Skip to content(if available)orjump to list(if available)

Car companies are in a billion-dollar software war

acheron9383

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 doesn't have the API to your MCU, or it runs some dogshit speed communication system that means you have 500ms lag. The feature is just unworkable, and if the PMs push it anyways you get what happens for the legacy car makers, terrible underpowered infotainment systems with no central design philosophy, stuck in an awkward, bad, middle between a full software stack and all buttons for everything. Their model of integrating 3rd party vendor computers just doesn't really work for this kind of thing; Tesla, Rivian, and the Chinese EV makers all manufacture all their own electronics, which lets them achieve the outcome. But you can not just roll all your own electronics in a year.

DanielHB

I worked in similar systems and you are 100% right. 80% of the time was spent on communication protocols between the different boards and microcontrollers. QAing and solving issues from short-sighted dozens of unique custom protocols that worked in non-standard ways (every time a component needs to talk to another component a new protocol was invented).

When you have dozens of communication lines required between different parts of the system it becomes just as complicated as your average micro-service cloud. Really, a car is a distributed system with dozens of "services". An analogy is that each microcontroller-microcontroller communication use their own custom binary-encoding API that runs on multiple different, incompatible versions of HTTP.

We actually spent considerable amount of time just developing our own custom protocol for communication that could run on all sorts of different physical interfaces (CAN, ethernet, modbus, etc) as well as a series of proxies between devices (so component A can talk to component C through a proxy in component B). And if we had to use a custom protocol from an external manufacturer we had to wrap it into our own custom protocol.

That protocol was actually used for our cloud data reporting as well, so eventually all our data communication would use a single unified protocol from micro-controller to IoT Linux to cloud data-ingestion pipeline to database.

chii

> (every time a component needs to talk to another component a new protocol was invented).

i'm sure that every time this happens, it individually makes sense to do it at the time.

This is a microcosm of how large systems get developed in small pieces, by different people, over a long(-ish) period of time. It's the same in the software world too i think, but presumably has a lot more consolidation than cars (as software for cars might be less common, and thus employees moving between companies is unlikely to make any sort of cross-pollination like there would be for FAANG-like companies).

pydry

This makes it sound like the problem is that they either lack a person with architectural responsibility for the cars' electronics as a whole or that person lacks the skills necessary to do their job.

eek2121

Agreed!

They also want to treat it as a new revenue stream rather than as a value add, which ultimately hurts them.

We end users don’t want to pay a subscription for our car. Especially for things we already get for free on our phone.

latchkey

I'm getting IG videos in my feed for a company that sells after market fixes because older Teslas have such poorly designed electronics, that they fail in common ways. The memory goes bad because they write useless logs to a chip, and it eventually fails. End users are beta testing...

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DINADISyP0f/

loeg

> The memory goes bad because they write useless logs to a chip, and it eventually fails.

I worked for a $ ~billions revenue software storage vendor who had the exact same issue (excessive logging wearing out under-spec'd flash drives).

namaria

The bane of every cargo cult cloud op. I worked with a company that had maybe 20 devs total, > 30 "microservices" in kubernetes and one of the most complex bits of the deployment was handling Greylog and Elasticsearch. Still they couldn't manage high availability, despite logging all the things. Go figure.

RedShift1

HPE also had this issue with their ILO 4. New firmware fixed that issue but if your flash chip was already worn out you're out of luck and the only solution is to replace the entire motherboard.

DanielHB

We had the exact same issue as well haha

These kind of problems only happen years after the software roll out so no one cares when you are under time pressure.

immibis

Issue, or revenue driver?

tw04

That’s always been the case with Tesla. I still have no idea how the yoke with no progressive steering and a tiny button for a horn ever passed any sanity check. Not to mention the NHTSA.

latchkey

Oh, I wish they would install tiny horn buttons on all the vehicles in Vietnam! In that country, the horn is a method of communication, much to the ire of literally everyone trying to exist.

fossuser

I have the yoke and love it - almost didn’t get it because of how much complaining about it exists online, but like most things online it’s not representative.

The horn has also been moved to the center on newer models.

A certain type of HN commenter has been shitting on Tesla for nearly a decade now despite their continued success and dominance. There’s no one close in most categories, but especially on software. This is reflected in the market.

iknowstuff

You’re using a software fault which wore out the flash as evidence of poorly designed electronics?

amatecha

How is writing excessive logs to a destined-to-fail flash chip in a car's electronics system not a poor design choice? Pretend the person wrote "poorly-designed electronics implementations/sytems" or similar, because that's obviously the intended meaning.

mavamaarten

If the flash was better, the product wouldn't fail so quickly. It's really a combination of poorly designed electronics, and a software bug wasn't there, the fault wouldn't have popped up so early.

HelloNurse

it isn't a software fault, it's a whole defective system that was designed poorly end-to-end: the software does something inappropriate, which the hardware cannot bear, probably because of a high level mandate to write too many logs and to be too cheap.

DanielHB

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 people still do it because the software gets the blame for bad product, not procurement who forced a bad chip to be used.

The infotainment is usually the #1 chip to be cut down because it is often the single most expensive electronics part in the system that can be "easily" swapped for a different part.

Gareth321

Your account sounds accurate, but how fitting then that their cost cutting focus is losing them customers and potentially their entire company. VW is losing the EV war. Most manufacturers have already lost. Tesla and BYD are going to eat everyone's lunch. They either need to revolutionise their approach, or they're toast. I suspect they'll attempt to milk their existing supply chains into bankruptcy.

cebert

If the OEM stayed with the same chip for several years, wouldn’t the price go down over time?

averageRoyalty

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.

garyfirestorm

I work in one of the big three - the culture here is more waterfall and less agile. They decided at some point ‘we don’t need to be experts in building systems, we should only be good at spec’cing them and putting them together’ This leads to a mindset of relying on suppliers for changing even one line of code and at their mercy. Talent leaves because they didn’t get to do any of the fun stuff. And you’re left with bunch of MBAs trying to wing it in what is available which is - no talent, bunch of admineers, and a long list of supplier bills. 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 can go on and on about this, but one of us even tried to be Tesla trying to build our own zonal architecture - and are currently struggling due to costs, tarrifs and turnover. Also you can’t overnight change this mindset - building vs assembling. But there has to be some way and I’m too about to walk out the door due to ~10yrs of frustrations.

whiteboardr

Get out if you can!

Spent 7 years at the three pointed star within design and UX - one day, when i’m over all i had to witness and experience i’ll write a book about the downfall of the german automotive industry.

It’s all politics and due to constant battles and changing ownership throughout departments they won’t ever have a solid foundation. And i dare to assume that this goes for most of the automotive industry.

It’s sad to see that a once driving force of innovation is stumbling over its own arrogance and ignorance.

A major factor contributing to this are cost saving measures from the early 2000s where most of them stopped in-house research and development giving most of the work to contractors - a very expensive cost saving measure long term.

We’re down to them using “technology” as a seasoning for consumption like a fancy restaurant - very little long term thinking.

andrewflnr

> They decided at some point ‘we don’t need to be experts in building systems...

So they've just chosen death. Fantastic, great to hear.

doodlebugging

> 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 that this would only be one small change that saved an inconsequential amount of money. But each group is incentivized to produce minor changes like this that save small amounts and that those amounts do add to substantial savings and help complete the process of enshittification of the ownership and driving experience for those who choose to buy one of these vehicles.

mihaaly

Isn't the trouble that agile is not compatible with things that has to be thoroughly made, 'finalized before release', like in every mission critical production? Casuality and the dyamic free spirit primised has much much less space here.

This is not sexy. This is important.

Needs different mindsets than the software folks grew up along in the past decades. Yes! Yes! There are much much more sexy topics to focus on for an agile software maker, that yields better looking results seemingly instantly. Compared to the boring finalization and coordination - oh, you devil bastard, coordination - heavy activities.

Don't take me seriously, speculating heavily.

jandrewrogers

There have been attempts at it. Unfortunately, they consistently botch the execution so badly that most of the executives in the business have PTSD from the experience. And these were very expensive failures that become lore inside the companies. When they do acquisitions of small companies entering this market those end up getting smothered by the culture of the automotive companies.

Everyone has spent a mountain of money on this problem but spent it all assiduously avoiding addressing the root causes.

whatever1

The answer is that current car platforms were designed with flexibility as first goal.

Car companies realized early on they could outsource component development and production to 3rd parties and they could make them bid each other to further lower the prices.

So their platforms were optimized to be able to swap component vendors very easily (to achieve lowest costs).

Of course the vendors are not 100% interchangeable and building a platform to accommodate everyone has to make sacrifices.Aka target the least common denominator across all vendors.

liveoneggs

too bad computers aren't spark plugs

kulahan

Then maybe they should let me buy some better damn chips so the experience isn’t so laggy.

I know, I know, shooting the messenger…

tashoecraft

How many issues due large companies run into thinking they can just throw money at it? Just look at google and stadia, or amazon and their failed game studio. They have immense money and knowledge and ended up with nothing.

Each car has dozens to 100+ ecus, written in different languages, by different teams, different requirements, and different companies. Some are proprietary. Ford can’t just tell Bosch, hey your abs module needs to now integrate with our api, multiplied by 100+ companies. The legacy car makers need to revisit everything, and move most of it in-house.

Peanuts99

At the same time, we've had car companies putting out cars for 20 years with 10s of different modules built by different companies and things have been working just fine. Suddenly it's a problem because apparently everyone needs a giant screen on the dashboard?

speeder

I worked at BMW. I knew there was a project in there, using a certain ECU that was being quite problematic (as in, project being slightly late because ECU was a bit buggy and sometimes crashed when it was supposed to have almost 100% of uptime for legal reasons).

You ask: Why BMW doesn't just buy the ECU manufacturer?

Well... the company that was selling the ECU to BMW, is BIGGER than BMW. Even if BMW sold 100% of its assets and stock, it wouldn't have enough money to buy the ECU manufacturer.

lmm

They don't have a culture that values it, at any level. Historically hardware was important and software was a nice-to-have addon cost center. That's the mentality that the people at the top are still in, and it trickles down.

raxxorraxor

They did the opposite for decades in the hope to save some bucks, they outsourced everything so only business people remained.

Worse this really grew into a culture of entitlement where only a ready to use product is acceptable. There is no R&D anymore, there are people looking to buy solutions that don't exist for car makers.

Gigachad

The talent might not exist. Software development has been seen as the preferable career over electrical engineering for a long time now.

kev009

This is weird because the microprocessor industry owes a lot of early success to automotive companies. Motorola 6800, Intel 8061 (https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/history/virtual-vaul...) etc. Quoting wikipedia: "the name "Motorola" by linking "motor" (from motor car) with "ola" (from Victrola), which was also a popular ending for many companies at the time, e.g. Moviola, Crayola"

TI has some powerful automotive SoCs like the AM69A/TDA4AH (https://www.ti.com/ds_dgm/images/fbd_sprsp79b.svg) that target the industry.. 8 Cortex-A72s, a full GPU, multiple Cortex R5Fs that can lockstep, and a bunch of powerful C7000 DSPs. The SDK is probably not awesome as embedded BSPs tend to be but the SoC should be workable. That should be plenty of compute.

So what is really going on, and what happened?

whatever1

This also works the opposite way. If the software roadmap does not inform the hardware requirements, then minimization of the bill of materials will lead to the selection of crappy hardware chips.

mmmBacon

If you’re making very low end HW maybe this is true. Because HW is something that you put into the real world there are other constraints such as power, cooling, space, security of supply, ability to ramp, cost, reliability, etc. The calculus for HW selection is much more involved than simply SW. Good SW/FW can be performant on much less capable HW but it does mean that SW engineers need to understand more about the HW. This is a very rare skill in 2025. Most SW engineers I’ve encountered cannot explain stack vs heap. Furthermore even fewer understand how to use malloc correctly.

DanielHB

> Good SW/FW can be performant on much less capable HW but it does mean that SW engineers need to understand more about the HW.

It also takes much more time and requires a different set of talents. Often just using a bigger chip is better than investing the R&D.

The best analogy I can make is trying to make your own custom rendering engine and then code the UI in it or just use a browser and writing JS. Even if you do make it, your own custom rendering engine will probably cut a lot of features like fancy animations.

Johanx64

Blaming hardware people rubs me the wrong way.

People just use android and javascript front-end.

It's not crappy hardware by miles, crappy hardware as a category doesn't even exist these days.

It's hardware that can run everything necessary hundreds of times over, but shitty bloatland sloppy javascript it + android bloat it can not.

Waterluvian

I feel like Subaru Eyesight violates this, which is why I’m so surprised with it. It’s a stereo camera system that just works so darn well. I’ve got to imagine the hardware that runs it is not insignificant.

mdavid626

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 driven I disabled all drive assist features (except for ABS and ESP). They just simply don't work well. Edge cases are not handled well - there is a little snow on the sensor? Beeps continuously, because you're hitting the wall going 100km/h on the highway...

I hope more cars/trucks like the Slate truck will come. We want cheap, simple and safe cars.

zelos

Automated Emergency Braking has made driving significantly safer, according to the statistics:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_emergency_braking_sy...

DoingIsLearning

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.

mihaaly

Statistics work on generic population but mush away a lot.

People are careless and inattentive beast of animals in our modern societies. Things are done for them, expected this way, they do not need to pay attention that much, which has lot of merits and advantages for the advancement of humanity. Dumb solutions doing as told and need to be handled expertly can be dangerous for modern people. Developing automation right (emphasis is here, big emphasis!!) is very necessary.

But unfinished and sloppy developers are killing careful people. Not show in the statistics, saving more bad drivers than killing good ones overridden by shit software cars.

Need to do it right with no collateral casualties.

I believe the tone of the conversations are into this direction anyway: please, pretty please, do it right! Not the current sloppy way! This is a dangerous game not mobile messaging platform, needs different mindsets than average software development approaches.

ErigmolCt

The direction is likely inevitable. Modern cars already are software-heavy, even without full autonomy or flashy features

GenshoTikamura

It is only as inevitable as consumers' alreadism-driven apathy. The moment they recognize that Car As A Service is something out of the sane world and having a means of transportation that can simply expire or be blocked remotely for a far-fetched TOS violation is against their interests, all inevitablism goes up in flames.

kylehotchkiss

Remove the LTE chip and all functionality related to ads, support wireless CarPlay and android auto, and use physical buttons. You’ll win every award in the industry.

anon7000

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

flax

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 strategy worked one time, then it also failed to recognize the flash drive, and failed back to radio, again.

I will never want to listen to the radio. I would love to remove radio as an option. I would love to have no fallback as an option. But no, the car just f-n loves the radio and will not stop trying to force it on me.

Oh yeah, and the radio is buggy and could get stuck if I tune into the wrong station. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-60333765.

This car definitely tries too hard to be smarter than it is. There's all sorts of exceptions that keep the doors from auto-locking when I walk away, and I would turn all of them off, but I can't. Walk away too fast? doesn't lock. Open the rear? won't auto lock. Car just doesn't feel like it? doesn't auto-lock.

And god forbid you hit the unlock button when the passenger has already unlocked it. Anxious beeps from the car for several solid seconds. That is not an error condition!

Performance and reliability have been great though. They just need to stop trying to be smart. They're not.

PlunderBunny

Re: radio always turning on, my LDV eDeliver 9 is the same but worse - sometimes the radio comes on immediately, and sometimes it takes about 20 seconds. You can’t preemptively mute it in the latter case. There’s lots of other weird quirks with the radio (e.g. going into reverse switches to a low-volume radio if you were previously playing music or a podcast in CarPlay). It’s as-if almost any change in the audio switches the radio on. Other than that, it’s a great van!

victor9000

Long pressing the source button turns off audio and keeps it from turning on automatically on the next start. This at least lets you explicitly decide when you want music.

rustcleaner

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.

noisy_boy

Use the volume button as "functional on/off" for the radio.

bbarnett

Ah yes, Mazda. The car company which won't even give you a fuse box diagram, and instead says to contact the dealer if a fuse blows.

https://www.cx90forum.com/threads/fuse-box-diagram.172/

Something foul and malign is afoot at Mazda these days.

ak217

Mazda also managed to squander a huge brand and structural advantage by falling into lockstep behind other Japanese automakers in underinvesting in EV manufacturing infrastructure. Now they have to rely on their JV partner Changan to lead the way in producing EVs, giving up the core structural strengths that Mazda previously had in designing and building their own components - including software and controls, which in the Changan-led models have no continuity at all with Mazda's domestic models. They just superficially copy the Mazda exterior design language while wholly dependent on Chinese supply chains (and some Android Auto for the software, it seems) for manufacturing the actual EV.

fooker

> underinvesting in EV manufacturing infrastructure.

This has been a fantastic decision, as a large number of EV manufacturers have gone bankrupt.

potato3732842

While that might affect their market share in HN neighborhoods I assure you Mazda is making money hand over fist selling their boring non-hybrid SUVs to normal people. People love them and they sell.

SoftTalker

A lot of people still don’t want or can’t really afford EVs given their limitations. I’d say it’s the majority where I live. I directly know only one person who has a full EV (not a hybrid).

I don’t think the Japanese automakers have squandered anything, yet.

adriand

Hopefully they figure it out because I love my Mazda 3 hatchback and would buy an EV version of it in a heartbeat. Not only is it very fun to drive (I have a manual transmission) but the interior design is excellent.

BoingBoomTschak

Mazda's target market is quite different from the EV buyers one, at least here in Europe.

Its reputation is that of a brand for people who really like cars, who can appreciate the care put into proper engineering and a wonderful manual transmission; or people with an eye for a "conservative" kind of quality. It's basically the new Volvo, but sportier.

deergomoo

I bought a Mazda3 a few months ago and I love it. It is exactly what I want as a driver.

I even adore the scroll wheel and wish it could be in any car I own in future. Yeah it takes slightly longer to do certain actions in CarPlay, but I can do it so much more safely than I could in the Civic I had before. The infotainment boots basically instantly; as you mentioned CarPlay starts itself, and the patronising-but-mandated “don’t use this in motion” warning dismisses itself. In the Civic I would be half way down the road already by the time it booted, blindly prodding at the screen to try to dismiss that warning so I could pause the podcast that started playing itself because I plugged my phone in.

And, while my 2022 car predates the stupid auto-re-enabling ADAS requirement in Europe, the 2024+ models have single button deactivation. I dunno how, cause it’s supposed to require a minimum of two presses legally, but it sure makes me wanna stick with Mazda.

However that makes the upcoming 6E that much more disappointing. They’ve partnered with a Chinese manufacturer, I assume because they don’t have an EV platform of their own ready yet. Looks fantastic from the outside, but the inside is a sea of touch screens with barely a physical control in sight.

bitmasher9

When I was doing my car shopping two years ago, I was initially considering another Mazda, specifically looking at the Mazda 3 AWD Hatchback. Their high tech features were significantly behind the other Japanese auto manufacturers. Some features like the ability for the car to automatically stay in a lane were not present.

When looking at who is doing it right, I wouldn’t put Mazda on a pedestal. They simply are behind the competition.

shostack

Generally agree but they are laying the path to enshitification. You see you can get turn by turn directions on the HUD, but only through their app where they want you to pay $10/mo for the privilege. Same for inputting addresses into their crappy nav system.

So I only use Google maps with Android Auto now, but cannot put the turn by turn display on. Also, who knows what telemetry Mazda is sending home on me without me knowing or wanting them to. Probably selling it to data brokers.

Izikiel43

Really? I rented a cx90 with hud and with CarPlay and Apple Maps I think it had turn by turn directions

ErigmolCt

The industry keeps chasing "connected experiences" and ad monetization while ignoring what most drivers actually want: responsiveness, simplicity, and reliability

lttlrck

Slate have done this and it's really quite compelling. You even get window winders.

https://www.slate.auto/en/personalization

archon

"Have done this" implies Slate has delivered even one vehicle. They have not. I hope Slate succeeds, but let's not get caught up in the preorder hype.

DidYaWipe

Yeah. Alpha "Motor" has been breathlessly hyping renders for years now, while declaring that their nonexistent vehicles have won all kinds of awards.

Oh, and every year there's "only three days left to invest!"

owenversteeg

I don't even think they've built a single prototype. I'd be happy to be corrected but last time I checked, none of the "prototype" shells they showed off had a powertrain.

null

[deleted]

almostgotcaught

This is the same way that hn proclaims every single arxiv paper as revolutionary. I really wonder sometimes who is this gullible on the internet (kids? bots? I influencers?)

moduspol

I was quite interested in this until I realized:

* Bed size is just five feet

* Towing capacity is just 1000 lbs

* Not AWD

None of these can be retrofitted after the sale.

Where I live, it'd struggle to be called a "truck" with these limitations.

majormajor

Meh. Base Maverick is a <5' bed, no AWD, and towing of 2000lb but I haven't seen one doing any towing in the wild. But the owners seem to love them.

Not everyone wants to spend 40-80k on a bloated luxury-truck-ized F150 when they only need to carry something oversized maybe once a year.

Tagbert

The window winders I can do without. Not sure that even saves a noticeable amount of money at this point with electric windows such as commodity.

StopDisinfo910

I seem to remember Jeep saying manual window winders were actually more expensive once you factor in the costs of having them as an option given how cheap electric ones are when they dropped them for the new Wrangler. Might still be cheaper if you only manufacture with them and don’t offer electric but the price difference can’t be that high.

Tsiklon

All depends on how they market it. Wind down windows to me today is an aesthetic statement - “we are selling a cheap, no frills vehicle - look see! Even wind down windows”

Such positioning could be what the intended customer base react well to.

saurik

I mean, they did something, for sure, but they sure as hell didn't do "this" ;P. What they are doing is more in the line of not providing even hardware, much less software, which is an entirely different paradigm... like, they don't even provide speakers?!...

giantg2

It'd be great if they make an engine swap package for existing trucks with optional battery sizes.

phyzix5761

Physical buttons are a huge need. Its so distracting navigating through screens to change the temperature while driving.

ericmay

That’s interesting - what vehicles require you to do that? I know the usual suspect is the Tesla, which I have, but I never have to navigate through menus to change the temperature while driving.

As an aside a lot of people like to levy criticism on the infotainment screens which I think is very well deserved, but then people text and drive, watch YouTube videos, and do all sorts of crazy things too.

Instead of levying criticism on these distractions (let’s include billboard too) we should instead focus on just reducing car usage since we won’t stop people from being distracted.

The safest car is the one in your garage.

hiatus

> As an aside a lot of people like to levy criticism on the infotainment screens which I think is very well deserved, but then people text and drive, watch YouTube videos, and do all sorts of crazy things too.

Instead of levying criticism on these distractions (let’s include billboard too) we should instead focus on just reducing car usage since we won’t stop people from being distracted.

This argument to me reads like one for abstinence from sex. The world is not so binary, we can both criticize distractions and build communities where car use is not a necessity. Not to mention in most jurisdictions some of these distractions are criminalized.

Gigachad

We rented a BMW which had all climate settings on a touch screen. That touch screen crashed once and we couldn't turn the air con off without trying to reboot the car which isn't exactly trivial since there isn't any obvious off button.

DragonStrength

Subaru require you navigating to second screen for climate modes. Simple temp adjustment has buttons, but the screen interactions for basic usage feels dangerous as a driver.

phyzix5761

Doesn't Tesla require you to navigate to a second screen when changing the fan speed?

bzzzt

Don't know about the rest of the world, but the EU requires e-call (automatic emergency call after an accident) for all new cars now so you can't sell cars without an LTE chip.

rustcleaner

... but you can be a bro and make sure that hardware is close to the surface somewhere for easy access, its presence isn't required to start and operate the car (either firmware check or the immobilizer performing metrics), and its removal does not cause an obvious and annoying alert during operation (IE removal should not make the car appear to be in a 'degraded' state per its indicators).

You are complying by installing it, the customers are the ones [easily] removing it [because you were a bro].

ponector

It is mandatory to have and it is in checklist during annual vehicle check. Without it it is not street legal. And the car should show an error in case the module is removed/failed.

Those safety add-ons are there for a reason.

femto

The Nissan Leaf is (was?) what you describe, apart from the LTE chip. The LTE doesn't seem to do much without NissanConnect (which was actually written by Bosch).

mschuster91

> Remove the LTE chip

You can't, it's required for eCall which is a mandatory feature in Europe.

Unfortunately, it's fraught with issues, especially for the very first eCall modules where the hardware supported only 3G (HSPA)... which is being phased out across Europe together with GPRS (1G)/EDGE (2G), leaving these cars without a working eCall system - and no upgraded hardware modules in many cases.

therein

Oops somehow a switch has attached itself to the fuse of the LTE module in my vehicle.

mschuster91

Won't work if the cellular modem is powered directly off the ECU's fuse or is embedded in the ECU itself.

barbazoo

Nice. I wish mine had a dedicated fuse for that.

ryanbrunner

Wouldn't be the first or the last time that a car has a different build out for different locales - as differences go, that's pretty minor.

mulmen

Ok but that doesn’t really solve the problem in Europe.

null

[deleted]

paulddraper

> required

That’s…terrible

cryptonector

Are there new vehicles in the U.S. that don't have an LTE chip and antenna?

ratatoskrt

...why? Seems pretty sensible to me?

therealdrag0

Hyundai is physical buttons and CarPlay. That’s why I got Kona EV, and Ioniq5 is well loved.

jesucresta

It is funny that developers are always looking at the processes of car making to improve their own extremely broken ways and now it is car-makers that "should" be trying to be more like the agile software devs.

As a dev the last thing I want is a software-defined car. Look what we did to TVs.

smartmic

So I have serious thoughts about driving “software defined vehicles” in the future. I mean, and the article has confirmed this sufficiently, the core competence of the established car manufacturers is not software. I don't trust the newcomers like Tesla or the Chinese manufacturers for the time being. In my opinion, the same standards should apply to software in motor vehicles as in the aviation industry. And there can't be things like permanent internet connectivity, on-the-fly updates or anything else that is suitable for consumer entertainment devices. So I'm seriously considering whether my next car should be an “analog” one - but it's going to be difficult, a Lada [1] (not so exotic in Germany, where I live) is only available second-hand because of the Russia sanctions. I'm happy to accept alternative suggestions!

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lada_Niva

serial_dev

I’m not sure I understand everything you said but I went with Dacia Duster, it’s the affordable brand, but I like that I can have a new car that has the controls and everything like a car from a decade ago… (lol) physical buttons, relatively good quality as they get to rely on Renault’s everything, I don’t need to go to settings to open the glove box, they don’t try to “out-innovate” everybody with ads, subscription heating, goofy scroll-knobs, or non rectangle screens. You can put CarPlay and Android Auto in it if you want.

Also, you can just buy older cars, that works too.

BTW, I thought about buying a Lada Niva, because I love the looks, but I heard it is not that reliable as you would assume, and they are pretty pricey for a car that is basically the same for forty years…

greenavocado

A fender bender is lethal in a Lada

FridayoLeary

They also have a poor safety rating from NCAP (at least they did 2 years ago), because they don't fit their cares with electronic aids such as emergency automatic braking, which is just another reason to buy one.

HPsquared

There are safety standards for automobile software: ISO 26262.

Software for steering or braking systems is of high quality. It's not the same team that does the infotainment.

ta1243

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 years that the "front assist" caused problems.

If that's "high quality", I dread to think what low quality would be.

izzydata

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 breaks and attempted to return to the 80mph I was at previously which caused more problems because I wasn't ready for that.

I am now of the opinion that a car should never under any circumstance drive for you. If a car has cruise control it should cruise control you into a wall. That I can at least anticipate.

raxxorraxor

That happens decently often. This is the reality for all systems aside from braking system in trucks perhaps, which are more sophisticated.

The decision to do an emergency break is the same problem fully self-driving cars need. You need to interpret sensory input and have a model of the environment.

Ironically some genius made these systems mandatory despite them being a safety concern. Granted, they tend to work if someone really falls asleep behind the wheel.

cryptonector

This happened to me a couple of years ago where the car I was driving decided that one of those water-filled tanks ahead of a barrier on a road under construction was in front of the car just because the road was curving hard to the right. It was very scary. It almost caused an accident by itself. I don't remember how the brake assist cleared, but the fact that there's nothing one can do to make the computer not break is very scary.

jim180

Same thing happened to my wife, while driving at about 110km/h…luckily no one was behind her.

stahtops

How do you square this with the article?

It states that consumer reports, (a for profit company providing independent reviews, and not a regulatory body) said the Model 3 stopping distance was not good. Allegedly due to a “bad ABS calibration”. Tesla released an OTA SW update.

Why wasn’t the bad calibration and degraded performance caught by regulators testing automobile safety standards?

The article also posits that this ability to make OTA updates expands the (IMO very very bad) SWE perspective that “it’s OK to ship unfinished and buggy products” into safety critical systems.

AlotOfReading

The role of US regulators in the automotive industry is pretty different from what you seem to be expecting. They see their main goal is to set minimum, testable benchmarks for safety and give manufacturers freedom to achieve that in any reasonably justifiable way. The consequence of this is that almost nothing is required beyond meeting FMVSS and passing the tests it prescribes. ABS stopping distance is one of those tests, but a quick glance at the CR tests doesn't look like an FMVSS failure. The stopping distance simply wasn't up to industry norms.

Another consequence is that ISO-26262 and most other standards are completely, 100% norm-based in the US. They're used because the industry expects them, not because there's a legal requirement. You can deviate all you want and the only consequence is that regulators might take a closer look at your paperwork in the event of issues because they look unusual.

HPsquared

Ah interesting, I wonder if Tesla is an exception and if their systems do in fact follow ISO 26262. Standards are not necessarily legal requirements, and not necessarily checked by external people.

It sounds like their ABS system wasn't designed as carefully as conventional systems if there was such poor braking performance. Reading around, it might have been related to the emergency brake assist functionality not being calibrated properly.

HappyJoy

Consumer reports is a non-profit last I checked

timewizard

> ISO 26262.

That is a piece of paper.

> Software for steering or braking systems is of high quality.

There's literally no way for me to know that before I trust my life with it.

signatoremo

You literally trust your life with medical devices full of software, those that conform to “piece of paper” standards, such as ISO 15708

null

[deleted]

pnw

How is Tesla, a 21 year old company that has shipped seven million cars across the world (including the worlds best selling car) a "newcomer"?

FridayoLeary

They only really became relevant ~ 10 years ago, I don't think they began selling lots of cars until ~2018 or later.

Digit-Al

Also, as many of the well known manufacturers have been going for 40 to 60 years, and some of them for over 100 years (Rolls Royce, Ford, Mercedes, etc...) then 25 years is a newcomer :-)

teekert

That Niva is so nice! Just very very fuel inefficient, but man can it do off road in the hills of Albania. Take the one with the low gear and the diff-lock (and heated seats!). It's a joy to ride that thing (although not on the freeway). I also considered it, but even before sanctions is was very expensive due to taxes (here in western Europe). But it's so much fun.

mrheosuper

Aviation standards allow boeing building their infamous 737-Max

raxxorraxor

It was Boeing that intentionally hid the importance of a system much more relevant than flight characteristics of a plane. That is an intentional violation of the spirit of the safety checks.

cosmicgadget

That wasn't a malfunction but rather a flight control feature the pilots didn't know about. (Iirc)

m000

But that's the point! A professional pilot misunderstood/was unaware of a new safety feature, despite their professional experience and continuous training.

So, is it really sane to put similar features in cars, where you get your driving licence at 16/18, and then that's it?

This also goes for the huge screens on the console. A pilot has been trained for each commercial aircraft model they fly to navigate their way around the numerous controls. But putting a tablet in front of an untrained driver? It sells well because it makes you feel as a pilot. But at the same time, it is a huge distraction and there is zero training to cope with it.

joha4270

That's a very Boeing friendly way of putting it.

As I understand it, yes the system worked as designed, but the design still managed to kill several hundred people.

I'm not qualified to evaluate the design of the system itself. Was it inherently flawed or would everything have been fine if the optional backup sensor had been mandatory, making this another example of corporate greed causing tragedy?

Either way, I don't think blaming the pilots is fair.

mrheosuper

a feature that is activated when SINGLE sensor goes haywire instead of two

andoando

By aviation standards, wed be stuck with 1950s tech. Even for aviation, aviation standards hold saftey back

pc86

You seem to be confusing aviation standards with aviation regulation.

decimalenough

They're not separable. Who do you think is coming up with the standards?

pc86

The core competency of most software companies is not software, I'm not sure how GM thinks it can do anything halfway decent (it can't).

mulmen

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.

shrx

Are you talking about the Renaissance Center? Of course it's open to the public, there's even a hotel inside.

sweeter

I'd trust BYD more than Tesla but I don't want to have to trust anyone. I drove a 20 year old Honda still to this day, but literally every new car has software in it and it won't be an option in the future. It's just too profitable to gather the data that they generate. It's a privacy nightmare. I'm still appalled that Tesla got caught pulling footage of people having sex in their own vehicles, but the legal world has no intention of doing anything about it.

deergomoo

I want a 7-10” central display that spends 99% of its time showing CarPlay but also has a radio if I need it, the backup camera when I’m in reverse, and lets me change a couple of settings for convenience features like auto locking etc. Everything else can be dials, knobs, and buttons. My Mazda3 is perfect for this and I’m quite sad that I’m almost certainly not going to be able to find anything like it by the time I come to replace it.

wlesieutre

Halfway through reading this comment I was thinking “Yup that’s why I like my Mazda3.”

Fingers crossed that they can keep it up with an EV transition. In the MX-30 they did an HVAC touchscreen, but perhaps the years long gap between that and their next EV will be an opportunity to reflect on how stupid that was. (Ignoring Chinese joint ventures that just use someone else’s platform)

reanimated

I would love to have both. The scroll wheel is convenient when I’m driving, but the touchscreen would make entering a new address much easier, as it’s very annoying to do now by scrolling, and voice dictation doesn’t work well in my language.

jmb99

Most cars from the mid 90s until the mid 00s (sometimes later) have this: you replace the double-DIN factory head unit with an aftermarket CarPlay-compatible head unit. $200-$1000 (depending on how much you want to cheap out), easy DIY install or pay another couple hundred bucks to a stereo shop to install it for you. You now have a 7-10” central display that boots to CarPlay but can do radio/bluetooth/aux/satellite, and turns on a reverse camera when you shift into reverse. Climate control and everything else is still physical switches, because car manufacturers were still making cars properly.

Won’t be able to control auto locking and stuff like that though because it either didn’t exist or wasn’t controlled by the factory radio, because it was just a radio.

neild

I have a 2024 Kia EV6, and this is pretty much what it does: Central screen displays CarPlay, backup camera, and infrequently-used settings controls, dials and knobs for most things, one secondary touchbar (row of buttons, but it’s really a touchscreen so the buttons can change) for climate controls. Pretty much perfect, although only wired CarPlay. (The 2025 models apparently have wireless.)

tharkun__

Climate controls, including in-seat heating, as well as radio/media is exactly the stuff that needs actual hardware knobs that are always in exactly the same place and that I can use by knowing where in 3D space they are by muscle memory and feel without looking.

hedora

We have an EV9, and the user interface is so pathologically bad that we’re planning to get rid of it.

Everything makes it beep. Beeps for “you will die now” are similar to “you put me in gear”.

There’s one exception: For many reasons, it turns off one-pedal driving. When it does that and is unexpectedly accelerating into cross traffic, it does not beep (until the collision alarm sounds, presumably, ask me if it kills me…)

otterley

You can get tiny USB dongles that convert wired CarPlay to wireless. I bought one and adore it! https://www.geekbuying.com/item/AB019B-Wireless-CarPlay-Adap...

therealdrag0

Hyundai is actual buttons, not touch.

hedora

Look at aftermarket MMI boxes. They do this for $150. (Screen and controls not included because they use the factory ones.)

Someone should tell an automobile manufacturer. It’d save them ~ $1B.

nickff

Car companies have to worry about regulatory compliance, certification, approvals, as well as warranties; aftermarket manufacturers do not have such concerns (at least to the same degree).

hedora

It’s a box that forwards a carplay / android auto UI to an LCD, and snoops the cam bus for button press events.

The entire thing is $150, which is nothing compared to the rest of the warranty.

If regulatory compliance for a car stereo actually costs $1B in the US, then that seems like a bigger issue than “unfair” competition from China, and I’d like one of their $10K EVs, please.

DidYaWipe

What is an "MMI box?"

lmpdev

Multimedia Interface?

magicalhippo

My Renault Megane e-Tech is basically this[1]. Well it's a 12.3" screen but if you're in the UK you can get the one with the smaller screen. Not sure why you'd want that though.

Anyway, it runs Android Automotive, but supports Android Auto and CarPlay as well. My SO uses the former exclusively and it's on as soon as she gets in the car, can't imagine it's any different for CarPlay.

If you run the Automotive shell, you can have a media widget at the bottom which can be set to radio, shown here[2], I listen to DAB that way.

It also has a row of physical buttons for the important stuff, like climate control, defrost and such. Media and volume controls are on the steering wheel.

[1]: https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-news/first-official-pictur...

[2]: https://cdn.automobile-propre.com/uploads/2021/09/megane-ren...

helij

New and a little older, maybe up to 5 years old Hondas are like that.

ToucanLoucan

This is basically exactly what I have with my 2010 Chrysler 300 and 2010 F-150s with aftermarket stereos. And they didn't cost me $80,000.

encrypted_bird

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 software based) - A Physical, metal key (not a chip)—I like to be able to go to my local hardware or key shop and make backups, thank you very much. - I don't need navigation; I have a phone for that.

And I don't need an app either:

- Wanna check the fuel/battery level? A little thing called a fuel gauge on the dashboard will work just fine. - Wanna check the tire pressure? Use a pressure gauge, feel the tire directly, or look at the tire, or base it on feeling while driving, i.e. the same little things we've done for decades just fine (not to mention the app or dashboard may not take into account used or third-party tires, as each tire brand/type/size is filled up to its own pressure rating). - Wanna lock/unlock doors remotely? Detached key fob. - Need diagnostics? OBDII still works excellently.

vachina

A Honda Civic 1999 fits you perfectly. No need to wait anymore.

jmb99

Pretty much that exact list is why both of my cars are 94 Buick Roadmasters (admittedly, no factory Bluetooth, but yes on everything else).

Incredibly reliable, very easy to work on, cheap high-quality parts, everything’s analog, you get a full suite of gauges (except oil pressure, but there is at least a light for low oil pressure and low oil level). 94-95 is OBD1, but GM’s OBD1 implementation is almost as detailed as OBD2 (just without per-cylinder misfire detection and secondary post-cat O2 sensors). Keys are $4 at the hardware store (if you disable the pass-key system, which was an anti-theft system that relied on a resistor in the shaft of the key - if you leave that, more like $25). Key fobs are $15 and can be programmed in 30 seconds. Oil changes cost $60, transmission fluid changes cost $150, diff fluid changes $150 ish (cut all those numbers roughly in half if you diy). Tires are $90-110 per for good ones, less if you have someone who can get them for you at cost. And they’re incredibly comfortable.

Only real downside is fuel economy, ~17mpg city, ~25mpg highway. With some tuning knowledge you can get that up to 30mpg highway on premium fuel. And if you don’t like the image of driving an old car, that can be a downside too.

theo10010

this with embedded solar panels in the car would be my ideal next car purchase, everything else is unnecessary spending and clutter

iancmceachern

My 2013 Scion FRS is exactly this. I think you can get the GT86 or BRZ currently in similar spec.

glial

Sounds like my 2011 Camry, which I absolutely love and hope to never sell.

dyauspitr

I don’t want anything without CarPlay anymore but I agree with your general sentiment. Google maps while driving and the ability to respond to messages by voice is great.

1a527dd5

I would really rather that cars didn't run software, or at the least the minimal software to get the job done where there is no other option.

My current car is a Kia; I love it. But the door locks are software controlled (you can tell from the lag). The issue is I like to lock my doors as soon as I'm in the car.

The software can't cope with this; about 500ms later it unlocks the doors again and won't let me lock until the software has realized that I can now lock the doors again. So there is a 3-4 second gap in which I want to lock the doors but I can't.

This is appalling for safety; I grew up in a dodgy area and all my then cars kept me safe by allowing me to lock as soon as I entered. Now I have to more cautious than ever.

The other issue is that it has collision detection and automatic braking; it works great 99% of the time. But one time it got confused with over head sun and road markings and decided to emergency stop on a school road. I was lucky there was no car behind me.

aucisson_masque

> it works great 99% of the time

You summed it up. I want the minimum required electronic in my cars and above all no software managing critical features like abs breaking that could be updated on the air, like the Tesla.

Humans aren't perfect by any means, software might be better than us by a few percent at avoiding crash but damn, when I crash i want it to be my own fault.

If tomorrow I run over a kid because my abs had a bug, go prove that in court. And yes it actually happened in France with the speed control, some manufacturer managed to fuck that up and people who had crashed (without killing themselves) have a hard time to dismiss the so called expert calling them basically retards incapable of pressing the break pedal, that they press the clutch pedal instead of the break one...

There are reports of people being stuck in their car for up to an hour, while on call with the police, trying everything, and you're telling me that they are not capable of pressing the break pedal during that entire hour ?

red_admiral

> But one time it got confused with over head sun

Didn't "confused with over head sun" once almost start a nuclear war?

I used to have a problem where a road made a bend right, but if you continued straight on (crossing the lane coming the other way) there was usually someone's car parked on the space in front of their house, beyond the road.

I was lucky my car only had the "beep at you loudly and flash the display red" collision detection rather than the "slam on the brakes" one because that road triggered a false positive something like half the time.

minusLik

The cars I know lock their doors automatically when they go at a certain speed (e. g. mine does at 20 km/h). Doesn't yours?

1a527dd5

It does. But that isn't what I want it to do. I want to manually lock the doors as soon as I close my driver side door.

minusLik

Does it work better when you use the key fob from inside the car? I would expect that because they surely tested a "unlocked accidentally and locked again right away" kind of scenario.

aetherspawn

Software isn’t super hard I suppose, but you still need a dozen “rockstar devs” and $1mil in licensed software to push out a car, so yeah probably it’s a minimum $5-10m exercise for basic software that can just drive around.

And if you start talking about razzle dazzle infotainment smart phone experiences, well that’s where you get the $1b price tag from.

My startup is actually aiming to disrupt the low end of this with a generic VCU that lets you design any vehicle you want and then tweak a few arguments to set how it should be controlled. The goal is to let you build a Slate-like car or truck (infotainment excluded / BYO) without writing software.

felineflock

About a year ago the Ford CEO (who is also Chris Farley's cousin) explained why legacy car manufacturers could not make good software: each of their cars have 150+ modules, each of them from several suppliers, each of them writing their own software.

For every software change on each module, they have to go to a supplier to ask because of IP rights.

That is why Ford is/was trying to build a new generation of modules with in-house software which they never wrote before.

Also pertinent: "Why Ford decided to merge its next-gen architecture with its current platform" https://archive.ph/CR2Pv

kqr2

They also dictate that their suppliers will all use AUTOSAR which is a legacy framework that makes even toggling a GPIO difficult.

https://www.reddit.com/r/embedded/comments/leq366/comment/gm...

  you'll spend a few more months sitting in online seminars while some talking head explains why it takes 6 hours to configure a million goddamn things so their garbage tool can shit out an entire Italian resaurant's worth of spaghetti code just to blink an LED at 1Hz. Except it's not 1Hz, it's 10Hz, or 0.1Hz, or some other bullshit that you didn't want, because you muttered the wrong incantation to the configuration utility somewhere around step 2 out of 800, so guess what, you get to back and do the entire fucking thing again.

andy_ppp

I would love a car platform that ran open source software, I think a lot of people would buy hardware they knew all the software was controlled by the owner. The way electronics plays into cars at this point is quite excessive, even seats and windows are running software.

Propelloni

I have driven several different, rather new, cars over the last two years. The most hassle-free experience was the second cheapest of the bunch, a 2024 Opel Corsa GS (a Stellantis brand). I actually was sad when I had to give it back.

Now I read that Stellantis is behind on the software game and I wonder if there is a relation. Seriously, I'm all for cost-effective cars but reading the article I do not get the feeling that so-called SDV are in the interest of me, the consumer.

FridayoLeary

I think the article was focussing on the advantages it would bring to the manufacturer. Fewer control units, less wiring, hence a faster build time. Putting everything in one place is easier from a manufacturing point of view.