Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mercedes-Benz previews its operating system MB.OS

media.mbusa.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 398 posts

Re: Mercedes-Benz previews its operating system MB.OS

#261

Post by gambiting »

Keyframe wrote: post #194
gambiting wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just a personal anecdote - I got a brand new Mercedes in 2016, it was even fully made in Germany - and it was probably the worst assembled vehicle I have ever owned in my life(and I used to own a 1995 Fiat Cinquecento), the number of creaks and rattles coming from all places in that car was almost funny if it wasn't so upsetting. I've had several visits to the dealership just to fix rattling seats, upholstery…

Are you sure it's made in China? For most markets XC60 are built either in Sweden or indeed in China, but I always wondered about chinese-produced ones. Fellow Volvo owner (XC90/2022 - Sweden-built though), car's a dream.

Yes I'm very sure. The car was built in Chengdou in January 2020 then transported over here by train (option which no longer exists at the moment because Russia closed the land link so cars have to be brought to Europe by ship the old fashioned way). It's a T8 plug-in hybrid for the British market.

Re: Mercedes-Benz previews its operating system MB.OS

#262

Post by perryizgr8 »

nanidin wrote: post #212
corbulo wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money. Why give that up when the customer is really only going to use bluetooth audio anyway? Anyone who cares enough about navigation is gonna use an app on their phone. Native car navigation is a superficial value-feature not a use feature. The edge that Carplay gets is really minimal. I'm repulsed by the new car market, its many multiples over-connected anyway. When it comes to digital features my gut says only th…

> Native car navigation is a superficial value-feature not a use feature I thought the same thing until I owned an EV. Using the car's navigation is essential for road trips that involve charging along the way. Maybe some day Google Maps et al. will gain access to API's to read the car's current charge and enough information to accurately predict charge along the route, but for now I have completely changed away from…

> Using the car's navigation is essential for road trips that involve charging along the way.

Sounds like a problem that will get solved automatically once charging stations are as common as fuel pumps.

Re: Mercedes-Benz previews its operating system MB.OS

#263

Post by DoingIsLearning »

harry8 wrote: post #240
PebblesHD wrote: post #170

> …and receive offers tailored to their interests… The day my car starts showing me advertisements of any kind is the day I take a sledgehammer to its infotainment system. For a luxury car brand to even include this in their copy they send out is a bit worrying.

do you remove all their advertising badges, model numbers, logos from the outside of your car too?

Out of the park non sequitur.

Re: Mercedes-Benz previews its operating system MB.OS

#264

Post by jacquesm »

jobjobjobjob wrote: post #257
jacquesm wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Road was drivable, but I couldn’t see road markings. That's a bit contradictory. If you can't see the road markings the road is not drivable.

In Ontario and it's very common to be driving on packed snow for a few days after new snowfall. You get barely any road markings at all. You just use common sense and memory to try and act like the lane dividers, turning lanes, stop lines are still there. It must be the same in many parts of the US as well. With winter tires and the right attitude its perfectly fine! But yeah if you can't see the road markings due to…

I've lived there. St. Josephs Island to be specific. I also went to the funeral of more than one person that 'didn't make it' through that kind of condition.

Re: Mercedes-Benz previews its operating system MB.OS

#265

Post by kalleboo »

woobar wrote: post #99
antipaul wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the saving grace. And luckily, the next generation CarPlay will span the entire dashboard, including in front of the driver [1] I can’t wait to abandon my native “infotainment” cluster** [1] https://www.macrumors.com/2022/12/28/next-generation-carplay...

It will still require stupid touch screens and will not integrate with custom hardware (HUD anyone?). It is subpar experience now, and using multiple screens to show even more "widgets" is strange value prop. The widgets I am interested while driving are not coming from some app. I want these screens to show information related to the car - cameras and parking sensors, cruise/lane control data, tire pressure, etc. No…

The 2 main things I look at on my car screen are "now playing" and navigation, both of those come from third party apps and both would be handy to have situated between the dials so I don't have to look off to the side

Re: Mercedes-Benz previews its operating system MB.OS

#267

Post by jason_wo »

AlotOfReading wrote: post #248
jason_wo wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes you are correct. I am currently having a project, making Linux "as real-time as possible": locking memory with mlockall, isolating cores, preempt kernel patch, .... It is still not real-time because you have no guarantees, but you typically get a max jitter of 0.1 ms, which is good enough for my use case. You could use Linux without a MMU (uClinux), e.g. on a Cortex-M, but is a horribly experience and no standard…

Preempt RT does give guarantees in the sense that unbounded latency is a bug and theoretical maximum latency bounds are known (see [0]). It is neither certifiable nor formally proven, but it's good enough for almost anything that isn't safety-critical. For the things that do require functional safety, you can use AGL and other hypervisor architectures that partition the critical and non-critical tasks with a few more…

Very interesting. Thanks for the link to the paper. Isn't the provided paper "just" about the scheduler? Eventually, I would have to output some data, e.g. on the CAN bus with socketcan through the network stack. This is probably a huge amount of code for which worst-case-execution-times are probably hard to get.

Does AGL mean automotive grade linux? What would be other hypervisors?

Re: Mercedes-Benz previews its operating system MB.OS

#268

Post by AlotOfReading »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #255
AlotOfReading wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Preempt RT does give guarantees in the sense that unbounded latency is a bug and theoretical maximum latency bounds are known (see [0]). It is neither certifiable nor formally proven, but it's good enough for almost anything that isn't safety-critical. For the things that do require functional safety, you can use AGL and other hypervisor architectures that partition the critical and non-critical tasks with a few more…

Preempt RT doesn't really give that. It might give that when you run a subset of Linux, but that is not Linux like nommu Linux is not Linux. They might say that's a bug, but there are countless algorithms and data structures in Linux that mean the state of the system and other workloads can slow down other parts of the system. Even setting aside the fact that a lower privileged process can take spin locks (not "preem…

I'd highly recommend you read the link and the paper it's based on. It's pretty thorough in addressing the limitations. Those same limitations apply to virtually every commercial RTOS out there as well though.

As for formally verified systems, depends on your definition of "nontrivial". You can build complex systems from the building blocks provided by the well known examples like SeL4 and pikeos. On a practical level though, complete formal verification is incredibly uncommon for exactly the reasons you'd expect. There's usually a mix of formal methods and other verification methods employed in safety critical applications. It's "good enough" given current capabilities.

Re: Mercedes-Benz previews its operating system MB.OS

#269

Post by f1shy »

nforgerit wrote: post #166

German Software Engineer here. I'd rather chop off my left pinky than working on any software product any German car manufacturer is developing: 1) Their management hierarchies only consist of MBA suits that think short term and treat their engineers like apes in a zoo. This frequently leads to engineers actually behaving like apes in a zoo. 2) German culture is deeply based on thinking in silos. They divide everythi…

Absolutely the truth has been spoken! In my experience the management are physics or mechanics engineers. The rest, I can only confirm. I would buy any day of the week a mechanical thing from Germany tool, or whatever. But when it comes to software NO F*ING WAY! Absolut trash.

For more details, see my other posts on the topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34164748 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34901394

Re: Mercedes-Benz previews its operating system MB.OS

#270

Post by harry8 »

DoingIsLearning wrote: post #263
harry8 wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

do you remove all their advertising badges, model numbers, logos from the outside of your car too?

Out of the park non sequitur.

What? Someone hates advertising and especially with their car. Absolutely reasonable position to take. I ask them how far they go with that? Reasonable to go absolutely hardcore and get rid of /all/ of it. Reasonable to say that level of advertising isn't that annoying so not worth the effort. I ask which because I'm interested in the response. None of that looks particularly controversial to me and I'm not seeing a non-sequitur.

I refer you to the guidelines recommended by the house which are here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

See what you make of them.

Post reply on HN