The Auto Industry May Mimic the 1980s PC Industry 287
An anonymous reader writes: An article at TechCrunch looks at some interesting parallels between the current automobile industry and the PC industry of the 1980s. IBM was dominant in 1985, employing four times as many people as its nearest competitor. But as soon as Windows was released, the platform became more important for most end users than the manufacturer. Over the next decade, IBM lost its throne. In 2015, we're on the cusp of a similar change: the computerized car. Automakers, though large and well-established, haven't put much effort into building the platform on which their cars run. Meanwhile, Google's Android Auto and Apple CarPlay are constantly improving. As soon as those hit a breakthrough point where it's more important for a customer to have the platform than the manufacturer's logo on the side, the industry is likely to resemble a replay of the PC industry in the 1980s.
Oh please (Score:5, Insightful)
Hardly anyone over the age of 25 cares about the eye candy touchscreen and gadgets in the car. They either car about space for kids and/or general crap, fuel economy, performance or looks or a combination of the above. Everything else can be done on a smartphone.
You're dying off (Score:5, Insightful)
I disagree with the premise of the article, as there are quite a few things about automobiles which are independent of the OS the in-vehicle entertainment and nav console - much more than a beige box pc.
However, it's worth noting that people over 25 are dying. Old people (over 25) as a market segment will change dramatically over then next 30 years as nearly everyone over 50 will no longer be in the market for an automobile. The "money" demographic will shift to those who are just now getting their driver's licenses.
I do find it depressing that, in an age where interactivity with personal devices can be done in an agnostic way, more and more interfaces are becoming OS specific.
Re:You're dying off (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, but the 20-year-old who wants a cool software suite in his car today will be a family man who just wants plenty of room tomorrow. Eighteen year olds have a nasty, but consistent, tendency to become 30-somethings.
When I was 18 I drove a Camaro with a kick-ass sound system and it was good.
When I was 35, I drove a mini-van with many screens to distract the kids and it was good
When I was 45, I drove a Camaro again, because I wasn't good.
When I was 55, I drove a Mercedes and it was very good.
Re: (Score:2)
Did they have minivans with screens in the 90's? I was still in Trans Am Mode back then.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:You're dying off (Score:4, Insightful)
When I was 18 I drove a Camaro with a kick-ass sound system and it was good.
When I was 35, I drove a mini-van with many screens to distract the kids and it was good
When I was 45, I drove a Camaro again, because I wasn't good.
When I was 55, I drove a Mercedes and it was very good.
So pretty soon you will be riding the Cadillac, with a Landau roof and a slanted integral sign as decoration, eh?
Re:You're dying off (Score:4, Funny)
Nah. Probably one of these:
https://ecaremedicalsupplies.c... [ecaremedicalsupplies.com]
Don Henley (Score:3)
This is hardly a new phenomenon. To quote Don Henley:
Out on the read today, I saw a Deadhead sticker on a Cadillac.
A little voice inside my head said 'don't look back, you can never look back.'
Re:You're dying off (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm in my 60's, no college debt, no house payment, making money hand over fist as an IT consultant. Who the fuck do you think the car companies drool over? Some young demographic with a bleak future or me?
Dumbass.
Re:You're dying off (Score:4, Insightful)
The argument isn't that old people don't buy cars now, it's that they won't buy cars in the future, because they'll be dead.
Re: (Score:3)
And every generation thinks they'll be different - they won't grow up to be asshole old people like their parents.
The OP isn't saying today's youth won't grow up to be assholes. She's saying they'll grow up to be assholes who care what OS is running on their car's dashboard.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You're an idiot. People over 50 are too old to buy cars!? Look at who has the money [wikipedia.org], in the U.S. at least. "Old people" who have far more money as a demographic than younger people.
Ever see who is driving the "young guy Sports cars?
That's right - old guys like you and me.
When I was growing up, a Mustang was a cheapy sports car that an industrious kid in high school could own Fast forward to today, and they are expensive enough that few kids own one.
Much of the under 30 market doesn't own a car period. And the ones who actually buy new cars tend to go toward minimalist freakboxes like the Kia's. I think paying for a smartphone has taken the place of car payments.
Re: (Score:3)
Why on earth would someone want to spend a ton of money on a car? Who cares what the thing that moves you from place to place looks like? (Apparantly, the answer is "shallow old people".)
Because we have the money? Which comes from saving the money, which then gives you more omney in the end.
Besides, way too many computer typs have been inculcated with the race to the bottom financial ethics, where the most important thing is the utter cheapness of anything. I recall a local flame ware that almost came to violence when two geeks were arguing over a five cent difference in price. Not everyone wants to live like that.
Even so, it's pretty hilarious that older people are being called shallo
Re: (Score:3)
Having bought a new car this year and a new car two years ago I think I'm right in their demographic. I'm a DINK in my 30's. I have been thinking about replacing my current audi with something newer. I looked a Mercedes and the reason I don't like them is mostly due to interior tech. I want a large display, centralized controls (like bmw, audi, and mazda). The more tech the better. My wife's new car has a HUD and that is really cool.
Sadly if you're not plush, luxury, and high tech, your not getting to provi
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Unless you paid cash, you didn't buy a car, the bank did
Entirely, 100%, wrong. The title is in my name (not the banks). A lien is NOT the same thing as ownership.
Five years ago I bought a new car or $22K. I had a choice, sell some assets (stock) and pay cash, or get a cheap 5-yr loan (0.9%). I took the loan. Today, my loan is paid off, i still have the car, I also have not had to put any money into it, I could sell the car if I wanted, and my original $22K is now worth about $37K. Even if the car lost half its value (it didn't), I still have about $4K left
Re: (Score:3)
You don't legally own the car until the title is transferred.
Transferred to whom? I guess it depends on where you live, but I get the title, and it's in my name. The bank never sees the Title. The title is issued to me directly from the state, usually in a couple weeks from when I get the car from the dealership.
Umm, I think you are confusing the vehicle Registration with the vehicle Title. If you buy a car and have car payments, whatever institution you're paying that money to holds the Title for the vehicle until the loan is paid off. That means the institution actually OWNS the vehicle as they hold the Title. The Title is then transferred to you once the vehicle is paid off and you then own the vehicle. I don't know a single country, let alone state, that issues a Title to the person that is making payments on a
Re:You're dying off (Score:4, Insightful)
When I was under 25 I made some very questionable stylistic and functional choices for my auto, now as I got older I grew out of it.
Re: (Score:3)
HP and muffler growl will go away as concerns. Even exterior looks will fade as a point of care as car sharing and on-demand ride services take over from individual ownership.
Re: (Score:3)
You must be the douche bag that made a deal with God and is going to live forever.
Re: (Score:3)
I think it isn't an issue of difference in the generations, Millennials vs Gen X, but just an issue of Age, where 25 year old are not dieing out they are constantly being replenished.
16-25 Is the time you are experiencing your independence. Going to college living on your own, hanging out with friends, It is new and exciting, you have little responsibilities (At least responsibilities with a short term effect), A car with a lot of gizmos that is sleek and fast, means you would be the one who is driving, the
Re:You're dying off (Score:5, Insightful)
While those Gizmos may be cool and fun, they are no longer your major concern. Now this isn't all that bad, you are more mature and comfortable with yourself, things don't bother you so much, but you also need such distractions as well.
I thought like that for a long time, then one day I realized that I had optimized "fun" almost entirely out of my life. I am a lot happier now that I make sure to budget for "fun" things. Going through life without frivolous, but fun things was negatively affecting my mental condition. The joy of saving a dollar can only take you so far.
Re: (Score:2)
As I've gotten older, I've gotten used to a lot of things that I previously associated with "being old." My hair now has streaks of grey. The songs I grew up listening to now play on the "Oldies" station. (Despite my yelling at the radio that Billy Joel is NOT oldies.) Sitting on the floor is still easy, but getting up involves a lot of aching bones/muscles. (Not to mention groaning sounds.) I'm turning 40 in a few months, so there's another "I Feel Old" moment approaching.
But now I've been "old" and
Threshold of old (Score:2)
Sitting on the floor is still easy, but getting up involves a lot of aching bones/muscles.
I think a good working definition of "the threshold of getting old" is the age when overexertion causes more pain in the joints than in the muscles.
As a young person, running an unusually long distance or lifting a weight an unusually large number of times causes sore muscles. As a not-young person, running an unusually long distance or lifting a weight an unusually large number of times causes sore joints -- and, unfortunately, it takes a lot longer to recover from sore joints.
Re: (Score:2)
People under 25 don't have the money to afford all this bullshit - they buy either cheaper new cars, or slightly used cars.
At any rate, saying that Ford is going to go the way of IBM because of the software running the fucking radio is supremely retarded.
Re:You're dying off (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, well you just wait until my YouTube movie career takes off, dad! Then me and Ben and Del are going to be famous, and rich! And we're not going to have to live in your stupid house anymore!
Re: (Score:2)
I blame the Boomers. They gave us Debt, Pollution, and Narcissists.
Re: (Score:2)
The real question is, is it because of the under-25s' age, or because of their generation? If the former, we won't see overall car buying habits change much in the future as the younger buyers move into the buying habits of older buyers. If the latter, we will see those habits change as the older buyers die off.
Re: (Score:3)
When I first clicked the link I was expecting an article about how Electric cars (Like Tesla), or Self driving cars (Like Google) were going to be disruptive to the industry.
The Infotainment system?
Good grief.
Maybe I'm wrong, and while I admit a lot of shoppers are shallow, I think basic practicality places much higher than the infotainment system. Aux-in / Bluetooth pairing are essential (or highly desirable), but after that most people really don't care about the entertainment system. People are more inte
Re: (Score:3)
People are more interested in: Price, Fuel Economy, Reliability, Safety, handling, availability of repair network.
Forgot to mention: Passenger comfort, Passenger capacity, cargo capacity, and tow rating.
Re: (Score:2)
But I want a car that I'm going to keep for 15 years to be obsolete in two! :)
Seriously, why don't we just have an activation code for an e.g. "Toyota App" for Android and iOS and a wifi display protocol as standard features by now? I can understand in 2010 why this wasn't the case, but at this point - people who eschew smartphones in 2015 should certainly be able to buy a $60 Android stick to plug in instead.
Oh, right - here's why the headline is complete nonsense - the PC Revolution was the perfect examp
Re:Oh please (Score:5, Informative)
Um, the PC industry has been regulated since at least the 1950's, and the Internet was created via a socialist military experiment.
Did you forget the sarcasm tags?
Re: (Score:3)
Um, the PC industry has been regulated since at least the 1950's, and the Internet was created via a socialist military experiment.
Did you forget the sarcasm tags?
I think he needs a dafuq? tag. I'm still trying to parse the disconnects \
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hardly anyone over the age of 25 cares about the eye candy touchscreen and gadgets in the car.
Speaking as someone who is over 40 I can assure you that that is not true. I think a touch screen can be a great feature in a car (see Tesla Model S) BUT it has to be well designed - not the shitty interfaces we usually see. I love cars like the Tesla Model S or Nissan GTR with a high geek quotient. Folks over 25 like gadgets just fine but we also expect that the gadget actually be intuitive and improve the driving experience. I do NOT want to spend needless time navigating stupidly designed menus or us
So, we're going to get Toyota clones? (Score:5, Insightful)
IBM wasn't undone by the platform, they were undone by the CLONES running the platform. And at the end of the day, a car is still 99% hardware. It takes a lot to build one, and I can't envision a world where cars can be easily home built from standard parts.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
That's almost true but electric cars are much more simple than our current internal combustion engine powered vehicles.
Compare a Tesla with a Chevy, there must be an order of magnitude fewer parts in the Tesla.
This along with the increasing importance of the car software platform (monitoring, communication, self driving, etc) could present a perfect storm for traditional auto companies that are caught napping.
Re: (Score:3)
the value of the tesla is in the software
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
the value of the tesla is in the software
No, the value of a Tesla is that it's a gorgeous car with exceptional styling, beautiful materials, great performance, and decent range. They control some of this with software that I'll never directly interact with, and the nav/AV system is great, but putting a Tesla computer in a Lancer is not going to make people buy Lancers.
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt that very much: http://www.humansinspace.org/w... [humansinspace.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Smaller components does not necessarily mean simpler.
Re:So, we're going to get Toyota clones? (Score:4, Informative)
>> IBM wasn't undone by the platform, they were undone by the CLONES running the platform.
IBM wasn't "undone" - period. Instead, the termination of its consumer-facing foray allowed it to tighten its grip on the short and curlies of the far more profitable corporate world, and even gave it a "PC 2.0" phase where it sold premium laptops (ThinkPads) to corporate buyers before selling that business too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So, we're going to get Toyota clones? (Score:4, Funny)
But... but... 3D printers!
Re: (Score:2)
And crowdsourcing!
Re: (Score:2)
And crowdsourcing!
Run by women in STEM careers, running pure FreeBSD.
Re: (Score:2)
Also it wasn't Windows, that sparked the Clone market, it was Good old DOS.
By the time Windows 3.0 (The first popular version) came out MS DOS was king, you went to a software store, you will have a shelf for Apple, a half shelf for Amiga and Commodore, then the rest of the store was for MS DOS IBM Compatibles.
But we Bought IBM Compatible computers, because they were cheaper, and they were no issues with quality. If you buy a Honda compatible car. Will it have the reliability and quality that we connect t
Re: (Score:2)
No, it was the availability of a clean room reverse-engineered BIOS (and that there were no limiting hardware patents on the IBM PC). First in-house by PC companies such as Columbia Data Products and Compaq, but later made available to all comers by companies like Award.
Clones did not depend on MS-DOS, since PC-DOS was readily available for use, along with CPM/86 and others. MS-DOS became popular because it was much cheaper for clone
Re: (Score:2)
It takes a lot to build one, and I can't envision a world where cars can be easily home built from standard parts.
I take it you have never heard of kit cars [kitcarusa.com] and crate [chevrolet.com] motors [fordperfor...gparts.com]
Re: (Score:3)
I take it you don't understand the meaning of the words 'easily' and 'standard'. Kit cars basically start with a 'donor' car. Not exactly easy or standard. And why provide liks to both Chevy and Ford crate motors? They are just standard motors, right?
Modularity (Score:2, Informative)
Nah, cars have used modular electronics for ages. Car makers don't make much of anything actually, that is why they are called Assembly Plants. So they can install anything and change it on a whim from model to model and the owners can also change things if they have the money and the inclination.
More than a stretch (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
so to suggest that the auto industry will follow some parallel of the PC industry is just silly.
Yep. Further: there are very few industries as overly-burdened with Federal requirements (see: http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rule... [nhtsa.gov] for just 1 example) as the auto industry is. The connection TFA makes between the two industries is tenuous at best. More accurately: it's non-existent.
Re: (Score:3)
True. But then again, my car will kill me if it malfunctions, whereas my phone or computer will merely inconvenience me in general.
I'm a fan of tight regulations on devices that are one of the leading causes of death and injury in this country, if not the leading cause.
Warning (Score:4, Insightful)
Vendor-driven marketing platitudes bearing little resemblance to reality using shortened memes for theme driven effect.
Year of Linux... (Score:5, Funny)
So, are we talking about the year of Linux on the Blacktop?
Re: (Score:2)
GM's been running linux on their infotainment for a few years now.
Very superficial (Score:4, Informative)
Piracy to become a problem (Score:2)
Along these lines, I see piracy to become a problem for these platforms. When every teenager in the neighborhood starts building their own computerized cars, they are just going to steal the platform (Android Auto and Apple CarPlay).
Re: (Score:2)
Piracy is less of a problem when the platform is "free" to start with. Most people will accept slightly annoying/intrusive advertising to get their OS for free. A few will jailbreak and clean it, but most won't.
If those ads are for relevant things (like "you have less than a quarter tank of fuel, why not try Chevron with Techron?", "You are nearing 50,000 miles, here's a coupon for a free tire inspection", etc.) they may not even be perceived as intrusive so much as helpful.
Hardly! (Score:2, Informative)
Cars will still cost a fortune and need to be reliable enough to get around for years.
Just because it runs some fancy app interface that will be obsolete almost as soon as it's installed isn't really the reason to buy a specific brand or model of car.
Head units are replaceable, even if the manufacturers keep trying to make it harder to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Just like PC's I want reliability and eficiency (Score:3)
in my cars.
There are two cars I want right now (well, one is being released soon).
1. The Elio for getting to work and back. [eliomotors.com] Perfect for getting me and my backpack the 30ish miles there and back, and even good for going to lunch with a coworker. Excellent fuel mileage, and unlike a Smart Car (which doesn't really get that great of fuel mileage considering) I wouldn't be concerned about having to defend my manhood every time I stepped out of it or worry about random strangers trying to give me a wedgie for driving it.
2. The Subaru Outback [subaru.com] as my vacation and haul the family around ride. The ability to easily carry many bicycles, kayaks, luggage, and people offroad, at good high cruising speeds Not to mention, great gas mileage for a rugged/versatile vehicle.
I don't care about data platforms, just the ability to interface with what's there. The Elio would let me put whatever I wanted in there and tie it to the stereo, I'm guessing a Nexus 9 would be perfect. The Subaru support Bluetooth audio so I'll put my Nexus 9 in there too!
Re: (Score:2)
in my cars.
There are two cars I want right now (well, one is being released soon).
1. The Elio for getting to work and back. [eliomotors.com] Perfect for getting me and my backpack the 30ish miles there and back, and even good for going to lunch with a coworker. Excellent fuel mileage, and unlike a Smart Car (which doesn't really get that great of fuel mileage considering) I wouldn't be concerned about having to defend my manhood every time I stepped out of it or worry about random strangers trying to give me a wedgie for driving it.
I am actually hoping to be able to get something like the Elio in about 7 years or so when my current commuter car (a 2014 Focus) gets at or near end of life. I would love having an extremely cheap, efficient car like an Elio for my commute (40 miles each way), which would hopefully get my wife to let me have a jeep or motorcycle for the lifestyle/local driving
Re: (Score:2)
I really dig the Elio, both as a consumer and a "car guy."
But a sub-10,000 dollar automobile that gets fantastic mileage, in America? I'm afraid that thing challenges too many well established estates to not meet a lot of opposition.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been worried about it getting the Tucker treatment myself.
Re: (Score:3)
I've had a real motorcycle. At 74 MPG it didn't get the efficiency this thing does, I also wound up wet and cold at work in February a lot. I might just get another motorcycle, but my work commute will be with this thing.
Re: (Score:3)
Ever heard of enclosed bicycles and tricycles? The air drag is much cut and you get silly speed increase or effort reduction from it.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, the Elio is more Sci-Fi cool [imcdb.org] and less of the Steve Urkle [wallpapers111.com] flair associated with the Smart Car.
Re: (Score:2)
That Trihawk was pretty cool. It's downfall was catering to the wrong market, I can tell from the video. I don't know how $15,000 scales to 1984, I would have to look it up, but the fact they were calling a specialty car demanding a premium instead of a budget mobile like the Elio probably is why nobody knows what it is today.
Cherry 2000, haven't seen that movie since what? 1991? I liked it back then, not sure if I would now or not.
Primary purpose is to drive (Score:2)
For cars, the awfulness of digital platform is for secondary purposes - these systems do not improve how the car drives, yet implications for your safety when something goes wrong are much higher.
Not as Ripe for Disruption (Score:3)
The Author Never Owned a Car (Score:4, Insightful)
The thing that's important about a car isn't the in car entertainment system. It's the wheels and the engine and the bits in between that let me get to where I need to go. I need that to last a decade or more. I need it to be a good match for the way I drive. The in car computer system? Don't care. My current ride doesn't even have much of a driver facing interface, other than some indicator lights. My in car entertainment system consists of a radio and whoever is in the passenger seat. Navigation comes from my smart phone. I upgrade the smart phone every couple of years, which expands capacity.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing that's important about a car isn't the in car entertainment system. It's the wheels and the engine and the bits in between that let me get to where I need to go. I need that to last a decade or more.
Then you don't matter. Not to the automakers. You'll buy a car (probably not even new from the dealer) about 4 times in your lifetime, if you chose wisely and don't get in wrecks.The automakers will make almost no money off of you. I'm the same way. Mostly I only buy late-model used cars, and try to drive them until everything starts to fall apart at once like the Bluesmobile.
The people who matter are people like my dad, who has bought or leased a new car every 2 years or less as far back as I can remember
Hmm (Score:2)
The tech in cars seems behind the curve, so the PC analogy may be apt in several ways.
A couple pulled over asking me directions, they had GPS in their car (mounted in dash not user replaceable) but it showed them driving on a lawn 30 meters away.
My phone was spot on, if anything I could suggest that might help it would be this.
DO NOT embed the tech in the car so that it is difficult for the user to replace, software and hardware will become obsolete quickly, the car its self not so much.
Make mounting and in
Dependency loop error (Score:2)
So we are using computer analogies to describe cars, but we use car analogies to describe computers. I would have thought of a good joke hear, but my mind is too busy saying WTF .... Fizzle
mistaken parallels (Score:4, Interesting)
The article dismisses the significant difference between the auto industry and the computer industry: if your computer is a piece of crap, it's just some lost $. (ie the only thing lost is some money and perhaps time). If your car is badly made, it can quite easily kill you and your family in a host of interesting ways.
This means that buyer conservatism is high, and willingness to 'experiment' is extremely low.
You'll notice in similar industries where computer equipment is of comparable mission-critical role, they are likewise extremely slow to adopt "the next big thing" and nothing like the 'retail' electronics marketplace.
So no, the automotive industry won't behave anything like the retail electronics market. Not at all.
No (Score:2)
Worst car analogy ever. (Score:2)
OK, here's the author's analogy. A PC was hardware that ran software. By choosing a third party operating system, the IBM PC's designers turned it into an interchangeable commodity.
These days a car is a hardware that runs software too. By choosing third party dashboard OSs, the manufacturers are turning them into interchangeable commodities.
Really? If the same dashboard OS ran in a Mercedes C class and a Ford Fiesta, they'd become interchangeable?
Want a 100 mpg instead (Score:2)
100 mpg, low cost, low weight, and some low cost insurance scheme if I don't drive it much. don't really need anything else. A couple USB sockets maybe, just for power.
Equipment must include speedometer, passenger blind, a way to open windows, seats and belts. Well, if it does have windows.
It must be able to reach at least 70 km/h and have at least a few kilowatts of maximum power.
That's a poor analogy. (Score:4, Insightful)
PC's in the late 80s were standardized - Functionally there was very little difference between an actual IBM PC running DOS or a far cheaper PC clone running DOS. That changed with IBM attempting the PS/2 architecture but by then everybody was settled on the AT (and later the ATX) motherboard architecture. AMD vs Intel exchange some performance vs price differences but ultimately that's like choosing a V6 over a V8 over an I4 and most people aren't going to care.
Each car manufacturer has its own architecture, designs and manufacturing styles - Just slapping a google-droidPod-phone-radio into the car isn't going to make a major difference when I'm looking for dependability or gas mileage (or battery mileage) or style/appearance.
A closer analogy would've been the 6502 systems (the original Apple vs IBM vs Commodore 64 vs Atari)
Inevitable (Score:2)
tech industry looks like auto industry of 1910s (Score:5, Interesting)
One problem with that analysis (Score:2)
A computer doesn't do anything but run the software written for it, so it was natural for the people who controlled the software to become dominant. A car still has to be, y'know, a *car*. It has to perform functions that software is there to enhance, but its purpose is not to run that software.
Driverless is the real threat (Score:3)
Once that happens, then the industry will entirely change. There will become three basic kinds of vehicles:
1. Recreational vehicles that do not have a computer. Further segregated into speed, off-road, and specialty classes.
2. Cheap. Probably focused on low gas useage, low speed, simple transportation designed to get you to work and the store at a reasonable rate, all while you read, listen to music, or watch videos. Power, speed, appearance will pretty much be ignored here. You want to show off, pick a girl, you get yourself a recreational vehicle.
3. Cargo. People will still need to haul stuff. Minivans/SUV types for parents, trucks for workmen, the main difference will be whether the cargo area is designed for people or for goods, and if for people will it have a minibar stocked with high end liquor, or a Videobar stocked with cartoons.
The idea that the dashboard will become the all important feature only applies to Mommy-mobiles. It will be a relatively small portion of the market.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see how driver-less cars will change (other than the big one of actually *having* self-driving options). If someone would choose a corolla versus a taurus versus whatever today, I don't see them as suddenly not caring about whatever differentiate those cars today. Basically to the extent your categories would apply in the future, they already apply.
I agree that the concept that the infotainment solution would not really change the fundamentals of the workings of the market, but neither does driver
Re: (Score:2)
Will the driverless car be secure from cracking?
Loss of cash cows for the auto industry... (Score:3)
Pretty soon nobody will buy a car if they can't swap in their own entertainment system, their own map/nav system. That profit center is gone, these auto makers have to wake up and realize it.
The auto makers are so averse to competition and openness. How old are wi-fi enabled standalone network file servers? Why didn't they build one in to the cars, as you drive into the garage it logs into the router, synchs playlists, music, pod casts, weather reports, map information and is ready to go out with the latest info saved in a had disk? They could have done it 10 years ago.
They hate electronics and hate electrical engineers. The petrol burning engineers seem to have a snooty attitude towards the electrical engineers. They could have removed the first gear ages ago. Just spruce up the starter motor to make it strong enough to move the car to 2 mph using amped up power from the alternator. Couple the wheels to the IC engine mechanically on the second gear. That would eliminate the low end torque requirement and they engine could be tuned differently for fuel economy, peak power at a different rpm etc etc. Much of the fuel economy of the Prius comes from having an IC engine that does not have to move the car from 0 mph.
Of course, I am talking with 20/20 hindsight. But I am not a professional auto engineer. It is their job to have thought about it ages ago. Railways were big in 1950s and 60s. General Electric made a killing replacing all the steam locomotives with diesel-electric locomotives in just one decade. So fast some of the gleaming steam locomotives made just one run, from Baldwin Loco Works, Philadelphia to the scrap yard. Seeing how the torque problem in the locomotives is solved using an electric motor they did not make the connection and try to replicate it in their automobiles. They only were interested in pissing contests involving the sizes of the engines. 4 liter engine, 5 liter, 6 liter. 8 cylinder, 12 cylinder... More and more complex transmissions, clutches, slip rings, torque converters... all pure mechanical systems. Could have been replaced by one clean electric motor. The diesel-engine-generator and electric motors in the locomotive are just torque converters. But no, they would not even think about it.
Not impressed (Score:3)
I have read the article and I don't see the connection. A 1980's IBM PC without an operating system is just a noisy and expensive room heater. A 2000's Toyota without "general purpose platform software" will still get you any place you want safely and efficiently. What kind of added value is such an automotive software platform supposed to offer?
Well, the author provides a list:
- Keeping drivers consistently and happily surprised with new services.
- Taking advantage of usage patterns to help customers become better drivers.
- Offering reasonable, consumption-based insurance and maintenance packages.
- Treating their dealerships like genius bars, not check-out counters.
- Making cars that can talk intelligently with your home and your office.
None of those sound too compelling for me and they certainly can't beat the operating system's pitch of "being able to use the friggin machine at all".
How about the 70's (Score:2)
For 2015 we're seeing a generation of drivers who simply don't care enough about having their own car. Low wages, transportation options, green choices, etc., are all weighing on an old school industry that hasn't evolved past SUVs. Going into the red while still carrying the burden of school debt is not likely to motivate them much, e
Bluetooth (Score:2)
Patently impossible (Score:2)
With computerised, self-driving cars there will never be a standard that everyone across the industry adopts unless one manufacturer becomes dominant in the field (just be dint of numbers that would probably be a chinese company) or the auto makers take a similar stance and forgo pat
Missing Option (Score:2)
Automakers, though large and well-established, haven't put much effort into building the platform on which their cars run.
There's a reason for that. They're quite bad at it. That, and BlackBerry/QNX [blackberry.com] are quite good at it. Currently if you want Apple Car or Android Auto in your vehicle that vehicle will be running BlackBerry QNX Car as both platforms are simply plug-ins [zdnet.com] for QNX Car. BlackBerry needs to renegotiate its contracts such that they get credit just like Microsoft did with Sync so people know how pervasive BlackBerry actually is. Currently over 50% of the cars made worldwide run QNX Car. The problem is car makers choose
Is Tesla taking notes? (Score:3)
Thay are already shaking up the industry, a focus on software might allow them to put the final nail in the coffin.
ignore the hype (Score:3)
no, we're not
i know alot of very wealthy people have invested alot of money and research into the idea that it is, but it's always been an over-reach to think they would be in general daily use...especially the google car with no steering wheel
self-driving vehicles are more advanced than ever, because *all automation is getting better*
i can definitely envision self-driving semi-trucks in dedicated lanes, or google car-type things at amusement parks and even in a central downtown area like Manhattan
i know it's hard to hear this but a truly autonomous car that interacts with daily traffic with no restrictions is much, much more complex than anyone other than the actual people who do the coding work will admit
talk to someone who actually codes the AI for this stuff...there's a bright future ahead, but the hype machine is in full effect
Re:In a decade... (Score:4, Funny)
And I, for one, welcome our new Google overlords. I'd like to remind them that, as a programmer, I would be very useful in managing the slaves in their data mines.
Re:Please let the big car companies die. (Score:4, Interesting)
Big companies can innovate too - look at IBM Research. Just because the results arn't on sale on Amazon or in your local high street doesn't mean they don't exist. In fact for some innovations ONLY a big company has the money to do the blue sky research. Big Pharma - whatever you make think of them - being the prime example.
Heard of Bang Bus? (Score:2)