GSCT

It really bugs me that manufacturers "force" purchase of GPS by bundling it with other appealing options. (Lexus did this to me with my new GS, forcing purchase of GPS to get the F Sport.) When almost everyone has a decent GPS on our phones, why would we need it in our car? I would rather pay for an option that allows my phone to link to a screen, or, even better a service that provides internet access. If pilots can use their iPads for GPS, shouldn't drivers be able to do so as we'll?

TangoRed

People are definitely working on the phone-to-screen link right now. For the time being, I like having the built-in GPS because it's well integrated with other functions in the infotainment system and the signal strength is better.

LexusChris

iTrader: (1)

I don't have one in either of my cars, but based on experience, I would prefer it built in if I did need it, the screen on your phone is smaller, and with the police after cell phone usage while driving, I would rather have it built in so if I had to make some changes in my route then have an officer pull me over for thinking i'm making a call. Also without unlimited data, it would eat up my data usage. Plus like TangoRed said the signal strength is better.

keyframe13

i prefer to use the car gps rather that my phone. Many times i'm using my phone for talking or something else. plus is very distracting to look at my phone rather than a fixed display. I do agree that the nav on the phone is so mych better and i really don;t get why Lexus is so behing the techinology comparing with others.
With other manufactures you have 3d maps, you can send the address from your phone or computer to the car (maybe the very new models do that). Why is it an $100 garmin so much smarter than a $2500 manufacture nav system. Why is is that on the $100 nav you get lifetime traffic and map updates for free and you need to pay hundreds to update the ****ty car nav.

GSteg

iTrader: (15)

Tried using my phone's navigation a few times and it sucks compared to a built-in GPS. Great thing about the car is that they're able to much a more powerful antenna than what comes in a phone.

PhilipMSPT

iTrader: (5)

A phone has a 4-inch screen.

Most of today's navs is about 9 inches.

Unless we're talking about a Tesla...

doge

As much as I love google maps its only works when you have a network connection. I travel to rural areas for work and therefor you standard phone nav is useless. Also for some reason my iphone has trouble finding gps satellites when I'm downtown...

darkdream

A car gps is much better when you do not have cell tower reception. Unless you have a satellite phone, then I would say a car gps is still useful.

mmarshall

Cell-phones, particularly Smart-Phones, aren't as widespread as you might think. A number of people don't want to own or carry one simply because of the danger of it being misplaced, lost, or stolen. Much of a person's private information can be, and often is, stored on those phones.

However, having said that, I agree with you that many people have simply become too dependent on GPS, and that there is no need to have it standard in some cars. For years, I drove all over the Eastern third of the United States with nothing more than a Rand McNally paper road-map atlas sitting in my lap without any problem (and paper aeronautical charts when I was a pilot). In fact, the paper maps and charts were MORE reliable than the GPS....they couldn't fail or malfunction, and you didn't have to learn and use dozens of buttons.

mrraider

That looks a lot like Google maps.

pheonix72

iTrader: (6)

Because car manufacturers make a lot of money bundle Navigation with highly desirable packages (and we have no choice but to pay for it).
I use Google maps 95% of the times; real time traffic and automatic re-route if there is better alternate.
For those iphone fanboys, try a different platforms. Their multitaskings are pretty good.

doge

Thats because it is

geko29

Sorry Mike, you're WAY off on this one. Smartphones have been outselling feature phones for more than two years now, and smartphone penetration reached 74% six months ago:

http://wallstcheatsheet.com/stocks/s...-percent.html/

A few months before that, subscriber count on the US carriers was 337 million:

http://www.fiercewireless.com/specia...t-quarter-2012

This is 1.08 mobile phones, and 0.80 smartphones per living, breathing human in the US. Obviously some people are double counted here, most frequently due to having a personal device as well as one issued by work. However, it's pretty safe to say that nearly everyone of driving age has a phone of some sort, and the overwhelming majority of those have a smartphone.

mmarshall

I didn't say they weren't widespread (obviously, they are). What I said was that they are not as widespread as some people think. 74% usage means that over a quarter of the population fels otherwise. Many older people, for instance, don't want to have one for the simple reason that they fear what will happen if they lose or misplace it.

Also, the use of cell-phones behind the wheel is being increasingly regulated in more and more states, though many drivers admittedly simply ignore the law and do as they please. Most of them obviously aren't getting caught.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

Easy $$$ to the manufacturer

We all know streaming a smartphones navi to the car would be the best but if an automaker can squeeze and extra $1500-2500 for a navigation/infotainment system then they still will, and give it a fancy name like Technology Package and then even if you don't want it you're forced to buy it because it's bundled with the technology you do want