Slashdot Mirror


GM Sees a Market For $5/Day Dedicated In-Car Internet

An anonymous reader writes "$5 doesn't sound like much for a day of internet service in some contexts: it's less than you might pay for it in-flight, and less than a few espresso drinks if you're lured in by a coffee shop's Wi-Fi service. But not all internet service is created equal; would you pay $5 for a month of in-car internet service if it meant a 200-meg cap, which is (only) 'enough to stream more than 6.5 hours of music?' That's where a new dedicated Internet service from GM starts (also at the WSJ, paywalled), and it's $10 for drivers who aren't also OnStar subscribers. Probably a more likely option for the occasional road trip, though, is $5 per day service (no OnStar requirement) for 250MB of data. Why wouldn't someone just use a smartphone with a data plan, or a dedicated hotspot device? GM thinks they'll be drawn to 'a powerful antenna that's stronger than that of a smartphone, along with a Wi-Fi hotspot that operates without draining a mobile device's battery. That hotspot is on any time the car is on.'"

216 comments

  1. "GM thinks" there's your problem. by nospam007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "GM thinks they'll be drawn to 'a powerful antenna that's stronger than that of a smartphone, along with a Wi-Fi hotspot that operates without draining a mobile device's battery. That hotspot is on any time the car is on.'

    My car also has a 'powerful antenna' for my cellphone and my phone has a Wifi-hotspot and it also doesn't drain the mobile's battery because by cellphone is in its socket and powered by the car battery. I pay 5 bucks a month for unlimited usage already.

    We should we pay twice?

    1. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most people are too stupid to figure out how to set it up properly.
      Having it built in to their car means that the dealer can charge for setup and maintence visits. "Sure, I can install that patch. Shop rates are $150 an hour, one hour minimum."

    2. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which antenna for your cell phone is that? (What phone / what car / whatchoo talkin' bout?)

    3. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Seems the target market for this would really be limos, taxis, and other drivers for hire.

    4. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      GM got bailed out by the government because it was "too big to fail." Guess what? GM is still "too big to fail."

      They can go ahead and try out any screwball idea they want. If it loses money . . . the government will pick up the tab.

      It's sort of like a venture capital investment operation . . . except the taxpayers get stuck with the losses, and none of the rewards.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    5. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by rhsanborn · · Score: 1

      This is what happens when a company's first priority is to find a way to make money. This product was built with money as the first principle. If, instead, GM asked what would be best for a customer, they probably would have made a deal with Google and/or Apple to build integration into the car and phone. They wouldn't get $5 a day, but they'd sell more cars.

    6. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by TigerTime · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How about this: They provide BOTH options and we'll see which one is more popular in 2 years.

      Whichever car company makes it easy for my phone to be the brains of the entertainment system, and their screen just be a dumb terminal for my phone's data will get to sell me a new car.

    7. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Albanach · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm not the OP, but I use this booster in the car. I use the larger antenna and get a huge signal boost. I get 3G where I'd normally only have edge, and a signal in areas where my phone normally reports no signal at all. The booster uses a USB connector to charge, so I have a $10 two port USB charger in the car that supplies power to both the booster and my phone.

      The booster only works while the phone is in the cradle, so calls need to be by speaker or bluetooth.

    8. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      And you'd use the WiFi in a Taxi rather than relying on your own cellphone? By the time you got it configured your ride is over.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Privatize profits, socialize losses.

      Capitalism and communism, finally united in harmony.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    10. Re: "GM thinks" there's your problem. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Additionally, OnStar needs to die. It was great in a pre smartphone era, now it's something that interferes with car use. I test drove 2013 impalla, there was no aux in on the stereo, no ad2p for the Bluetooth that, and the sales guy was like, but OnStar and xm radio are great.

      Smart phones have made both of those worthless, yet you're trying to tout your high tech car. Worst than the focus I rented with ford sync (which seemed to have am interface designed by an idiot, not reconnecting to ad2p on restart, and two menu items 3 levels deep with the same name (audio settings), and a message to go to audio settings with no path to get ad2p working) which did at least work.

      Unless the car is going to act as a large touchscreen for my phone, or have a custom control app so I can control my phone easier while driving (ideally steaeing wheel, and a touch data display) it's worthless. The first needs the phone manufacturers to agree on a standard, the second seems to be the Nissan approach.

      I carry a nav, radio, and music library with me, and it's constantly updated, I dont want your custom solution (ford sync, OnStar), I want to use the thing that I change every two years, and have the benefits in the car too.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    11. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 1

      Oh please. Yes, this is probably going to flame out and die, but the losses won't amount to more than a rounding error to GM's bottom line. You don't have to look very hard to find examples of corporations who haven't been bailed out by Uncle Sam tossing money down the sewer.

      --
      Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
    12. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by pollarda · · Score: 1

      In my mind is for that price, it had better be a direct satellite connection. (In which case it would be worth it -- especially if I could get a cheaper cell connection when I'm not out in the boonies.) Sat connections aren't cheap (usually about $1.00/min for a sat phone connection.) But for a cell connection, this price is outrageous....

    13. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      Answer: convenience.

      I actually installed a RPi-based hotspot in my car with a Verizon stick. It's really nice to be able to access Internet on my laptop and non-3G tablet without bothering to activate a hotspot on my phone.

    14. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      But then what happens when all the phone sanitisers are gone and we get killed off by a plague spread by telephones?

    15. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Chas · · Score: 1

      It's called "teleconference".

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
    16. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Depends on your taxi ride and your data plan.

      Heck, I've had 45 minute taxi rides going to the airport in New York. So if I could, say, download a movie for the flight using someone else's WiFi and not use my data caps, why wouldn't I?

      Of course, lately, I've seen a lot of airport taxis with a WiFi/Cellular base station in the trunk. A local bus service has it in their busses as well.

      On the other hand, GM is twisted--$5 a day for 250MB of data per month? That's a bit more than $150 a month. I can get a better deal from...well...just about anybody! Verizon offers 250MB of data for $20 a month. AT&T has a plan for $15. I'm sure there are cheaper ones

    17. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by msauve · · Score: 1

      Re-read the summary. It's $5 for 250 MB in a day, or $5 for 200 MB in a month. Looks like they have a range of plans, up to $150 for 10 GB in a year.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    18. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Nutria · · Score: 2

      This is what happens when ...

      "journalists" write inflammatory headlines and sheeple don't read the article. (If I didn't know better, I'd have sworn I was at theblaze.com!)

      Down in the PR release, it clearly states: For existing AT&T customers, a 4G LTE-equipped GM vehicle can be added to a Mobile Share Plan for $10 per month.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    19. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      But who will take out your trash? And watch the kids while you work? And revolt against you for the evils of "gentrification" while you take your meager paycheck from another fat idiot smoking a cigar? (On second thought, your plan sounds OK.)

    20. Re: "GM thinks" there's your problem. by bradgoodman · · Score: 1

      Sorry - Not for a $150 a month.

    21. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by rhsanborn · · Score: 1

      Thanks for clearing that up for us. I stand contrite and corrected.

    22. Re: "GM thinks" there's your problem. by bradgoodman · · Score: 1

      I can't even hear the letters "XM" without twinning. 32Kbps audio stream for music - comparable to AM quality. Stations they seem "talk" are even lower. I but a car with a nice "premium" sound system - XM makes it sound like a gramophone.

    23. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by bobjr94 · · Score: 3, Informative

      No different than the cars that come with xm radio, after the free 3-6 months almost no one continues and pays for a subscription. Many people don't even know about the free trial when they buy their car. My wife's new Subaru supports bluetooth audio, wired ipod/Iphones, usb drives and hd radio. So do many mid-range and up aftermarket radios. You can play internet stations though bluetooth on your phone to the car for no extra charge and what ever songs are in your device's storage. They even shows the audio track tags on the display when on bluetooth or usb.

    24. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Nutria · · Score: 1

      I stand contrite and corrected.

      Now I know I'm not reading theblaze.com... ;)

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    25. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dont worry post antibiotic will push us back to pre antibiotic human levels or about 800 million.

      Which is fine with me even if I am a goner too.

    26. Re: "GM thinks" there's your problem. by VernonNemitz · · Score: 1

      I think I want a phone with a slight modification, that lets me jack into the car's antenna.

    27. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by sahuxley · · Score: 1

      Redundant internet options are a good thing. This is a smart move by GM in the face of giant ISP mergers and poor net neutrality legislation.

    28. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Privatize profits, socialize losses.

      Capitalism and communism, finally united in harmony.

      Again.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    29. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "GM thinks they'll be drawn to 'a powerful antenna that's stronger than that of a smartphone, along with a Wi-Fi hotspot that operates without draining a mobile device's battery. That hotspot is on any time the car is on.'

      My car also has a 'powerful antenna' for my cellphone and my phone has a Wifi-hotspot and it also doesn't drain the mobile's battery because by cellphone is in its socket and powered by the car battery. I pay 5 bucks a month for unlimited usage already.

      We should we pay twice?

      Phones used to have a large bell inside of them to let you know it was ringing.

      That wasn't good enough, so we invented ring tones to sell. And people bought them in droves.

      Then, apparently that wasn't good enough, so we invented ring-back tones, so people calling someone else wouldn't have to listen to a boring ring either.

      The point here is don't question what people will pay for anymore. People invent really fucking stupid shit and spend hundreds of dollars on it, ironically while bitching about the price of a $3 app because its not "free".

      GM is sure counting on that stupidity.

    30. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      How about this: They provide BOTH options and we'll see which one is more popular in 2 years.

      Whichever car company makes it easy for my phone to be the brains of the entertainment system, and their screen just be a dumb terminal for my phone's data will get to sell me a new car.

      Yeah. Fuck all that advanced air bag and self-parking bullshit. Who needs safety when we can bolt our texting while driving device right into the car for maximum distraction.

      Good luck. We're gonna need it with people like you on the road demanding those killer features.

    31. Re: "GM thinks" there's your problem. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Wow, thats insane, that has to be worse than typical fm even. At least in an area where you can get clean stations.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    32. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      it also doesn't drain the mobile's battery because by cellphone is in its socket and powered by the car battery.

      Shhhhh don't tell them about car chargers or they'll charge us for that too!

    33. Re: "GM thinks" there's your problem. by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      I test drove 2013 impalla, there was no aux in on the stereo, no ad2p for the Bluetooth that, and the sales guy was like, but OnStar and xm radio are great.

      There's an aux-in, it's either in the centre console or in the glovebox. And it'll always be where the SD card is for the map data. As for ad2p, I don't know of many cars that have it today.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    34. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by davester666 · · Score: 1

      The real problem is with what data will the car send to GM with your so-called "consent"? That's the real driving force for getting the internet into your car, so the manufacturer can get a bunch of information about you, and get you to pay for the privilege.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    35. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      And I have a NFC tag that when I drop the phone in the holder, automatically makes sure the Bluetooth is on and the volume is set to max, and the WiFi hotspot is enabled. When removed from the holder the WiFi hotspot is automatically turned off.

    36. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      GM should have been broken up. As soon as any company gets too big to fail, it needs to either break itself up or have the government step in and take it apart.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    37. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parent needs modding up please.

    38. Re: "GM thinks" there's your problem. by bradgoodman · · Score: 1
      AM is worse than FM - XM is even worse than AM! They say they use a "proprietary codec" to make it better - and I'm sure it's a *little* better than a standard MP3 compression (maybe) - but a "good quality" MP3 will be 320kbps - 10x the bitrate of XM - and there are many that even complain about that!

      I only know this because I was so disturbed by the quality of the XM radio in my car that I had to look it up...

    39. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by parkinglot777 · · Score: 1

      And how much do you think they need to charge more in order to recoup the cost (right now the price is varied)? I know that it is not much (if not go over), but I just want to see how others think if they have to pay extra for this kind of service, which does not seem to be needed for those who already have a smart phone with their own Internet connection from their service provider...

    40. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      by[sic] cellphone is in its socket and powered by the car battery.

      Came here to comment on exactly this.

      "Draining the cellphone battery? Gee, if only there was a device that would let me charge my cellphone while in my car..."

    41. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by rtaylor · · Score: 1

      You don't need to break it up, just increase the tax rate a smidgen on large firms (revenue over $1B?). Call it "bailout insurance" and dump it into a non-profit government managed fund.

      If companies have contributed, then they can make claims at roughly the same scale as they contributed (see government pension plans for a similar setup).

      --
      Rod Taylor
    42. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Russ1642 · · Score: 1

      You go into your phone and activate the hotspot. Done. It's not just easy for nerds, it's easy for my 84 year-old grandma.

    43. Re: "GM thinks" there's your problem. by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Most phones used to have an antenna socket. Maybe some still do.

    44. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GM seems to be operating on the 'engineering the ideas of yesterday for a new tomorrow!'

      I would NOT buy a car with an always active hotspot period.

      If I want a hotspot on an active (or any outwardly accessible computing), I want to control where and when and what.

      I guess GM won't be getting any of my money anytime soon.

    45. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by MooseMiester · · Score: 1

      GM is on life support today. As Ford - who took no dirty money - is planning on putting WiFi routers in every Ford vehicle starting in 2015 GM has to try and do something to convince the millennial market they are still hip and cool.

      GM didn't get bailed out by the government, the UAW did. In Detroit, the difference between the mafia, the UAW, and the Democratic party... is zero, they are all the same. Ask someone who lives here.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist
    46. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by MooseMiester · · Score: 1

      TOO FUNNY. This is how Social Security works "a government managed fund". What happened there? Well, the politicians stole the money, that's what.

      We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world - and you want to increase it? Let's push them all outside our borders as fast as we can, okay?

      --
      Murphy was an optimist
    47. Re: "GM thinks" there's your problem. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Hmm, there was no AUX button on the stereo and the sales person didn't know about it, but that doesn't really mean much. We did look in center console, but not glove box. It felt very anachronistic, like what I'd expect from a mid-level car 5-10 years older.

      Disc changer was being listed as a bonus, but honestly, I'd rather have a tape deck to make a cheesy aux in than a CD changer.

      I know that the Hondas and Nissans I was looking at all had ad2p with the mid-level+ trim packages, as did my rental focus a few years ago.

      I ended up buying an '06 Honda, because they are easy to clip attachments into the back of the stereo, and buying a Grom Audio kit.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    48. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, when did the meaning of "too big to fail" change from "We are so big and diversified that we can suffer losses in several business units without threatening the solvency of the parent corporation" to "Help! Help! Oh Will, you must save me!!" (Ob Dr. Smith Quote).

    49. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      Tried that, still not as easy to use. Also, holders suck. I'm also using my RPi to get statistics from CAN bus and do a couple of other tricks, like emulating OnStar and sending address directly to in-car navigation so that I don't have to enter it manually.

    50. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Magic. Gm has magic.

    51. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by rezme · · Score: 1

      You seem to have a pretty myopic view on what a smartphone is capable of. I use mine daily on my commute for music, attached to the line input of my stereo. Just because you link a smartphone to a car's entertainment system doesn't mean you have to text with it. Moreover, those that text while driving aren't waiting for some hot shit infotainment system in their car to do it, they're just using their phone to do so already.

    52. Re: "GM thinks" there's your problem. by jp10558 · · Score: 1

      Well, the benefit to XM is it works where my smartphone doesn't get any data, oh and it doesn't massively drain my data allotment. FM around here is staticy or switching between HD and not, plus has more ads than music. That's why I never used to listen to the radio. But XM has many ad free channels, comparable quality to much of the streaming apps on my phone at 3G, costs far less, and doesn't limit me to whatever I remembered to load on my flash drive before leaving.

      You're in a car, you have lots of road noise - most people probably aren't experiencing awesome audio quality however you slice it.

      --
      Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3
    53. Re:"GM thinks" there's your problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They will probably cripple your vehicle's systems to only work with "GM-brand Internet".

      It's like permanent nag-ware installed. I can't stand having 'disabled' features in my car (so far, just the XM button), but soon there will be other features of your car that relies on "GM Internet" such as radio station IDs or other such things that will make your experience crap unless you pay the fee. Bugs the hell out of me and I hate that it works.

  2. No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    would you pay $5 for a month of in-car internet service if it meant a 200-meg cap, which is (only) 'enough to stream more than 6.5 hours of music?

    No, I would not.

    1. Re:No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      would you pay $5 for a month of in-car internet service if it meant a 200-meg cap, which is (only) 'enough to stream more than 6.5 hours of music?

      No, fuck you.

      FTFY

  3. This would be awesome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In 2004. In 2014, I can get a wifi hotspot for $30/mo.

  4. RENT the devices in a car I already BOUGHT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I often wonder why the cell phone embedded in my car only works for Toyota and not for me? Why did I pay some god damn $8000 for the tech package and can only get their network and their services? This shit has to end, not get worse.

  5. it it works across borders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if it works across borders (canada/us) it might be worth while (international data is pricey).

  6. stream music--WHY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The main use I can see for car internet is getting traffic reports or other realtime info that your GPS can't figure out with its builtin maps. Streaming music to a car is almost crazy: an in-dash mp3 player with a 32gb memory card can hold hundreds of albums, no need for streaming.

    1. Re: stream music--WHY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use my phone to stream Pandora in my car every day and I love it.

      I could use my iPod if I wanted, but i prefer streaming. I have nearly unlimited stations and find new songs/bands all of the time.

  7. My honest response to $5/day for 250MB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    would be "GM, go fuck yourself."

    1. Re:My honest response to $5/day for 250MB by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You'll pay for it. Either now or with the next bailout when that bomb drops.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  8. Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by faffod · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When everything was analogue, you needed a custom device for each service (phone, TV, fax, etc). In the digital era that way of thinking is as archaic as the dinosaur. I do not want an internet connection that might be slightly better than my current phone, only to be left in the dust in a couple of years. I want a system that allows me to add my phone's internet the car seamlessly.
    Yes someone is monetizing my mobile internet; no that doesn't mean that I want everyone monetizing it over and over again.

    1. Re:Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by SecurityGuy · · Score: 1

      Truly, this wouldn't be GM putting the buggy whip manufacturers out of business, it's GM expecting they can make everyone buy a buggy whip when they already own a car. I guess this is what we get for bailing out stupid companies rather than letting them die.

    2. Re:Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by Strudelkugel · · Score: 1

      Given all that we know about GM, can someone explain (aside from the obvious political reasons / TBTF), why this company was bailed out? Romney was correct, it should have been allowed to go bankrupt. In addition, the taxpayer still had to eat a $10 billion loss. GM management was incompetent to the core. This idea is yet another example of it for all of the reasons you list and more.

      --
      Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
    3. Re:Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by j-beda · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Given all that we know about GM, can someone explain (aside from the obvious political reasons / TBTF), why this company was bailed out? Romney was correct, it should have been allowed to go bankrupt. In addition, the taxpayer still had to eat a $10 billion loss. GM management was incompetent to the core. This idea is yet another example of it for all of the reasons you list and more.

      The question is would letting GM go bankrupt have resulted in more than 10 billion in losses in terms of lost payroll taxes and increased social assistance benefits for all of the GM workers and all of the assorted companies that also would have gone under?

      Further down in the linked article is "On all TARP investments to date, including the sale of Treasury’s shares in AIG, the government has recovered a total of $432.7 billion on $421.8 billion disbursed. " so overall, it doesn't look like all the TARP funds were such a bad investment even from a straight purchase-sale calculation.

      Of course, it is much harder to figure out if, long term, this was a good policy - would the economy have been better off to "kill off" the sick or better off in "healing" the sick? Have any of the "sick" been healed or are they still "sick"? Have we ensured similar things don't happen in the future?

      I don't have high hopes for answers to these sorts of questions.

    4. Re:Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >blah blah blah LESS REGULATION blah blah blah
      >blah blah blah TOO BIG TO FAIL blah blah blah
      yet another fair weather republican...

    5. Re:Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by Solandri · · Score: 1

      The question is would letting GM go bankrupt have resulted in more than 10 billion in losses in terms of lost payroll taxes and increased social assistance benefits for all of the GM workers and all of the assorted companies that also would have gone under?

      The thing is, that's precisely the wrong argument to make. It's actually the opposite of how it works.

      When a company goes bankrupt (chapter 7, liquidation), it doesn't vanish from the economic landscape leaving all its employees without jobs and its subcontractors without work. It gets chopped up and the parts get sold off to the highest bidder. The parts live on even though the whole does not - bought up by Ford, Toyota, Honda, etc. or even someone else wishing to start a new automaker, who would incorporate those factories and subcontractors into their own product lines. The relative value of those parts during a bankruptcy sale are correlated to the health of the original company. If the parts sell for close to the original value of the company, it was actually pretty healthy. And, say, 80%-90% of the employees and subcontractors would've retained their jobs and contracts as part of a new company. OTOH, if the parts bring in little money and lots of employees and subcontractors lose their jobs and contracts, the company was in poor health. You are better off killing it off now, rather than allowing it to continue operating, accruing more losses every day.

      So if GM going bankrupt would have resulted in minor losses and little effect on the economy, then it was a prime candidate for a bailout. In that case, the company was more or less healthy, and was just having a short-term cashflow problem. A prime candidate for a bailout to help tide it over during this rough patch.

      But if GM going bankrupt would have resulted in massive losses and huge detrimental effects on the economy, that's a sign the company was incredibly unhealthy with massive waste and inefficiencies. Keeping it running is detrimental to the economy, and you want to kill it off ASAP with a bankruptcy. So claiming that a bankruptcy would've caused widespread devastation to the economy is actually an argument for a bankruptcy and against a bailout.

      Fortunately, the Democrats happened to be wrong. GM was actually pretty healthy and only needed some cashflow to tide it over while it scaled down its operations and trimmed its product lines. GM going bankrupt would not have devastated the economy, which meant that a bailout was the proper thing to do.

    6. Re:Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Here are some honest answers that people may not wanna hear:

      They should go bankrupt because this is a free country and the government has no business picking winners and losers. You know all that corruption you whine about? This is the core of 99% of it.

      They should go bankrupt because to save them rewards poor business choices and teaches future managers to be even more risky, knowing future politicians will ride to the rescue with similar memes as "too big to fail" whose actual purpose is not losing the next election because big companies are failing "under their watch". See also banking, housing. And, soon, college student loans.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    7. Re:Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by MooseMiester · · Score: 1

      The UAW was bailed out. Not GM. Simple.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist
    8. Re:Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by MooseMiester · · Score: 1

      GM is on life support TODAY. Ask someone who works there.

      Fiat was ready to buy the assets of GM. The UAW said "You can't buy these plants unless they are staffed with UAW members". Fiat said "No way". So the Democrats could either kill one of their biggest cash cows... probably losing the 2012 elections for lack of money to buy votes, or they could send the UAW a big fat bribe.

      Well we all know what they did. And when GM fails, again. you can bet your bottom dollar if Democrats are in office, they will need to be "saved", again, and they will tell the same lies about how they "saved the auto industry"

      --
      Murphy was an optimist
    9. Re:Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by j-beda · · Score: 1

      Poe-tae-toe, poe-taa-to.

      The "bailout" (it is reasoned) prevented the factories from shutting their doors and putting a whole wack of people out of work, which would have had tremendous negative consequences for government expenses and revenues.

      Should labour and management have made different decisions in the years leading up to this problem? Probably. Is either party blameless? Probably not.

    10. Re:Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by j-beda · · Score: 1

      I don't disagree with most of Solandri's arguments - in a properly functioning economy, bankruptcy of one place is not particularly tough on the system as a whole, and the statements about the GM situation have been exaggerated and/or simplistic.

      It should be considered however that much of the economic troubles at the time were driven by uncertainty, lack of confidence and liquidity. If the government had not stepped up with the cash infusion as was done, it is not clear that anyone would have stepped up to buy the pieces available in liquidation and kept any of them operating. In "normal" times perhaps there would have been the 80%-90% retention of the employees and subcontractors, but in this case it seems quite possible that without the confidence brought in by the government bailout it could have been the catalyst of a negative feedback loop that would have had huge follow-on negative repercussions.

      I do think that the question "would it have been more expensive to let them go under" IS a valid argument/question. In a sense, the system worked as designed - as I understand, GM did file for bankruptcy (chapter 11), and reorganized and ended up with new owners (one of which was the US Gov). Without the involvement of the US Gov, it seems likely that the reorganization would have resulted in much larger disruption to US Gov interests. In this case, the US Gov acted just like some deep pocket investor who thought that they could turn a profit on supplying some capitol.

    11. Re:Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by MooseMiester · · Score: 1

      Are you personally involved in the Auto industry? Do you live within a 100 miles of Detroit? If the answer to either of these questions is no, with all due respect, Sir, or Madam, you are seriously mistaken.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist
    12. Re:Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by j-beda · · Score: 1

      I doubt very much that the "other party" would have done things significantly differently. Of course they would have framed it differently. And then THEIR opponents would talk about "corporate welfare" and how the working man was getting a raw deal.

      As an aside, how could the UAW block such a purchase? I can only imagine they could do so if they had some financial right to how GM was disposed of, in which case you might say that one of the owners blocked the sale, which seems a perfectly reasonable thing to be allowed to do. If I had come in and said "I'll buy the assets of GM" but did not make an offer that the owners found acceptable, why should them accept it?

      These are interesting issues of public policy. What rights and obligations does society have to help/protect business owners and workers? Certainly the community has an interest in who does what. Society is ill-served if large fractions of the population are under-employed or under-paid. Society is ill-served if it is too difficult or not profitable enough to invest in new and continuing businesses.

      If you think that these types of interests are easy to balance then I think you aren't thinking enough.

    13. Re:Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by j-beda · · Score: 1

      Are you personally involved in the Auto industry? Do you live within a 100 miles of Detroit? If the answer to either of these questions is no, with all due respect, Sir, or Madam, you are seriously mistaken.

      About what?

    14. Re:Still stuck in an analogue thinking pattern by MooseMiester · · Score: 1

      About who was bailed out, duh.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist
  9. Yes but... by funwithBSD · · Score: 1

    with the coffee shop I still get the espresso drinks, so it is a win win.

    --
    Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
  10. That OR by DrXym · · Score: 1

    They could work with industry to produce a external antenna protocol for bluetooth - i.e. you tether your phone to the car and utilise the car's antenna for 3G/4G. In addition the phone could act as a hotspot for in car services and other phones in the vehicle. But hey they would be too useful. Instead, pay GM $5 for a proprietary solution instead.

    1. Re:That OR by Obfuscant · · Score: 0

      They could work with industry to produce a external antenna protocol for bluetooth - i.e. you tether your phone to the car and utilise the car's antenna for 3G/4G.

      Instead, tether your phone to the car via WiFi and utilize the car's antenna for 3G/4G.

      Instead, pay GM $5 for a proprietary solution instead.

      So, GM is installing a 3G/4G modem feeding a WiFi hotspot using standard protocols that anything with a WiFi connection can talk to, and this is a "proprietary" solution?

    2. Re:That OR by gmack · · Score: 1

      It is proprietary in that it will only talk to GM's (expensive) service rather than a more general purpose device where you could slot in your own sim card. $5 a day? That's well over double what I would pay my local cell phone provider for the same service.

    3. Re: That OR by shitzu · · Score: 1

      Double? I pay ~5$ a MONTH for data.

    4. Re: That OR by gmack · · Score: 1

      For 6 gb transfer per month? In my country, it is more expensive.

    5. Re: That OR by shitzu · · Score: 1

      Unlimited. Although speed is capped at 2mbit/s for that price - but that is enough speed for my mobile.

    6. Re:That OR by DrXym · · Score: 1

      So, GM is installing a 3G/4G modem feeding a WiFi hotspot using standard protocols that anything with a WiFi connection can talk to, and this is a "proprietary" solution?

      Yes it's proprietary if it only works to their service. If they said you could stick any 3G modem SIM in there, then it would be okay but IMO it's still overkill when most people would already have data in their phones. It is more likely they want to share the data from their phones to the car than the other way around.

  11. 32GB is useless because of DRM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cars that have built-in storage also have built-in DRM that forbid you from dumping MP3s (legally acquired or otherwise) into your vehicle. You have to manually rip each CD you bought, into the car's storage, to prevent piracy, y'know.

    1. Re:32GB is useless because of DRM by steveg · · Score: 5, Informative

      Are there still cars with built in storage?

      Ford included a whopping 10GB hard disk in their fanciest tech package 5 years ago. You can't get that now. Instead you get a USB port in the center console.

      I've got a 64G low profile thumb drive plugged in with most of my music collection. Standard MP3s, no DRM issues. There are *other* issues -- the system has only so many slots to hold metadata, so if I add too many songs it will freak out and re-index the USB each time I start the car. But as long as I don't exceed some limit it behaves just fine.

      For my purposes anyway, no storage and USB is far superior to built-in storage.

      --
      Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
    2. Re:32GB is useless because of DRM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would also be nice if the slot was in the glove box or a console hatch so they didn't need to be low profile.

    3. Re:32GB is useless because of DRM by steveg · · Score: 1

      Actually, it is. But even inside the center console, I feel safer with the low profile flash drive. The slot is on a ledge about halfway up the front of the compartment, so it's reasonably well protected, but I could still imagine dropping something on it or catching it as I put something in there.

      --
      Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
  12. what about roaming costs will they just auto bill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what about roaming costs will they just auto bill you the $15-20 a meg fee?
    even when fringe roaming?

    the add to your Mobile Share Plan part makes it seem it's your plan and you are on the hook for any roaming / over fees. I hope it's easy to trun data off.

  13. $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with you? by jk379 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I just don't see the cost working out. On top of that if you have the car for 10-20 years it's going to be the same as having an old 8 track. Car NAV systems don't seem to age well, I don't see this keeping up with the times. 5G will be out before too much longer.

  14. 150$ mo. hotspot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    + 400$ mo. for the vehicle, ins.. 10% interest on every breath... this is the kharma nirvana of perfect balance WMD on credit neverending holycost MANufactured 'weather' prosperiterrorism.. does it run on solar or hydrogen?

  15. $5 Day or Month? by adam.voss7843 · · Score: 3, Informative

    The summary mentions both $5 a month and $5 month.

    Glancing at the linked article, it sounds like you can subscribe for as little as $5 a month and get 200 MB for the month. As a non-subscription you can pay $5 for 250 MB for 1 day.

    In both cases there are more expensive tiers offering more data.

    1. Re:$5 Day or Month? by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      There are plenty of times when I'd have liked to have rented a hotspot for $5 for the day - one day only - especially if it was a different provider than the one my phone already used.

      I own a little FreedomPop (Sprint) device for emergencies now (on the $4 "rollover" plan), and my personal phone is a GPE HTC One on T-Mo, so I've got the spectrum reasonably well covered in case of emergency.

    2. Re:$5 Day or Month? by Technician · · Score: 1

      I hit Goodwill (thrift store) and picked up a home Clear branded WiMax modem/wireless router. The thing runs on 12 volts, so a DC cord instead of the wall wart makes it very mobile on a home dataplan. Clear supports bring your own device at $20 Month to Month. I keep it in the motorhome and use it on summer trips. I check for coverage before departing, as not all destinations are covered.

      It just happens to be one of the many options. When using it, I can plug in my VOIP phone adapter too. My mobile office has an office phone. I recharge batteries any time the sun shines.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    3. Re:$5 Day or Month? by wahmuk · · Score: 1

      I have the FreedomPop Overdrive Pro (3G/4G) on Sprint as my mobile internet in my car. I use a Nexus 7 as my GPS and entertainment, and don't even have a regular stereo in the vehicle. It works well enough for Pandora or NPR and for some navigation every now and then. I spend far less time in my car than a lot of people, so their 500MB/mo plan is usually adequate, but I'm using more as each month goes by. The next step up, 2GB/mo for $19.99, is probably in the cards for me soon. That's 2GB on 3G that Verizon wanted to charge me $50/mo for! So... would I pay $5/day for internet access in my car? Hell no!

      --
      You can't take the sky from me!
    4. Re:$5 Day or Month? by sh00z · · Score: 1

      I hit Goodwill (thrift store) and picked up a home Clear branded WiMax modem/wireless router. The thing runs on 12 volts, so a DC cord instead of the wall wart makes it very mobile on a home dataplan.

      Does it work while in motion? (track from tower to tower)?

  16. Sounds Familiar by Virtucon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For over a decade the Automotive industry has been trying to tie mobile Internet access into very rigid platforms that add to the cost of the vehicle. These systems are usually obsolete by the time they make it to market and are not easily upgradable in the field. With the wealth of cell phones and other in-car add-ins (tom tom etc.) The value of these auto industry developed systems becomes less and less important. Sure, there's a "bling" factor to them but don't forget that you'll want it updated to something else about as often as you upgrade your cell phone. That means that supporting things like BlueTooth and USB/iPhone connectivity and integration are where the industry should be, not trying to build out another island of isolated electronics.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    1. Re:Sounds Familiar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have Ford Sync in my car along with navigation. I bought the car new 18 months ago and it is already outdated. My new smartphone is already far better, easier to use, and more convenient to use than the on board system. There is already things my new phone can do that the system does not and will not ever support. Ford should have got out of the game and just built in a touch screen with an HDMI and a USB input release an API for others to integrate into the system. They can have their own basic controls for the radio, heater, climate control etc but allow others to make their own.

      Cars are going in this direction but it will be slow. Goolge and Samsung for example are FAR better at creating a pleasant UI system than a bunch of developers hired by Ford. When I want directions to somewhere with my phone, I click one button and say "directions to CVS" or "directions to CVS on Hoadly Road". In about 3 seconds I am presented with directions to the nearest CVS. With my Sync system and just about every other car I've driven recently, I can't do that. I have to say directions. I am presented with a list to select a POI and those POI choices are department store, convenience store, mall, amusements, restaurants, etc. I say one of those and hope CVS is the one I picked and I am presented with another list of endless choices. What city, what state, what is the street address blah blah. If EVERYTHING goes well and I happened to guide myself in the right direction, I may get directions to the CVS on Hoadly road. The thing I do not understand, if the car can listen to me, why can't I say everything at once. Directions to CVS on Hoadly road". I gave it what I wanted, Directions, CVS is a business, Hoadly road is a street name, and the GPS knows where I am and should be able to assume the closest fucking street named Hoadly Road near where I am.

      That example is what happens when a car company hires a bunch or random people to build something for them.

    2. Re: Sounds Familiar by shitzu · · Score: 1

      Car systems are usually outdated even before the vehicle hits the market as the industry is used to a 5-6 year development cycle. So 18 months is not "already".

    3. Re:Sounds Familiar by MooseMiester · · Score: 1

      Uh sorry to burst your bubble but MICROSOFT wrote Sync and FORD vehicles run on Windows CE.

      This would be the "bunch of random people" you are referring to.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist
    4. Re:Sounds Familiar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HUH? Whose bubble do you think you are bursting?

  17. Your location is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wi-Fi location technology just got a little more complicated.

  18. In-car charging anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Last time I checked, I could already charge my phone in the car. So there goes the "battery drain" argument. And I can use the personal hotspot plan my phone already comes with. No thanks, GM.

  19. Yes, for maps by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    For maps 200MB is a fair amount, usually you are driving around the same areas and maps are heavily cached (and all of the modern mapping frameworks for mobile devices are vector based so they can send a lot of data for just a little bandwidth).

    In fact T-Mobile today gives you 200MB/month free if you buy a T-Mobile iPad.

    However having a cap is very bad, because maps integrated into a car will be relied on, and if near the end of the month it suddenly shut down it could easily leave you stranded. Hopefully that just means after that they would charge you some extra fee.

    Personally I don't mind just using my smartphone as the data source but not everyone can deal with things like that.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  20. Hey GM..... by tburke261 · · Score: 1

    I've give you $200 to install it and exactly $0/month to add it to the existing 'bucket' of 3G/4G I'm already way overcharged for. Oh, and I'll never drive one of your products.
    (My Subaru will soon be getting a Wilson 4G LTE setup w/external antenna)

  21. Battery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    along with a Wi-Fi hotspot that operates without draining a mobile device's battery.

    If only there were a way for me to power my smartphone when it's a hotspot in the car! Maybe it could draw power from the thing smokers use to light cigarettes since I have no use for that.

  22. OnStar proves there's a market by SethJohnson · · Score: 1

    I'm with everyone else pooh-pooing this misguided disservice. It's not for us.

    But, GM is not floating this concept out of sheer ignorance. They already have hooks into a certain collection of consumers who don't know crap and subscribe to OnStar because operating a GPS themselves is too complicated. GM marketing executives are sitting in board rooms laughing at how much money they are still getting out of these subscriptions while cellphones would seem to have made OnStar obsolete. This internet package is just an added service fee they're trying to pile on top of these clueless subscribers.

    A closer look would likely reveal that many of them are still subscribing to AOL at home.

    1. Re:OnStar proves there's a market by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      the target customer, here, would be the same one that buys a 'smart tv' instead of using a computer and a tv monitor together.

      note: there are more dummies in the world than smart guys. we are a tiny tiny minority in the world.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    2. Re:OnStar proves there's a market by nblender · · Score: 1

      There are people (I like to call them retards) who buy a new car every 2-3 years... They're not concerned with how much the car costs; only what their monthly payments are... They're not concerned with what gadgets are in the car and how functional or useful those gadgets are going to be in 5 years... As soon as the 'new car smell' fades away, it's time to buy another one... These are the people who will gladly get the internet option...

      (sorry for any retards I've inadvertantly insulted).

    3. Re:OnStar proves there's a market by DigitAl56K · · Score: 1

      the target customer, here, would be the same one that buys a 'smart tv' instead of using a computer and a tv monitor together.

      note: there are more dummies in the world than smart guys. we are a tiny tiny minority in the world.

      I bought a smart TV. It didn't cost much more than a regular TV - there are plenty in the budget category now. It has hassle-free built-in support for Netflix HD and Amazon Prime HD, both supporting surround sound. I didn't have to spend ages setting up a media PC, leaving it running all the time, showing other people how to use it, stuffing it into an already cramped space.

      There's a difference between being a 'smart guy' and being judgmental to others just because you personally don't see the value in something.

      That being said, I think smart TVs offer a lot more value to a lot more people than this offering from GM, for reasons many others have already posted.

    4. Re:OnStar proves there's a market by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Think how valuable that chump list is.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    5. Re:OnStar proves there's a market by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Some people have OnStar just because of the crash reporting stuff - it's not just for GPS. That's actually a pretty valuable service for someone older or driving alone a lot.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    6. Re:OnStar proves there's a market by nabsltd · · Score: 1

      Some people have OnStar just because of the crash reporting stuff - it's not just for GPS.

      Although the satellite connection of OnStar offers service in some places you can't get cell phone service, there aren't very many such places.

      So, as long as you have a bluetooth connection in your car, your car can dial your phone when you are in an accident. I know not every car that supports bluetooth has the "crash dial 911" feature, but every Ford sold today does, and I suspect a lot of other manufacturers not named GM are similar.

    7. Re:OnStar proves there's a market by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

      Spot on. A short tale from my recent past...

      There was this guy that used to live up the street from me. He had a sports car, a trailer, an SUV, a boat...basically every toy you can imagine. One day I'm driving by and I notice a sign on his front door. The bank foreclosed on his house. What an idiot. He surrounds himself with these stupid toys and neglects to pay his mortgage.

      Sadly, the world is full of people like this. More concerned with trying to look rich than making the sacrifices to actually be rich. Short term gains. The guy riding the junk car with $3000 worth of tires and rims.

      I look down my street and see all of these expensive cars and I just know that 8 out of 10 people can't afford them. Yet they sign up for leases and drive the things and get another one 2 years down the road. Great way to stay in debt forever.

      Yeah, this GM internet thing is just going to take off for people like that.

    8. Re:OnStar proves there's a market by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      These people *are* often concerned with resell value though (which is why we have so many dull colored cars on the roads at the moment). Let them know that this unupgradeable, obsolete-in-6-months crapfest will make their vehicle harder to sell and they'll avoid it.

    9. Re:OnStar proves there's a market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong. OnStar is cellphone based. No satellite involved whatsoever besides GPS. Maybe you can get better range because of the antenna, but if you're out of tower range, you're out of OnStar range.

    10. Re:OnStar proves there's a market by nabsltd · · Score: 1

      OnStar used to brag about the satellite technology they used, and Hughes was part of the initial development and provided "communications and satellite technology" (according to Wikipedia).

      But you are correct that if they ever used it, they don't now, so my point is even more valid: every car with bluetooth is just as much able to help you in an accident as GMs with OnStar. It's just a matter of whether the car has the right programming.

  23. Pricing Disaster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Won't make money if they don't charge a lot... won't make money if they do...won't make money.

  24. Car systems to be locked in? by swb · · Score: 1

    What bugs me about this is that I imagine that anything built into the car that could use internet connectivity will be locked into using the GM $5/day network, even if the widget in question is gaining access via Wifi to the OnStar wifi network and will not allow you to choose your own wifi (mobile hotspot, tethered phone, municipal wifi, etc).

    For some reason I see a bunch of greedy bastards putting internet-aware applications into the car and then trying to squeeze you for the internet to make them work.

    1. Re:Car systems to be locked in? by Kaenneth · · Score: 1

      Like Netflix on Xbox requiring Live...

    2. Re:Car systems to be locked in? by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      If it didn't, my xbox might actually be in use instead of gathering dust somewhere. Instead it's the Wii-U (that I'm not especially impressed with) that sits out front getting the attention. Great move, Microsoft.

  25. Uhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I spend far less than $5 a day for cell phone + internet. Why would I pay $5 just so my car has internet? lol

  26. Gm Executives are Stupid. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    What is this 1998? A dedicated hotspot in the car? I can buy a portable hotspot that works better and is cheaper for service PLUS has LTE so it will be faster. Oh and It's also on my same phone bill so I have one bill.

    This is more proof that GM is a has-been company that only makes medicore low grade products and is hell bent on staying that way.

    Hey GM, Want to be a leader again? Shot for the highest quality and offer a 10 year 150,000 mile warranty that covers EVERYTHING as standard on your cars. nobody buys GM junk because it falls apart after 5 years and is over 10 years behind everyone else.

    I grew up as a UAW/Chevy family kid and I will not touch the garbage that GM makes. Been burned too many times by their low grade dog food that they sell. Only way I will come back is they start fessing up to their mistakes and give us bumper to bumper zero cost 10 year warranties that cover over 15K miles a year driven. Make it no risk to me and I'll look at GM again.

    Honda got my last 3 car purchases because of the very low risk of ownership.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re: Gm Executives are Stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll give you a little hint, those car makers with the highest quality actually offer the shortest warranties not the longest. The car manufacturers only offer long warranty periods if they are unrealable I. Order to induce the customers into buying their cars. Case in point Toyota 3 yar / 36k mile,. guess how long a warranty jeep has?

    2. Re: Gm Executives are Stupid. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Odd, my Honda's all have 10 year warranties as a normal warranty, and they extended the warranty on the engine to "forever" because some engines had a casting problem in the engine block.

      GM only ever told me, "your fault for buying GM, yes we know the intake is defective and allowed water in the oil to burn out the bearings, we will repair it for full retail cost because you actually drove the car. GM cars are not mean to be driven"

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re: Gm Executives are Stupid. by nabsltd · · Score: 1

      Odd, my Honda's all have 10 year warranties as a normal warranty

      Your Honda might have a 10 year "power-train" warranty, but not a 10 year "bumper-to-bumper" warranty, which is the type the GP was referencing.

    4. Re: Gm Executives are Stupid. by Alioth · · Score: 1

      That doesn't make sense. If a maker of an unreliable car had long warranties, they would end up paying out a lot of money on warranty work. The rational thing for a car maker with an unreliable product to do is to have the shortest warranty possible.

  27. Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please, people... don't buy into this junk.
    250MB is NOTHING(1/4 of a GB). Especially for that price, which is 5 times more expensive than my home internet bill, which I have 300GB for.
    Just tether off your phone, which you hopefully have at least 1 to 5 GB of data monthly.

  28. Cars or mobile entertainment facilities? by pspahn · · Score: 1

    Hey GM, you know what car I'd like to buy? A brand new, 1992 Toyota Pickup (Hilux). Brand new. I'd prefer locks and windows that engage manually. I'd prefer that I wasn't beeped at incessantly if my seat belt is not clipped in or my lights are on. I'd also like to have physical switches that control heat, etc.

    I do not want an internet plan.

    I do not want an "infotainment" system.

    I do not want cameras mounted all over.

    I do not want a tailgate that automatically deploys for anything.

    I do not want a steering wheel with buttons all over it.

    I do not want a seat with buttons all over it.

    I do not need a special box for my sunglasses or garage opener.

    Okay, I know, I have a huge lawn that people keep walking on, but really, why is there NOBODY that sells basic vehicles that aren't loaded with all sorts of "safety features" that simply provide a safer way to do unsafe things while you drive? Hell, you can't even buy a light-duty pickup anymore (though they might still classify them as such). I am in a vehicle to move myself and optionally some other materials from point A to point B. I don't need to be entertained. I don't need a computer to tell me how to drive. I just want to go somewhere.

    ... and with that, I will return to my fruitless search looking for the guy who was smart enough to buy a warehouse full of 1992 Toyota pickups and keep them garaged for 20 years.

    --
    Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
    1. Re:Cars or mobile entertainment facilities? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      There is nothing in an old pickup that can't be put back into like new or better condition. For less then the price of a new truck. (or a then/than troll).

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Cars or mobile entertainment facilities? by Algae_94 · · Score: 1

      Okay, I know, I have a huge lawn that people keep walking on, but really, why is there NOBODY that sells basic vehicles that aren't loaded with all sorts of "safety features" that simply provide a safer way to do unsafe things while you drive? Hell, you can't even buy a light-duty pickup anymore (though they might still classify them as such). I am in a vehicle to move myself and optionally some other materials from point A to point B. I don't need to be entertained. I don't need a computer to tell me how to drive. I just want to go somewhere.

      I'm not sure what you mean by a light duty pickup. Considering your questioning of their availablity, I'd wager you mean something smaller than a "full-size" 1/2 ton truck. If that is the case you have 3 options. 1. Nissan Fronteir 2. Toyota Tacoma and coming back in the fall is 3. Chevy Colorado / GMC Canyon. A new one of these will have way more bells and whistles than that 1992 Toyota.

      You can still order the "work truck" versions of 1/2 ton trucks and get them without all the power options on the seats, windows, etc. It will still be more than the '92 truck, but closer to what you want.

    3. Re:Cars or mobile entertainment facilities? by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the Hilux options for "Able to float out to sea and still run afterward" and "building demolition device"

      GM would charge a LOT for those features and they wouldn't actually work.

      --
      Sig for hire.
    4. Re:Cars or mobile entertainment facilities? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are anything BUT small trucks and damn look at the first pictures GM shows of the 2015 Colorado, same old school GM dash and that really nice elaborate infotainment system. One of their major selling points is that "system", You already have one of those in your hands now and you can buy another one $0 and a two year phone contract.

      http://www.chevrolet.com/2015-...

    5. Re:Cars or mobile entertainment facilities? by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

      Are you at ALL familiar with the Hilux they're speaking about? There is a very good reason to want THAT specific pickup over any other. It's immortal.

      See for yourself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

      Parts 2 and 3 also available.

      --
      Sig for hire.
    6. Re:Cars or mobile entertainment facilities? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Frontier, rust magnet. Taco, fucked over Hilux. Chevy, I've known too many Chevys.

      The old Nissan hardbody was also a rust magnet but it came with the unbeatable KA24 engine. The Hilux was nigh-indestructible and trivial to work on. But just say no to Chevy, they're designed to disintegrate and to be a PITA to work on. They use gigantic steel rivets to hold in the window regulators for fuck's sake. Give me a bolt, or an Aluminum rivet, please. PLEASE.

      Only in Latin American markets can you get a decent fucking truck. They still have bare-bones Toyotas and more importantly, they can get the Nissan Patrol, let alone with a diesel.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Cars or mobile entertainment facilities? by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      If you ever find that mythical warehouse let me know since that is the kind of truck I am looking for. I want a vehicle with high clearance, 4WD, a manual transmission, and manual 4WD selector for when I go hunting and camping, as well as some cargo space for hauling stuff, or the ability to tow a reasonable sized trailer. Posi differentials are a plus but I don't do any off roading but there are some really questionable roads I do use so not necessary, but a winch would be nice since there often are fallen trees across some of these roads.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    8. Re:Cars or mobile entertainment facilities? by Algae_94 · · Score: 1

      I'm not familiar with it, just sharing some info on what manufacturers have out there now.

      If the Hilux is really immortal, the GP should have no problem finding one to buy. It could be possible that Top Gear is exaggerating something, but they wouldn't do that, would they?

  29. $5 a day for cell data? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's awful. If it was satellite internet and you could activate it in emergencies where you had no cell signal, they'd have something, but this just sucks.

  30. Simple mount point for smart phone... by Dastardly · · Score: 1

    I have a Toyota Prius from the year before the Aux port was added (pisser). But, the one thing I really need, is a place to put the freaking phone. My solution is a phone case and some velcro tape on the center console (on the radio) and on the back of the phone. A few seconds to plugin the charger and stick the the phone to the console.

    No stupid suction cup phone holders that don't stick properly or block visibility or don't fit the phone right so it falls out or whatever.\

    It also works well when I want to use the golf app on my phone for scoring and range finding by sticking some velcro on my pull cart.

    If it is good enough to put a man on the moon, it is good enough to hold my smart phone.

    1. Re:Simple mount point for smart phone... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Actually, Velcro was good enough to help kill the crew of the Apollo 1.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Simple mount point for smart phone... by danbert8 · · Score: 1

      Bullshit... The Velcro was only flammable in a high O2 atmosphere. Pretty much anything made with hydrogen in it at all will burn in a high oxygen environment. Heck even non-hydrogen containing materials will burn well if the temps get hot enough.

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
  31. Can we please stop by geekoid · · Score: 1

    comparing everything to coffee?
    "and less than a few espresso drinks"
    or more expensive then a few, depending.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  32. No Need by MrBGsays · · Score: 1

    Verizon, tether no need for GM

  33. GM: Welcome to 1995 by pla · · Score: 1

    "GM thinks they'll be drawn to 'a powerful antenna that's stronger than that of a smartphone, along with a Wi-Fi hotspot that operates without draining a mobile device's battery. That hotspot is on any time the car is on."

    I actually use a 4g modem for my primary home internet. I have a cute little USB-powered fob that acts as a hotspot, and it has an external antenna port if you need a better signal.

    And yes, I take it with me when I go on road-trips - I'd trade it in a heartbeat for "real" broadband at home, but portable does have its perks.

    So what, exactly, does GM view as its market for this particular scam? People who need near-broadband speed in their cars, for some use that draws very little actual data (based on the caps mentioned), and have no clue how to use a MiFi/JetPack/etc 4g hotspot?

    Too big to fail? More like too dumb to realize they've already died.

    1. Re:GM: Welcome to 1995 by bobjr94 · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm sure the gm board room is full of suits near/past retirement age. They have little knowledge of things like this work. They were likely approached by a mobile internet provider, told we have this great deal for you, you get 30% of sales and all you need to do is put this little box in your cars. You can keep making money on each car after it leaves the show room. They said yes, that's been the problem, we only make money off a car 1 time, when it sold, now we can keep bringing in money for years.

    2. Re:GM: Welcome to 1995 by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      So what, exactly, does GM view as its market for this particular scam?

      AOL users. They're out there.

  34. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

    On top of that if you have the car for 10-20 years it's going to be the same as having an old 8 track.

    This is not part of Detroit's marketing plan. No one owns a car for 10 or 20 years anymore, for the most part, they simply don't last that long. Want to own a car that long? Look to Europe, and maybe buy a Volvo.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  35. And Telsa will never be a problem. LOL by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Seriously, these companies are gutting themselves trying to figure out how to run up massive profit levels of 20, 50, 100% with enormous executive salaries/bonuses. And yet, here is Tesla who does not advertise ANYWHERE, and yet, they are backed up on sales. So, what do they do? They offer up the service equal to what Rolls Royce used to have, and solving all issues such as expensive batteries, and making long distance charging a none issue (either free, or if you want, you can rent a fully-charged battery that will carry you 2x as far).

    GM, and other car companies like MB, Audi, Toyota, etc will never figure out what hit them until it is far too late.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:And Telsa will never be a problem. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This advertisement for Tesla Motors has been brought you by a hopeless fanboy who can't afford one.

  36. This actually makes sense. by EvilSS · · Score: 1

    Well, it makes sense for GM anyway. The cars with OnStar are already equipped with the expensive part (the cellular modem). It's what OnStar uses. OnStar users are already paying for their data line with their subscription, so that's covered as well (non-OnStar users pay a premium to use the hotspot). Just work out a deal with the cell provider, toss in a cheap WiFi component (that you will pay for in the price of the car) and presto! A virtually no cost added (again, for GM) revenue source. The user paid for the hardware and the service, the cell company paid for the infrastructure, GM's cut is pure profit. Even if it's only used once per 1,000,000 vehicles a day it doesn't matter to them.

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  37. GM idiot tax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) NO!
    2) $10 Charging cable
    3) (NO) (outrageous) PROFIT!

  38. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look to Europe, and maybe buy a Volvo.

    Or to Japan. Toyotas last forever. I know dozens of people with early-90's Corollas, Camrys, Avalons, and Siennas - all those are close to (or over) 20 years old. Toyota was putting in 6-digit odometers long before many American cars had them, and it wasn't just for show - they really did last that long.

    In fact, the longest-lasting cars GM ever made were designs "borrowed" from Toyota. There are still thousands of old Prizms on the streets. I drive one that's 19 years old and has been driven through almost every state including a trip from Maryland to Alaska and back!

  39. Maybe on a Bus and with Unlimited Bandwidth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd just use my normal phone at its 10 cents-per-megabyte cost. Yeah, that adds up to $10 per 100 MB, but I'm only going to check email, Twitter, or a few light webpages. People with monthly data plans have no incentive to use GM's system.

    I mean, I download a game from Steam and that's 10 gigabytes. Most cell companies would charge $5-10 per gigabyte. It simply doesn't make sense for most users.

  40. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Look to Europe, and maybe buy a Volvo.

    Or to Japan. Toyotas last forever. There are still thousands of old Prizms on the streets. I drive one that's 19 years old and has been driven through almost every state including a trip from Maryland to Alaska and back!

    Big whoop. I made that same trip in a Ford Maverick http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Maverick_(Americas), back when the Al-Can Highway was mostly gravel and aluminum cans and Circle, AK was as far North as you could go on a public road in the USA.

    And then took that Ford to Maine. And Florida. And a few other distant trips trying to kill that zombie car. Except for certain outlier designs (including every car manufacturer from BMW to Honda), if you take care of your car it will provide basic transportation functions for a long time.

  41. What a car needs by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

    Some sort of standardized magnetic mount
    QI Charging
    Wifi Link or some standard to link to displays that can work on existing phones
    Bluetooth, handsfree, audio, steering wheel controls, vehicle information
    Some Wifi accessible storage

    All potentially open standards.

    Past that a Bluetooth GPS might be useful.

    Lets face it phones update every couple years cars not so much. Pretty much a 1080p touchscreen and some bluetooth and let people with a clue deal with powering it.

    --
    No sir I dont like it.
  42. Has GM ever, um seen, a modern mobile phone? by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

    Has GM seen a modern mobile device? Oh they are magical things indeed! Maps, GPS, instant messaging, email, music streaming, podcasts, MP3s, even streaming live TV and video, almost anywhere.

    And with bluetooth, all of that can be streamed right into the car audio system. Or you can use an aux cable, truly the tail of the magic fairy.

    The best part, all of that is included with my phone plan. As much as a I want. Oh sure there's a cap, but exceeding it by a huge margin still wouldn't hit this $150 a month rate, and that cost there would be for something only usable in the car. My magic mobile? Goes with me where I go, and if you will excuse me, I am going to go now, if you get my meaning. But I'll be online the whole time.

    Magic times these are!

    --
    Sig for hire.
  43. Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just plain wrong. Go back to high school.

  44. Or if you bought a car in 2003, you'd be out of se by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks GM and OnStar!

  45. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why are you a cunt?

  46. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 1

    My daily driver is an 87 F-150 I6 4speed, slow but fuel efficient and can haul a heavy load (my work truck). My wife drives a 96 Explorer, her commute is less than 5 minutes between work and dropping kids off at school. We share a 97 Dodge neon for highway trips, gets 40 MPG with some mods and cheap on parts if your somewhat of a mechanic. Then there is the big work truck a 2006 Dodge 1 ton diesel hardly get used at all unless I need to use the big trailer. None of my vehicles have rust or any body damage, look nice and meet all emission regulations. Old vehicles are very much alive for 20 years if you treat them well and people like me enjoy swapping a motor or tranny on a Sunday afternoon.

  47. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by khb · · Score: 1

    "... No one owns a car for 10 or 20 years anymore..."

    Each of my Hondas have done at least 10 years. My 1996 Acura is still quit healthy. My 1987 Shadow as well.

    I suspect that no one who reads /. Is in the target demographic. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

  48. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by khb · · Score: 1

    "... No one owns a car for 10 or 20 years anymore..."

    Each of my Hondas have done at least 10 years. My 1996 Acura is still quite healthy. My 1987 Shadow as well.

    I suspect that no one who reads /. Is in the target demographic. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

  49. People will pay by n0w0rries · · Score: 1

    People will pay because people are stupid. Meanwhile the internet in your car will also provide detailed tracking as to what you do, when you do it, and who you do it with. All of this information will be used to control you and keep you a happy consumer. Another advantage is the easy "DrivePay" system so you can pay tolls and mileage taxes very easy. In 3 years you won't be able to find a strip bar not named "The board room", "The office", "The convention center", or "The Dry Cleaners". Don't worry jealous partners, there's an app for that 6 months later for $4.99 on itunes or play store.

  50. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by shitzu · · Score: 1

    You are thinking of a Volvo from the 80ies. Current Volvos are Ford (think Ford Focus, not F150 Ford) and not very sturdy.

  51. Way overpriced... by Rick+in+China · · Score: 1

    "$5 doesn't sound like much for a day of internet service in some contexts" - um, but it does in this one. Regardless of the cap, that's $150/month in addition to your home or other internet fees, assuming you drive once a day. Most people don't spend *that much time* in their vehicle, and there are laws to prevent drivers from say, watching media in many countries - so what's the urgent internet use that phones can't cover exactly? That warrants $5/day? The whole proposal is absurd to me.

  52. How much I do hate the $5 coffee cup comparison! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Almost everyone who try to justify below $10 prices brings up that it will be "same or less than single cup of coffee".

    Most people don't drink coffee so fuck it!
    Most coffee drinkers people don't drink just 1-2 cups of coffee a day so fuck it!

    $5 a day is a price what is way over the service unless you use it just few times a year. It is exactly those reasons why you don't want to go to bar and cafe because drink+small cake is easily over 10€ what is about $14. You wouldn't even go once a week at those places.
    It use to be in many European countries just 15-20 years ago that single cup of coffee was just below 1€. But today if you find a place what gives you it below 3€ it is a amazing.

  53. Re:How much I do hate the $5 coffee cup comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My general rule is when anyone compares something to the price of a cup of coffee, stand guard because they are attempting to screw you over! The official currency in the United States is dollars, not a cup of starbucks!

    Maybe GM ought to use the "pennies per day" analogy as well. How many pennies per day does it cost? 500! You can claim than anything costs pennies per day, including the interest on the national debt.

  54. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by citizenr · · Score: 1

    My daily driver is an 87 F-150 I6 4speed, slow but fuel efficient

    AHAHAHAHAHA
    only an American would call 5 Liter 2 ton truck fuel efficient

    My wife drives a 96 Explorer, her commute is less than 5 minutes

    AHAHAHA, I bet your wife is pulling boats to work in her 2 ton truck too, right? No? Groceries? Do they weight 500KG? No ? oh ....

    --
    Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
  55. RFTA It's $5 a month, not day! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Is actually reading the article too much to ask on slashdot, or is it just customary now for the article submitter to blatantly lie to generate some click bait? Here are the actual rates per month for On star and non-On star subscribers.

    200 MB $5 $10
    1 GB $15 $20
    3 GB $30 $30
    5 GB $50 $50

    Reading comprehension is too much to ask on slashdot these days!

  56. Nope by jandersen · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't pay for internet in the car. I wouldn't have internet in the car if it was free. There are times when I just want to be away from idiotic SPAM, endless trivia and other distractions, and one of those times is when I drive a car. In fact, I'd prefer if everybody else on the road also stayed away from unnecessary distractions and concentrated on driving safely.

  57. Not a good idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Wow! Look at that....." Crash!!!

  58. err... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why are you being such an asshole?

    1. Re:err... by Phreakiture · · Score: 2

      Because this is Slashdot.

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
    2. Re:err... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because this is Slashdot.

      Now kick the Persian into the pit!

  59. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    The more forward thinking manufacturers are moving to smartphone mirroring and unlimited for-life data service anyway.

    Toyota and Subaru both offer MirrorLink on their touch screen systems, so you just plug your phone in and use whatever app you prefer for navigation or music. Never gets out of data, uses your existing data plan, costs you nothing. The built-in sat nav unit is there too, with 8 years of updates promised, but you aren't stuck with it.

    Nissan and Tesla offer unlimited mobile data services. Nissan only use it for sat nav data, Tesla lets you actually browse the web and stream audio. Tesla also uses Google maps with Garmin navigation, so you get constant updates. They also push software updates that way. No limit on how much you can use it, lasts the lifetime of the car.

    It's the future, and I'm very hesitant to buy a car that doesn't have MirrorLink now. A Leaf or Tesla is about the only exception I'd make.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  60. fuck GM by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    Fuck GM, and fuck our government for bailing them out.

    1. Re:fuck GM by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Well, that was a thought out and reasoned post with an articulate response to the reason for bailing them out.

      I think people like you just get angry in complex situations because you lack the ability to grasp anything about 3rd grade level.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  61. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I got rid of my 2001 Prius a couple years ago - 11 years old with 208k miles (28k when purchased).
    I'm keeping the 2012 for at least 300k miles, however long that takes ( 9 when purchased new).

  62. $5 a month? Yes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to some of the other comments, it's $5 a month. But even if it was $5 a day, if I was a frequent traveler, I'd pay for it, no questions asked. Driving can be fun, but when you're taking a break, internet is great to have. Or if you're taking turns driving, that's a long stretch of time that you can diddle around on your laptop and having internet means you're not stuck with whatever you happened to download beforehand or doing some writing.

  63. I Can Rent a Whole Car by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    With discounts, I can rent a whole car for $10 a day. Why the fuck would I spend this much for additional internet? Hell, I can already utilize my smart phone or iPad (3g) from the vehicle.

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  64. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 1

    Idiots should keep their mouths shut so no one knows how stupid they are. An F-150 in a 1/2 ton truck, mine averages 20mpg. An Explorer is a 1/4 ton truck,and what do you suggest to drop three kids off at school, a Smart car? Let me guess an enviro nutjob like yourself believes in sending perfectly good vehicles to the wreckers because they are last years model and not cool enough. Who cares about the C02 emissions from the manufacture of new vehicles.

  65. It's just not worth it by Alioth · · Score: 1

    Car built-in stuff generally isn't worth it. Modern cars can easily last 20 years (my last one did). The inbuilt radio in that car is now positively archaic - FM/AM/LW with a tape player. The same thing will happen to in-car satnav systems, in-car wifi hotspots - within the car's useful life they will fall so far behind they may not even be usable (updates for that satnav? a hotspot that is what 9600 baud WAP over GSM is today when compared to 4G?)

    Today all I want built into the car is an amplifier with some input standard that's going to last (for example Bluetooth, or even just a 3.5mm jack plug in). I'll supply my own satnav/music system/WiFi hotspot. I can keep updating them for trivial cost rather than to try to keep built-in car systems up to date at enormous cost.

  66. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by Alioth · · Score: 1

    I think the parent meant a truck that *weighs* 2 tonnes, not a truck with a payload of 1/2 ton. Your F150 almost certainly weighs at least 2 tonnes, and so does the Ford Explorer. 20mpg is not considered efficient anywhere except in North America.

  67. Gigantic children! by Weaselmancer · · Score: 1

    Why do you need a half ton truck to drop 3 kids off at school? If you like driving trucks, fine. But don't make up nonsense justifications. You don't need that kind of tonnage just to haul children.

    Unless they are gigantic, of course. Honestly the first image that popped into my mind when you made your post was that you had three children the size of gigantic granite boulders and you offload them like gravel. While "Like A Rock" is playing in the background.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re: Gigantic children! by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 1

      Funny but no the children are not huge but hockey bags are. And we need 4x4 in the winter, lots of snow. Damn it now I got that stupid song in my head and thinking of Chevys.

  68. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 1

    Explorer weighs 2 tons my F150 weighs 2200 lb. And a full sized truck that gets 20mpg is good fuel economy for a work truck usually carring 1, 000 lb. Example of another full sized truck from 87 that has better fuel economy?

  69. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    No, Ford sold off their interest in Volvo and it's now owned by Geely in China. The Ford-made Volvos are actually some of the best; they share parts with Mazdas and Fords, and all three brands seem to have benefited a lot from the cooperation. Before Ford came along, Volvos had a lot of reliability problems. Sure, they were safe in an accident, but that's not the same as reliability. The newest Volvos, while Chinese-owned (but made in Sweden or Belgium) have excellent reliability.

  70. Already Obsolete by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    There are many, MANY hotspots available with external antenna ports, and running one off of a 5V in-car supply is trivial.

    My Armada has a Netgear Unite Pro hotspot in it with a roof-mounted antenna. I just drilled the 3/8" hole in the roof for the antenna mount right above one of the overhead console boxes, and ran a 12V line to a 5V power supply. It took less than two hours to install, and works fantastically. Any time I need to take it with me I just grab it out of the console box.

  71. Just what we need.... by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

    yet another in car distraction, courteous of GM. Looks to me like a solution trying to find a problem. What, exactly, would one do with in-car internet? Catch up on the latest House of Cards episode while barrelling down the freeway at 70 mph? Fill in your fantasy football picks? While driving....in a car....possibly at high speed...certainly with a lot of distractions.

    Do you think that maybe, just maybe, we could leave the internet behind until we're done driving? It's one thing to be surfing the web over a hot latte and another thing entirely to be doing it while piloting a 3000 lb. missile down the road. If you make a mistake at Starbuck's you spill your coffee. If you make a mistake in your car then maybe someone dies as a result of it.

  72. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by shitzu · · Score: 1

    Ford selling its interest and model development are two different things. Most of the current Volvo models are designed during the Ford reign and have many Ford components from body to engines. The reliability compared to Japanese (Toyota/Honda/Subaru) is abysmal.

  73. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

    No one owns a car for 10 or 20 years anymore

    With an '04 Alero and a '77 Cutlass Supreme in the garage, I must be "no one." :-|

    --
    20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
  74. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

    No one owns a car for 10 or 20 years anymore

    Really? None of the cars in my household are less than ten years old. Actually, come to that, we haven't even made a car payment in the last ten years.

    The cars all work fine, though two of them are getting up toward 150K miles. We'll have to replace those in four or five years, probably.

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  75. $2/day for T-Mobile (no contract) data access by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is $2/day for T-Mobile (no contract data access) to data.
    I use it when traveling, otherwise it has a $10/yr pay-as-you-go plan. Been on that since 2005-ish. My total outlay for phones, data, service since then has been under $400 - that's over 9 yrs!!!

    It isn't right for everyone, but for people like me who do not need data very often (I work from home). If you need data more than 20 days a month, get a real plan that includes data. I generally want data about 7-10 days a quarter. I have a Nexus4 phone, BTW.

    There are tricks to make minutes/plan active for 1 yr at a time, but that is easy to find via google (only needed once).

    Clearly GM has their head shoved up some orafice if they think people will pay 2.5x the going rate for expensive data access.

  76. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by jjbenz · · Score: 1

    I just got rid of my 16 year old Geo Prizm last year, it still ran well. If you take care of a car it will last many years.

  77. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

    I just don't see the cost working out. On top of that if you have the car for 10-20 years it's going to be the same as having an old 8 track. Car NAV systems don't seem to age well, I don't see this keeping up with the times. 5G will be out before too much longer.

    This is how Detroit lost its shorts.

  78. No clue on technology.... by superdave80 · · Score: 1

    ...along with a Wi-Fi hotspot that operates without draining a mobile device's battery.

    Yeah, because I'd NEVER think to plug in my mobile device while in my car. How much do these idiots get paid?

  79. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    No, Volvo uses Volvo-designed engines.

  80. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by Hamsterdan · · Score: 1

    "only an American would call 5 Liter 2 ton truck fuel efficient"

    What part of l6 didn't you understand?

    --
    I've got better things to do tonight than die.
  81. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by Hamsterdan · · Score: 1

    "No one owns a car for 10 or 20 years anymore, for the most part, they simply don't last that long"

    They do if you don't buy junk.

    --
    I've got better things to do tonight than die.
  82. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by DocSavage64109 · · Score: 1

    Explorer weighs 2 tons my F150 weighs 2200 lb. And a full sized truck that gets 20mpg is good fuel economy for a work truck usually carring 1, 000 lb. Example of another full sized truck from 87 that has better fuel economy?

    Dude. There is no way your F150 weighs 2200 lbs. My old 74 chevy weighed some 4500 lbs and only got about 12mpg (with a 7.4l v8). For comparison, my current 2009 toyota corolla has a curb weight of 2723 lbs. I could be wrong though, maybe ford makes their pickups out of cardboard ;) That 20mpg is quite respectable, but I assume that's highway mileage.

  83. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, I'm an enviro nutjob, and I understood your point and agree your vehicle choices might well be appropriate for you. Don't be mackin' on the enviro nutjobs, OK?

  84. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by shitzu · · Score: 1

    Which contain lot of components by Ford.

  85. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    No, they don't. Citation or STFU.

  86. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is not part of Detroit's marketing plan. No one owns a car for 10 or 20 years anymore,

    This statement seems hard to believe, given the average age of a car on the road, currently in the United States, is over 11 years old.

  87. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by shitzu · · Score: 1

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki...
    Lots of Volvos listed.

  88. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    Where? I see a bunch of Volvos listed with some 4-cylinder engine. Volvo doesn't sell any cars with 4-cylinder engines in the US, only 5-cylinder and 6-cylinder engines. If some Europeans are having problems with their Volvos, I certainly haven't heard of it, nor am I likely to over here.

    My S40's 5-cylinder is working just fine, thank you.

    (Actually, I think Volvo just started selling some wagon this year in the US with a 4-cylinder option, but it's not listed here, and is a brand-new (and likely all-Volvo) engine.)

  89. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by shitzu · · Score: 1

    Volvo doesn't sell any cars with 4-cylinder engines in the US? Really?
    Don't let the fact that it is called "T5" or "T6" fool you. Some of them have 4 cylinders despite the name, for instance:
    http://www.volvocars.com/us/al... (this is a US site)

    Of course if you compare their reliability with a typical American car, they are reliable. If you compare it with Japanese, they are not.

    Anyway, the argument was that Volvo does not use Ford engines, but in fact they do use them in most of the current models. Also other parts of the current model range share stuff with Ford lineup. The Geely stuff will start coming later this year.

  90. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by citizenr · · Score: 1

    "only an American would call 5 Liter 2 ton truck fuel efficient"

    What part of l6 didn't you understand?

    What do You think it means? No, it doesnt lean 6 liters, it means inline 6 Ford 300
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
    Even I know that, and I know shit about US tractor^^I mean family cars.

    --
    Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
  91. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    You really have no idea what you're talking about. "T5" is Volvo's nomenclature for their turbo 5-cylinder 2.5L engine. "T6" is a turbo V6 engine. No, they don't sell any 4-cylinder models here.

  92. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by shitzu · · Score: 1

    Well, i might not have an idea, but i can read. It is an amazing skill. If you bothered to click the link, you would see specs for current s60:

    T5 Drive-E FWD
    Starting at:
    $33,300 MSRP
    Engine Description 2.0 Liter, 4-Cylinder, Turbocharged, Direct-Injection
    240 hp

    T6 Drive-E FWD
    Starting at:
    $38,150 MSRP
    2.0 Liter, 4-Cylinder, Supercharged & Turbocharged, Direct Injection
    302 hp

    Yes, there are a couple of 5 or 6 cylinder models as well, but you cannot say that ""T6" is a turbo V6 engine. No, they don't sell any 4-cylinder models here."

  93. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    Very interesting; this is a new development. 302HP out of a 2L 4-cylinder engine is quite a feat.

    Regardless, those aren't Ford engines by any stretch of the imagination. They ended their relationship with Ford quite some time ago.

    As for Ford reliability, did you realize you're also saying that Mazdas are unreliable? The platform shared between the three shared a lot of parts between all three makers. And by most accounts, it's actually one of the most reliable Volvos ever made, and the Mazda3 (up until 2013) is generally considered very reliable as well.

  94. Re: $150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with by shitzu · · Score: 1

    Well. There were three arguments here. Lets backtrack to where it started.

    Someone said that cars don't last 20 years with the exception of a Volvo perhaps. To which i replied that Volvos aren't very "sturdy" any more since they share the technology with Ford.

    That got sidetracked with the arguments whether Volvo has used Ford engines (they have) and the number of cylinders in a Volvo. That being settled - I have had in my family and company different cars. During the warranty period we had to visit Ford's and Volvo's dealership several times. Ford even had some EZrust galvanic processing applied so that all the doors were replaced under warranty. With Honda and Subaru - not a single time, just scheduled service.

  95. Re:$150 MRC for hotspot that doesn't travel with y by Hamsterdan · · Score: 1

    "5 Liter 2 ton truck"

    That would be a 302(V8) , not an l6

    --
    I've got better things to do tonight than die.