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

681–690 of 848 posts

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

#681

Post by bluGill »

jmb99 wrote: post #495
perlgeek wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some features I've found useful: * giving me the current fuel and battery levels in the app * giving me an ETA on when charging is finished * locating my car * telling me if the car has been sitting there for a few minutes with ignition off but doors unlocked, giving me the option to lock them remotely * telling me about open windows, giving me the option to close them remotely None of them is really crucial, but for…

> giving me the current fuel and battery levels in the app When is this actually useful? In the ~12 years I’ve been driving, I’ve never needed to know the fuel level of a car when I’m not in it. I guess maybe if I’m planning a road trip and need to know if I’m going to have to stop for gas before I leave? But I’ll figure that out when I get in to leave and I’m probably not leaving with > locating my car Again, never…

In some areas you pay different rates to charge your EV at different times of the day. If that is the case for you then you will want to pay attention to and control charging. Normally you will want to do a get your car charging at the cheap rate, but sometimes you are willing to pay triple costs because you need to leave soon and there isn't enough remaining range. (your car matters - my PHEV only gets 30 miles from a full charge, so I'm always low when I get home, while many EVs get several hundred miles and so really only run low when on a road trip)

Eventually I expect cars, chargers, calendars, and the electric company will somehow integrate so that you can plug in and the system figures out when to charge your car. that is a complex project though with privacy concerns that are hard to address.

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

#682

Post by bluGill »

jmb99 wrote: post #498
tacker2000 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

to be honest, we are now at the stage where everything that CAN get an internet connection, WILL get one eventually. Be it your god damn dryer or fridge or lawnmower...

Just bought a fridge. It was very difficult to find one with normal doors, a freeze door (not drawer), no stupid water or ice-making gizmos, and no wifi. There was literally one single choice in the dimensions I needed, unless I spent 6x as much on a European import.

You don't have to connect your fridge to wifi. Sometimes you can ignore a feature. Adding wifi to a modern fridge is really cheap (a micro controller is better than a mechanical thermostat or so I'm told - often wifi is included in a micro controller even if you don't use it)

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

#683

Post by vv_ »

bluGill wrote: post #71

Why does your car need an internet connection? I don't use the built in maps since my phone has a map and a connection. what is the killer app of a connected car? businesses might want to watch their fleet but does anyone else care

> Why does your car need an internet connection?

There are several reasons to have internet connectivity in a car. For example, you might want to start your car remotely (e.g. winter time and you want to pre-heat it) or you'd like your onboard navigation maps to update automatically, or you'd like the latest traffic reports (if available in your region), yadda yadda.

While there are a lot of people that love Android Auto and Apple CarPlay, there still remains a sizeable group of people that want to have a navigation solution without using their phone, or to be able to enjoy their car without having a smartphone at all.

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

#684

Post by jorvi »

DanielHB wrote: post #564
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…

Just to add one more thing to your point, if embedded devs work really hard and make the code work faster/better all reward you get is an _even_ more underpowered chip for the next version. Hardware procurement is cut-throat, sometimes they have mandates to reduce component costs and the procurement people WILL reach them. Often procurement > product in the power dynamics so no matter how bad the product gets those p…

I hate the penny-wise pound-foolish attitude both in embedded and Android phone development.

For years now, Samsung has used a 'virtual proximity sensor' in everything but their premium stuff. Sensors like that are a few cents. Degrading the entire experience on the phone for a few cents cost savings. Say you do that for 25 components, saving 4 cents each. You've now saved $1 on a BoM of $100-$200, whilst making the whole experience of your product feel a lot worse.

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

#685

Post by rad_gruchalski »

timewizard wrote: post #178
rad_gruchalski wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I can actually remove my number plate. One tool, five minutes, car still drives. And of course it's a tracker. It reports my location to a third party. There is no other definition for it. That it purportedly only does this during an "emergency" is not something I can verify nor trust.

I’m certain you aren’t that important for anyone to care.

Yes: it reports your location to a third party. When you have an accident. So you can get help.

And of course it can be verified. At the end of the day it’s a sim card in a passive mode. Maybe you don’t know how to verify it. There are millions of them driving around. I’m sure someone more qualified than you would have already reported if they were tracking in real-time. The system is nearly a decade old.

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

#686

Post by vv_ »

Hobadee wrote: post #102

I've long wondered why no car manufacturer has gone for an open source model. Certain things should absolutely be locked down (for example, the airbags and other critical safety features) but there is absolutely no reason the HVAC and Infotainment system need to be closed source. Open it up and let hackers go crazy, then just "borrow" the best options out there for next year's model and everyone wins!

Because there are regulations for the infotainment system as well. For example, you can't watch videos or read SMS/messages. Not to mention that the infotainment system likely has access to the CAN bus, through which you _could_ impact other safety systems.

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

#687

Post by rad_gruchalski »

rustcleaner wrote: post #542
rad_gruchalski wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Well… do you? eCall sim is passive, activated only in an emergency or explicitly as a response to the action of the occupants of the vehicle: https://www.bosch-presse.de/pressportal/de/en/bosch-explains...

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

#688

Post by germinalphrase »

hedora wrote: post #229
bjelkeman-again wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that car isn’t intended for customers transporting kids. Two seats.

My biggest concern is lack of a stereo. Did they include speaker cutouts and wires, or are you looking at a $1000 labor bill, minimum? I’d much rather they included a $200 system, since ~ 100% of their customers will want to be able to have speakers in the doors and a mic in the dash (at the very least).

The presented solution from Slate is a mount for a Bluetooth speaker.

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

#689

Post by forgetfreeman »

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…

The future we want: The Ford Econoline rebooted with diesel-electric hybrid and full EV powertrain options, kei truck style flatbed with foldable sidewalls and tailgate, built on an actual frame so custom bed options are now possible, fully analog controls, no connectivity or center console display of any kind.

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

#690

Post by whstl »

namaria wrote: post #652
whstl wrote: post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh I got the sarcasm, I was just agreeing. And I also agree about worse is better. To me the most tragic part is that "worse" has become almost as costly as doing "The Right Thing", mostly due to the extreme flexibility and rush to the market from vendors and libraries. Our foundations weren't as sketchy when the concept was invented.

It has definitely gotten much worse. The only thing keeping me sane is hacking solo projects in languages with great tooling. I don't think I can even stomach interviews anymore, let alone the whole application process farce.

I remember doing an interview with systems design using microservices and mentioning at the end "Well I guess that's it but if this was my personal project I would just have a single server and no native cloud bs".

The guy basically answered "Oh, same. I just ask for people to do microservices because that's how the CTO wants".

Post reply on HN