Google is a Traitor

Car companies that leapt into the arms of Google early and raced to implement Google Search in their cars got a grim surprise last year. Google suddenly let them know that Google Search results could not be rendered on a non-Google map.

It doesn’t seem like a big deal on the surface, but this one twist in policy set off a scramble on the part of navigation and map providers to find a solution. There are several reasons for the scramble:

1. On-board navigation systems from car makers use maps from TomTom or HERE built-into the car. If car makers can’t render Google Search results – which, in a car, will overwhelmingly be related to location information – it greatly diminishes the value of Google Search and/or puts pressure on the car maker to use Google’s off-board map.
2. Alternative sources of POI/address search include HERE, deCarta, Telenav and CloudMade. Uber’s acquisition of deCarta took a popular POI/address search alternative out of the market. In fact, TomTom had chosen deCarta to be its POI/search partner.
3. POI/search in the car is a specialized application. DeCarta had tuned its POI/address search results to prioritize addresses along the navigation route and in the direction of travel. Auto makers had been forced to “tune” Google Search’s results, as well, to take into account automotive scenarios.

The combination of Google’s policy switch and Uber’s acquisition of deCarta highlighted the automotive industry’s vulnerability to a supplier with its own interests at heart. Car makers that had spent millions of dollars to implement Google Search suddenly had an application in their cars that required them to take one of three paths:

1. 1) Remove Google Earth – and replace it with a POI/search solution that could be rendered on an on-board map from TomTom or HERE.
2. Leave Google Search in the car – but add an additional POI/search solution that could render on a TomTom or HERE map.
3. Implement Googlemaps in the car in addition to or as a replacement to the on-board maps from TomTom or HERE.

Google’s decision reflects the hard ball, sharp elbowed kind of power plays common in the wireless industry and with which the automotive industry has been forced to cope. Auto makers are not accustomed to this way of doing business. Most suppliers to the auto industry understand that they must see to the long-term needs of the car makers – delivering cars that will have an 11-year lifespan with all of the liability and safety implications that go with that.

Companies such as HERE have historically maintained a low profile – acting as so-called “white label” behind-the-scenes suppliers of automotive grade solutions. HERE has recently sought to integrate map, search and a variety of other contextual content. But HERE has never taken a Google-like stance.

The auto industry’s motivation to adopt Google was strictly as a customer accommodation and to gain some marketing cachet from associating the auto brand with the Silicon Valley Goliath. The car companies’ reward to this customer accommodation has been relentless powerplays of which the search policy shift is just one.

This kind of thing helps to explain why so many of my German friends do NOT use Google’s gmail – even paying monthly fees for private email accounts. The latest aftermarket head unit from Pioneer shows tight integration between gmail and the in-car system. It is merely another manifestation of Google’s long-term intent to control and manipulate the consumer’s entire search, navigation, and content consumption environment for the purposes of delivering targeted advertising.

POI/address search in a car is a big deal, though it may not be an application that is used every day. The reality is that the car itself is a browser with every twist and turn and mile driven – as well as every gesture made by the driver – representing the equivalent of a ‘query.’

There are other shortcomings to Google Search - even before the policy switch:

1. Google's search results can't be taken at face value since Google will boost search results for advertisers.
2. Google Maps' geocoding APIs are not precise and not matched well to addresses and points of interest.  They are designed to locate advertisers, not for navigation.
3. Search limitations are not the only restriction - Google Map users must use Google routing.
4. Google's search software is not spatial, meaning it does not return results optimized for people in motion, rather for people sitting in front of a screen at a desk with paid results first. This is ironic since it boosts search results for sites that are mobile friendly.

POI/address search is only the beginning. Car makers are building their own purpose-oriented automotive context “search engines.” Companies like Telenav, CloudMade, TomTom and HERE are working to bring this vision to the market. Google is simply pushing its standard search, voice, map and navigation tools with no tuning to automotive use cases and auto maker requirements.

As for me, it may be time to tune up my AOL account and turn down the gmail.