," says Christopher Gelpi, a political scientist at Ohio State University who studies public opinion toward military conflicts. The percentage of Republicans, conservatives, and people 50 and older who see a responsibility rose by double digits compared with the July survey.

Even Americans who see a responsibility to act are worried about an expanding commitment less than three years after the United States withdrew combat troops. Fifty-one percent are more concerned that the U.S. will go too far in getting involved. About a third, 32%, say their greater concern is that the U.S. will not go far enough in stopping the Islamist militants.

Views differ sharply across age groups.

Those under 30 are less likely to approve of airstrikes than older Americans are, and they are much more likely to express concern about the risks of an expanding U.S. engagement in Iraq. By more than 3-1, 18-to-29-year-olds worry more that the U.S. will get too involved. Those 65 and older are about evenly divided between concerns over whether the U.S. will go too far or not do enough to stop the militants.

The telephone survey of 1,000 adults, taken Thursday through Sunday, has a margin of error of +/-4 percentage points.

Obama returned to the White House from his vacation early Monday morning to meet with Vice President Biden and top national security advisers about Iraq. The United States has widened airstrikes to help Kurdish fighters trying to retake the Mosul Dam from the Islamic State forces. On Monday, U.S. fighters, bombers and drones conducted 15 airstrikes, the U.S. Central Command said.

President Obama meets with members of the National Security Council for an update on Iraq in the Roosevelt Room of the White House on Aug. 18.(Photo: Win McNamee, Getty Images)

Since Aug. 8, the U.S. has conducted 68 airstrikes in Iraq.

Most Americans, 54%-31%, approve of the airstrikes. That is a bit lower than public support for NATO airstrikes in Kosovo in 1999 and U.S. airstrikes against Iraq and Afghanistan in 1998 and 1999.

"The public attitude seems to reflect very much the kind of attitude that you heard from Obama when he was justifying the airstrikes," Gelpi says. "The president was very much in sync in feeling we ought to try to do something but we shouldn't do too much. Whether the president is leading the public, or whether the president has his finger in the wind and understands where the public is at, is hard to say."

Fifty-two percent say they are following news stories about the airstrikes "very closely" or "fairly closely." While that's higher than the 49% paying attention to the continuing friction between Russia and Ukraine, it's lower than the 57% paying close attention to the aftermath of the police shooting in Ferguson, Mo., and the 58% tracking the Ebola virus breakout in West Africa.

Of the most interest: the death of actor Robin Williams, followed closely by 62%.

Follow @susanpage on Twitter

A Venture Capitalist Who Raised $100,000 For The ALS 'Ice Bucket Challenge' Died After Diving From A Nantucket Building

Venture capitalist Corey Griffin, who had just raised $100,000 for the ALS "Ice Bucket Challenge", died after diving off a building in Nantucket this weekend, the Boston Globe reports. He was 27.

According to Nantucket Police, Griffin dived off the "Juice Guys" building on Straight Wharf at 2 a.m.

Witnesses told police that Griffin floated to the surface and then went under not resurfacing again.

Colin Perry, an off-duty lifeguard who was nearby, made several rescue dives and recovered Griffin from the bottom of the harbor. CPR was unsuccessful, the police report said. He was pronounced dead at 3 a.m. at Nantucket Cottage Hospital.

Griffin, who worked for New York-based finance firm Risk Assistance Network + Exchange (RANE), was good friends with Pete Frates — the former Boston College baseball captain credited with making the "Strike Out ALS: Ice Bucket Challenge" go viral.

"Team FrateTrain lost a good friend today, Corey Griffin," Frates posted on Facebook.

"Helping out was nothing new for Griff. He held his own event for me back in 2012, just a few months after diagnosis. He worked his butt off these last few weeks for ALS. We texted everyday, planning and scheming ways to raise funds and plan events."

Griffin graduated from Babson College. He played hockey at Boston College before transferring to Babson.

After college, he worked for Bain Capital in Boston, according to his LinkedIn profile. He was most recently the director of strategic initiatives for RANE. 

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/corey-griffin-dies-in-diving-accident-2014-8#ixzz3AnndA9xT

Daniel Pereira- All of me Cover ( OlaiasStudio )

Watch Scotty McCreery Pay Tribute To Elvis Presley...

We’re really happy to pay homage to the great Elvis Presley, who passed away suddenly on this date in 1977. Elvis was taken away from us much too soon, but his music and incredible talent will remain forever.

Let’s continue our celebration of “The King” by watching Country singer Scotty McCreery pay tribute to the icon by singing one of Elvis’ first songs, That’s Alright Mama.

That’s Alright Mama was written and originally performed by blues singer Arthur Crudup. Yet it’s best known as the first single recorded and released by Elvis Presley. Presley recorded the song on July 5, 1954, and released it July 19, 1954 with Blue Moon of Kentucky as the B-side. The song is ranked #113 on the 2010 Rolling Stone magazine list of the “500 Greatest Songs of All Time.“

Still hungry for more Elvis? Check out this amazing 16 year-old Canadian sensation, who sounds so much like Elvis! Stunning video footage!

Mariah Carey - My All