TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

451 点作者 rntn2 天前

66 条评论

acheron93832 天前
As someone who works professionally on embedded software devices that update over the internet, car companies are stuck not because they can't get software talent, but because they have no ability to actually build the electronics alongside the software, which is ultimately what constrains embedded software. Without the right hardware, the constraints are just insurmountable, you can not do X feature because board A doesn't have the API to your MCU, or it runs some dogshit speed communication system that means you have 500ms lag. The feature is just unworkable, and if the PMs push it anyways you get what happens for the legacy car makers, terrible underpowered infotainment systems with no central design philosophy, stuck in an awkward, bad, middle between a full software stack and all buttons for everything. Their model of integrating 3rd party vendor computers just doesn't really work for this kind of thing; Tesla, Rivian, and the Chinese EV makers all manufacture all their own electronics, which lets them achieve the outcome. But you can not just roll all your own electronics in a year.
评论 #43960953 未加载
评论 #43961025 未加载
评论 #43958298 未加载
评论 #43957725 未加载
评论 #43958517 未加载
评论 #43958142 未加载
评论 #43960957 未加载
评论 #43958871 未加载
评论 #43957799 未加载
评论 #43959376 未加载
评论 #43966408 未加载
评论 #43957788 未加载
评论 #43961802 未加载
评论 #43964126 未加载
评论 #43961013 未加载
评论 #43962439 未加载
评论 #43960998 未加载
评论 #43960717 未加载
评论 #43959370 未加载
评论 #43960396 未加载
评论 #43962438 未加载
评论 #43957974 未加载
评论 #43961313 未加载
评论 #43960761 未加载
评论 #43961023 未加载
评论 #43961004 未加载
评论 #43959806 未加载
kylehotchkiss2 天前
Remove the LTE chip and all functionality related to ads, support wireless CarPlay and android auto, and use physical buttons. You’ll win every award in the industry.
评论 #43957161 未加载
评论 #43956502 未加载
评论 #43957217 未加载
评论 #43960755 未加载
评论 #43956987 未加载
评论 #43960471 未加载
评论 #43957735 未加载
评论 #43959867 未加载
评论 #43956520 未加载
评论 #43956343 未加载
评论 #43959252 未加载
评论 #43956399 未加载
评论 #43957936 未加载
mdavid6262 天前
Looking back at the last 10 years how my fellow developers write code, the last thing I want is software defined vehicles. No one is rewarded for writing good code or for handling all the edge cases. People are rewarded for getting things done. The problem is, that this approach works e.g. for non-critical web applications, but not for cars, which are dangerous, heavy object traveling at high speeds.<p>Every car I&#x27;ve driven I disabled all drive assist features (except for ABS and ESP). They just simply don&#x27;t work well. Edge cases are not handled well - there is a little snow on the sensor? Beeps continuously, because you&#x27;re hitting the wall going 100km&#x2F;h on the highway...<p>I hope more cars&#x2F;trucks like the Slate truck will come. We want cheap, simple and safe cars.
评论 #43960662 未加载
评论 #43968853 未加载
评论 #43960700 未加载
评论 #43962864 未加载
smartmic2 天前
So I have serious thoughts about driving “software defined vehicles” in the future. I mean, and the article has confirmed this sufficiently, the core competence of the established car manufacturers is not software. I don&#x27;t trust the newcomers like Tesla or the Chinese manufacturers for the time being. In my opinion, the same standards should apply to software in motor vehicles as in the aviation industry. And there can&#x27;t be things like permanent internet connectivity, on-the-fly updates or anything else that is suitable for consumer entertainment devices. So I&#x27;m seriously considering whether my next car should be an “analog” one - but it&#x27;s going to be difficult, a Lada [1] (not so exotic in Germany, where I live) is only available second-hand because of the Russia sanctions. I&#x27;m happy to accept alternative suggestions!<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Lada_Niva" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Lada_Niva</a>
评论 #43956411 未加载
评论 #43956702 未加载
评论 #43956333 未加载
评论 #43957371 未加载
评论 #43957957 未加载
评论 #43957250 未加载
评论 #43956264 未加载
评论 #43959230 未加载
评论 #43956729 未加载
评论 #43956626 未加载
评论 #43956527 未加载
评论 #43956496 未加载
deergomoo2 天前
I want a 7-10” central display that spends 99% of its time showing CarPlay but also has a radio if I need it, the backup camera when I’m in reverse, and lets me change a couple of settings for convenience features like auto locking etc. Everything else can be dials, knobs, and buttons. My Mazda3 is perfect for this and I’m quite sad that I’m almost certainly not going to be able to find anything like it by the time I come to replace it.
评论 #43959027 未加载
评论 #43959688 未加载
评论 #43958094 未加载
评论 #43958018 未加载
评论 #43958335 未加载
评论 #43958005 未加载
评论 #43958179 未加载
encrypted_bird2 天前
My ideal car:<p>- No Internet connection - No touchscreens - No LCD dashboard; I like dials. - 100% user-repairable; there should be no need to go to a dealer if one can easily fix a problem themselves or one wants to go to an independent mechanic (often cheaper!) - Buttons and (analog, not digital) dials for the media center - Media center with ONLY Bluetooth, CD player, and radio media center - Analog locks (not software based) - A Physical, metal key (not a chip)—I like to be able to go to my local hardware or key shop and make backups, thank you very much. - I don&#x27;t need navigation; I have a phone for that.<p>And I don&#x27;t need an app either:<p>- Wanna check the fuel&#x2F;battery level? A little thing called a fuel gauge on the dashboard will work just fine. - Wanna check the tire pressure? Use a pressure gauge, feel the tire directly, or look at the tire, or base it on feeling while driving, i.e. the same little things we&#x27;ve done for decades just fine (not to mention the app or dashboard may not take into account used or third-party tires, as each tire brand&#x2F;type&#x2F;size is filled up to its own pressure rating). - Wanna lock&#x2F;unlock doors remotely? Detached key fob. - Need diagnostics? OBDII still works excellently.
评论 #43961966 未加载
评论 #43972858 未加载
评论 #43959249 未加载
评论 #43961954 未加载
评论 #43960699 未加载
评论 #43959661 未加载
评论 #43959601 未加载
评论 #43960566 未加载
评论 #43960547 未加载
1a527dd52 天前
I would really rather that cars didn&#x27;t run software, or at the least the minimal software to get the job done where there is no other option.<p>My current car is a Kia; I love it. But the door locks are software controlled (you can tell from the lag). The issue is I like to lock my doors as soon as I&#x27;m in the car.<p>The software can&#x27;t cope with this; about 500ms later it unlocks the doors again and won&#x27;t let me lock until the software has realized that I can now lock the doors again. So there is a 3-4 second gap in which I want to lock the doors but I can&#x27;t.<p>This is appalling for safety; I grew up in a dodgy area and all my then cars kept me safe by allowing me to lock as soon as I entered. Now I have to more cautious than ever.<p>The other issue is that it has collision detection and automatic braking; it works great 99% of the time. But one time it got confused with over head sun and road markings and decided to emergency stop on a school road. I was lucky there was no car behind me.
评论 #43957611 未加载
评论 #43960638 未加载
评论 #43957588 未加载
felineflock2 天前
About a year ago the Ford CEO (who is also Chris Farley&#x27;s cousin) explained why legacy car manufacturers could not make good software: each of their cars have 150+ modules, each of them from several suppliers, each of them writing their own software.<p>For every software change on each module, they have to go to a supplier to ask because of IP rights.<p>That is why Ford is&#x2F;was trying to build a new generation of modules with in-house software which they never wrote before.<p>Also pertinent: &quot;Why Ford decided to merge its next-gen architecture with its current platform&quot; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.ph&#x2F;CR2Pv" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.ph&#x2F;CR2Pv</a>
评论 #43960187 未加载
评论 #43963241 未加载
misja1111 天前
&gt; Consumers have had it with clunky, slow automotive technology, and the modern car is so computerized that a seamless electronic interface is an absolute necessity.<p>Say what? Give me a clunky manual interface with buttons and knobs any time over an electronic interface for which I have to look away from the road.
评论 #43963116 未加载
评论 #43962582 未加载
Propelloni2 天前
I have driven several different, rather new, cars over the last two years. The most hassle-free experience was the second cheapest of the bunch, a 2024 Opel Corsa GS (a Stellantis brand). I actually was sad when I had to give it back.<p>Now I read that Stellantis is behind on the software game and I wonder if there is a relation. Seriously, I&#x27;m all for cost-effective cars but reading the article I do not get the feeling that so-called SDV are in the interest of me, the consumer.
评论 #43958208 未加载
FrankWilhoit2 天前
Embedded-systems programming is not taught, and no one is willing to pay for training. The result is that development is outsourced to entities that claim, falsely, to have the knowledge. Eventually the consequences of the fact that they do not have the knowledge surface in an undeniable manner, and the only way to cover is to make a great show of a fresh start. (This affects all industries, not just automotive, but right now that is where the spotlight shines.)
评论 #43956371 未加载
评论 #43956856 未加载
评论 #43957681 未加载
评论 #43956033 未加载
评论 #43956138 未加载
评论 #43955677 未加载
评论 #43955924 未加载
评论 #43956391 未加载
评论 #43956328 未加载
评论 #43956481 未加载
jccc2 天前
&gt; Tesla was able to fix this with a software update over the air, something no one else could do for a braking system. That was impressive, but the example presented a worrying question: Did engineers not do stopping-distance testing before they shipped the car to customers?<p>I wonder if anyone here can think of an example (or six) of other more worrying questions about this. Before cradling your head in your hands and asking where you can get a decent new car that&#x27;s just a goddamn car.
评论 #43959072 未加载
bluGill2 天前
Why does your car need an internet connection? I don&#x27;t use the built in maps since my phone has a map and a connection.<p>what is the killer app of a connected car? businesses might want to watch their fleet but does anyone else care
评论 #43956930 未加载
评论 #43962670 未加载
评论 #43956507 未加载
评论 #43956548 未加载
评论 #43958869 未加载
Hilift1 天前
&gt; When the Model 3 first came out, it took far too long to stop in Consumer Reports testing, thanks to bad anti-lock braking system (ABS) calibration. Tesla was able to fix this with a software update over the air, something no one else could do for a braking system. That was impressive, but the example presented a worrying question: Did engineers not do stopping-distance testing before they shipped the car to customers?<p>Narrator: No, they really did not.
Jiocus2 天前
The author mentions &quot;military grade firewall&quot;, as a must have in a vehicle. Genuine question; What&#x27;s a military grade firewall?
评论 #43955951 未加载
评论 #43956002 未加载
评论 #43956427 未加载
评论 #43956822 未加载
评论 #43959993 未加载
评论 #43959650 未加载
评论 #43957692 未加载
评论 #43955929 未加载
评论 #43957670 未加载
评论 #43955923 未加载
评论 #43958474 未加载
评论 #43958372 未加载
api2 天前
I am awaiting a hatchback or sedan like this:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.slate.auto&#x2F;en" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.slate.auto&#x2F;en</a><p>Give me a car that is perfectly 100% autonomous, or give me a car with three gauges and basic controls only. Everything else is an uncanny valley: all the downsides of complex tech without being useful enough to justify it.<p>Until then I like my Nissan Leaf: physical controls, phone just docks with infotainment screen, and reliable.
评论 #43956958 未加载
wave1002 天前
I can confirm that Volkswagen is borderline incompetent when it comes to software - a few months back, my 2020 Audi A4 (and those of tens to hundreds of others) all started having the same issue, where the infotainment will randomly reboot every 5-30 minutes (taking out nav, the backup camera, and the parking sensors with it, and requiring a PIN to get back into the system).<p>Despite the problem having the hallmarks of a backend issue (many cars with the same software running into the same issue on the same week), corporate is still insisting that it&#x27;s a hardware issue and trying to sell us on $5k hardware replacements. I love the car for its build quality, but almost kind of wish I&#x27;d gotten a Tesla given how bad VW is at software.
arakageeta2 天前
These companies fail because vertical integration, and even a monorepo, is needed to make these efforts successful. This is completely at odds with the existing OEM&#x2F;Tier 1 business model and engineering process grown up around it. Also, neither OEM nor Tier 1 have software cultures up to the challenge.<p>This is why the Chinese OEMs, Tesla, and Rivian are able to move fast.
评论 #43959723 未加载
评论 #43958013 未加载
gU9x3u8XmQNG2 天前
There&#x27;s another huge constraint that the article and a lot of responses do not seem to mention:<p>- Compliance and,<p>- Regulation.<p>In Australia, for example; we have very strict requirements for manufacturers - and it seems mostly out of regulatory incompetence that vendors like Tesla are able to deploy and bypass in the way they do.<p>I&#x27;ve been told, by stakeholders in industry, that the systems that facilitate the software of vehicles to align with such requirements historically were strictly controlled.<p>(The same applied to the hardware)<p>Whilst it&#x27;s also over simplifying it;<p>- I am not excited at the prospect that `developer-a` can `git commit` functional changes to my vehicle.<p>I&#x27;m not sure you should be, either!
topherPedersen2 天前
General Motors was in the lead then they just quit. It was stunning to see all of their incredible self driving Cruise cars vanish and then overnight see them all replaced by Waymos. It was like watching the downfall of Xerox PARC.
whinvik2 天前
Hardware companies trying to build software, without actually understanding software.<p>There&#x27;s a reason why Apple, Nvidia, Tesla got where they got to.
评论 #43957765 未加载
评论 #43958344 未加载
评论 #43958359 未加载
1970-01-011 天前
IMHO, Tesla stubbornly refusing to launch an App store will be seen as is its biggest failure when one of their many competitors finally takes on this challenge. They have millions of iPads bolted onto electric wheels, and for some reason refuse to monetize it.
teekert2 天前
Just talk to Canoncal, or IBM, make a NixOS config, or just do something. How hard can it be? My father’s 5 yo Volkswagen van has an 80’s looking UI, the touchscreen is already failing. Going from the normal UI to CarPlay is just jarring, any 2024 Linux distro looks, feels and acts more modern. What are they doing over there??<p>I could probably whip him up something nicer if only there was just a Nuc or something in there somewhere.
评论 #43962140 未加载
评论 #43957327 未加载
评论 #43958024 未加载
Hobadee2 天前
I&#x27;ve long wondered why no car manufacturer has gone for an open source model. Certain things should absolutely be locked down (for example, the airbags and other critical safety features) but there is absolutely no reason the HVAC and Infotainment system need to be closed source. Open it up and let hackers go crazy, then just &quot;borrow&quot; the best options out there for next year&#x27;s model and everyone wins!
评论 #43958489 未加载
评论 #43957194 未加载
评论 #43956922 未加载
评论 #43957360 未加载
评论 #43962692 未加载
评论 #43956932 未加载
aetherspawn1 天前
Software isn’t super hard I suppose, but you still need a dozen “rockstar devs” and $1mil in licensed software to push out a car, so yeah probably it’s a minimum $5-10m exercise for basic software that can just drive around.<p>And if you start talking about razzle dazzle infotainment smart phone experiences, well that’s where you get the $1b price tag from.<p>My startup is actually aiming to disrupt the low end of this with a generic VCU that lets you design any vehicle you want and then tweak a few arguments to set how it should be controlled. The goal is to let you build a Slate-like car or truck (infotainment excluded &#x2F; BYO) without writing software.
评论 #43962470 未加载
light_hue_12 天前
No one is talking about the terrible wages they pay developers.<p>On average, the best people will tend to better jobs. Salaries are half of places like Google.<p>Of course their software is in trouble.
rustcleaner2 天前
We really need the right to modify our vehicle software, with zero &#x27;safety&#x27; or &#x27;environment&#x27; camel noses to shoe-horn in the total lockdowns we see prevalent today. &#x27;FOSS&#x27; hardware should be exempted from a whole bunch of regulations to make it enticing and accessible to technicians, home builders, and boutique bespoke builders. What we don&#x27;t want is Tesla&#x27;s&#x2F;Apple&#x27;s model, we want the GNU&#x2F;Linux on Talos II model with no surprise NSA backdoor management engines.<p>Like... <i>can we pleeeease have this already!??</i>
评论 #43969051 未加载
评论 #43962640 未加载
gitroom2 天前
Pretty cool seeing how all those little gripes with car tech stack up, kinda makes me question if adding more software actually makes things better or just adds more mess. you ever feel like simpler is actually safer when it comes to stuff like this?
jvdvegt2 天前
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.is&#x2F;dQ7oH" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.is&#x2F;dQ7oH</a>
winddude2 天前
as a car guy and software engineer I just want to say car&#x27;s need way less software, way more separation of concerns, more standardisation and more open platforms, but most of the money is made on service, so the manufactures are incentivized to make closed systems.
评论 #43959687 未加载
stefanoco1 天前
This thread is becoming huge and so searching through the comments is not easy. Nonetheless it’s my impression that little or no attention was directed to the regulatory compliance needed for vehicles to be marketed under the rules of UN (known as UN&#x2F;ECE Regulations and approval scheme) and similar approaches worldwide. Which means that roughly speaking that the security and safety of the car being sold today rest assured until I don’t change (upgrade) the software governing its functionalities. It’s totally unclear how it might be possible at least in Europe to upgrade major parts of vehicles software without breaking its approval. Comments on this?
thaumasiotes2 天前
&gt; Thus, the double-edged sword of SDVs. They are more upgradeable and flexible than their predecessors, but that advantage allows companies to deliver under-baked software with a “fix it later” approach.<p>The article seems to overlook the fact that if you can receive a benevolent update over the air, you can also receive a malevolent one over the air. Over-the-air is not a good update model for cars. It would be better if you had to install the update manually.
anotherhue2 天前
&gt; These are companies that have typically seen software as a problem to be solved, not a design to be experienced.<p>Some unexpected Kierkegaard in there (I only recently learned Dune was referencing it).
jesucresta1 天前
It is funny that developers are always looking at the processes of car making to improve their own extremely broken ways and now it is car-makers that &quot;should&quot; be trying to be more like the agile software devs.<p>As a dev the last thing I want is a software-defined car. Look what we did to TVs.
andy_ppp1 天前
I would love a car platform that ran open source software, I think a lot of people would buy hardware they knew all the software was controlled by the owner. The way electronics plays into cars at this point is quite excessive, even seats and windows are running software.
davkan2 天前
This stuff is exhausting, I’ve never been happier to drive a 93 manual than hearing about infotainment systems.<p>I recently purchased a new bike which has electronic shifting and while it performs better than and and requires less tuning, I honestly miss the pure simplicity and connectedness of a cable actuated derailleur.
zombot1 天前
Only car companies? Isn&#x27;t it rather that everybody and their hamster is pivoting to become a surveillance company, if you just manage to cram software into whatever it is you&#x27;re doing? Get extra score for making it &quot;AI&quot;!
rustcleaner1 天前
That&#x27;s it, it&#x27;s time to start a FOSS car project which is operated by poor lawsuit-proof individuals, because we will need to &quot;steal&quot; existing ECU firmware and incorporate it illegally into this FOSS car project. The idea here is to component-wise replace all the major computers on a bunch of well known car makes and models, creating a standardized car model (software platform), so we can kill trackers, black box recorders, take back control over power and efficiency from the ecofascists, etc.<p>We are only as sovereign as we are willing to fight, and if voting worked do you think they&#x27;d let you? lol
catigula2 天前
Car software is so thankless and opaque.<p>Look at the market landscape: literally nobody knows that Toyota produces the #1 system for automated driver safety aids (ADAS) and it isn&#x27;t close - their current generation of vision&#x2F;radar fusion sensors have the only car on the market that passes 2029 federal regulations for AEB (62mph to dead stop if an obstacle is detected being a metric that some other manufacturers called not feasible) on a 2023 Corolla.<p>Compare that to IIHS data for other brands&#x2F;makes, even &quot;safe&quot; ones - many of them perform abysmally. The systems are awful. It took me a genuinely decent amount of digging to uncover that most cars, even lauded ones, are equipped with &quot;compliance software&quot; that meets bare minimum requirements, i.e. Honda, Hyundai, etc.<p>And yet every review and even poster on the internet calls Toyota woefully technically inept because Kia makes fancy screens. Alas.
评论 #43959908 未加载
taeric1 天前
To throw a curve into this discussion, I&#x27;m not entirely clear that software companies have any clue how to enter this space. Cars are supported for far far longer than your average software system is expected to run, nowadays.<p>Google thinks they have a good support policy on phones that are approaching a decade in age. My truck is literally older than Google. And the mechanics down the street can easily get it back up and running from any trouble I typically see.
0xbadcafebee2 天前
Writing software, and doing it well, is expensive and time-consuming. It&#x27;s like manufacturing anything else from scratch. It requires an investment in resources and expertise, proper planning and execution. Much like building a car, you can build software inefficiently. But if it comes out like shit, that directly affects your bottom line.<p>To run a profitable businesses with shitty software, you need a big fat pipe of money from a captive market. Most automakers don&#x27;t have that kind of market. They cannot afford to waste time writing shitty software that won&#x27;t increase their bottom line.<p>Building a highly effective software team is one of the hardest things to do in tech. We actually know how to do it - review the DevOps studies from the past 10 years - yet organizations don&#x27;t do it, because it requires very specific leadership goals, buy-in, and culture. Most organizations are led by &quot;personalities&quot; that &quot;go with their gut&quot; rather than data-driven decisions, and most people, let&#x27;s face it, just aren&#x27;t very good at their jobs. Finding a company with good leaders, good managers, and good workers, is like finding a leprechaun.<p>Automakers should have learned this decades ago, that only extreme attention to detail and high quality results in better outcomes (and thus bottom line). It&#x27;s fucking hard work to make a good car. It&#x27;s also fucking hard work to make good software. Did they really think &quot;just add more software&quot; would be easier than making more cars?!<p>They don&#x27;t need to make all this software. Automakers are happy to buy some parts commodity, and have some made bespoke. Software doesn&#x27;t all have to be bespoke. Take 100 different x86 computers and the same OS will run fine on all of them. They don&#x27;t all need to invent their own novel way of networking and controlling embedded devices. Look to the software that works well everywhere for inspiration. It&#x27;s all standards-based, loosely-defined, layered, simple, with replaceable parts. <i>Kinda like a car.</i>
nottorp2 天前
I would like a list of those companies making &quot;software defined&quot; vehicles so I can avoid them.<p>Not because of the shit infotainment systems - although the idiots could save money by just doing carplay and android auto, they&#x27;ll never do something better.<p>But because I want physical only failsafes for stuff like brakes and cutting off the engine.<p>Also, use the savings in software to bring physical buttons back.<p>Besides the life threatening &quot;software&quot; features, don&#x27;t forget that they could also adjust engine power in software. As in, include 75 hp in the selling price and sell you highway speeds for $999 for a week or $299 per month with a 2 year commitment...
ElijahLynn2 天前
&quot;So Who Wins?<p>The clear leaders here are the companies that weren’t already locked into the old-world approach to automotive software. Tesla, Rivian, Lucid and almost all of the Chinese automakers have built ground-up systems that work without legacy bloat.&quot;
VagabundoP1 天前
I looked into getting an aftermarket replacement for my sucky infotainment system; replace it with an Android tablet or something.<p>But it seems like too much trouble, if I could even do it.
评论 #43961427 未加载
kats2 天前
&gt; Consumers have had it with clunky, slow automotive technology<p>No. I don&#x27;t want it. I want Not to have it.<p>I don&#x27;t want a touchscreen. I don&#x27;t want a computer car. And I definitely don&#x27;t want an internet-connected car.
评论 #43959673 未加载
jillesvangurp2 天前
It&#x27;s not just about the software but about the hardware architecture of the car. Legacy manufacturers are coming from a situation where they are integrating hardware and software from a lot of different suppliers. This makes upgrading the car a very tedious process and slows down the process of getting suppliers to fix issues and provide new firmware in a timely fashion. It&#x27;s worse for them because they often want to do ICE and EV variants of the same car. Which means sticking with the same supply chains and associated issues.<p>Vertically integrated companies do this very differently. Tesla pioneered this. The Chinese copied this and at this point you also have companies like Rivian and a few of the legacy manufacturers that are doing the same. Effectively they in house all the software and e.g. Rivian runs the software on a handful of hardware subsystems instead of having hundreds of chips with their own firmware for things like the wind screen wipers, the software that controls the windows, the AC, the keyfob, AI driving features, and so on.<p>I mention Rivian here because they just did a deal with VW to start doing the same for them.<p>The issues here are not just technical but cultural. I used to work in Nokia when it was in the (slow) process of figuring out that they were a software company rather than a hardware company. Then Apple and Google came along and they were slow to adapt their internal processes and management. Apple makes firmware that goes on their phone. They provide OTA updates. There&#x27;s only one supported version of that firmware: the current &amp; latest one. It&#x27;s the same for all phones they still support with updates. Nokia did the opposite. They forked their software for each product variant (dozens per year). And they did not do OTA upgrades. So most of their phones weren&#x27;t updated at all (by users), and would typically ship with bugs that had already been fixed on other branches of the software. And it would ship on the schedule of the manufacturing process, regardless of the state of the software. With all the obvious consequences. Nokia got a well deserved reputation of shipping half baked software.<p>By the time MS bought them out, they had learned and improved a lot but Apple and Google were running circles around them by then and it did not matter anymore.<p>You see the same with car manufacturers currently. It&#x27;s all about the buttons and the bling. They have a gazillion of upsells, features, special trims, and what not. And it all adds up to a whole lot of nothing if the software experience isn&#x27;t great. That&#x27;s why VW is paying billions to Rivian to fix that for them.<p>Their cars are too expensive, have too many chips and wires, and their software just isn&#x27;t good enough. And they don&#x27;t have ten years to figure this out for themselves. That&#x27;s what Rivian is supposedly fixing for them.
评论 #43958448 未加载
ErigmolCt2 天前
The wildcard here might be consumer tolerance
javiercornejo1 天前
no excuses... it was their primary business since ever and software wave is coming from 60s when human went to space, so software as car engines are relevant long time ago, they couldn&#x27;t tolerant this mess with providers, ECUs and technologies, that long, for their core business.
ChuckMcM2 天前
From the article: &quot;<i>Evidence of that dichotomy is not hard to find. As automakers have introduced vehicles with more advanced computing and electrical architectures, they have also struggled to deliver bug-free software on time.</i>&quot;<p>This was something that really hit me when the Internet allowed game developers to ship a game that wasn&#x27;t done. You got the game, and the first thing you did was download a &quot;patch&quot; that was at least as big as the CD the game came on (several hundred MB). I&#x27;ve got &quot;released&quot; Windows98 games on CD that are essentially unplayable because what was shipped on the CD was unplayable and without the update server on the network sending out those critical fixes, its never gonna work. For game archivists that means finding a fully patched install and then preserving <i>that</i>.<p>This is a shitty experience that serves manufacturers but not their customers. I don&#x27;t expect it to get better any time soon but I wish it would.
ChrisMarshallNY2 天前
I worked on a project to create a software-defined still&#x2F;video camera.<p>It did not succeed, despite some <i>very</i> smart people on the team.<p>This stuff isn’t easy at all.
matheusmoreira2 天前
Cars now have computers, cellular internet connections, cameras, microphones, <i>privacy policies</i>... I can barely find the words to describe just how frightening the status quo is.
评论 #43957960 未加载
cosmicgadget2 天前
&gt; These legacy companies have poached big hitters from Apple, Tesla and Google. They’ve sunk billions into it.<p>Part of the problem might be poaching high title people from embedded tech companies while not doing anything for developer compensation.
评论 #43956824 未加载
评论 #43955970 未加载
评论 #43955809 未加载
daft_pink2 天前
like airlines, car companies are generally a terrible investment.
kjkjadksj2 天前
Terrible mobile website for what its worth. Two sentences per in paragraph ad and I couldn’t fully read the article because it bogged my se2 down to a crawl. How I wish I could jailbreak this phone and install a real adblocker but alas not on magic version number.
评论 #43961116 未加载
评论 #43957990 未加载
评论 #43956516 未加载
amelius2 天前
Where is the Apple car? Was the project canceled, and why?
评论 #43958370 未加载
djoldman2 天前
Somewhere in the last decade I became a curmudgeon who yells at clouds.<p>I&#x27;d like a car with zero screens, no internet connectivity possible, and maybe one audio input and a radio.<p>Also I drive a manual, which here in the US seems to be almost unheard of.<p>As an aside, what&#x27;s next? You can&#x27;t buy a chef&#x27;s knife without wifi?
评论 #43957986 未加载
评论 #43959079 未加载
评论 #43956967 未加载
exabrial2 天前
All I want my car to do is drive from a -&gt; b. Connecting AirPlay is nice, but not necessary. All other touchscreen stuff is dangerous, crappy, and outdated the minute it&#x27;s rolled over the showroom floor. Just stop, please.
egypturnash2 天前
If you want to know the many ways this is going to suck, then think about everything you&#x27;ve ever heard someone bitching about in the modern video game ecosystem, then multiply it by &quot;but instead of people not being able to play a video game, someone might die&quot;.<p>Is this how we get the Butlerian Jihad? Because part of me sure does want to learn how to identify cars built like this and learn ways to disable them when I see them parked somewhere around town, before one of them fails to recognize me on my bicycle as something that should be avoided.
tgsovlerkhgsel2 天前
Legacy car companies haven&#x27;t realized that good UX is no longer optional. If the system people use to interact with your car is unpleasant or unusable garbage, it ruins the whole car. Just like it doesn&#x27;t matter how good your kitchen is if the waiter is rude and spits on the food in front of the customer.<p>And yet most of the companies don&#x27;t seem to be willing to spend the one-time cost of getting the UX right.
postexitus1 天前
I have a BMW with iDrive 7 and none of this feels familiar - am I in the lucky minority which happens to have chanced upon a good manufacturer which did a good job on integration - or am I so clueless that I don&#x27;t recognize I am lookin at a dumpster fire?
aguara_guazu2 天前
DLC vibe anyone?
xyst1 天前
Vehicle manufacturers could barely build a functional and usable &quot;infotainment&quot; systems.<p>Now these same dinosaurs want to build and ship &quot;software defined vehicles&quot;? What a joke.
tacker20002 天前
Software defined vehicle? Never heard of this term. More marketing buzzword BS.<p>Yes, Tesla has one of the best user interfaces in a car, and has set the bar high. But just because they have OTA updates it&#x27;s now called a &quot;Software Defined Vehicle&quot;?
评论 #43960134 未加载
评论 #43956879 未加载
lotharcable1 天前
There is a 0.0% chance I am going to buy a car that requires a network connection.<p>All of this is complete nonsense and a huge waste of resources.<p>Especially for electric cars. These things are so simple that it is not funny. The level of sophistication required is barely much more then what went into a 1990s era Sony Walkman.<p>What a humiliating fail for modern automakers.
unethical_ban2 天前
&gt;Now, they need to make compelling apps, slick new features and all-new electrical architectures that neither the companies nor their suppliers are used to using. They need to build Tesla-level upgradeability with far less willingness to ship unfinished goods, all while tucking it behind a military-grade firewall to ensure your car can’t be remotely hacked.<p>Did the market demand this? Does safety? Fuel efficiency?<p>I&#x27;m holding onto my 2014 vehicle precisely because of this over the air update, constant tracking bullshit.<p>If you can&#x27;t deliver a reliable car without needing to patch it weekly, I don&#x27;t want it.
tsunamifury2 天前
Well good luck.<p>If anyone ever wants to hear I got the Porsche CEO to step down for his terrible tech strategy. There is no hope