Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Near-Future Fords to Feature Windows Automotive

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the clippy-is-my-copilot dept.

dpbsmith writes "The Detroit Free Press reports that a Windows Automotive software suite named Sync will be featured in some cars available Spring 2007, all 2008 Ford models, and Lincoln and Mercury models later. The software does not, apparently, run the engine or do anything directly connected with transportation. It will, rather, allow the user to 'use their vehicle as a computer in key ways, such as hands-free cell phone calls or downloading music or receiving e-mail.' Bill Ford and Bill Gates were reported as saying that having high-definition screens in vehicles, speech recognition, cameras, digital calendars and navigation equipment with directions and road conditions will set car companies apart from their competitors in the future. 'There are going to be those who have it and those who don't. And even those who get it later are going to be a generation behind,' Ford said."

63 of 441 comments (clear)

  1. This is going to.... by ThePopeLayton · · Score: 5, Funny

    add an entirely new meaning to crashing your car.

    1. Re:This is going to.... by The+Zon · · Score: 5, Insightful
      It will, rather, allow the user to 'use their vehicle as a computer in key ways, such as hands-free cell phone calls or downloading music or receiving e-mail.'
      I'm more worried about the RIAA impounding my car as evidence until the trial's over.
      --
      Some attitudes replaced or by cgi optimizes
    2. Re:This is going to.... by cherax · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Does either of these Bills even do any of these things (e.g. music download) while driving a car? Do they even drive their own cars? Given that just about any distraction (talking on a cell phone, being drunk, being a teen-ager, etc.) increases accident rates by 400%, are they prepared to take responsibility for the increased body count? Or, at the very least, for having given people greater opportunities to do serious harm with a machine originally intended for transportation? The car as entertainment center. The car as office. Sheesh.

    3. Re:This is going to.... by JFMulder · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why should THEY be responsible? It's the people who make the mistakes, not the constructor. There's way to use this in a very safe way. When the United States has more accidental deaths because of MP3 downloading while driving than of gun ownership related incidents (how many time little Bobby's got shot because they played with their dads gun?), then you might have an issue. In the meantime, there are far more dangerous stuff that is made available to people.

    4. Re:This is going to.... by Loco+Moped · · Score: 2, Insightful

      (how many time little Bobby's got shot because they played with their dads gun?) About one for every 40,000 that get killed in auto wrecks because their parents are yammering away on cell phones. You could have chosen a better argument to make your point.

    5. Re:This is going to.... by Xymor · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Sorry for being late boss, my car got a virus and the time the gas ran out, I was in Canada!"

      I think I'll get an iCar instead.

    6. Re:This is going to.... by The_Rook · · Score: 4, Interesting

      this is no joke. early versions of the (windows ce based) idrive system on bmw 7-series cars would crash taking the enitre car with them. nothing would work including the windows and door locks. as i understand it, drivers, on occasion, would get trapped inside their cars and would have to break the car's window to get out.

      --
      when religion is no longer the opiate of the masses, governments will resort to real opiates.
    7. Re:This is going to.... by DrVomact · · Score: 4, Funny

      Give a whole new meaning to "driver incompatibility". "Driver not found" would be really scary. The most scary one of all would probably be something like "Windows has detected a new device, "Brakes". If you have media for this device, insert it now. Or would you like Windows to search for a new driver on the internet?"

      --
      Great men are almost always bad men--Lord Acton's Corollary
    8. Re:This is going to.... by kasperd · · Score: 3, Funny

      Will all the crashes will be blamed on bad drivers?

      --

      Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
    9. Re:This is going to.... by SeaFox · · Score: 3, Funny

      Format
      Or
      Reinstall
      Daily

  2. Right by taskforce · · Score: 4, Insightful

    States and countries are banning using cell phones in cars left, right and centre and Microsoft, hot on the heels of the latest trends as always, decides the best place to put a PC is right on the dashboard.

    --
    My 3D Texturing Skinning work (under construction)
  3. What could possibly go wrong? by sentientbeing · · Score: 3, Funny

    Are you sure you want to turn right?

         Yes/No/Cancel

    An unknown error has occured. Please tell Microsoft about this problem.

    --

    ------
    beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    1. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by LinuxIsRetarded · · Score: 3, Funny

      Perhaps we might be better off with a Linux distribution in our cars. Let's try this scenario:

      Driver: "Why can't I turn right?"
      Tech support: "RTFM, n00b."
      Driver: "I don't even know what that means. Were there zeros in that word?"
      Tech support: "(Sigh). Just drop to a shell and pipe the result from eflorp etc/turn/dir to xargs florp -bs7. Use apt-get to get version 0.78 of the xflorp library. Recompile your kernel. Reboot your machine."
      Driver: "I think I'll trade this in for a Honda"

  4. Waitaminute -- it's not April 1... by FlyByPC · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm sorry, but this doesn't pass the "laugh test."

    We already have drivers chatting on cell phones. Now we want them downloading music and checking their email while driving?!? Close your eyes for a minute and imagine what your favorite busy intersection is going to look like with that going on. NOT pretty, huh?

    Don't get me wrong -- I (like pretty much everyone here) really like technology -- but there are already way too many distractions for even good drivers to handle. We need to either go with laws that require a low-distraction environment (no cell phones, video screens, etc) for drivers, or develop a foolproof autopilot system. And with the current state of technology, I think any "autopilot" option is basically only on the table as a scare tactic.

    --
    Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
    1. Re:Waitaminute -- it's not April 1... by lawpoop · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yea! How about adding technology to cars that actually helps somebody *drive*, such as a HUD, navigation assistance, radar/sonar, etc.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
  5. They still don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A significant portion of automotive customers want quality, as in things that need fixing as little as possible, as in "Toyota quality", not more stupid gadgets that break. Also, if I was to spend money on gadgets, I'd want to keep them with me when I change cars and not have to re-buy them. I'd also want to be able to upgrade them and sell them separately, like computer parts.

    1. Re:They still don't get it by vought · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Dear Ford:

      Please deliver what we want, not what you think we want.

      Specifically:

      -Just enough car. You do a good job with your European models, satisfying the market there. How about providing US customers with (!) Japanese-style size, build quality, and engine choices? Here in the US, we can get small cars with too little power or poor gas mileage. We can get medium-sized cars with too little power or worse gas mileage. We can get large cars that uniformly have terrible mileage. Cut this computer crap and build a fundamentally good car, and I'll dump my Toyota and Honda.

      -Build for the world. You are probably aware of this, but your vehicle lineup in the US conforms only to US mileage requirements. While truck sales figures might tempt you to think otherwise, most of us don't enjoy spending lots of money on fuel. Why not maximize efficiency of operation and manufacturing at the same time? Build some cars with reasonably efficient powerplants and offer them in the US as well as in other markets in which you choose to compete.

      -Stop treating us like idiots. Your consumers won't desert you if you choose to produce and market cars that provide space, safety, and mileage that are far above what you build today, but Ford will get few additional sales from the addition of a new techno-geegaw that saps driver attention. Ford, you've already lost huge numbers of sales to Japanese manufacturers on the low and mid-range, non-commerial/nonfarm customers aren't buying many trucks anymore, and at the high end, well, let's just say Luxury trucks are a dead-end. The smart money is in safe and sane european luxo-sedans and a few odd folks buy Cadillacs.

      And yet, when all is said and done - you could have seen your current sad sales situation coming - you chose to keep making giant SUVs and marketing 500-hp Mustangs that only do two things well (use copious amounts of $2.50 Premium fuel and go fast in a straight line). You ignored research and development on the technology that could provide cars that most Americans need in favor simply building lots of copies of the cars Americans kinda wanted during the late 90s. The roads are littered with 96-01 SUV boom Explorers that have terrible resale value and FoMoCo used the money from this unprecedented profitable period to...make more and bigger trucks, and to create the "new" Mustang - a car that while not totally based in 1960s technology, gets terrible mileage anyway and provides little utility for the vast majority of drivers. But hey - the base model sells well in cities where daddy can afford to buy his sorority daughter a new toy during her sophomore year.

      So do us a favor, Ford. Stop building cars to make Car and Driver happy. The Accord's been on their ten best list for 23 of 25 years, and not because it's super fast, super-roomy, or super anything - but because it does most things well - why not just create an Accord with a Ford badge instead of spending millions on developing 500hp Mustangs that get laughed out of the automotive press?

      Sincerely,

      The Pragmatic American Car Buyer

    2. Re:They still don't get it by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Just enough car. You do a good job with your European models, satisfying the market there. How about providing US customers with (!) Japanese-style size, build quality, and engine choices? Here in the US, we can get small cars with too little power or poor gas mileage. We can get medium-sized cars with too little power or worse gas mileage. We can get large cars that uniformly have terrible mileage. Cut this computer crap and build a fundamentally good car, and I'll dump my Toyota and Honda.

      Well said, except that I like rear wheel drive (drive one and you'll see what I mean - it doesn't push like a pig around corners). So cloning the low- and mid-range Japanese models sold in the US isn't a great idea in my book. But no one has mentioned Ford's Australian division that produces (reputedly) good-quality rear-wheel drive midsize sedans. Import those and you'll be competing with the Euro car makers at 2/3 of their prices. Make sure to offer manual and hybrid drivetrains as well.

      -b.

    3. Re:They still don't get it by chris_eineke · · Score: 3, Informative

      Dear Prospective Ford Motorvehicle Buyer:

      We know what you want, but it's too expensive to compete. Congressmen are cheaper.

      Love,
          Ford

      --
      "All you have to do is be fragile and grateful. So stay the underdog." Chuck Palahniuk, Choke
    4. Re:They still don't get it by oyenstikker · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ford is screwed. They can't make money building Accord and Civic knockoffs. The profit margins are too low. Honda and Toyota can do it because they have much lower labor and insurance costs. The Big 3 can't; their expenses are too high. They have to make high profit margin cars. There are three proven markets for that: 1) Huge ugly trucks. Ford's bread and butter. 2) Exotics. Ford has, and still can, build a GT[40] that will compete with Porsches and Ferarris. But they don't have the beauty of the Porsches and Ferraris. There _is_ a substitution for cubic money, its called soul. 3) Luxery Sport. For whatever reason, Lincoln and Cadillac just don't seem to be able to find a good balance of power, handling, comfort, and style like BMW and Mercedes Benz have.

      There is another problem: it is the American car buyers. They don't want a simple, balanced, efficient car. They won't buy them. That is why you can't get a BMW 318i here anymore, and never could get a 316 or a 1 series or an Audi A3.

      --
      The masses are the crack whores of religion.
    5. Re:They still don't get it by SaDan · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Rather than amend the Clean Air Act to give Diesels a fighting chance, we defer to gas hogs and sophisticated catalysts.


      Eh? You are unaware of the new diesel engine and fuel regulations here in the USA, I take it? We're getting much cleaner fuel, which should mean it will be easier to import those sweet European diesel powered vehicles. The only question is whether the European cars will be able to pass our safety requirements.

      The EPA is also switching the way they rate vehicles fuel economy, which means we'll get betters numbers for MPG figures on newer vehicles.

      And, sophisticated catalysts aren't necessarily a bad thing if it means less harmful emissions from the vehicle.

      Your rant isn't nearly as informed as it could be, and I get the sense that you really don't know much about the industry.
    6. Re:They still don't get it by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Interesting
      They are actually quite good.

      So everyone says. The problem is that Ford won't ever admit that its Aussie (and possibly Euro, but Australian travel conditions are closer to American conditions) divisions kick the asses of its domestic designers. So the Australian cars won't be brought to the US unless they're an expensive "premium" product. Too much "not invented here" disease.

      Besides, Australian cars are rather "simple" for American tastes - when GM brought the GTO here, everyone bitched and moaned about how bland and feature-less the car was. Very few people complimented GM on showing good taste and restraint in design.

      -b.

    7. Re:They still don't get it by Keeper · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dear American car buyer:

      We'd be more than happy to sell the type of vehicle you describe if Americans would actually purchase them. In the meantime, while Americans continue to put trucks, SUVs, and cars with large displacement at the top of the sales charts, we'll be happy to continue building and selling them.

      Sincerely,

      The Real World.

  6. Priorities by lexarius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't know what other people look for in cars, but my priorities run something like this: Price (within my budget), runs well, safety, good mileage, maneuverability, bells and whistles, overall appearance. Bells and whistles aren't an edge until other priorities are met. As it is now, my next car will be another foreign model.

    1. Re:Priorities by Loco+Moped · · Score: 3, Funny

      Can we just go back to drunks? Their driving skills may have been impaired, but at least they had driving skills.

      You know, that's actually a valid point. Drunks, at least some of them, KNEW they were drunk and at least TRIED to stay on the road.
      Our new cell-phone-blabbing, mp3-playing, makeup-applying, pizza-munching bunch of road-hogs is not even aware that they're supposed to be driving, it seems.

    2. Re:Priorities by Lord+Ender · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You must be married. Single people care about the style of the vehicle as the #1 spot. Our culture is causing people to be single longer. Car companies can't pretend it is the 50s where everyone is married with children anymore.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    3. Re:Priorities by lgw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, perhaps, but you might be surprised. If people's priorities didn't often change when they started earning real money, there wouldn't be a Republican party. ;)

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  7. A generation behind? by DrMrLordX · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Those who "get it later" may wind up with software that has fewer bugs due to updates, patches, etc. This is a Microsoft OS we're talking about here. Even good MS software products require patching (usually).

    Will early adopters need to pull in to the dealership to get the latest patches, I wonder?

  8. Non-critical software on a shared data bus? by Toby+The+Economist · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The fact that a given subsystem is not directly involved in things like braking isn't actually that reassuring.

    There was a submission to the RISKS digest a while ago - I cannot recall the exact details, but the problem was that non-critical software was able to cause what was effectively a denial of service attack on the car-wide shared data bus ring, and THAT stopped the brakes from working.

    If a software can affect a component or module which is necessary for a critical function, then that software *is* critial. Given the existance of for example shared data buses, pretty much everything is in fact critical.

    1. Re:Non-critical software on a shared data bus? by kent_eh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would hope that the only wiring that was shared between critical and non-critical systems would be the +12V and GND.

      While I suppose a massive hardware failure in the entertainment system could cause a brownout (And it'd be hard to blame that on Microsoft), the fuses should take care of that.

      I hope.

      --

      ---
      "I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
  9. It won't run the car -- heh heh heh by bjanz · · Score: 2, Interesting
    So, lemme see now: the Windows Automotive product will control the non-critical aspects of the vehicle, such as radio, cell phone, and other "navigation" features. But, it *won't* do anything really *useful* like control ignition, transmission shift speeds, antilock braking, etc. Those are already covered by Ford's existing embedded control systems.

    What we have here is an excellent example of why Windows is just *not* trusted for "critical systems". Even Ford is showing their lack of trust in Windows by relegating it to non-critical vehicle operations, regardless of how well it is advertised to work.

    I guess embedded vehicle control systems are just too important to be trusted to Windows.

    So, one "boo" for using Windows *at all*, but one "thank g-d" for avoiding it where vehicle safety is concerned.

    re. cell phones, tv, and "heads-up" displays: most folks get distracted by stuff at the side of the road or conversations inside the car. Now we're adding yet more distractions. Look, let's just do it right: put a PAS (pedestrian aiming system) in the heads-up display and install "Grand Theft Auto"!

    \burt

    --
    There is no such thing as bad weather - only inappropriate clothing.
    1. Re:It won't run the car -- heh heh heh by Loco+Moped · · Score: 2

      I guess embedded vehicle control systems are just too important to be trusted to Windows.

      One of just a few million things I can think of offhand.

    2. Re:It won't run the car -- heh heh heh by DerekLyons · · Score: 2, Insightful
      What we have here is an excellent example of why Windows is just *not* trusted for "critical systems". Even Ford is showing their lack of trust in Windows by relegating it to non-critical vehicle operations, regardless of how well it is advertised to work.

      Not to interrupt your reflexive slam here; but so what?
       
       
      I guess embedded vehicle control systems are just too important to be trusted to Windows.

      I wouldn't trust Fedora Core with an embedded vehicle control system either.
       
      Not every OS is suitable for every purpose. Even Linux (the desktop kind you can DL off the net or buy in the store [1]) isn't suitable for hard realtime uses. OTOH, an OS designed for hard realtime isn't suitable for a desktop. Being 'not trusted for critical uses' is nothing more or less than an attribute of a particular OS, not a bug or a failure. Without being able to discern between attributes and failures, it would make as much sense to slam the Space Shuttles OS for not being able to run Pine as it does to slam Windows for not being trusted for use as a critical system controller. There is simply no such thing as a 'one size fits all' OS.
       
      [1] I specify this because yes, there are various special purpose Linux distros available - including ones for hard and soft realtime. To call them all 'Linux' and set them as a group in comparison to Windows is somewhat misleading.
  10. DashPC? by spoonyfork · · Score: 2, Informative

    Whither DashPC?

    --
    Speak truth to power.
  11. What Sort Of Warranty, And Who Backs It? by dprovine · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My question, based on less-than-satisfactory experiences as a customer with both companies, is "What happens when something goes wrong?"

    Will Ford say that it's not their responsibility to fix the troubles from Microsoft? Will users have to sign an EULA that says "This car comes with no warranty"?

    What if people try to get repairs for the system under the warranty, and Microsoft shafts Ford on supporting their stuff, the way Microsoft has shafted everybody they've ever partnered with? Can even Microsoft hold off a lawsuit from a major carmaker?

    1. Re:What Sort Of Warranty, And Who Backs It? by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Perhaps, instead of the scenarios you point out, Windows Automotive will be the first flavor of Windows to get proper warranty.

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  12. In teh spirit of dumb comments.... by presearch · · Score: 3, Funny

    Considering that Ford owns a big piece of Mazda....

    Zune, Zune!

  13. Heard this before by spribyl · · Score: 3, Funny

    IF MICROSOFT BUILT CARS.....
    1. Every time they repainted the lines on the road you would have to buy a new car.
    2. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason, and you would just accept this, restart and drive on.
    3. Occasionally, executing a maneuver would cause your car to stop and fail and you would have to re-install the engine. For some strange reason, you would accept this too.
    4. You could only have one person in the car at a time, unless you bought "Car95" or "CarNT" Group Licence. But, then you would have to buy more seats..
    5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was much more reliable, five times as fast, twice as easy to drive - but would only run on 10 percent of the roads.
    6. The Macintosh car owners would get expensive Microsoft upgrades to their cars, which would make their cars run much slower.
    7. The oil, gas and alternator warning lights would be replaced by a single "general car default" warning light.
    8. New seats would force everyone to have the same size butt.
    9. The airbag system would say "are you sure?" before going off.
    10. If you were involved in a crash, you would have no idea what happened.
    11. We'd all have to switch to Microsoft (tm) Gas.

    1. Re:Heard this before by Hamoohead · · Score: 4, Funny
      You missed a couple:

      -- Every time you replaced a headlight you would have to find an updated and signed device driver. If the driver was found not to be DRM compliant, the windshield and stereo would be instructed to go into "lo-res" mode.

      -- Every few years, Microsoft would further change the road specification requiring road makers to comply or face the prospect of having no cars on their roads. This would also require you to strip down your car and reinstall everything.

      -- Your car would require weekly connection to the internet to verify its authenticity. Depending on the release version, if verification failed you would either be required to pay for your car again before being allowed to continue your journey or a popup window would appear in the lower right corner of your windshield informing you that you are driving an illegal model. Police would be instructed to arrest the driver immediately upon seeing this.

      -- Nissan would file a class-action suit against MS claiming copyright infringement on their navigation system. MS would respond with a patch to the road system spec requiring all Nissan owners to install an MS upgrade kit to their vehicle to continue driving on MS roads.

      -- Billboards would pop up out of the pavement blocking your field of view requiring you to stop your car and click "X".

      --
      "If your parents never had children, chances are you wonât either." -Dick Cavett
  14. I'm confused by JanneM · · Score: 2, Insightful

    OK, I'm confused now - wasn't Ford's problem that they we're selling too few vehicles? This sounds like a solution to the very opposite problem to me.

    --
    Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
  15. Found On Road Dead by xs650 · · Score: 4, Funny

    The meaning of the acronym FORD will now changed from Fix Or Repair Daily to Format Or Reboot Daily

    1. Re:Found On Road Dead by NewToNix · · Score: 2, Funny
      Actually, the one I know would be perfect with no changes: Found On Road Dead.

      Yes but now we will know who killed it...

  16. What about when things go wrong? by juiceg · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Anyone remember when this chap got locked in his car because the OS froze?

    http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/12/10525917 31421.html?oneclick=truestory

    I can hardly wait until "I got locked in my car" becomes a standard excuse for why you're late for a meeting.

  17. System Requirements by WED+Fan · · Score: 5, Funny

    In keeping with the resource hogging of Vista, Windows Automotive's System requirements:

    • 525HP engine, 700HP recommended
    • 1080i capable windshield/screen (you brits)
    • Trunk/Boot latch with a 3ms response time
    • 22in Wheels with Pimp-o-Bling Enhancements recommended
    • 7.1 Audio with BASS-O-DEATH
    • Auto roll up "View Portals" (Windows refer to the OS and cannot be applied to any glass see through barrier, read the License.)
    • Vehicle techs must be MCSE, MCSD, and the new MCATSE (Microsoft Certified Auto Technical Systems Engineer)
    --
    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
  18. Cntrl - Alt - Delete? by ThePopeLayton · · Score: 2, Funny

    What are you going to have to do to restart your car? Honk the horn, Run the wipers and open the passenger door?

  19. Predictions are easy with hindsight.... by MarkByers · · Score: 3, Insightful

    having ... navigation equipment with directions and road conditions will set car companies apart from their competitors in the future.

    Umm... most people here that want in-car navigation systems are already considering buying them. In Denmark there are tons of adverts for them all over the place, including a huge billboard not far from my home. If Bill Gates want to get Microsoft navigation systems as the standard, they better hurry up because they aren't innovating but just following in the others' footsteps (as usual).

    --
    I'll probably be modded down for this...
  20. Re:Appropriate union of buggy technology by kfg · · Score: 2, Funny

    Found On Road DoSed.

    KFG

  21. Dumbass marketroids by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Funny

    "There are going to be those who have it and those who don't. And even those who get it later are going to be a generation behind," Ford said.

    No, idiot, the ones who get it later will be a generation ahead.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  22. Yet another speech-driven mess by eck011219 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As a person with a moderate stutter (which gets worse while I'm driving, coincidentally), I'm getting pretty sick of everything going to speech recognition. According to the article, this system will be controlled this way as well. It's getting so I can do less and less in my environment unless I can speak fluently. Now I'm going to have to speak fluently to listen to the flippin' radio? Blech. And really, are we going to trust MS with speech recognition after this?

    Besides, what's wrong with cars now? They go, the radios have knobs, and we all know how to run them. If we want to listen to music that doesn't exist on the radio, we have devices for that, too. And with many new cars now being released with jacks for mp3 players, seems to me the problems are pretty much solved. The way it works now, you can pick and choose what devices you want, install or order them, and you don't have to fight through a whole computer UI (and let's be honest, it probably won't be as intuitive as it could be) to get to the stuff you want.

    And really, I hardly think the biggest problem that Ford currently has is the multimedia experience for its drivers. How about cars that run reliably first, and THEN turn your focus to how to bugger up my radio.

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  23. Re:Mostly a problem with women by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Informative

    Well, my experience is generally that anyone using a cell phone in a car might as well be drunk since it's hard to tell the difference from the way they drive. Now, it may be true that women talk longer on the cell phone: I say that because most women I know talk longer on the regular telephone, in fact I will go so far as to say that the invention of the cordless telephone did more to crank up phone usage than any other single factor. My old girlfriend would talk for hours on the phone, that doubled when she went cordless and then dummy me bought her a headset and I never got to talk to her again. However, I don't know if that applies to cell phone usage, although I suspect it does.

    Now, I will say that women drivers, in my experience, are becoming more aggressive, more dangerous, regardless of whether or not they're using a cellular phone. Worse, at least in the area where I live they're all driving giant ASSUVs (Arrogant Suburbanites Sporting Ugly Vehicles.) Apparently insurance company statistics bear that out ... women in the 18 to 25 year old range used to be substantially safer than their male counterparts. Not anymore. So when you combine their native inability to handle a large vehicle (that may sound sexist to some of you, but I drive sixty miles a day surrounded by these feminine sociopaths and it's reached the point where I'm considering moving closer to work) and the inability of pretty much everyone, regardless of sex, to drive effectively with a cell phone jammed in their ear, it's getting pretty goddamned dangerous out there.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  24. Re:Mostly a problem with women by Richy_T · · Score: 5, Funny

    My old girlfriend would talk for hours on the phone, that doubled when she went cordless and then dummy me bought her a headset and I never got to talk to her again.

    I'm married, where can I buy one of these headsets?

    Rich

  25. Re:"Found On Road Dead" happens even more by kfg · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A BSOD on the 405 in LA.

    Didn't Dylan write a song about this?

    Tangled up in Blue.

    KFG

  26. Does this mean... by torrentami · · Score: 3, Funny

    a new owner will have to obtain a new license in order to drive the car if he buys it used?

  27. I wonder if... by Idbar · · Score: 2, Funny

    The system can update itself while you are driving without you turning off and back on your car. Even better, I hope if the navigation system updates, you don't have to go back home and start over.

    In the future news:
    Detroit - The first windows based automotive crashed when the driver refused to update the system, filling the windshield with several pop-ups and finally automatically restarting the engine for the commuting driver in the expressway.

  28. Examples of technology distracting drivers exist by buro9 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    News-Gazette.com
    The 25-year-old ... died on Sept. 8 from head injuries he received Sept. 2 when [the driver] hit him with her car because she was downloading ring tones to her cell phone instead of paying attention to driving.
    Until we get autonomous vehicles that can take us from A to B without a driving having to pay attention, can we stop surrounding the driver with every means under the sun to not be paying attention.
  29. Re:Is there anyone? by edavid · · Score: 2, Informative

    Zune... Rip, transmit with your Zune, DRM has been added...

  30. First I had to kick Gates off my computer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    and fight every day for my right to run Linux. Now Windows comes back in my car. I suppose I'll have to build my own car now to keep Bill Gates out of it.

    When I get to be 89 and need an artificial heart and I see them about to stick it in my chest and it has a Windows logo, I suppose that's when I'll finally snap and just start choking people.

  31. Re:be the end of Slashdot for me... by xENoLocO · · Score: 2, Informative

    Or you can just subscribe to slashdot.

    It's quite nice, actually.

    --
    "The need to build the internet comes from something inside us, something programmed... something we can't resist."
  32. One Ford was enough by jeffgtr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've owned one Ford. It was a Contour and had all sorts of bells and whistles. It was very unreliable, many things broke. It was a totally bad experience. My last two cars have been Toyota Corollas, very dependable, not as many gadgets but they had (have) all the ones that matter. Excellent experience with both. I used to be a windows user then switched to OSX because of the rock solid unix underpinnings and reliability. Quite happy with that decision. The thought of a Microsoft/Ford monstrosity won't be in my purchasing plans ever. As an aside. I recently had an Alpine CD player with Ipod interation, good grief thats distracting enough. I couldn't imagine fussing with a windowsish device while driving. It's a bad idea. Why can't American auto makers give us a car that just works, why can't they get that? No they have to do something like install Windows in the car to make it even more unreliable and user hostile.

  33. You're crazy! by shaneh0 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I've never seen a ford without windows!

  34. better warn Honda and Toyota! by guisar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If this is the best Ford has got, not wonder they are tanking. I can see powerpoint briefs instead of manuals, having to reformat your stereo and of course being lost when the required (expensive) upgrade to the nav system refuses to read your old route files. Come on Ford, why not bring back a big of reliability, build quality and mileage instead of wasting your R&D on this nonsense. Given your presence in the EU and their attitude toward Microsoft, do you really publicizing this relationship is wise?

  35. Re:Examples of technology distracting drivers exis by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Informative
    These days, if you wanted to, you could use off-the-shelf components and get a working system.

    I've actually seen a Mac Mini mounted in the DIN slot in a car's dashboard with a small LCD monitor hinged over the CD slot and a keypad controlling it. Apparently, by design or not, the Mac Mini is perfectly sized for this application. And it uses a laptop HDD which just so happens to be pretty vibration resistant.

    -b.

  36. The bills are _already_ a gen behind by Dr.+Zowie · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Toyota Prius has a very nice automotive computing system with high def screen, speech recognition, bluetooth phone access, and a zillion other features. No Redmond involvement at all...