431–440 of 848 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I visited Detroit last year and went to the GM headquarters. It’s open to the public with no appointment. You can wander around the Escherian maze with no guidance. A physical manifestation of every business decision GM has made in the last four decades.
Are you talking about the Renaissance Center? Of course it's open to the public, there's even a hotel inside.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok but that doesn’t really solve the problem in Europe.
I mean we can also change laws again in europe (in favour of that) - but we could also keep it as a separate module. So the LTE chip only gets used for an emergency call and nothing else. No remote control. Unlikely to happen, but possible (not 100% safe, but good enough).
My ideal car: - 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 soft…
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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 de…
The reason for this is a physical limitation: the cars weren’t shipped with wideband O2 sensors, so there’s no way to measure the AFR when wide-open (since it’s targeting a significantly richer mixture, and narrowband O2 sensors can only signal whether a the combustion is stoichiometric, or rich or lean relative to stoichiometric, with no further info). The implantation is probably not a bug but rather a compromise; in an ideal world, the “most recent” BLM will hopefully be from an “almost wide open” part of the map, and the general rich/lean characteristics will be close enough. And, the fuel table in the factory tune is quite safely rich when wide-open, so even with a leaking injector causing the idle BLMs to be way off, the fuel being pulled when wide open will still be completely safe.
Aside from that, 128k of bug-free code.
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…
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was encouraging to hear an exec from Ford recently say essentially this in an interview. The legacy manufacturers seem to realize that Tesla is eating their lunch because of their lack of vertical integration. It’s not going to be an easy problem to solve but will be interesting to see what effort achieves.
[flagged]
The author mentions "military grade firewall", as a must have in a vehicle. Genuine question; What's a military grade firewall?
I don’t know what constitutes a “military grade firewall” but presumably something that stops that. Or at least tries to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is only half the story, working for a major vendor, we sell both hardware and software, the whole way up to a full customisable well integrated platform. The manufacturers are deliberately choosing less capable systems, or taking thing piecemeal. Most of our customers simply don't believe good interfaces are worth the money... They tend to either want either a set of features checked off (only for existence, not…
> customers simply don't believe good interfaces are worth the money I guess I'm in the minority, then, but as a data point: I own a VW ID.4 and I'd pay significantly more to get software that isn't such a burning dumpster tire fire. And no, the excuses provided in this thread don't cut it. To be clear: it doesn't even annoy me anymore that the infotainment is slow and crappy, I've gotten used to it and I just never…
I'm not blaming you, I initially thought a VW ID.4 was a cool option. It just wasn't clear to the marketplace how bad the software was, and it's easy to assume "it's fine, I don't need fancy stuff" until you live with it and see how fundamentally bad the software is. How is the market to know? If it takes a couple years to figure it out, it makes sense for the hardware company managers to just make the hardware specs at the competitive price, and software is ... just whatever needed to get it out the door.
I worked for a few years at a sub-division of Samsung, and I've thought for a while about why "hardware" companies can be so bad at "software" ... in many cases, it's just that the leadership chain doesn't know what good software is and who is good at it. Managers don't really know what a good programmer is or does. Division heads don't know what managers are good at managing software teams and projects. And so on.
So at some point 2 years after the car is released, the CTO drives it and realizes that the software systems are fundamentally crap and can't be fixed, and it was not close or in-progress or anything, but he should have realized it 3+ years ago if he had good software sense, long before the car was released. And that's what happened with the VW ID.4
My ideal car: - 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 soft…