Slashdot Mirror
Will Your Next Car Run Windows?
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft is beginning to move into the automotive industry. Their 'Automotive Business Unit' is selling a custom version of Windows CE called Windows Automotive. Microsoft attended a conference in Detroit this week to promote their software."
I would think Detroit has enough worries about bad perceptions regarding their reliability without adding this to it. There's a reason why it's called "WinCE"
"Wow. Now THAT'S a lot of angry Indians." - Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer
Do I have to pay the M$ tax on my car.
Can I opt for a -$100 upgrade and use other certain free OSes ?
Answers in order: probably, and probably not.
sigh.
dave.
It should be noted that I read recently (sorry no links but maybe others can chime in) that BMW is working with Apple to replace its Windows in Car solution with something from Apple.
;)
Will this only extend to the music portion of the car?
Or will apple oversee other parts like navigation etc..
It was not known according to the article, but the take away was BMW was not happy with their Microsoft solution.
So you next car might not have a steering wheel but perhaps a "Clickable scroll wheel"
http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS3211177525.html that was mentioned recently, http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/18/ 2154245&tid=163&tid=106 for even more info.
The question is, though, do we need such things in our cars? Do we really need cars equipped with "home entertainment systems," if these cars will only be used for trips to the nearest shop or driving to work?
Of course we don't _need_ them. However, people want them and are will to pay extra money for them -- a guy I work with runs a business installing this kind of stuff. People will pay a small fortune to keep the kids quiet in the back seats...
Does anyone know of a open source project to control a Fuel-Injected engine? I have been thinking about how to set it up, and am not sure of the off-the-shelf hardware that would be needed. But since most engines just use a simple collection of sensors that return a given voltage it probably wouldn't be that hard. And feedback is done by sending X volts to device Y.
So anyone who knows of USB/PCI/Serial devices that can communicate this way on many (30 - 40) lines. Post them here, please!
I'd ideally want an embedded solution, but why not a PC-based solution. You'd just have to wait for the PC to boot before you could start the car.
``Will Your Next Car Run Windows?''
No.
I will make every effort to avoid it. I always tell people a computer without Windows is like a race car without a home entertainment system. It gives you shiny bells and whistles and games, but slows the thing down and makes it prone to crashes.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
The article doesn't say _anything_ about wince running the fuel injectors, or the ABS, or air bags, or brakes, or steering... It mentions only annoying stuff that has no business being in a car anyway.... Having an in-vehicle DVD player itself is probably more likely to cause crashes than what operating system is being run on said DVD player. Yes, I'm old. I drive a 21 year old diesel truck with no electronics and 440,000 miles on the odometer.
In France one of our big car maker will be forced to sell a very simple model that was primarily aimed at eastern Europe markets.
Thanks to the european market they could not really prevent this from happening because the market is open and there are consumers who want cheap and simple cars.
Why would one want to pay for mostly marketing hype when the basic solution are fine and cheaper. Also people have already started to notice that electronic in car increase the number of problems and the costs of repairs.
I see electronics in car as I see most stuff that cell phone manufacturers are making : pointless stuff.
Maybe it is just me, but I still fail to see the interest of bells and whistles everywhere. I need simple stuff that works well (but still reading some slashdot topic is funny).
with their AutoPC, which had a non-x86 CPU in it, I think an ARM or some such. I bought one for a car that I no longer have, along with the AutoPC GPS unit, CD changer (mounted in the trunk), and some software for it. I believe it ran a custom version of WinCE or something similar, and was the forerunner to MS' automotive obsessions.
The AutoPC was interesting; you could get directions via the GPS receiver, some software, and the NavTech CDs (now DVDs) that MapQuest.com uses. Additionally, there were various screensavers you could download that would show you your speed (based on GPS), direction, etc etc. All in all it was fairly nice, but a little underpowered; you couldn't play MP3s from the internal CD-ROM without lots of skipping. Supposedly a later version of AutoPC, called JoyRide or something, fixed all that.
But yeah, in almost two years of use, I never ever had it crash. Ironically, the same couldn't be said for my Linux box, which crashed after 499 days uptime (back in the 2.0.x days this was).
Imagine if you could simply just IM the car in front of you. Type (or speak, or something) in the license number in your auto IM client, and say "you just cut me off, you !@$^#$^@^%!" Now THAT would be fun....
I think they are making a rather bold statement there. Cars are turning in to complex interconnected systems. There isn't anything stopping manufacturers from connecting engine controls, brakes etc into a central computer, so it can, for example, warn you of failures or needed maintenance. I'm pretty sure brakes are intimately tied in to the computers in hybrids in particular.
Most experienced software engineers can tell you when you develop complex systems with a lot of interconnects and multiple computers unexpected shit can happen.
Me, I am doing a studious job of maintaining my 1997 largely computer free car. Having a computer in it would be nice, especially for maps, but I really dont want to pay an arm and a leg for it and get a very closed Windows computer that has more control over me than I have over it.
I especially don't want a satellite link/GPS, like OnStar, which gives OnStar more control over my car than me and that makes it relatively easy for the police state to track my every move, and disable my car at their whim. Its kind of like giving up your right to bear arms, you are giving big brother another huge step towards complete control over your life. Chances are my car would never be used against me, but the fact that the potential is there is....disturbing.
@de_machina
Clearly the intent is to use WinCE for running the radio, DVD player, navigation system, etc. Of course some sort of operating system is necessary to control all of those things through a single multifunction input/display unit.
I recently moved from Vermont to Westchester Co. New York. The roads around here are like a labrynthine maze. I use my handheld mapping GPS almost every day to find my way around. I would most certainly make effective use of an in-dash navigation system, even just to go to the store. Afterall getting lost and ending up in a bad neighborhood can really ruin your day. And lets face it, sitting in a car is boring, and a DVD player keeps the little brats quiet and entertained.
BTW don't foget, WinCE shares absolutely zero code with other versions of Windows. Although I am a dedicated Linux proponent, I have spent some time evaluating and writing code on Windows CE and the API and overall architecture are pretty good. I haven't looked at the internals, but (correct me if I am wrong) I think MS makes the source available, don't they? Anyway from a developer's point of view it's a pretty good platform for developing such devices.
-73, de n1ywb
www.n1ywb.com
It should also be noted that BMW is a high-end product, so they aren't necessarily concerned with licensing fees. So it isn't about money. One thing that BMW is concerned with - quality when it comes to their brand image.
I have owned BMWs for about 9 years now (and no, I can't afford new ones). But BMW is VERY strict when it comes to using their logos and even colors in anything. They are very brand conscious, because they don't want it diluted. They produce phenominal cars, and want to make sure that their brand is associated with quality. I was a little sad when I heard that they had chosen a Microsoft product for their vehicles for that very reason. I actually thought that Apple is a lot like BMW in some respects. They aren't the biggest car maker, they are somewhat of a niche product catering to a very specific customer, and they produce high-quality products. I think Apple would be a great choice, but I think a BMW-home-grown product would also be cool. (Hello? SuSE?)
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
And if your kids don't shut up, maybe you shouldn't try to pacify them.
You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
Metroworks is refining some unleaded just for you.
No, an operting system is not needed to control all of these units through a single multifunction input/display unit.
Each of these systems pre-existed without a traditional operating system, whether those systems were mechanical, simple electrical circuits, PLCs or whatever. Why they would do this is the combination of two reasons.
Price drops in hardware that can support an OS significant enough to compete with the cost of the alternative mechanical / electrical solution, and the ability to produce intermeidate versions and upgradable versions of the product which removes costs associated with pre-production glitches in the design.
Needless to say, since the issues won't be heavily scrutinized before the item is produced, there's going to be a much greater chance that the design of these systems will become much more like programming projects instead of traditional manufacturing. With all of the known pressures on programming projects, I'd imagine that the good things in UI design that comes from the manufacturing field will be lost in a maze of widgets, and that project deadline pressures will result in rationalizing the release of less than perfect code, with maybe a "new downloadable" update planned for "when we can get to it in the future"
There's a lot more pressure to get it right when you're mistake is going to be hardcoded into a manufacturing run of a hundred thousand items or so.
Actually, what will happen is your car will shut down on the freeway at the 45,000 mile mark.
Not mine.. It isn't running MS software. There is a taxi that got over 250,000 miles. Toyota was so impressed, they bought the car to find it's potential wear points.
If MS did that, then the problem of Win95 locking up after a month of just not being re-booted would never have been an issue.
The truth shall set you free!
Last year the Thai Finance Minister was trapped inside his BMW allegedly due to a software glitch. http://www.thaivisa.com/index.php?514&backPID=514& tt_news=325
But another report said it was due to an electronic failure..
http://asia.cnet.com/news/systems/0,39037054,39130 270,00.htm
Sorry, but this statement is straight up false. The WinCE kernel is based off of the Windows NT 4.0 kernel. Also, WinCE shares the architecture of Windows 2000.
Microsoft ripped out a large part of the OS functionality and replaced other parts. Most of the API is the exact same as Win2K, but a lot of function calls with eleven arguments under Win2K require to you pass nine of them as NULL or zero under WinCE.
Just imagine the security situation this chainsaw OS surgery has created. Think bluesnarfing is fun now? Try it when you can hijack the entire entertainment and navigation system of that expensive SUV that just cut you off!
I should probably append to this.
Automotive Engineers design cars. They hire Automotive workers to do the actual building of them, with equipment that are designed by other engineers, that are built by other workers.
Software Engineering does not follow suit to most engineering practices. A Software Engineer may be a programmer, an architect, or both. The difference between the Automotive worker and the Software Engineer being that the worker doesn't need to know what the engineer was thinking in the automotive case, he just needs to follow the plan.
On the contrary, the Software engineer does not design once and build many times. The engineer designs and builds equally. In other words, providing a full plan of the software is writing the source code.
Also, while it has been streamlined, the Automotive worker needs to know how to use welding tools and the specialized tools that the worker is provided. On the contrary, you can give a software engineer his favorite tools that he's used since birth but if he doesn't know how to write in C++, he's useless for a project based in that language until he learns it. A cleaner description of this is, the software engineer's primary manufacturing tool is his mind.
This is why you never hear automotive workers talking about the "art" of automotive construction.
Some may say this is why only the worst software engineers consider unionizing. I think it's too general, but partially accurate.
I've been lost in bad neighborhoods, not to mention driving through one regularly when I visit my sister down in DC. No one has ever bothered me - in fact, people have been much more helpful a.f.a. directions than suburbanites usually are. There's a sizable segment of suBURPanites that runs and cringes whenever someone in a car slows down and opens their window. BTW - I was carjacked once, in a suburban gas station
And lets face it, sitting in a car is boring, and a DVD player keeps the little brats quiet and entertained.
Would it be so bad if you talked to your "little brats" or had your spouse do so when he/she was in the car with you? The spouse could even read something to them or play games. Besides, what's wrong with just listening to music instead of having constant canned visual stimuli? Listening to music on the radio can be very worthwhile.
If I have kids, I'm raising them in a city or small town where they will be able to walk to interesting places rather than being stuck in a glass-and-steel rolling bubble.
BTW don't foget, WinCE shares absolutely zero code with other versions of Windows.
The one experience that I've had with WinCE was on a palmtop @work connected to a label printer. The thing kept crashing and/or not recognizing the printer. We finally connected the printer to an old laptop running Win2k, and all was good. Maybe my opinion is biased by a bad experience, though.
That being said, I think that cars' controls should be as simple as possible, with large buttons that can be easily found without staring at the dash. Only a few buttons are really needed on a radio - adjust volume, balance, equalizer presets, tuning, mode, and CD/MP3 control (skip +/-, album +/-, etc). Heater and A/C controls have become needlessly complex also - give me the controls on an older car any day (one lever for fan speed, one for temp, a third one or a couple buttons for air direction).
The one thing that I would appreciate is a computerized dashboard that could show readouts of various engine sensors in real time, and show diagnostic data, ideally in plain English. e.g. rather than Code P0014, it should say, "Left Cylinder Bank Oxygen Sensor Erroneous Reading". The dashboard should also be customizable. Certain things like speed and RPM should always show up, but you should have a choice of what other gauges appear there - temperature, outside temperature, trip computer, oil pressure, voltage, etc.. You should also have an easy interface to allow for changes to the car's behavior. For example, you should be able to turn automatic locking at 5mph on or off, according to what you prefer, and without paying a deale^W $tealer to do it for you. Settings to do with emissions should of course be hardcoded and not user-changable.
-b.
Also note that buying a vehicle because it looks cool is ok - except that big heavy SUVs are impossible to see over, under, through, or around, damage the roads, and consume more resources.
So, what you're basically saying is that people shouldn't drive SUVs becuase you don't think they look cool. Did you ever think that maybe people who buy SUVs might not have an immediate need for some of the extra features over a van, but decided to go ahead with the SUV becuase they would like the convenience of the extra features. It's actually a lot like my grandfather's cell phone. He doesn't actually need one, but it sure is convenient when his car breaks down on the side of the road.
And for the record, it's pretty easy to see over, under, through, or around an SUV if you're driving one yourself. (Except for those jackasses with illegal tint.) Anyway, I don't drive an SUV any more, but when I did, I enjoyed the extra ground clearance the vehicle provided. Not to mention the vehicle just felt more robust than many minivans due to its stiffer ladder frame construction as opposed to the unibody construction that many minivans use. Lastly, the vehicle was rear wheel drive, a big plus in mine and many people's books.
Although, I do want to go on record as saying that any "SUV" based on a car platform, with unibody construction, and featuring front wheel drive, isn't really an SUV. It's just a minivan masquerading as one, partly to be cool, and possibly partly because trucks/SUVs don't have to abide by the same fuel consumption regulations as cars. (To be fair, I'm not sure if minivans are classified as cars or trucks by the government, so they may also have to comply to the less strict truck regulations.)
If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.
Because on slashdot, any joke about how much Windows sucks is about as likely to get you moderated "Insightful" as it is to get you modded "Funny".
Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
I also recall somewhere that a number of senior automotive execs became extremely leery of MS after they did a presentation of some grand vision they had for the automotive industry. Apparently they the auto execs) like the fact that QSSL, besides making a solid product in QNX, has decided that is all they are going to do. MS could take a lesson from QSSL- do one thing and do it right.
Despite the media attention Microsoft has been getting lately regarding security (or lack thereof) concerns, most end users still don't understand what all the fuss is about, because let's face it - that's a problem for the computer techs to worry about.
The general public don't even understand who or what Microsoft is. They just click here to go to "mail", which is 99% of the time, Outlook Express, but they don't know that. It's just their mail. Then they click on the attachment and it opens in the word processor, which is of course Word, but again, they don't know that.
In fact, they don't know, by name, any of the software they use on their computer. They don't know which company made it, and neither do they care.
Sometimes they hear about these 'linux' people, and they regard them as akin to someone who builds a hotrod from scratch - it's certainly not something that they would be doing themselves.
Some of these people work for the auto industry. They use computers, but as an end-user, not as a technician or programmer. They have managers, who use the corporate email program, which is of course Outlook, but they don't know what it's called.
Some of the high ranking managers have PDAs that they use to check their email and show off with in board meetings. They run Windows CE, and once again, they have no idea of that fact.
At this point, does it surprise anyone that knowing what they do about the computer industy, that these companies choose to work with microsoft to get integrated computers installed in their cars ?
Microsoft has always targeted the CEO/CIO types the most strongly, because you only need to put the work in to convince a few of those types to use your products and you'll get thousands or more licenses sold. And guess what, it's those same people who are the ones deciding who to partner with for integrated car computers.