Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Transportation Intel

Intel Wants To Computerize Your Car 191

Posted by Soulskill
from the your-volkswagen-will-be-assimilated dept.
cartechboy writes: 'Google just unveiled its cute self-driving car prototype, and now Intel is the next tech company looking to get in on the rapid digital change coming in cars — a potentially lucrative area for expansion. Intel is releasing what it's calling an "in-vehicle solutions platform" — processors, an operating system and developer kits Intel is hoping automakers and others would use to build in-vehicle infotainment systems. From the developer perspective, there is a chance the Intel release makes building easier and cheaper. But is it good for automakers to be building these systems instead of Google and Apple? So far, no automaker has done so well on software, and some have seriously damaged their reputation (ex: MyFord Touch and Sync, Cadillac CUE).'
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel Wants To Computerize Your Car

Comments Filter:
  • by GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) on Tuesday June 03, 2014 @08:58PM (#47161219)
    I try my best to avoid buying any car that has a computerized display that is a wannabe tablet or phone. Car manufacturers think they're so cute trying to roll their own solutions when in fact all they're making is dead end technology that makes their cars more expensive.
  • by The Grim Reefer (1162755) on Tuesday June 03, 2014 @09:13PM (#47161301)

    I find it hard to drive a car without that type of system in it anymore.

    I'd say that qualifies as a problem.

  • Re:Please no (Score:4, Insightful)

    by eWarz (610883) on Tuesday June 03, 2014 @09:44PM (#47161439) Homepage
    I do. I just want a better user experience. I hate having to rely on my cell phone for GPS (due to expensive map updates), music (cause pandora is better than satellite radio), voice control, and more. Car manufacturers are trying too hard to make 'infotainment' into something profitable, instead they should focus on making a fantastic user experience (oh shit, your gas is running low, here is the cheapest, most reliable gas station in your range)
  • Re:Please no (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 03, 2014 @10:36PM (#47161663)

    Oh fuck that! Just make a standard that allows the smartphone to remain both the brains and connection point for the rest of the car via. Want a faster internet connection, more storage, or better navigation? Ok, get a new cell phone. Far easier to upgrade that than the rest of the hardware.

  • by Lumpy (12016) on Wednesday June 04, 2014 @07:50AM (#47163177) Homepage

    If it was all OPEN Protocols and well documented so that anyone can interface to this stuff, I'm all for it. But the automotive world had to be slapped with federal mandate to use ODB-II because the assholes at GM,Ford, and Chrysler were hell bent on their own secret sauce.

    If I as a shade tree mechanic can not diagnose and change settings on a system, then it's a bad design. right now I can on any car with my laptop and interface box. ODB-II forced the hands of car makers to not be dicks. The problem is they started to separate the interfaces so they could be dicks again. BMW for example has two separate systems one requires a special device to talk to the main systems and the ODB-II is only used for engine management.

    Luckily that has been reverse engineered and you can get an interface to their kBus.

    Heavy regulation by HONEST people is needed for the automotive industry. Because you can not trust those scumbags that run those companies to do the right thing.

You are an insult to my intelligence! I demand that you log off immediately.

Working...