How Ford Will Upgrade Owners' Display Screens

gManZboy writes "'Sometime early next year, Ford will mail USB sticks to about 250,000 owners of vehicles with its advanced touchscreen control panel. The stick will contain a major upgrade to the software for that screen. With it, Ford breaks the model in which the technology in a car essentially stayed unchanged from assembly line to junk yard' — and Ford becomes a software company. This shift created a hot new tech job at Ford: human-machine interface engineers — people who come from a range of backgrounds, from software development to mechanical engineers, and who can live in the worlds of art and science at once."

Comments

"with it, Ford breaks"

[decora]

yup. sounds about right.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[peragrin]

FORD uses Microsoft software for it's screens. of course it needs updates. they are probably software patches to keep the damn things from crashing so often

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[Lumpy]

Because "ford sync" is actually Microsoft AutoPc from 1999. I had that abortion in my car from clarion. It's buggy, it locks up, voice control barely works, etc...

My nephew bought a new Mustang with it, and when he demoed it I about spit. it's the SAME VOICE and is responding the same way... kind of works. he also mentioned that it stops working at times until he shuts off the car and waits 10 seconds and then restarts it.

Yup. I would hate to tell him how I could lock my version up hard by turning on the ignition, let it boot, then off and on again quickly. I could lock up the autopc so hard it takes a hardware reset and a complete wipe back to factory default to get it working again.

Clarion got pissed when I did that in their demo vehicle at CES in 2000. Yup, same bug that they would not admit exists from a year ago.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[Bengie]

Car + Crash = Bad

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[hairyfeet]

That is the part I don't get about TFA. The article blathers on about 'Ford did this' and 'Ford did that' but all the ads I saw talked about how it was MSFT's software, so which is it? Is Ford merely calling up their contact at MSFT and saying "We want this feature and do something about this problem" or did they essentially hire MSFT to just write them the OS and hand them the source code which they are having to add features and fixes in house?

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[IndustrialComplex]

Because non MS software works well without patches...

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[Grishnakh]

It's really pretty disappointing too. From everything I've read, Ford's latest vehicles are, mechanically, really pretty good these days, and a giant improvement over the stuff they were making 10 years ago (compared with the competition). But these stupid Sync and MyTouch systems are completely ruining the whole package. I believe one article I read pointed out that Ford instantly went from leading the initial-quality surveys (thanks to improved mechanicals and quality) to being near the bottom, all because of these stupid touchscreen systems.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[FunPika]

Wow, Blue Screens of DEATH will sure get a whole new meaning if it ever causes an accident in a car.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[jd2112]

It's really pretty disappointing too. From everything I've read, Ford's latest vehicles are, mechanically, really pretty good these days, and a giant improvement over the stuff they were making 10 years ago (compared with the competition). But these stupid Sync and MyTouch systems are completely ruining the whole package. I believe one article I read pointed out that Ford instantly went from leading the initial-quality surveys (thanks to improved mechanicals and quality) to being near the bottom, all because of these stupid touchscreen systems.

Kind of like BMW and their iDrive abomination.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[FatdogHaiku]

"Please wait while Microsoft validates your airbag deployment software license..."
Congratulations, you airbag deployment software license is valid.
Microsoft will now continue deploying your airbag...

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[iggymanz]

no, Ford does in-house software development with help from Microsoft. I've a relative who does that, he is Ford employee.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[Grishnakh]

Yes, exactly. You'd think Ford would have learned from BMW's well-publicized mistakes, but apparently not.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[shutdown -p now]

Their software runs on Windows CE. I doubt they'd customize the OS itself (why?), but the actual userspace software that handles the car is likely all Ford.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[shutdown -p now]

Is there any good in-car software these days?

I've been looking hard, but they all seem to be crap - maybe not the "crash all the time" kind of crap, but "features circa mid-90" and "UI designed for a blind octopus" kind of crap. Comparing them to any other modern smart device - even, say, Nokia Symbian smartphones - is really sad.

Actually, come to think of it, I don't really need my car to have software on its own, at least not the kind that drives touchscreen. Just let me dock my smartphone, and give it full access to the main screen (and to any secondary screens, if any) and input knobs dedicated to it, as well as the audio system; and read access to all measurement devices in the car. Let software companies write software to handle all that, and let me pick the one I like.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[Grishnakh]

Actually, come to think of it, I don't really need my car to have software on its own, at least not the kind that drives touchscreen. Just let me dock my smartphone, and give it full access to the main screen (and to any secondary screens, if any) and input knobs dedicated to it, as well as the audio system; and read access to all measurement devices in the car. Let software companies write software to handle all that, and let me pick the one I like.

The problem with cars is that software becomes dated and obsolete far faster than the rest of the car does. Replacing a car every two years is idiotic, at least as far as the chassis, engine, suspension, etc. is concerned. What we need is cars where the consumer electronics are easily upgraded every year or two, while the rest stays the same, but without making your interior look like shit.

For most newer cars these days, the stereos really seem to be OK in my opinion, as long as they have a USB port and have Bluetooth connectivity so you can use your cellphone hands-free; these seem to be pretty common features in new cars these days. The problem, however, (as I've seen it, as I've been looking at new cars lately) is with the nav systems. Basically, you seem to have two choices: 1) a horrendously overpriced factory-installed system that visually integrates with the interior well, but costs $2-3k, and seems to be early-2000s technology with a shitty UI consisting of some weird knobs on the center console (like the Audis I've looked at), or really stupid shit like having a DVD drive that takes up most of the glove compartment and is only used for software updates, and those updates cost $300 each (like the Volvos I've looked at). Or, 2) you can buy a Garmin/TomTom/Magellan portable nav system for $2-400 that fits in your hand, has far better performance and UI than the factory systems costing 5x as much, has free map updates, has a touchscreen (apparently touchscreen technology is beyond the factories from what I've seen), however the only way to use it in your car is either to have a passenger hold it in his hand, or you buy some cheap-ass holder that clips to your air vents (like an 80s-era cupholder!) and have wires hanging out of the thing.

I'm sorry, I have a really hard time spending $40k on a car to be stuck with crappy old technology like this, or making it look ghetto with one of the aftermarket nav systems.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[shutdown -p now]

Yes, you basically summed up everything that's wrong with it. My (2011!) VW has an in-dash nav system, and it turned out to be quite a downgrade from my portable Garmin unit in pretty much everything but screen size, and some nice (but tangential) integration with other car functions. The reason why I'm not using Garmin is that it then needs two wires, one to power it, and one to plug into AUX to use the car's sound system - and then I cannot use car's audio system for playback. Which would not be so bad by itself, since Garmin also plays MP3s and has an SD card slot - except that I want the wheel buttons for volume and back/forward to work! What a mess.

Well, on the bright side, my in-dash nav has a touchscreen. I guess that's progress.

The problem with cars is that software becomes dated and obsolete far faster than the rest of the car does. Replacing a car every two years is idiotic, at least as far as the chassis, engine, suspension, etc. is concerned. What we need is cars where the consumer electronics are easily upgraded every year or two, while the rest stays the same, but without making your interior look like shit.

That was the gist of my idea. Clearly, sound system ages pretty well, and I don't think that you really need to change screens every two years, either - our display tech is "good enough" today to last for more than that; think of an iPad display fitted into the dash - I know I could live with that for a long time.

What needs to be easily upgradable is internal hardware - CPU, RAM, storage and such - and the software that runs on top of that. But we already have all that in our smartphones! And we already have all the connectors and standards needed for that - e.g. my Galaxy S2 smartphone has USB OTG and MHL, so it could easily have external sensors connected to it via USB, and drive any external display via MHL. All that's needed is for the cars to expose all that, and software to be written to work with it.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[Grishnakh]

I thought TomTom had a free updates option, maybe I was wrong. However, I do know that Garmin has a version of all their models (with an "M" suffix IIRC) which costs $50, and gives you free lifetime map updates.

My point here is that you can get a top-of-the-line Garmin with free updates for a small fraction of the cost of a typical factory nav system, and the Garmin is not only faster, the graphics are 5-10 years ahead of the factory systems, the UI is far more advanced, etc. The other responder's 2011 VW at least has a touchscreen system, but the $40-90,000 Audis I looked at a 6 months ago did not, you had to control them with some funky knob on the center console.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[FuzzyMan45]

Any chance you can ask him where/how a normal consumer would file proper bug reports on the SYNC software? There's some issues in the 2011 fusion line that I've found and would love to report but the only angles are forums and tech support line which i don't have much confidence with.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[xmundt]

Greetings and Salutations.
          FWIIW, Pioneer makes a really slick product, called the "AVIC" which addresses pretty much all these complaints. It slots into the dash and replaces the radio, and, includes a nice, large GPS screen that pops out, and also provides sophisticated but easy to use controls for video and audio components. It is not cheap at close to $1000.00 but the GPS unit in it works quite well and is accurate.
          Regards
          Dave Mundt

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[Grishnakh]

Except that on many high-end cars now, the radio is fully integrated with the HVAC system. I'm sure the Pioneer doesn't cover that.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[tapspace]

I worked on the Sync project. Part of the reason MSFT was all over the marketing materials is that MS was the one running the campaigns. Ford (and suppliers) did a lot of work, and currently, MS is involved as little as possible. I didn't work on the frontend, but from what I understand, there is an interface. If changes must change anything past the interface, they need to negotiate and pay for changes from MS. Ford does this as little as possible, because they don't want to pay extra... and they don't want to work with MS. Ford and MS are two gigantic companies used to pretty much pushing everyone around and it didn't take long for the relationship to go sour.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[plover]

"Deploy airbag: Cancel or Allow?"

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[Hasai]

Ford does in-house software development with help from Microsoft.

Oh. My. God.
~Higgins

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[iggymanz]

There is no such venue.

Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[flowwolf]

Hello. I see you are trying to deploy your airbag. Would you like some assistance?

what a summary!

[Anonymous Coward]

"people who come from a range of backgrounds, from software development to mechanical engineers, and who can live in the worlds of art and science at once"

did MLK write the summary?

Re:what a summary!

[Anonymous Coward]

Workplaces like that are very common today. They're basically two or three American mechanical engineers, coupled with two or three American software developers. They usually have one good manager a level above them, but then another 15 or so useless managers above that. Then there are the 85 off-shore software developers who collectively are less productive than the two or three American software developers. Aside from getting their own assigned work completed, the American software developers also have to do or fix the work assigned to the off-shore developers. But since this whole off-shoring idea was originated by one of the 15 useless middle managers, it's untouchable and can't just be discarded, although it's a complete waste. Then there's a 'user interface designer' that the software developers have to fight with daily. This poor fellow dropped out of art school and somehow became an expert in UIs. He wants to spend all day adding curved corners and gradients to every part of the UI. Then he decides to drop menu bars, status bars, and other useful UI functionality like that, because it's not 'usable'. The software developers battle with him constantly over his stupid ideas, but this designer is the son of the brother of one of the middle managers, so he stays around although he's a complete waste.

Re:what a summary!

[billcopc]

This.

Offshoring, in my experience over the past 3-4 years, has been more trouble than it is worth. The time you spend babysitting these novice developers eats up whatever you "saved" by paying them 1/4 of your local wage, and it drives that project manager absolutely batshit insane. And then it takes them at least twice as long to do anything.

I often get the impression most of these guys can't be bothered to think for themselves. If you tell them "Add a newsletter subscription form", they will add the form, sure, a form that does nothing when you click Submit. It doesn't matter that the same guy has been working on your site for over a year, he's still not going to realize you didn't just want an inert form on your website. If you then say "make it insert into the database", hey great, now it's inserting into the database - in some random table that isn't the subscriptions table! So the net result is you practically write p-code, which they then thinly translate into Java or PHP or whatever.

Some shops can apparently tolerate this level of mediocrity. We've tried offshoring a few times, thinking maybe we had bad luck the first few times... nope, always the same bullshit, so that's why I now know how to configure and script Asterisk IVRs. We wanted to pay someone to just get it done since it was well outside our expertise, but in the end we had to do it over from scratch because all the offshore contractors we hired were complete imbeciles - so much for calling themselves Asterisk experts!

Re:what a summary!

[Anonymous Coward]

So the net result is you practically write p-code, which they then thinly translate into Java or PHP or whatever.

If you do it a certain way it's not so bad. The good but expensive programmer writes the stuff in precise English. It then gets compiled by some Indians into Java/.Net.

Then the good expensive programmer goes off to write something else while a cheaper bunch of people maintains the crap :).

If you really want to offshore work and not just "compilation", I think you should skip the "cheap" Indians, the Eastern Europeans are much better, they charge more but at least they're better than AIs- you still need to be a bit careful, but the hit rate is better.

Re:what a summary!

[swalve]

Ask culture versus guess culture. You expect them to guess as to what is necessary to make the subscription form work, and they expect you to ask for what you want.

Re:what a summary!

[Lumpy]

Most companies love medicore as it had higher profit margins. Even high end companies like Crestron are doing it. I have Crestron gear that is from 10-12 years ago that still runs perfectly. Yet new stuff I install for customers have a 35% failure rate. OR they dont work as reliable as they should. All of crestrons IP enabled WifI touchpanels are complete crap. Even their flagship TPS-6X is not reliable. out of 60 I have installed 30 drop connections or fall over at random times, and all of them have battery life issues due to bad design.

Medicore is higher profit margins for the executives and shareholders. Screw the customer.

Re:what a summary!

[smpoole7]

It's not that they love mediocre so much as the "15 PHB Managers" mentioned above delude themselves. They've also been taught that the *perception* of quality is more important than the reality. "Sell the sizzle, not the steak," convince the customers that you're the best and there you go.

They honestly don't know any better, because they've never actually built anything. All they know how to do is maximize profits. It's not just the software, either, it's the hardware. In spades. Some salescreature from Asia will waltz in and say, "I can build your gidgle-widgets for fifty cents!"

The PHBs get moist eyed. They exclaim, "we're paying ten times that now!" They pound each other on the back and cry. "FIFTY CENTS? Yay! Halloo," and they sign the deal.

The new stuff arrives and about half of it breaks. About 10% of it doesn't even work out of the box. The PHBs DON'T CARE. The way they look at it, they're saving so much money that, even if they have to replace the customer's unit two or three times, they still come out ahead.

The Internet is changing that, though, because most of us consumer types look at reviews before we buy anything. PHBs *hate* online reviews, because they say, "their stuff may 'sizzle nicely, but the steak itself is awful ..."

(Gosh, I'm awfully poetic this morning. I need more coffee.)

Re:what a summary!

[Nemyst]

Sorry, but no.... Just no. He asked for a form that does a specific task. If the form does not do this task, then this isn't about guessing, it's that they're incompetent.

Re:what a summary!

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

This.

Offshoring, in my experience over the past 3-4 years, has been more trouble than it is worth.

The work ethics and habits of American workers evolved over the decades when long career in one company with a gold watch and a pension. They work in certain way. The management on its part should be nurturing the workers who have a deep understanding of the company and the customers, especially those workers who cultivate skills that can not be useful seeking employment elsewhere. But management ditched the gold watch, picked up the golden parachute.

The work ethics and the habits of the body-shopping firms evolved in a climate where the relationship is definitely not long term. Both sides knew it. Both sides expected the other side to take maximum advantage of it. American management went in thinking American work ethics in third-world prices. But it is not dealing with employees but intermediate contractors. Even if the body-shopping contractors have long term employees who are loyal, they would be loyal to the contractor, not to the outsourcing companies. Further everyone knows the cluelessness of the middle management. So they found every loop hole in the contract, every stretchable point, every exploitable gap and the body shopping contractors took the American management to the cleaners faster than you can say "aloo gobi, channa masala, butter nan and mango lassi please".

There are world class employees and workers in India. But they (I should say we, because I am a desi who would not work for a desi salary) go up the value chain pretty quickly and are not available for hire at third world prices. What you do get for third world prices are third world class work.

Re:what a summary!

[Anonymous Coward]

people who come from a range of backgrounds, from software development to mechanical engineers, and who can live in the worlds of art and science at once

Then there's a 'user interface designer' that the software developers have to fight with daily. This poor fellow dropped out of art school and somehow became an expert in UIs. He wants to spend all day adding curved corners and gradients to every part of the UI. Then he decides to drop menu bars, status bars, and other useful UI functionality like that, because it's not 'usable'. The software developers battle with him constantly over his stupid ideas, but this designer is the son of the brother of one of the middle managers, so he stays around although he's a complete waste.

I just thought I'd chime in here. Ford has contracted out at least one UI deign project for their new cars to several parallel design firms, including one I work with (sorry NDA prohibits more info). The design is a long term project made up of: one manager below the level of company founder; one graphic designer; and a bunch of usability researchers from disparate backgrounds including: UI design, anthropology, CS, music, and education. They spend most of their time putting together fast and dirty mockups of interfaces and then watching as many people as possible (in the target demographic) try to use them and interviewing those people about the experience.

It is too early to judge the quality of the end product and even if it is excellent who knows if Ford will go forward with it. That said, I thought it important that people know your vision of how UIs are designed does not reflect the reality of my current experience with their "in process" design work.

Re:what a summary!

[Grishnakh]

This sounds like an excellent summary, but I'm wondering how you explain how these same dumb-ass UI "experts" have come to be in control of Gnome, Unity, Windows Metro, etc.

Re:what a summary!

[swalve]

No, if you read his comment, he (said he) asked for a form and nothing else. He assumed they were going to guess that he wanted all the other stuff too, they assumed he would be smart enough to ask for exactly what he wanted. "Make a form" != "Make a form that accepts email addresses and submits them to the subscriptions table in the database"

Re:what a summary!

[hot soldering iron]

Beautiful! Accurate and concise, also.

BTW, what brand coffee are you drinking? I could sure use some, myself.

Re:what a summary!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, this. It's not a well-recognized phenomenon, but there's evidence for it across the centuries and in different cultures. From the opposite side of the spectrum, see Aulus Gellius's Attic Nights I.13, where Publius Crassus Mucianus, the Roman commander in Asia, prepared to besiege Leuce and needed a giant beam to make a battering ram. He wrote off to some locals, whom he'd visited recently, and asked for their tallest tree, of two especially tall ones he'd seen there. The natives, however, guessed: they sent the smaller tree, reasoning correctly that it was actually better suited for making a battering ram. So, Crassus had their chief scourged for failing to send the tree for which he asked. Takeaway: the Romans were not a guess-based culture.

Re:what a summary!

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod parent up...

The offshore developers have no idea if the other parts of the project are being worked on by another group. He wants them to do work that the company might not need or pay for just because he can't say exactly what he wants

Re:what a summary!

[Anonymous Coward]

I've had some very good developers in India working on my team. Unfortunately, in the last few years, wage inflation means they cost almost as much as an onshore programmer - and the "timezone" tax probably made them more expensive. I was happy to have them though. Although there are developers of that caliber available in the Silicon Valley, there just are not enough to go around so it's easier to build and maintain a great team if you increase the candidate pool.

Never in my life have I hired an onshore H1-B developer or an offshore developer to save money, it's always been because they were the best person (and, esp. in the case of the H1-Bs, it actually ends up costing me a little more because I have to eat the costs and delays associated with the H1-B).

As a benefit, the offshore developers often have much less of a sense of "entitlement" and spend a larger percentage of their time working and a smaller percentage of their time whining than us prima donnas in the valley.

Re:what a summary!

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you hiring through a job shop overseas? Historically that hasn't seemed very successful unless you're a big company that has a lot of clout. Big companies can contract for 200 developers in India through a job shop and get any developer replaced at any time for any or no reason and the next day a replacement is in place. Thus, through iterative natural selection, big companies can end up with some decent teams. But guess where those developers that the big company tried and didn't like go? Yep, back into the pool to be allocated to the smaller contracts.

Unfortunately, a small company that needs just a few developers has a hard time hiring good developers "direct" in India unless they are fortunate enough to have a great native manager "on the ground" there to figure it all out.

Re:what a summary!

[Jaime2]

No, he's saying that it's expensive to say exactly what he wants, and that offsets all of the savings. At the end of the day, it's the thinking that's expensive not the typing. If you move the typing to India, but don't move the thinking, then you've hired a typist instead of a programmer.

Re:what a summary!

[slimjim8094]

But that's his point. That's what "Add a newsletter subscription form" means. If it doesn't do anything, then it's just a form. And if it puts it some random place in the database, then it didn't subscribe them to the newsletter and so it's not a newsletter subscription form.

If somebody came to me and said "Add a newsletter subscription form", I'd write a form that did what it said on the tin. Precision is good, but not when it's at the expense of understanding. The most precise definition of what you want is the source code, why not give them that? Oh, because you're paying them to translate your requirements into code.

Re:what a summary!

[shutdown -p now]

My suspicion is that the recent slew of UI redesign is the computing equivalent of postmodernism.

(i.e. if people hate it, that's because they "don't understand" it, not because it's objectively crap)

Re:what a summary!

[Hasai]

....If you tell them "Add a newsletter subscription form", they will add the form, sure, a form that does nothing when you click Submit....

Wow; sounds just like your typical Union guy.

Re:what a summary!

[billcopc]

A "newsletter subscription form" would be expected to subscribe its submitted to some newsletter. If I asked the same developer to build a "newsletter admin panel" a week ago, with supporting database fixtures, I expect him to put 2 and 2 together and figure that this "newsletter form" will tie into the other module he just built for me. I don't think that's unreasonable. Same site, same feature group, it's pretty DUH to me.

Let's turn it around. Suppose one of my existing clients asked me to do the same job, adding a subscription form to their site, that's all the information I need from them. It is literally a 1-line email, assuming I already have access to their files and database: "Hey Bill, please add a subscription form to the footer". I'll log in to the DB, find the subscription table I created last week, and write the two dozen lines of HTML and PHP/Perl/Java/C to feed into said table. I'll even take a quick glance at the site design and probably figure out exactly where they want it (bottom right). Then I reply back with a test URL for them to vet. The entire process takes, oh, 15 minutes if I'm sleepy. I could ask the same of any of our North American staff, even the graphic artists, and get similar results.

With the outsourcers, it takes 15 minutes to write the request with such extreme verbosity that my grandmother could probably figure out how to add the damn semicolons to each line. Then it takes their guy 15 minutes to do it, if we're lucky. Usually it takes a few round-trip emails to finally get what we want. I would much rather pay the outsourcer twice as much to figure it all out on his own, freeing up my time. I'm giving him work, because I'm too busy to deal with it myself. I'm not his manager, I'm a client. Clients shouldn't be telling contractors how to do their job.

Now, I know what you're thinking: it's a 15 minute job, of course the overhead will be disproportionate... but no, on larger jobs, they just have more opportunities to screw up. The local guys, even if it's a brand new hire, will usually get it 90% right the first time, with little tweaks in a subsequent email - cosmetic stuff, for the most part. There is one project in particular that looks like it will break the outsourcing routine for us, because it is so far off schedule and so frustrating that I could have built this thing ten times over, in one tenth of the time, for the same money we've spent on the cheap guys. The difference, of course, is that the client is furious, and the project manager can't commit, because he has no faith in the contractors' ability to deliver.

If I hire someone to repaint my car, I drop off the car, pick a colour, and I expect them to take it from there. I shouldn't have to tell the painter dude that he needs to mask over the chrome and windows, buy paint and tape, and dress in overalls and a facemask. If it takes him an extra hour to do those things, fine, bill me an extra hour. That's why I hired the guy in the first place. What these outsourcers do is equivalent to waving an unplugged airbrush in front of the car, not even asking themselves why the colour isn't changing...

Re:what a summary!

[billcopc]

Okay, but what if I don't need the best person, just a "good enough" coder to do grunt work ? I could pay a college student $12 an hour, or I could give that same money to someone in Asia, where it might be equivalent to mid-grade pay, in terms of relative wages and cost of living. I would expect to get mid-grade output from the guy.

Flip it around. Suppose a client hires me at my going rate of $95/hr, expecting a decent developer with reasonable experience and skills. They're not getting a veteran specialist who can architect your entire supply-chain automation suite on a paper napkin before you even take your second sip of coffee. They're getting a diversified coder with a good background in network admin, and paying the going rate for that sort of work. If they needed the rockstar architect, they'd pay rockstar rates.

Re:what a summary!

[billcopc]

I LOLed. Also, cool UID :)

But yeah, I know what you mean. It's like they're untouchable. At least, if an American contractor fucks you over, you can sue them over unsatisfied contract terms. If an outsourcer takes your money and leaves you with an unfinished product, you're screwed. Union guys are a bit worse though, they not only keep the wages collected for the unfinished work, they will also extort you for 12 months of paid stress leave, under threat of an unlawful dismissal suit... but I digress!

Re:what a summary!

[swalve]

That is why it is a cultural disconnect. They are speaking the same language, but the underlying assumptions are different. It's not right versus wrong, and that's what makes it difficult. An American ordering french fries expects ketchup to be offered, and doesn't understand why the Belgians have given him mayonnaise. Either person isn't wrong, they are just operating off of the expectations they grew up with.

Like in your car painting example, if you hire a guy who advertises "I'll paint your car", he might show up with all the equipment ready to go, but ask you where the cans of paint are. You expected him to bring the paint, he expected you to provide it. Or you call a phone guy and say "I need you to come out and install some new phone jacks". Should he assume that you want to buy new phones from him too?

I'm not saying it is impossible that the outsourcer is just an incompetent moron, but that when people are dealing cross-culture like that, it pays to assume that they have different assumptions about how things get communicated. I guess it really is guess versus guess in this case, since both sides are guessing (incorrectly) that the other will make the correct assumptions. Guess culture is more efficient when the players have the same frame of reference- I know that when my grandfather says "see you at the house",he means HIS house. If I had a chauffeur, his frame of reference would be different. He'd need to know whose house and where it is. If he was firmly a guess culture person, he would assume that since nobody told him differently, the only house he knows about is MY house and take me there.

I even see it in my workplace. My manager is firmly guess-culture. Figure it out, and he'll tell you if you are wrong. It is occasionally confusing. Another manager is firmly ask-culture. He has told me how to do the same thing multiple times, as if it is the first time I've ever been asked to do that thing. I always found it insulting, until I saw their behavior from the ask versus guess framework. It takes him 10 times as long to explain anything, but it pays off in the end because he doesn't have to deal with followup communications. If you go and do what he said, he will be satisfied. Where my boss might save time in the beginning, he has to deal with more "OK, I did X, Y and Z. Was that what you wanted?"

You are right, clients shouldn't have to tell contractors how to do their job. But their job is to do what is asked of them, and secondarily, do ONLY what is asked or risk doing something unwanted or undesirable. How are they supposed to know that "make a form" means "make a form and a bunch of other backend stuff too" unless they have been told? It is just as valid for them to assume that you have someone else working on the backend stuff as it would be for them to assume that you want them to do it.

Opening

[Ice Station Zebra]

Sounds like an opening for a black hat to compromise a Ford vehicle with some mal-ware.

Re:Opening

[Mantis8]

F.O.R.D. = fix or repair daily will take on a whole new meaning now.

Re:Opening

[mikerubin]

Format Or Reinstall Daily

Re:Opening

[Antique Geekmeister]

Yes, it is. The lack of specialized hardware or connectors for the upgrade makes the update fully software dependent. And with modern GPS systems, it makes unauthorized tracking (or unconstitutional law enforcement tracking) a personal privacy risk as well. And it creates fascinating tune-up paths for local mechanics with the skills to manipulate the carburetor and automatic transmission settings. The ability to turn off automatic headlight settings in software is invaluable for illegal activities, and to alter fuel-air ratios for high performance driving is criticial to access in software for modern systems.

I do hope that Ford's engineers are a good team, and not been forced to follow management policy decisions made in hurried moments between policy meetings that affect the safety and reliability of basic engine systems. I've certainly seen that happen with critical manufacturing and networking architectures, with managers too busy or unable to have the meetings with their employees insted of their own managers to listen to negative concerns about subtle flaws in a planned architecture. "We'll fix that if it happens" is a very dangerous approach that I had to deal with yesterday.

Re:Opening

[hedwards]

That was amusing back when Ford has serious quality issues, those days are by and large gone.

As others have mentioned this is probably largely MS' fault for not doing proper QA prior to shipping the product. I'd consider blaming Ford, but let's be honest it's not like MS has any methods in place for requiring QA of products built with their products and they do often times deliberately provide work arounds so that the integrators don't have to.

Re:Opening

[The Askylist]

I had an issue upgrading from version 2 (Bridgend Boyo) to the latest, Dagenham Dustbin. Next year's Emphysemic Escort is supposed to fix it, but I suspect I'll be disappointed till Z-Car Zodiac is finally released.

Re:Opening

[kmoorman]

Consumer Reports has Ford quality way down again, mostly because of this software.

And if you buy a Ford and blame Microsoft for its problems I guarantee that you will be in the vast minority. Anyone with half a brain will be blaming Ford.

Re:Opening

[PPH]

Anyone with half a brain will be blaming Ford.

As they should. Ford is responsible for their brand's reputation in the final analysis. If they buy crap from some third party, they'll be the ones to suffer.Its the same thing with airplanes. When a Boeing or Airbus crashes, nobody remembers that it was a GE engine that blew up.

Guess where Ford's CEO came from? Its sad, because Boeing really needs someone who understands their reputation's problems in the face of outsource vendors.

Re:Opening

[Grave]

And if you trust Consumer Reports' methodology, you have less than half a brain.

http://www.allpar.com/cr.html
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2011/03/consumer-reports-admits-reliability-data-was-scarce-for-chrysler.html
http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/shortcomings.php

There are plenty more articles out there explaining the problem.

Re:Opening

[jones_supa]

Firmware-Originated Repetitive Deficiencies

Re:Opening

[ninetyninebottles]

And if you trust Consumer Reports' methodology, you have less than half a brain.

I don't think you understand the scientific method. A study with methodological flaws that might make it less accurate is still valid information. A scientist tentatively believes whatever the best scientific research has supported. Yes, Consumer Reports has always had significant self selection bias from their survey based studies, but that's still the best data we have.

There are plenty more articles out there explaining the problem.

Studies explaining the problem are no help. Show us valid, large scale studies without the same level of methodological problems. Otherwise your comments are pitting random unfounded beliefs influenced by marketing campaigns against a study with potential for bias in both directions. Guess which one is more likely to be accurate.

Re:Opening

[sirroc]

I would rather do that, than be Found On Road Dead.

Re:Opening

[Richy_T]

Found on Road Defragging?

Re:Opening

[martin-boundary]

FORD: you can have any error message background you like as long as it is blue.

Re:Opening

[Daniel Phillips]

Consumer Reports has Ford quality way down again, mostly because of this software.

And if you buy a Ford and blame Microsoft for its problems I guarantee that you will be in the vast minority. Anyone with half a brain will be blaming Ford.

It's Microsoft, it locks up and it takes too long to reboot. What's unclear about that?

Obviously, taking too long to reboot is a made in Microsoft problem. As is locking up, for that matter. No way should the whole thing lock up. It's Microsoft, what can I say?

Re:Opening

[ICLKennyG]

We have spent countless resources training people not to stick unknown USB keys they get in the mail into things. Now we have a huge userbase of idiots who are going to get a package in the mail with a USB key and be told to stick it in their car (legitimately). It's not a giant leap of faith or logic until somone repackages this into something that completely fucks with PC's or SmartPhones. Snearknet viruses return!

uhh.. article years too late..

[rrossman2]

Seriously... the article writer and story submitter haven't been involved with or paying attention to autos for the past.. oh.. 10+ years?

Most "recalls" anymore are for flashing the software or programming in the ECU, TCM, BCM, or whatever other module. There's a recent 2007-2010 model year Honda recall for transmissions shifting issues that the fix is flashing new programming into the computer. How is that not software?

Heck, GM radios (yes, made by delco or whoever) come with certain features locked out.. to unlock say the input port to work with XM requires plugging it into the shop computer and basically "flipping some bits" in the radio firmware (for lack of better terms) to enable the feature.

There are older recalls that are just software updates.. and these updates are as much software and done by the car manufacturer as the Ford update (IE: Ford doesn't make the radios, other companies do.. some companies that make OEM radios include: Fujitsu Ten (Eclipse), Panasonic, Delco, Alpine, Pioneer, Becker, Kenwood, JVC... most of that short list I typed out also still make or made after market radios at some point.

Re:uhh.. article years too late..

[Stormthirst]

Isn't the point though that Ford are confident enough in the update process that they can let users do it themselves? A recall implies that there is such a serious issue that a class action law suit would be more expensive than doing the recall?

Re:uhh.. article years too late..

[excitedidiot]

VW has been making software updates to vehicles since the MK4 models, starting in 2001. In fact, nearly all VW's made in the last few years, have had software updates.

Re:uhh.. article years too late..

[mseeger]

Agree, heard drivers complaining about firmware updates massively changing the driving behaviour of their cars dramatically already a decade ago...

Re:uhh.. article years too late..

[rickb928]

Plugging in a USB stick isn't 'doing it yourself'.

Re:uhh.. article years too late..

[Lumpy]

"Heck, GM radios (yes, made by delco or whoever) come with certain features locked out.. to unlock say the input port to work with XM requires plugging it into the shop computer and basically "flipping some bits" in the radio firmware (for lack of better terms) to enable the feature."

Wrong. to enable XM radio you plug in the Receiver module, on power up you press and hold AUX intil the display flashes. it then detects any new devices and enables them.

They don't plug it into the shop computer unless you call the guy smearing grease and dirt all over the inside of the car a "computer"

Re:uhh.. article years too late..

[JBMcB]

It's not even that complicated. Some OEM radios can be "flashed" with update CD-ROMs. This became prevalent about the time that MP3 and satellite radio head units became popular, the car companies knew there were going to be problems and hedged their bets allowing CD updates. They aren't available to the consumer, though, you still need to take it in to the dealership to get the update.

Re:uhh.. article years too late..

[Chris Mattern]

It is compared to having to take the car to the dealership and having *them* plug in the USB stick--which up until now was the only way they would do official patching.

Re:uhh.. article years too late..

[Ihmhi]

On the bright side, there's always the custom ECU option. You can install any OS you want on a computer; why not your car?

Re:uhh.. article years too late..

[tixxit]

Just replaced the ECM (recall) on my wife's '05 Corolla. Also, please note the incredibly cool MegaSquirt (open source engine management).

Re:uhh.. article years too late..

[rrossman2]

No... any in-dash OEM nav unit could be updated via a DVD... so no different than the USB (which when you update the map info it also updates the system firmware). Again, same procedure after market use.. then after market did it via SD Card for those that supported them, and now DVD/USB/etc.

So once again, this Ford trick isn't new.. just a new media vs most other OEMs... but still the same as inserting an update DVD.

Re:uhh.. article years too late..

[Chris Mattern]

You're missing the point. The point isn't that it's a USB. The point that it *isn't* after-market. This is an actual official update from Ford that Ford expects the customer to install himself. This is the first time that an auto manufacturer has had customers do this sort of thing (as opposed to the customer doing it behind their backs with after-market DVDs or whatever).

Re:uhh.. article years too late..

[PoopMonkey]

I think you're missing the point. I've updated the in-car GPS/radio in my car several times with a DVD from the car manufacturer. This isn't after-market. My car is 3 years old. It isn't a Ford either. The only new part (to me) is the delivery mechanism.

HMI in automotive is not new

[hubertf]

I don't know for Ford, but German automotive manufacturers have dealt with human/machine interfacing for a very long time,
and in the process have not focussed on software/screen only, but also added many more interfacing methods like buttons, dials, cameras facing into the car and outside.
Names that come to mind are car manufacturers (Audi, BMW, Porsche, Mercedes-Benz) and their suppliers (Continental, Hella, Vector Informatik).

The whole topic has been covered not by computer science or engineers, but very much by information science.
So maybe you want to have a look there if you are into this topic.
Keywords: driver assistance, hmi, navigation systems

  - Hubert

Re:HMI in automotive is not new

[TubeSteak]

I don't think bringing up BMW in this conversation will do you any favors.
They were almost universally flamed for iDrive when it came out and the subsequent upgrades have only made it 'less bad'.

Re:HMI in automotive is not new

[Anonymous Coward]

The original iDrive implementation (i.e. circa 2003) was flawed in that they removed ALL of the useful buttons in favor of the menu system, which led to absurd combinations necessary to do simple things like changing the AC setting. This is the iDrive that everyone bitched about.

They very quickly backed off of that, and put the most useful set of physical buttons back. The modern iDrive implementations are very well balanced between physical buttons and menu combos. They are fairly intuitively organized (so the initial learning curve isn't that bad), and once you get the motor memory down you can operate everything in the car without taking your eyes off the road. It's all ultimately opinion, but IMHO the current BMW implementation is vastly superior to both button-centric systems (e.g. Honda) and touchscreen systems.

Re:HMI in automotive is not new

[Waccoon]

Thank goodness you didn't mention Volkswagen, or I would have had to slap you telepathically. I'll give you a pass for Audi and Porsche.

Microsoft Sync

[AmberBlackCat]

I can't help but think there's a connection between (Ford uses Microsoft software for the car audio & display) and (Ford becomes the first company to issue a patch so users can upgrade their car's software).

Re:Microsoft Sync

[swalve]

Yeah, I think the "innovation" is that they've made a car radio as smart as a laser printer. Stick a USB key into the front of it, tell it to "print" the firmware file and bam, firmware upgraded.

I would bet anything that you can't upgrade the car's ECU via the USB port.

Re:Microsoft Sync

[Golden_Rider]

Yeah, I think the "innovation" is that they've made a car radio as smart as a laser printer. Stick a USB key into the front of it, tell it to "print" the firmware file and bam, firmware upgraded.

I would bet anything that you can't upgrade the car's ECU via the USB port.

Seriously though, there is nothing "innovative" about this. Other car manufacturers have been doing that for years (offering updates for stuff like navigation / car infotainment via USB, so that the car owner can do the update himself). Just as an example, here's the download page of Volkswagen (I am sure other car companies are doing the same): http://www.volkswagen.de/de/servicezubehoer/VolkswagenOriginalZubehoer2/Downloads/Software-Updates_und_Anleitungen.html

Re:Microsoft Sync

[shutdown -p now]

For some mysterious reason, there's no equivalent page on VW USA website (or at least I couldn't find one).

Congrats to the lucky ones

[argStyopa]

I'm pleased that they're paying attention to this; unfortunately I bought a 2011 edge without the fancy screen, so I'm in the-hell-of-1974-bad-stereo-control, to the power of many-more-features-shoehorned-in.

I *am* curious why that touchscreen - which is approximately the size of 2 smartphones - was a $1611 upgrade from the basic controls.

Right now I (apparently) have the software and most of the systems in my car, but imagine trying to run an mp3 player, navigation system, bluetooth phone, etc with THIS (http://image.motortrend.com/f/2008_ford_edge/2308898196140957893+ppromo_mt_large/center_console.jpg) set of controls?

I seriously can't wait until all cars have at least a USB port so I can save/store/communicate things like radio stations, seat preferences, etc all just by uploading my own user config. It'd be even nicer to get diagnostic data from the car that way that's a little more comprehensive than "oh, the red light is on".

Re:Congrats to the lucky ones

[Anonymous Coward]

It'd be even nicer to get diagnostic data from the car that way that's a little more comprehensive than "oh, the red light is on".

Get a ODB-II reader.

Re:Congrats to the lucky ones

[swalve]

I just bought a new car, and it does have more diag data than just a red light. Now, it's "if red light A is lit steadily, and amber light B flashes six times, the airbag is bad. If it flashes 5 times, you are out of gas." Etc. It is confusing.

Re:Congrats to the lucky ones

[Lumpy]

"I *am* curious why that touchscreen - which is approximately the size of 2 smartphones - was a $1611 upgrade from the basic controls."

Because they can. It's also why $12.95 in thin plastic sticky taped to your vehicle costs $1190 in "performance styling"

All stock Nav systems are crap compared to aftermarkets like Kenwood. yet they cost 3X the price and deliver 2X the features... like real bluetooth from BluAnt or BlueParrot.

I can drive at highway speeds with the windows down and the other end cant tell I'm in the car with my Kenwood Bluetooth hands free setup.

Re:Congrats to the lucky ones

[ninetyninebottles]

I seriously can't wait until all cars have at least a USB port...

Long ago, decades even, I thought, "well now that portable music players like the walkman are common, at least all new cars will have Aux input ports for sound so we can play any source of music. I mean, it's only a few cents to add a line in to the stereo, they'd be morons not to add it. The problem is, it never happened. Not enough people think about these things when buying a car so manufacturers never did it. Right up though the peak of the iPod era most cars still shipped without an Aux port building a huge market for third party tape deck converters and radio transmitters to get music into your car stereo.

My point is, don't hold your breath. The auto industry is glacial and near fatally stupid much of the time. Just because a standard USB port makes sense doesn't mean it will ever happen. Quite likely by the time users can upload preferences into a car USB will be a legacy port and we'll be uploading via wireless transmissions and complaining about how we need an adaptor to get data off the quantum entanglement based network and into our autos.

Re:Congrats to the lucky ones

[Grishnakh]

The problem with the aftermarket stuff now is that it seems like, unlike back in the 90s, no one's using standard DIN-sized components any more, so it's nearly impossible to replace your radio or nav system without it looking like shit.

Re:Congrats to the lucky ones

[ColdWetDog]

I seriously can't wait until all cars have at least a USB port so I can save/store/communicate things like radio stations, seat preferences, etc all just by uploading my own user config

Whatever happened to just driving?

Yeah, yeah, I know. Time for my meds.

Re:Congrats to the lucky ones

[ColdWetDog]

The problem with the aftermarket stuff now is that it seems like, unlike back in the 90s, no one's using standard DIN-sized components any more, so it's nearly impossible to replace your radio or nav system without it looking like shit.

What are you ever about? Duct tape comes in all sorts of colors these days.

Re:Congrats to the lucky ones

[nschubach]

I think GP's referring to the on-board nav/radio computer automatically reading the codes and providing more detail instead of going to a third party reader.

Re:Congrats to the lucky ones

[nschubach]

I thought all the manufacturers basically used Double-DIN slots... granted, the bezels are custom, but they are usually a $20-$30 replacement piece.

Re:Congrats to the lucky ones

[MyForest]

...and furthermore, you can get a Bluetooth OBD scanner which you can use live with your smartphone as you drive along. I'm using a cheap scanner from eBay and the Torque app for Android.

My seven year old daughter was watching the speed graph linearly increasing whilst the RPM graph saw-toothed. Now she understands gears in a whole new way.

Re:Congrats to the lucky ones

[Lumpy]

All of them have double DIN. cars that have the integrated look stock radio you can buy scosche kits that make them look better than OEM.

You are thinking the retarded American cars of the 70-s to 90's where they had 1.5 din openings.

Re:Congrats to the lucky ones

[yoshi_mon]

I would tend to agree. Most head units, be they OEM or aftermarket, seem to still be DIN or Double-DIN layouts. There often is a need for a new face plate even if the sizes match but an oldschool aftermarket seller like Crutchfield includes those typically.

Re:Congrats to the lucky ones

[Grishnakh]

Some of the cars I've looked at lately (such as Volvos) have the radios and HVAC systems integrated into a single system with a single display. There's really no way to replace the radio without losing your air conditioning system. The CD/tuner unit hidden inside may very well be a DIN size, but there's no faceplace to it, and the display is remote.

Re:Congrats to the lucky ones

[Grishnakh]

No, I'm thinking of the Volvos I looked at recently where the HVAC and radio systems are integrated into a single control panel and display. There's no way to replace the radio without losing your HVAC.

Not different

[Anonymous Coward]

I work for a company with a lot of different dealerships. Dodge and Ford both have been updating the head unit's software for at least four years now when you bring your car in for service. We don't charge for it (surprisingly), it's just one thing checked even if it's an oil change or something.

Re:Great!

[facetiousprogrammer]

Easy - prevent the car to start without latest update!

Psych majors, too

[paiute]

There is a whole field in industrial psychology which studies the interaction between human and machine in terms of information flow and decision making. These guys and gals work for the CIA, NSA, FAA, NASA, DOD, etc.

New way for infection?

[Anonymous Coward]

So does anyone else see this as a new vector to take over someones vehicle with Malware, scareware, etc...? It's already easy to socially engineer someone to install back doors into "secure" systems by leaving USB drives in a parking lot, smoking area or sidewalk. Now all you have to do is mail someone a thumb drive that looks official with a letter to install it into their car.

Re:New way for infection?

[Grishnakh]

I would hope that they're using cryptographic signing, so that only software updates signed with Ford's private key are able to be installed. It'd still be possible to break this, but very unlikely if it's a strong key.

Re:New way for infection?

[Lehk228]

I would hope there is a crypto signature check before the system loads the new firmware

UI issues

[Alomex]

The upgrade is to fix UI issues. How bad is the UI? I rented a Ford Focus a month ago and could not figure out how to switch the radio station to a non-programmed location!!

The screen gave you no indication and none of the likely combinations worked, and I'm a techie who loves gadgets, CLI, etc.

I can only wonder what would the average customer experience be like.

Re:UI issues

[justthinkit]

We have suffered with Ford Focus POS at work as well. In addition to the crap stereo you mentioned, there is no visibility due to massive headrests and just lousy design.

For comparison we also have a bare bones Toyota Yaris and it puts the Focus to shame. Great visibility, typical Toyota engine that never complains and is suprisingly peppy, etc. etc.

BTW, we briefly had a Chevy Aveo...This is what happens when a car is made too small for its own good. Needless to say, Consumer Reports was not at all kind to the Aveo.

A shame, really, that North America can't make good low end cars.

Re:UI issues

[toddestan]

Technically, the Aveo is a Korean-made car with a Chevy badge on it. However, from the looks of it the Koreans only make the thing, otherwise the rest of it is a 100% boneheaded GM design.

The current system is useless, of course it needs

[weeble]

Of course the Ford system needs patching. Anybody who has used an iPhone in a Ford will know that. There is there is no method to control playlists or songs it is not powerful enough to charge the iPhone. It would be better having a standard USB charging port than anything that is installed in the car.

"becomes" a software company?

[nurb432]

Umm a normal car today ( and recent past ) has more embedded computers than you can sneeze at.. And basic ECM's have been around for a LONG time. All of these take code.

More than 10 years now

[nurb432]

My 30 year old 'hobby car' has an ECM. While you cant reprogram it externally its a computer with an EPROM that holds its code.

And it wasn't the first..

Re:Great!

[hedwards]

Consider that the update is being shipped via USB stick. I think there's your answer the car is almost certainly locked against unsigned updates, so the likelihood of it working out well in that case is pretty slim. Especially considering that the only connectivity is likely to be through the USB port rather than WiFi.

If it was WiFi, I'd be wondering how long until somebody figures out how to literally unlock the care via WiFi.

A little background info...

[mrquagmire]

The summary is a little misleading. This is not a "major upgrade," it is a complete rewrite of the MyFord Touch system. You see, for their first attempt, Ford decided to outsource the project to a company called BSQUARE who put the UI together using Adobe Flash Lite. For some reason, the results were slightly less than stellar.

Anyway, Microsoft itself is supposedly helping with the rewrite and Ford is doing the rest in-house (without Flash) so those of us who have been dealing with this awful system for the last year are at least a little hopeful.

Re:A little background info...

[Sollord]

It's even more amusing/worse as this update is a rewrite of a rewrite since MyFord was a total rewrite of the original ford sync system which ford originally developed in house with MS. Talk about going full circle

Volvo was doing software before Ford owned them

[axonis]

Well Volvo were way ahead with software updates from the late 90's. The S80 was well known for having more computing power than an F15 with over 40 computers. I guess in this context thats why Ford bought them, then sold them off once they learned a few tricks. Unfortunately Ford did not learn how to upgrade a car via the Internet, like with a Volvo when you get it serviced. i.e. when they plug the car in at a dealer, it connects to the factory via the internet. I think a USB stick is just a marketing gimmick.

Re:Volvo was doing software before Ford owned them

[garyebickford]

Funny you should mention the F15. Back in the late 1980s I worked in San Diego, and learned that the unmarked building next door was a General Dynamics facility where they wrote the software for the F18. According to them, the F18 had hundreds of VME boards, and that 1/2 the cost of the plane was the software. I'm sure that in theory, today most of those VME boards could be replaced by one board with a couple of chips on it (disregarding issues with EMP, etc.) Which raises the question - could a suitably programmed iPhone or Android phone run an F18? Probably yes.

Re:Carburetor???

[swalve]

(I drive a toyota, with none of that fancy-shmacy stuff)

[insert Toyota joke here]

I agree- I *believe* engine control/management/safety are on a different bus from playthings. Or at least I hope they are.

New rule: if you've ever actually owned a car with a carburetor, you must pronounce it car bur EET er. Optionally while wearing a cowboy hat, hooking your thumbs on your belt and kicking your heels.

Good move Ford!

[Snaller]

That's more like it, people want updates (even if they don't know they do)

The real news here ...

[DougReed]

... is not that Ford is updating software in cars; it is that USB sticks and US mail to million of owners is now cheaper than paying the mechanic to plug-in the car and flash the radio.

I cant wait!

[Chardansearavitriol]

Because theres nothing I like than waking up in the morning to see a new update which immediatly bricks my car. We all know its gonna happen. Its just a matter of time.

Re:I cant wait!

[PPH]

In my day, we actually found our cars up on bricks when our tires went missing.

Now get off my lawn!

Shipping software for your computer-car

[anarcat]

What's different here is that Ford is now shipping software to their customers, as opposed to having their customers go back to their favorite garage and have the mechanic plug the car into a magic computer, that often even he has only a faint clue of how it works. This is a significant paradigm shift. It means that Ford will be able to manage more frequent software releases, and maybe start thinking about changing whole features within the lifetime of the car, outside of regular "oh you need to have an inspection after 100 000km" kind of things. So that's cool.

Now the bad part is that your "computer-car" stays proprietary software, and there will probably still be no way in hell that you will be able to modify that software yourself, unless you do some reverse engineering. But it necessarily opens up interesting avenues like running Rockbox on your radio receiver, or flashing some controllers with free software for some of us that are into that kind of crazy thing. I say "necessarily" because the car owners do not have the proprietary interfaces to interoperate with the car, which are a significant barrier of entry for us wannabe car hackers.

In order for Ford to deliver that software to joe users, it means it has to lower this barrier of entry, and that can only be a good thing for everyone.

Re:Shipping software for your computer-car

[tipo159]

As noted, it is only news because the mfg is supplying it directly to customers for them to do the installation.

Introducing big changes in how a shipping car works has been done before. New features (such as being able to switch between full automatic and manual gear change modes through the paddle shifters on the steering wheel as well as the shifter on the floor) were introduced in software upgrade to the transmission on my smart car a couple of years ago.

For some time, I have been able to buy third-party modules that plug into my VW's OBD port and recode controllers to enable new features.

This is probably less costly for Ford since they don't need to reimburse the dealer's service dept. to plug in a USB stick and verify that the installation worked. But I bet that the dealers won't be happy about the missed opportunity to look at the car and find something else that "needs" to be looked at (and repaired back to Ford).

Re:Shipping software for your computer-car

[Anonymous Coward]

How are they dealing with those who bought cars used? Do they have to register the car with Ford so the sticks get mailed to the right people?

Re:Shipping software for your computer-car

[ColdWetDog]

What's different here is that Ford is now shipping software to their customers, as opposed to having their customers go back to their favorite garage and have the mechanic plug the car into a magic computer, that often even he has only a faint clue of how it works. This is a significant paradigm shift. It means that Ford will be able to manage more frequent software releases, and maybe start thinking about changing whole features within the lifetime of the car, outside of regular "oh you need to have an inspection after 100 000km" kind of things. So that's cool.

Iranian tin foil hat: All the pretty little USB sticks in the mail. Let's plug it into the computer at work to see what happens. It's from Ford, what could possibly go wrong? /Iranian tin foil hat

Just sayin...

Installation: Step One

[PPH]

Close all the windows.

Re:now an engine firmware upgrade would be excitin

[HornWumpus]

That is easy for just about any modern car out there (3rd party updates). Typically all they do is change out the fuel/air mixture tables and maybe remove a speed governor. I imagine the newer ones (with drive by wire) also undo the awful computer override of your throttle motions (turning your intended throttle stomp into a gentile roll).

Granted most of the ECM updates are to make the motor run _better_ (usually at a slight mileage cost). I'm sure you can find one to make it run even more like shit then the factory de-tune. You can also have an RV cam installed in your motor. That will truly have it running like crap.

JC Whitney used to sell V8 to four banger conversion kits. You disconnected four spark plugs and four injectors. Hopefully on the same cylinders.

Tesla is the way to go

[WindBourne]

They run Android. With them, we do not have to worry about blue screams of death. I mean between Found On Road Dead and MS, it is the LAST PLACE YOU WANT TO BE.

Re:Tesla is the way to go

[roc97007]

I think "blue screams of death" is my new favorite phrase. This is the reason I'm hanging onto my older Ford; it was manufactured just before the motor company started using Winders.

Re:Tesla is the way to go

[WindBourne]

Actually, it is an old one. Decades ago, I worked at Bell Labs/Avaya. We had to port one of our phones systems to Windows because the sales idiots SWORE that it would sell well. Well, we moved it at GREAT expense, and then sold less than 10 over the next 2 years. They had SOOOOO many outages. From what I heard later, It was actually more expensive to service those 10, then to service well over several hundred of our unix systems. So, we called it the 'blue screams of death'.
Windows suxed then, and it still does to this day.

Missed an opportunity here...

[advocate_one]

they should have restricted the USB stick mailout to just their authorised dealers and service agents... and then mailshot all the customers with an offer coupon for a discount on a service and also a free software upgrade...

well..

[satsuke]

In a world where autos can be thought of as price points for a certain size and feature set (with most comparable models being in the a narrow power/accessories/size/price range) .. it makes sense that they'd make the software a value-add way to differenciate themselves.

The experience in my Toyota Prius is similar, the 2004-2009 models come standard with a touch screen, and a lot of the functions center around it (backup camera, sound system, battery monitor, engine diagnostic code and testing). It was something that people noticed when getting into the car and added value above what was perceived by competetors. (it's no longer standard equipment btw, several thousand dollar upgrade just to get the camera).

Not all off shore developers are bad

[Shivetya]

Guess I am one of the lucky ones, I have worked with some great developers whom we farmed work too. We had two on the team over there who were better than most of the developers we had locally. It might depend on the type of work involved, my shop is on mid and larger systems and our requirements are a whole lot stricter so we don't see what others might.

Still to dismiss a whole part of the industry under thinly veiled bigotry does not serve the Slashdot community well. I guess its easy to ride along on the misery train and blame the other guy, but first we must dismiss his ability because if we did not then where we would be.

So guys, cool it with the assertion that off shore developers are not up to speed, the simple fact is there are many good developers in other parts of the world and many are far better than those who whine about them

Re:Not all off shore developers are bad

[uncqual]

+1

If the main criteria for hiring is "cheap" and/or the goal is "offload work no one wants to do" and/or you treat the offshore developers as "out of sight, out of mind" and/or as "second class citizens", you may not do so well offshore. However, if you hire to high standards, pay well, and give the offshore teams interesting work, it can be a great source of talent. Obviously remote development shifted 12 hours brings its own challenges and opportunities and that needs to be factored in.

In recent years, as India's own software industry expands, it appears that more great developers in India are choosing to stay home rather than pursue the painful US immigration process. The unmistakable gradual, yet likely irreversible IMHO, decline of the US (both in relative and absolute terms) probably contributes to this as well. This of course means there are more good offshore developers and less in the US and the offshore developers are costing more.

(For example, on the "cost more" issue, I know of one large company with substantial development operations worldwide whose recent US raise pool was 3% while the raise pool for India was substantially over 10%.)

(And, to the AC who is going to ask if I'm in middle management or related to one of the CxOs - Nope, I'm a developer/sometimes first level manager.)

Re:Not all off shore developers are bad

[uncqual]

I understand.

The point I meant to make is that I've had fairly good luck with offshoring because the goal was not "saving money" - it was to expand the available highly skilled candidate pool. I.e., not expecting to pay less (although five or ten years ago, one could) and not lowering standards for offshore developers.

Also, I should have clarified, my comments were relevant only to India where there isn't a language barrier (or, that unfortunate cultural trait prevalent in some countries of nodding [figuratively over a phone call] in agreement while not agreeing with, or maybe even understanding, a word the other person is saying).

Good luck on that getting something on time -- sounds like you may want to schedule 80 weeks soon and/or find another job before the fecal matter hits the rotating air circulation device :(

Re:Not all off shore developers are bad

[billcopc]

If good outsourced labour isn't cheap, then what's the point ? The work we're farming out isn't rocket science, it's basic web development: PHP, Java, MySQL - stuff even the greenest junior coder can handle. If, then, the outsourcer costs more than a fresh-out-of-DeVry code monkey, fuck outsourcing!

Along that same vein, if I'm shopping for a veteran developer to lead a team, I won't be hiring some random stranger on the other side of the globe who doesn't even speak my language. There are 7 billion people in the world, surely I can find a qualified worker closer to home, that will be easier to communicate with and manage.

Only new thing may be USB

[sangreal66]

With it, Ford breaks the model in which the technology in a car essentially stayed unchanged from assembly line to junk yard'

This is nonsense. Audi, and I assume most manufacturers, have been issuing software updates on their map DVDs for years.

This is without even getting into the programmable nature of modern engines.

Re:Only new thing may be USB

[sangreal66]

Well it is a software update. I don't know about Ford, which is why I said I assume other manufacturers do it, but with Audi the map DVDs included firmware updates with feature changes. How is that not a "software update"?

In fact, I'm pretty sure Ford has issues updates for Sync in the past too.

Re:Saddest. Up-mod. Ever.

[ColdWetDog]

Magic 8-ball says:

You will not be invited to any Christmas parties this year.

business math for science majors

[decora]

offshoring costs you 1/4 the money, and you get 1/2 the performance.

that means, you are getting twice the efficiency.

in a few years, these 'noobs' in Mumbai will have experience and it wont take them twice as long to do the work.

their cost of living is not going to magically increase by 50%, but their productivity just might increase that much with experience. especially for niche crap like 'design a custom joomla extension for me'.

its already happening on sites like freelancer.com

Re:business math for science majors

[0123456]

offshoring costs you 1/4 the money, and you get 1/2 the performance.

that means, you are getting twice the efficiency.

LOL.

Then they tell you that yes, absolutely, they will deliver on time. Then the day before they're supposed to deliver they say actually, it's not done and they'll need more money to complete it. Six months later they send you a complete pile of crap that doesn't work. Then you pay your own developers to rewrite it into a less buggy piece of crap that you can actually ship with only a huge collection of bugs that randomly fsck up your users' day.

Meanwhile you're a year behind the competition who didn't decide to save money by outsourcing. But, don't worry, the manager who made that decision took his big bonus and moved on to a new job where they're convincing their new boss to follow the same plan that was so successful for you.

perhaps they meant 'consumer software company'

[decora]

would love to hear more about your story.

we have seen inside chryslers situation a little bit.. thanks to 'extreme programming'

Licenses?

[SmurfButcher Bob]

The "non-transferable license agreement" that is included in typical software means it's time to invest heavily in Vehicle Storage technology...

smug debunker is smug

[decora]

the article is about consumers being mailed USB sticks to reflash the cars by themselves.

i know what youre thinking. 'they cant fuck that up. how can they fuck that up?'

consumers are smart. they can fuck up anything. a-n-y-thing.

the difference here is that Ford is pretending that a 12 year old frying his motherboard while trying to improve his Call of Duty framerate is going to have the same safety and legal consequences as someone half-frying their car's computer systems, leaving it with partially updated software or some other kind of screwed up half-installed patch.

Re:smug debunker is smug

[nschubach]

I'm curious if it would be possible to take this USB stick upgrade and figure out a way to load Android/Linux on the vehicle's Nav/Audio system instead of the Microsoft software.

Re:The current system is useless, of course it nee

[ColdWetDog]

It would be better having a standard USB charging port than anything that is installed in the car.

While I won't speak for Ford's lack of software prowess, you do realize that you practically get 'USB charging ports' as freebies in your breakfast cereal. I've got a half dozen of the little cigarette lighter plugs with a USB female port and either a red, blue or green LED (take your pick) power light. They come in practically everything with a USB cable these days.

Do cars still have cigarette lighter plugs these days?

Yet again...

[roc97007]

Yet again, big manufacturers make years-old trends look like some new thing. The console in my F-150 gets upgraded about once every two years, and has gone through two upgrades since I bought it. But the console is aftermarket.

Re:The current system is useless, of course it nee

[iggymanz]

they have cigarette light plug shaped "accessory 12V power outlets", my minivan doesn't even have ashtrays, you have to buy those as add-ons to the storage drawers, drawers are marked with slashed-out cancer stick as that would melt or char them. Mostly a good thing, just carry lighter if you ever need emergency campfire starter!

Hitchhiker's Ford Model 42

[LittleBigScript]

If Ford made a Word Processor would it be called FordPerfect?

Re:Carburetor???

[BLAG-blast]

I agree- I *believe* engine control/management/safety are on a different bus from playthings. Or at least I hope they are.

You *believe* incorrectly.

http://security.cbronline.com/news/modern-cars-vulnerable-to-remote-malicious-attacks-mcafee-090911

http://www.autosec.org/pubs/cars-oakland2010.pdf

Got to love the way there is nothing keeping the cellphone chip from talking to the rest of the car and no way of turning it off.... Mailing USB sticks with a ford sticker on them is just creating another attack vector.

This is something new?

[jtara]

PERHAPS the fact that the customer is updating the firmware themselves is something new. But as others have pointed-out, car manufacturers have been updating firmware in engine and other onboard computers for years.

Human-Machine Interface Engineer? Not new either. Let me tell you how I turned some line workers into Human-Machine Interface Engineers 30 years ago...

I was working for a small company in Michigan that made measurement and control systems used on automotive assembly lines. We were working on a system for a Bendix axle plant. It read a Brinell (hardness) gauge, and controlled the movement of the part through the station, application of the gauge, good/bad paint spray, etc.

The company was perpetually behind, they had one and a half software people (I was the one - the other was a hardware guy that dabbled), and they didn't want to bother me about this job until I'd finished the prior one. So, I finish up this job and they tell me they've got this new job for me to do, and they're sending me to Ohio the next day on the primary contractor's private plane.

They had the hardware put together. They told the client they were sending two guys to wire-in the system. No software had been written or designed. I didn't even know what it was supposed to do. They briefed me...

We arrive at the plant and the guy we meet starts screaming at us. We were two days late. We didn't KNOW that we were two days late, but we were apparently two days late.

While my co-worker started wiring-in the the box, I set up my Altair (yes, really) on the plant floor next to the line. So, for two weeks, I sat there with this deafening noise designing and writing code. The line was down, of course, and the two workers responsible for it had to stand around twiddling their thumbs.

You haven't felt pressure till you've shown-up at an axle plant two days late to write software on the plant floor from scratch, with the line down, and two monkeys hovering around twiddling their thumbs.

The line workers might have had some light maintenance tasks, but otherwise they didn't have anything to do, so they helped out. Sometimes we need them to operate the equipment, etc.

We had a panel with a small LCD display (a few characters) and a bunch of big, industrial buttons in neat rows and columns. And no design. At all. (OK, I mean, we knew what we needed to do with the gauges and solenoids. We knew the operating sequence of the line. But there was no per-determined UI design.)

So in a leap of faith I ask the guys: "how do you want this to work?" Why not? These were they guys that have to work the machine every day. Who better to do the UI design?

They were delighted. I made the buttons work the way the line workers thought the buttons should work. I made the display show messages that were meaningful to them. It really helped to smooth-over the situation of us arriving late with nothing but a gutless box that did nothing to wire-in...

Re:This is something new?

[kermidge]

Outstanding.

The first? Living under a rock.

[Chewbacon]

I've been updating my Dodge Charger's touchscreen headunit for 3 years now. Can download it off the Internet or pick up a CD at my dealer.

How do we...

[yoshi_mon]

I just read the thread and while there were a lot of good comments I am still struck with a question.

What do we use instead of a car analogy for such a story?

Re:How do we...

[Chrisq]

I just read the thread and while there were a lot of good comments I am still struck with a question.

What do we use instead of a car analogy for such a story?

A PC analogy?

Rebooting cars - Re:"with it, Ford breaks"

[billstewart]

My 1971 and 1987 Chevy vans had similar problems. The 71's ignition system would crash (which took real creativity on Chevy's part, since it was a pre-computerization car), and I'd either have to pull off the road or else just put it in neutral while driving, turn off the ignition, and then reboot. It became easier after the neutral safety switch failed; I could reboot it while leaving it in drive. The 87 got a new engine after 100K miles, and it wasn't quite identical to the original. Under some driving conditions (typically accelerating up a hill), it would decide that the gas mixtures just looked wrong and light the Service Engine Soon idiot light. That didn't seem to affect engine behaviour, but I'd have to reboot it to make the light go away.

And my 2001 Chrysler had a recall about a year later - no hardware change, it was a firmware update that made the acceleration better.

Ford is not the first.

[bell.colin]

Ford is not the first to offer upgrades.

My 2006 Nissan has had ISOs you can download to upgrade the in-dash display/computer controls from the CD/DVD drive deck.

This has been available for years (started with higher-end cars first.)

"FORD"...

[bradgoodman]

"Fix it again, Tony!" -- Dale Gribble

Uhm, why send sticks?!!!?

[Kartu]

There is a site to download SYNC (that's how ford calls this) updates from for North America:
http://www.syncmyride.com/

In Europe, it will be integrated into standard ford.de,co.uk etc sites next year.

Why on earth would Ford "send sticks" pretty please?