Renault Opens Up the 'Car As a Platform'

pbahra writes "Renault has launched what it describes as a 'tablet,' an integrated Android device built into its next range of cars, effectively opening the way to the car-as-a-platform. At the Le Web conference last year, Renault's chief executive, Carlos Ghosn, announced the company's intention to open up the car to developers, safety considerations not withstanding. 'The car is becoming a new platform,' said Mr. Hoffstetter. He said the seven-inch device can be controlled by voice recognition or by buttons on the steering wheel. 'We need help now,' he said. 'We need developers to work on apps.' When it launches, there will be about 50 apps bundled with the device, mostly written by Renault. 'We will open a Renault app store for people to download their own apps,' he said." While I like the idea of such apps for certain purposes — a maintenance interface, less-inconvenient navigation and stereo controls, interesting driving stats — I'm skeptical of the average driver's ability to use one of these without turning his car into a 3,000-lb angry bird.

Comments

Or, translated in plain english

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

The automotive market is ultra-saturated, fewer people buy cars because of the crisis these days, so we'll come up with any useless concept to sell them.

Re:Or, translated in plain english

[the eric conspiracy]

Your car drives you to a remote location, locks your doors and refuses to relinquish control until you buy $1000 worth of generic viagra.

Re:Or, translated in plain english

[msauve]

"And you get car malware."

Could be worse. Could be Microsoft/Ford Sync.

Re:Or, translated in plain english

[BasilBrush]

That's very lacking in imagination. Having computers with UIs in cars is well established. Whilst they provide some useful features there are plenty of useful things third party app developers could supply.

e.g. Apps to direct you to car parks with space. And in future to an actual parking space. Or an app that accesses data in fuel prices and how much fuel you have in your tank to intelligently recommend where to refuel.

Re:Or, translated in plain english

[jo_ham]

Not every car company is like the US ones. Renault is doing just fine. This is just the logical extension of selling your car with an iPod/USB interface.

Re:Or, translated in plain english

[kimvette]

This isn't useless.

If the platform can read OBD, CAN, and other automotive buses, it is possible to write the equivalent of a Tech-II app, design your own gauges, your own trip efficiency calculators (and "most efficient" driving route), and possibly even design your own tuning profile (timing, fuel curve, boost pressure, etc.) or install a tuning profile from your preferred tuner, as well as enable vehicle options (e.g., if you change your head unit, add a disc changer (does anyone still bother with those?), add fog lights, etc.) and program driver profiles. There is a lot this can do for you.

The down side is: if everything (HVAC/defroster, radio tuning presets and volume control, etc) is done through the touch screen, I could see an increase in avoidable collisions occurring. They should never replace physical controls but merely augment them.

Re:Or, translated in plain english

[Gordonjcp]

What's particularly a pain in the arse about BMW is that from at least the E30/E34/E32 family onwards the central locking actuators have a mechanical locking mechanism that prevents the lock rod being pulled out against the motor - that is, when the central locking is on the locks can't even be released from the inside, or with the key.

Now, imagine you need to recover a nice new 3-series with an electrical fault. There's no power, so the central locking doesn't work. You can't unlock it with the key (the newest models don't even have external locks). Even if you take out a window you can't get the doors open. You can't even release the locks without removing the door card, but you can't do that because the door is still closed and you haven't got room to get at it. You can't get at the wiring to the actuators (and in any case the newest cars use CANBus to talk to them so you're out of luck until you get the electrics back up. You can't get at the body ECU without the passenger door open, without sitting in a weird upside down yoga pose on the passenger seat, legs wrapped around the headrest and head under the dashboard (and if you can do that for any length of time I'd like to meet your sister).

At this point, just sawing the car in half, fixing the locks, and welding it back together starts to look like a viable option.

Re:Or, translated in plain english

[cvtan]

I think you are talking about the double locking mechanism that in many cases is never used. There is a trick to unlocking the door with the key involving lifting up the door handle while turning the key. Dead cars can be powered up by energizing the system through the license plate light. Locked cars can still have the hood opened with a long screwdriver stuck through the grill in the right spot.
My MINI has the interesting feature that the rear hatch is opened electrically and the battery is located under the trunk floor. If the battery is dead, you can't open the back to access it without pulling the emergency hatch release handle under the rear seat.
My wife's Prius also has the battery in the rear under an electrically unlatched hatch. There you have to crawl on your stomach through the rear cargo area to unlatch the rear. Great fun, but I don't understand the need for an electrical hatch release mechanism.
The BMW Z1 had doors that would not open unless the side window retracted so the door could sink down into the sills. A dead battery means the doors don't open. There is a story that some high-up BMW executive got stuck in his car when the battery failed. Auto engineers clearly think that car batteries always work. They don't.

Phone interface

[Wonko the Sane]

I don't really want a lot of intelligence built into my car. Instead of having a screen built into the dashboard I'd rather have a standard way of docking my phone so that I could use its built-in navigation and audio functions.

Obsolesence

[Anonymous Coward]

The real problem is that the hardware will be hilariously outdated in 18-24 months, whereas the car has a much longer expected lifespan.

Re:Obsolesence

[BasilBrush]

Compare and contrast with Voyager 1. Made 35 years ago, and the technology is so reliable it's still sending data back home from outside of the solar system.

For cars I can imagine something similar to car audio. You get something up-to date with a new car, and you put up with the fact that it ages. Eventually someone purchases it as a used car and decides the audio isn't good enough, and fits an updated one.

Between those two points, the actual music (the apps) change with the times, even if the hardware doesn't.

Sounds like a downgrade

[evilviper]

While I'm a big Android supporter, having Android in your car sounds (mostly) like a downgrade. The in-car systems now are VASTLY more reliable than and smartphone/tablet I've come across, and running very reliable real-time OSes like QNX. Unlike phones, they have to meet the regulatory requirements of all other new car parts... being fully functional for 10 years, and working on the last day of the 10th year exactly like they did on day 1. It's a very different model.

The desire to have better in-car navigation systems is completely understandable, but car companies are well aware of this need as well, and will soon be addressing these concerns without throwing away their entire systems. (No, I can't provide any details)

The fragmentation of smartphone platforms is much more significant of an issue than in-car systems. Apps need to be cheap or free to entice end users. But when it's bundled with your vehicle, even a couple hundred bucks for an app is lost in the noise of the car's sticker price. With that kind of money available, in-car systems can be as fragmented as the manufacturers want, and they'll still attract developers because the smaller market and specialized skills are more than made up for by the larger sale price.

Speaking as a road user not in a 4,000lb box....

[SuperBanana]

Speaking as a road user who is not in a 4,000lb box - this is the last thing we need. Apps for your car? Seriously?

Hang up the phone.
Drink the coffee at your home/work/coffee shop.
Stop texting.
Stop picking out your favorite song on the playlist.

DRIVE. YOUR. CAR. Please. Your car is not an entertainment system, smartphone, web browser, etc. It's a powerful, heavy, moving object. Capable of inflicting life-altering or mortal injuries and enormous property damage, which must be piloted accurately to within less than a few feet at speeds humans were never designed to travel. Treat it as such, which means PAY ATTENTION and keep BOTH HANDS ON THE WHEEL and your EYES ON THE ROAD. Nowhere else, any time your vehicle is moving.

I'm tired of people telling me, "gosh, bicycle? It's SO DANGEROUS!". Yeah, guess why? It's because the same person who declared it "dangerous" can't for one second take seriously piloting a machine capable of so much death and destruction, and instead is texting someone while sipping a mocha grande while checking out that cute person in the shop window.

You want to know why it's so dangerous to jog or walk or cycle along the road? Look in the mirror., across the table at dinner or a business meeting.

It doesn't help that running over a cyclist or (sometimes) a pedestrian is an almost guaranteed way to get away with murder. 99% of the time, the most the driver gets is a traffic ticket for saying "oh, I was changing radio stations" or "the sun got in my eyes." Hell, one asshole in Colorado recently claimed it was "new car smell" in his Mercedes S-class that caused him to pass out, hit a cyclist, and then drive on without stopping until he was across town, where upon he put the damaged bits of his car in the trunk and called for roadside assistance (not 911) for a tow.

Translation...

[Anachragnome]

Translation...Your car will now cost even MORE to keep fully functional.

Seriously, retired automotive mechanic here.

Does anyone really think auto-repair shops actually fix this stuff? They do not, for one reason--they are far too complex for the average mechanic to understand, let alone repair. Stuff like this, and others (electronic compasses built into rear view mirrors, sound systems, navigation systems, etc) are simply removed from the vehicle and replaced with a new one when they have failed. At best, the device is sent off to the original manufacturer for repairs--the cost of repairs and shipping is passed onto you. Cars now require specialists, much like the medical field, as a result of the continuing "advancements" and most shops cannot afford to employ these specialists. The result is not having any choice but to bring the vehicle to the dealer for "repairs".

On another note, most new-car dealerships make more from their repair departments then their sales departments.

I'm skeptical too, but

[drinkypoo]

I see a lot of virtually identical comments about driver distraction, but none about reducing it. What about a PID climate control system that learns what temperatures you expect and when, and how quickly the cabin can get there based on outside temp and coolant temp? Sure, climate control is becoming more common but it's not everywhere yet. What about a better road atlas that's easier to use so that the driver spends less time dicking with the computer? Tune the stereo based on the GPS region. Hell, tune the engine based on the drive history and the traffic conditions. Use the vehicle logging system and fault codes to give the driver information that's useful right now instead of lighting a little picture of an engine on the instrument panel. None of these are new ideas but being able to put them all in one computer and be able to replace pieces of them if they suck is a fantastic idea.

Re:Angry (Thunder)bird

[Belial6]

Blaming people driving off cliffs and into lakes on GPS devices is a little like blaming car accidents on the consumption of bread the prior day. Yes there is a correlation, but that doesn't make it the cause. Barring mechanical failure, or a road hazard, anyone that would drive into a lake or off cliffs is already driving their car in a manner that is completely unsafe, and an accident is inevitable anyway. Blaming the GPS for those kinds of accidents is like driving massively stoned and then blaming the the billboard for you smashing into the car in front of you because "The sign was soooo trippy...."