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

381–390 of 848 posts

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

#381

Post by smogcutter »

doodlebugging wrote: post #349
garyfirestorm wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in one of the big three - the culture here is more waterfall and less agile. They decided at some point ‘we don’t need to be experts in building systems, we should only be good at spec’cing them and putting them together’ This leads to a mindset of relying on suppliers for changing even one line of code and at their mercy. Talent leaves because they didn’t get to do any of the fun stuff. And you’re left with b…

> They go for cheapest component they can spec for a given feature cutting 4MB memory will save 5 cents per car, we sell half a million cars, that’s big savings! I'm tired. Been out in the sun all day. Explain this to me please. When I do the math I get 500000 * $0.05 = $25000 That's a small drop in a large bucket of their gross income or net profits. EDIT: Harsh sun must've burned a few of my processors. I see now t…

It’s very obviously a rhetorical exaggeration.

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

#382

Post by kulahan »

whatever1 wrote: post #327
averageRoyalty wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the concept, but the question I have is why? These companies have huge wallets, and can surely scoop up a smaller automative microcontroller company and bring it in-house? It seems like a problem than enough money could solve quickly, but they've been doing horribly at this for decades now.

The answer is that current car platforms were designed with flexibility as first goal. Car companies realized early on they could outsource component development and production to 3rd parties and they could make them bid each other to further lower the prices. So their platforms were optimized to be able to swap component vendors very easily (to achieve lowest costs). Of course the vendors are not 100% interchangeabl…

Then maybe they should let me buy some better damn chips so the experience isn’t so laggy.

I know, I know, shooting the messenger…

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

#383

Post by AlotOfReading »

typewithrhythm wrote: post #312
AlotOfReading wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you mean by different architecture here? I've never seen a situation where manufacturers choose fundamentally different architectures between price points on the same platform. I feel like I'm misunderstanding what you mean though.

Someone like Ford for example will have several software platforms, some for low cost vehicles, some high, some that are adaptable between trim levels. So as you go up in features on some model "the BigTruk" you might be going through variations of one sw platform, or jumping between platforms. Some have several platforms for high and low cost based on centralised vs distributed, so for example an s class will not ha…

Yes, different platforms have different architectures. Within a platform, the system level architecture will be relatively fixed. OEMs will part subsystems out to different tier 1s for different vehicles on that platform, but that's (ideally) just plugging different boxes together on the OEM side.

There's a lot of very expensive development tools (e.g. dSpace simulators) that rely on this model of automotive development.

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

#384

Post by sgustard »

phyzix5761 wrote: post #379
ericmay wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s interesting - what vehicles require you to do that? I know the usual suspect is the Tesla, which I have, but I never have to navigate through menus to change the temperature while driving. As an aside a lot of people like to levy criticism on the infotainment screens which I think is very well deserved, but then people text and drive, watch YouTube videos, and do all sorts of crazy things too. Instead of levyi…

Doesn't Tesla require you to navigate to a second screen when changing the fan speed?

Tesla added a feature via a software update a year ago that lets you change fan speed by holding the left steering wheel button.

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

#385

Post by bitmasher9 »

anon7000 wrote: post #142
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.

Mazda has done a great job at this so far, very minimal screen which automatically just shows CarPlay, and buttons for all the normal car stuff, which also isn’t overdone. The only flaw is the scroll wheel to interact with the screen, which is just slightly too clunky in apps with too many options

When I was doing my car shopping two years ago, I was initially considering another Mazda, specifically looking at the Mazda 3 AWD Hatchback. Their high tech features were significantly behind the other Japanese auto manufacturers. Some features like the ability for the car to automatically stay in a lane were not present.

When looking at who is doing it right, I wouldn’t put Mazda on a pedestal. They simply are behind the competition.

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

#386

Post by 01HNNWZ0MV43FF »

doodlebugging wrote: post #349
garyfirestorm wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in one of the big three - the culture here is more waterfall and less agile. They decided at some point ‘we don’t need to be experts in building systems, we should only be good at spec’cing them and putting them together’ This leads to a mindset of relying on suppliers for changing even one line of code and at their mercy. Talent leaves because they didn’t get to do any of the fun stuff. And you’re left with b…

> They go for cheapest component they can spec for a given feature cutting 4MB memory will save 5 cents per car, we sell half a million cars, that’s big savings! I'm tired. Been out in the sun all day. Explain this to me please. When I do the math I get 500000 * $0.05 = $25000 That's a small drop in a large bucket of their gross income or net profits. EDIT: Harsh sun must've burned a few of my processors. I see now t…

Penny wise, pound foolish

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

#387

Post by imglorp »

whatever1 wrote: post #351
garyfirestorm wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can tell you this works if your product doesn’t need frequent upgrades/updates and isn’t cohesive. In legacy auto world, you ask for one line of code change and the supplier slaps 100k bill. This is generally why things look old, outdated, carried over and buggy.

I totally agree with what you say. I am just not sure if the car market is willing to pay a premium to have this nicer fully integrated experience. Maybe there is space for a couple of premium makers.

My preference would be do less! Shift all the nav and entertainment to phone integration; stop trying to make half assed shit versions of those. How many billions were spent on that?

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

#389

Post by mrheosuper »

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…

Aviation standards allow boeing building their infamous 737-Max

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

#390

Post by imglorp »

whatever1 wrote: post #331
liveoneggs wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

too bad computers aren't spark plugs

To be fair, this seemed to be the right strategy since they were able to be profitable in a very crowded market. Yes, the new companies try to verticalize everything from components to software, but none of them seem profitable (marginally Tesla passes the bar, but not so sure if you took away all the subsidies and carbon offsets). So maybe the legacy guys were right all along?

To what extent was a clean sheet design a huge advantage over the legacy makers?

And to what extent were the subsidies an advantage? They phased out after 200,000 units and Tesla has sold millions.

Post reply on HN