Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Kia UVO

    William Maley

    Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

    September 20, 2013

    For the past few years, Kia has become the brand that offers a lot of equipment for a very surprising price. Kia is now applying that idea into their infotainment systems. Last year, Kia introduced the next-generation of their UVO which brings forth a new layout, more features, and what Kia calls UVO eServices. I had the chance to play around with UVO in the 2014 Kia Cadenza I reviewed earlier this week.

    First, a quick history on UVO. Introduced back in 2010, UVO was jointly developed by Kia and Microsoft. The system used a 4.3-inch color display and a advanced voice recognition system that allows drivers to take phone calls, send SMS messages, and access media through a variety of sources. Sadly, you couldn't get UVO if your Kia came equipped with navigation. The new version of UVO addresses that as you can get UVO with or without navigation. On certain Kia models, you have the choice of a 4.3-inch screen without navigation or an 8-inch screen with navigation. All Cadenzas come equipped with the 8-inch screen as standard.

    gallery_10485_690_744129.jpg

    Using UVO on a daily basis was a breeze thanks to a simple, yet elegant interface with large touch points. The system responded very quickly whenever I changed stations, inputs, or different functions. Not bad for a new infotainment system. Voice commands also worked pretty flawlessly. No matter what I spoke, the system was able to comprehend and perform the task. Whether it was to play a certain song off my iPod or making a phone, UVO did it.

    The only real downside to using UVO deals with the button layout in the center stack. As I wrote in my Cadenza review, the buttons are too similar in size and shape. Add in the fact the buttons are mounted low in the center stack and you have someone taking their eyes of the road longer than necessary.

    Now on to the star of the next-generation UVO system, eServices. UVO eServices is much like General Motor's OnStar where it offers a number of services for drivers in day-to-day use and in the event of an emergency. Where it differs from OnStar and number of other services is how it connects. With OnStar and other systems like it, they have a cellular connection in the vehicle to offer those services, hence why you have pay a fee to you use it. With UVO eServices, the system uses your cell phone to provide the connection via the Bluetooth system.

    gallery_10485_690_1179625.jpg

    Once your phone is paired with the system, you can use eServices. The services available are;

    • Roadside assist: Calls Kia's Roadside Assistance
    • Vehicle diagnostics: Reports if there is anything wrong with the vehicle and allows a driver the option of to call a nearby dealer to schedule an appointment or call for roadside assistance.
    • Parking minder: Sends coordinates of where the vehicle is parked to your smartphone via the UVO smartphone app.
    • My POIs: Stores specific points of interest for quick recall; i.e. Your Home.
    • eServices Guide: Walks users through some of eServices functions
    • GPS Info: Displays coordinates of the GPS system.

    Other features of eServices include automatic 911 notification if the airbags deploy, a UVO smartphone app that allows your iPhone or Android smartphone some connection to the vehicle, and MyUVO.com where you can get basic diagnostic information and can schedule a dealer appointment.

    While I didn't get the chance to play around with all of the eServices, I can say Kia has a very impressive package here. UVO's eServices doesn't offer all of the services like OnStar, but it does cover the basics really well. Add in the fact that you don't have to pay an annual fee to use it only increases the value.

    gallery_10485_690_1054073.jpg

    It's hard to believe that Kia could be one of the automakers leading the way with infotainment systems. But with the new UVO system and UVO eServices, Kia has a one-two punch that's places it at the top of the infotainment pile.

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at [email protected] or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Very ingenious of KIA to mimic a majority of OnStar services without the additional fee & cell-network of GM's service. I think GM should take notice of this and find a way to bring down their cost, or at least offer an OnStar-lite that competes with UVO's 'free' functionality.

    @Mudmonster: Were there any instances of latency during transitions or functions at all?

    If no, then that's actually quite impressive on Microsoft and KIA's part, as the CPU is merely a 400MHz ARM chip with similar specifications as the first generation Ford Sync system. Ford's new MyTouch system has a more powerful chip, yet has an awful user experience and Cadillac's CUE has a more modern triple-core CPU, yet it still exhibits latency and hangs.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @Mudmonster: Were there any instances of latency during transitions or functions at all?

    Not really. Moving between functions was pretty quick. I was surprised by how fast this system was in its first generation.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • It's amazing how a leather wrapped steering wheel changes the experience at the wheel for the better (it seems to make for an almost different car from the model with a urethane steering wheel).
    • Another thing to think on is the evidence bullet proof? Sadly, the same type of people who have said an eye for an eye, death penalty if you took a life have convicted others with hate in their heart only to have science prove the convicted innocent.  In this regards I wish all guns had palm / finger tip readers to confirm who last fired the gun. While others might say the death penalty is cruel, how is it when the person if proved beyond a reasonable doubt took a life? What about serial killers who are sitting for life, a burden on society in jail because folks feel there should be no death penalty and yet they took multiple lives themselves. Would it not be better for society if that person was no longer around, a burden on the tax payers? Many good questions to be asked. Lets take this a step further, auto makers who due to a focus on profits take shortcuts on safety of an auto, who should be held accountable for the deaths related to their products and how do you hold them accountable? An example of profit before safety, FORD PINTO Details of the Pinto's flawed fuel system: Location and construction: The sheet-metal gas tank was placed behind the rear axle, a design common at the time, but the Pinto's tank was made with exceptionally thin walls. It was held in place by two metal straps. Vulnerable parts: During rear-end impacts, bolts protruding from the differential housing could puncture the thin-walled tank. Additionally, the fuel-filler neck could tear away from the tank itself. Internal cost analysis: Internal Ford documents revealed that engineers were aware of the risks in pre-production crash tests and considered inexpensive fixes, including adding a rubber bladder to the tank. Alternative designs rejected: Engineers considered safer alternative designs, such as placing the tank above the axle (a design used on the Ford Capri), but this was rejected due to cost and styling constraints. Final design choice: Executives opted not to make these changes after a cost-benefit analysis concluded it would be cheaper to pay out potential lawsuits and settlements than to implement the repairs.  So who do you hold accountable for the deaths?
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search