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

541–550 of 848 posts

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

#541

Post by arkh »

tqi wrote: post #376
doodlebugging wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Rinse and repeat across hundreds of components and your team "pays for itself" "We found $X cost savings" is the easiest path the promotion. It's measurable, cleanly attributable, and immediate, while the downsides are not. Maybe perform is bad bc they skimped on memory, or maybe it's because the software team sucks. Maybe it means future updates are hamstrung, but who cares the bonus checks cleared years ago. Beside…

And with the help of software your get: this algorithm works well to recognize signs using 2 cameras. We can alter it a little to make it work with 1 camera (huge savings) and losing like 10% accuracy. With a cheaper camera we lose again some accuracy but even more savings.

Now you get a shitty feature for savings while the people who implemented it can go cry in a corner thinking about their good version.

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

#542

Post by rustcleaner »

rad_gruchalski wrote: post #137
kortilla wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people don’t like built in trackers

It's not a tracker. It activates during an accident, or via manual action. Hopefully those same people know what ANPR is and how does it affect them.

If it always has a cell tower connection, it is a tracker and... do you even operate?

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

#543

Post by cornholio »

seszett wrote: post #517
cornholio wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Give it five years and it will be guaranteed garbage. Spotify will refuse to run on an unsupported older Android without the latest DRM API, while Google Maps will crash your system randomly, requiring you to disconnect the car battery to jumpstart it again. Volvo will offer you an upgrade of their proprietary device at the low price of $1899. It's puzzling to see this push for general computing on devices that need…

> There is nothing good that can come out of installing Android in your TV, fridge, let alone a - for fuck's sake! - a car. Android Auto is not Android on the car, it's a protocol that allows an Android phone to use the car's system as a display, with limited UI integration.

Yes, Android Auto has some of the standardized interface features I was talking about, allowing the general computing needs to be fulfilled by a device brought by the user.

This is not what the GP is describing though, he's talking about the experience of a built in infotainment system running Android that can (for the time being) sync with his device.

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

#544

Post by rustcleaner »

That's it, it's time to start a FOSS car project which is operated by poor lawsuit-proof individuals, because we will need to "steal" 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.

We are only as sovereign as we are willing to fight, and if voting worked do you think they'd let you? lol

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

#545

Post by arkh »

TylerE wrote: post #537
acheron9383 wrote: post #199

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…

As much as everyone used to clown on Tesla for it, the vast majority of cars would be better off with an iPad glued to the dash.

Volkswagen Up!: infotainment is just a USB port and a phone clamp.

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

#546

Post by rustcleaner »

flax wrote: post #193
anon7000 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

My 2017 Mazda cx5 refuses to not play the radio. There is no "off" for the audio, you have to choose a source. I use my phone, via bluetooth. But sometimes, for unknown reasons, the car does not connect with the phone. It then falls back to the last source chosen before BT, which is radio. Okay, so I created a flash drive with an mp3 of 30 seconds of silence, played that, then went back to bluetooth. This failback st…

I think making manufacturers pay you back the whole car in a recall, or half the car and you keep it, for this kind of crappy design, would be a good thing (especially since I am sure the firmware is code signed lolol). Oh no more Matsuda or GM because they went bankrupt from fines and restitution? Cry me a river, sucks to suck cutting corners lol.

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

#547

Post by Mashimo »

averageRoyalty wrote: post #213
acheron9383 wrote: post #199

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.

> a smaller automative microcontroller company and bring it in-house?

I think in a lot of cases that would be Bosch, which is huge.

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

#548

Post by DoingIsLearning »

zelos wrote: post #523
mdavid626 wrote: post #518

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. Every car I've d…

Automated Emergency Braking has made driving significantly safer, according to the statistics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_emergency_braking_sy...

I would argue that the software quality of ADAS systems is very different from Infotainment.

Infotainment systems are a race to the bottom on BOM+SW price point. ADAS OEM's understand that there is a human cost, liability, and reputational cost for failure.

The real risk with these monoliths is when companies start to remove the distributed/redundant nature of safety critical systems, in order to reduce hardware costs.

There are multiple very good reasons for a distributed system in a car. However, irrespective of how clever your architecture is, there is only one good reason for centralized systems in a car and that is cost. It benefits no one but shareholders and C-suite.

OTA updates are sold as a key benefit but again it's marketing, they only reduce costs for the manufacturers and effectively remove a lot of the penalties of recalls. I would argue that difficult/costly recalls put pressure on manufacturers for 'first time right' design, OTA favours happy-go-lucky software.

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

#549

Post by rustcleaner »

izzydata wrote: post #158
ta1243 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My car randomly braked today because it thought a car on a side road was pulling out. Not just sound the alarm but actually apply the brakes. Fortunately I didn't have a tailgater behind me. I disable the "land assist" every time (which often tries to steer me into wildlife or other cars and was clearly not built for use on a single track country roads with hedges and random verges), but this was the first time in 3…

This happened to be on a highway when driving my friends car with all these assisted driving "features" while in cruise control. I was going up a small hill and for whatever reason there was a car stopped right at the top that I couldn't see. So the car slammed the breaks while I was in the middle of swerving out of the way. Which caused me to swerve more than I had intended. After I regained control it removed the b…

Yes, YES! Exactly! I'm hanging onto a couple older cars now because the new stuff is terrible!

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

#550

Post by pjc50 »

ploxiln wrote: post #439
jwr wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Well, consider, you could have paid more for a different car that has better software, like a Tesla, Lucid, Rivian ... but you didn't. 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…

This is, incidentally, why it's so important to have a free market in software separate from hardware, despite what Apple may think. You can't have a free market competing on every possible feature; some features are going to be dominant. So people will choose cars based on size, aesthetics, price and brand .. but not on the quality of the software, which is very hard for them to evaluate even on a test drive.
Post reply on HN