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

Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

insideevs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 848 posts

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#91

Post by mrloop »

gambiting wrote: post #54
dmitrygr wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait till you see how much it costs (in sales) to NOT have it. Eg: I won’t buy a car without it.

Generally yes, but I would buy a car that has no screen at all, just give me a phone holder on the dash.

My old ford tourneo custom has a well placed phone holder. I use this and a MagSafe charger plugged into usb port on dash. Works great, I can use my phone, or anybody else can use the van and their phone, it’s really easy. Just looked and newer models have great big touch screen instead :(

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#92

Post by serial_dev »

smartmic wrote: post #30

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'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 c…

I’m not sure I understand everything you said but I went with Dacia Duster, it’s the affordable brand, but I like that I can have a new car that has the controls and everything like a car from a decade ago… (lol) physical buttons, relatively good quality as they get to rely on Renault’s everything, I don’t need to go to settings to open the glove box, they don’t try to “out-innovate” everybody with ads, subscription heating, goofy scroll-knobs, or non rectangle screens. You can put CarPlay and Android Auto in it if you want.

Also, you can just buy older cars, that works too.

BTW, I thought about buying a Lada Niva, because I love the looks, but I heard it is not that reliable as you would assume, and they are pretty pricey for a car that is basically the same for forty years…

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#93

Post by ghaff »

stahtops wrote: post #90
ghaff wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If I want to be driven, I’ll just book a waymo. So move to one of the 2 or 3 cities in the US that have Waymo?

I think you missed the part about the fully autonomous future. We aren’t there yet.

And won't be for a very long time.

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#94

Post by pc86 »

smartmic wrote: post #30

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'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 c…

The core competency of most software companies is not software, I'm not sure how GM thinks it can do anything halfway decent (it can't).

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#95

Post by [deleted] »

mschuster91 wrote: post #73
kylehotchkiss wrote: post #48

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.

> Remove the LTE chip You can't, it's required for eCall which is a mandatory feature in Europe. Unfortunately, it's fraught with issues, especially for the very first eCall modules where the hardware supported only 3G (HSPA)... which is being phased out across Europe together with GPRS (1G)/EDGE (2G), leaving these cars without a working eCall system - and no upgraded hardware modules in many cases.

[deleted]

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#96

Post by AlotOfReading »

v9v wrote: post #34
AlotOfReading wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not practical to produce a car that never needs updates. That would be a bug-free system, which is impossible. Since they're going to ship updates anyway, a lot of focus is on minimizing the cost and hence OTA. For what it's worth, I work in this industry and the general rule of thumb is that every increase in validation from QM (standard quality) up to the various levels of safety critical code has up to 10x th…

> That would be a bug-free system, which is impossible. Why? If the rest of the car can function within design specifications for years, why can't the firmware? I'm fine with updates to add compatibility with new protocols and such, but to me a bug implies there's a standing problem with the current system that's not due to some sort of wear/changing standard/component damage etc. While one can point to examples of c…

The rest of the car doesn't function within specifications for years. That's what recalls are fixing. These days, a lot of software recalls are being issued to work around physical design "bugs". The Tesla cybertruck frunk pinching issues are a well-publicized example.

But, do you have an example of a software project anywhere that's bug-free? I'd include the space shuttle code, but even that famously high quality development process produced a (low) number of bugs.

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#97

Post by ryanbrunner »

gambiting wrote: post #54
dmitrygr wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait till you see how much it costs (in sales) to NOT have it. Eg: I won’t buy a car without it.

Generally yes, but I would buy a car that has no screen at all, just give me a phone holder on the dash.

Physical controls are worth it for me. Having a press to talk button, track advance and volume controls on my steering wheel is a pretty nice quality of life feature. I could do without a screen if the car has that.

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#98

Post by ryanbrunner »

mschuster91 wrote: post #73
kylehotchkiss wrote: post #48

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.

> Remove the LTE chip You can't, it's required for eCall which is a mandatory feature in Europe. Unfortunately, it's fraught with issues, especially for the very first eCall modules where the hardware supported only 3G (HSPA)... which is being phased out across Europe together with GPRS (1G)/EDGE (2G), leaving these cars without a working eCall system - and no upgraded hardware modules in many cases.

Wouldn't be the first or the last time that a car has a different build out for different locales - as differences go, that's pretty minor.

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#99

Post by gnopgnip »

nicce wrote: post #51
kylehotchkiss wrote: post #48

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.

I have heard CarPlay royalty is quite big - has anyone some numbers? Edit: maybe my information was old - some sources say it costs nothing

There are no licensing fees or royalties for CarPlay or android auto.

It does cost time/money to integrate, like any feature

Re: Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

#100

Post by pc86 »

andoando wrote: post #84
smartmic wrote: post #30

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'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 c…

By aviation standards, wed be stuck with 1950s tech. Even for aviation, aviation standards hold saftey back

You seem to be confusing aviation standards with aviation regulation.
Post reply on HN