Slashdot Mirror
The Auto Industry May Mimic the 1980s PC Industry
An anonymous reader writes: An article at TechCrunch looks at some interesting parallels between the current automobile industry and the PC industry of the 1980s. IBM was dominant in 1985, employing four times as many people as its nearest competitor. But as soon as Windows was released, the platform became more important for most end users than the manufacturer. Over the next decade, IBM lost its throne. In 2015, we're on the cusp of a similar change: the computerized car. Automakers, though large and well-established, haven't put much effort into building the platform on which their cars run. Meanwhile, Google's Android Auto and Apple CarPlay are constantly improving. As soon as those hit a breakthrough point where it's more important for a customer to have the platform than the manufacturer's logo on the side, the industry is likely to resemble a replay of the PC industry in the 1980s.
Hardly anyone over the age of 25 cares about the eye candy touchscreen and gadgets in the car. They either car about space for kids and/or general crap, fuel economy, performance or looks or a combination of the above. Everything else can be done on a smartphone.
IBM wasn't undone by the platform, they were undone by the CLONES running the platform. And at the end of the day, a car is still 99% hardware. It takes a lot to build one, and I can't envision a world where cars can be easily home built from standard parts.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
Nah, cars have used modular electronics for ages. Car makers don't make much of anything actually, that is why they are called Assembly Plants. So they can install anything and change it on a whim from model to model and the owners can also change things if they have the money and the inclination.
Cars are not PC's, but the author of TFA tries to argue that they are little more than a computing "platform". Automobiles are, of course, much more than that. Most of that "much more" is totally unrelated to computer-related functions or features, so to suggest that the auto industry will follow some parallel of the PC industry is just silly.
Vendor-driven marketing platitudes bearing little resemblance to reality using shortened memes for theme driven effect.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
So, are we talking about the year of Linux on the Blacktop?
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
And I, for one, welcome our new Google overlords. I'd like to remind them that, as a programmer, I would be very useful in managing the slaves in their data mines.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
Too many differences to list. One, the cost of entry into the market for making automobiles is staggering, so there aren't going to be any new manufacturers. Quite different from the PC. Two, the cost to the buyer. PC's got cheaper but cars are getting more expensive. Three, you can live without a PC (you could back then, anyway) but very few cars are bought as luxury items. So, the vast majority of cars are going to continue to be sold as transportation devices and not as smartphone substitutes.
I disagree with the premise of the article, as there are quite a few things about automobiles which are independent of the OS the in-vehicle entertainment and nav console - much more than a beige box pc.
However, it's worth noting that people over 25 are dying. Old people (over 25) as a market segment will change dramatically over then next 30 years as nearly everyone over 50 will no longer be in the market for an automobile. The "money" demographic will shift to those who are just now getting their driver's licenses.
I do find it depressing that, in an age where interactivity with personal devices can be done in an agnostic way, more and more interfaces are becoming OS specific.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
in my cars.
There are two cars I want right now (well, one is being released soon).
1. The Elio for getting to work and back. Perfect for getting me and my backpack the 30ish miles there and back, and even good for going to lunch with a coworker. Excellent fuel mileage, and unlike a Smart Car (which doesn't really get that great of fuel mileage considering) I wouldn't be concerned about having to defend my manhood every time I stepped out of it or worry about random strangers trying to give me a wedgie for driving it.
2. The Subaru Outback as my vacation and haul the family around ride. The ability to easily carry many bicycles, kayaks, luggage, and people offroad, at good high cruising speeds Not to mention, great gas mileage for a rugged/versatile vehicle.
I don't care about data platforms, just the ability to interface with what's there. The Elio would let me put whatever I wanted in there and tie it to the stereo, I'm guessing a Nexus 9 would be perfect. The Subaru support Bluetooth audio so I'll put my Nexus 9 in there too!
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Big companies can innovate too - look at IBM Research. Just because the results arn't on sale on Amazon or in your local high street doesn't mean they don't exist. In fact for some innovations ONLY a big company has the money to do the blue sky research. Big Pharma - whatever you make think of them - being the prime example.
The big difference is that the auto industry is extremely capital intensive compared to the software industry. You can't start a car company out of a garage like you could a computer company. Even Tesla (with all of Musk's cash backstopping it) almost went bankrupt trying to get off the ground. For this reason, established players have a massive advantage. The more likely scenario is not that Automakers will lose their position as automakers, but that they will be forced to purchase automation equipment from tech companies. But automakers have always used third-party component suppliers- so this would really not be a huge change for them.
The thing that's important about a car isn't the in car entertainment system. It's the wheels and the engine and the bits in between that let me get to where I need to go. I need that to last a decade or more. I need it to be a good match for the way I drive. The in car computer system? Don't care. My current ride doesn't even have much of a driver facing interface, other than some indicator lights. My in car entertainment system consists of a radio and whoever is in the passenger seat. Navigation comes from my smart phone. I upgrade the smart phone every couple of years, which expands capacity.
Easy Online Role Playing Campaign Management
The tech in cars seems behind the curve, so the PC analogy may be apt in several ways.
A couple pulled over asking me directions, they had GPS in their car (mounted in dash not user replaceable) but it showed them driving on a lawn 30 meters away.
My phone was spot on, if anything I could suggest that might help it would be this.
DO NOT embed the tech in the car so that it is difficult for the user to replace, software and hardware will become obsolete quickly, the car its self not so much.
Make mounting and interface universal and easy to replace with better tech.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
The article dismisses the significant difference between the auto industry and the computer industry: if your computer is a piece of crap, it's just some lost $. (ie the only thing lost is some money and perhaps time). If your car is badly made, it can quite easily kill you and your family in a host of interesting ways.
This means that buyer conservatism is high, and willingness to 'experiment' is extremely low.
You'll notice in similar industries where computer equipment is of comparable mission-critical role, they are likewise extremely slow to adopt "the next big thing" and nothing like the 'retail' electronics marketplace.
So no, the automotive industry won't behave anything like the retail electronics market. Not at all.
-Styopa
PC's in the late 80s were standardized - Functionally there was very little difference between an actual IBM PC running DOS or a far cheaper PC clone running DOS. That changed with IBM attempting the PS/2 architecture but by then everybody was settled on the AT (and later the ATX) motherboard architecture. AMD vs Intel exchange some performance vs price differences but ultimately that's like choosing a V6 over a V8 over an I4 and most people aren't going to care.
Each car manufacturer has its own architecture, designs and manufacturing styles - Just slapping a google-droidPod-phone-radio into the car isn't going to make a major difference when I'm looking for dependability or gas mileage (or battery mileage) or style/appearance.
A closer analogy would've been the 6502 systems (the original Apple vs IBM vs Commodore 64 vs Atari)
There were hundreds of automobile startups in the 1900s-1920s until standardization and consolidation. Electric and steam vehicles were competitors before internal combustion won out.
Once that happens, then the industry will entirely change. There will become three basic kinds of vehicles:
1. Recreational vehicles that do not have a computer. Further segregated into speed, off-road, and specialty classes.
2. Cheap. Probably focused on low gas useage, low speed, simple transportation designed to get you to work and the store at a reasonable rate, all while you read, listen to music, or watch videos. Power, speed, appearance will pretty much be ignored here. You want to show off, pick a girl, you get yourself a recreational vehicle.
3. Cargo. People will still need to haul stuff. Minivans/SUV types for parents, trucks for workmen, the main difference will be whether the cargo area is designed for people or for goods, and if for people will it have a minibar stocked with high end liquor, or a Videobar stocked with cartoons.
The idea that the dashboard will become the all important feature only applies to Mommy-mobiles. It will be a relatively small portion of the market.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Pretty soon nobody will buy a car if they can't swap in their own entertainment system, their own map/nav system. That profit center is gone, these auto makers have to wake up and realize it.
The auto makers are so averse to competition and openness. How old are wi-fi enabled standalone network file servers? Why didn't they build one in to the cars, as you drive into the garage it logs into the router, synchs playlists, music, pod casts, weather reports, map information and is ready to go out with the latest info saved in a had disk? They could have done it 10 years ago.
They hate electronics and hate electrical engineers. The petrol burning engineers seem to have a snooty attitude towards the electrical engineers. They could have removed the first gear ages ago. Just spruce up the starter motor to make it strong enough to move the car to 2 mph using amped up power from the alternator. Couple the wheels to the IC engine mechanically on the second gear. That would eliminate the low end torque requirement and they engine could be tuned differently for fuel economy, peak power at a different rpm etc etc. Much of the fuel economy of the Prius comes from having an IC engine that does not have to move the car from 0 mph.
Of course, I am talking with 20/20 hindsight. But I am not a professional auto engineer. It is their job to have thought about it ages ago. Railways were big in 1950s and 60s. General Electric made a killing replacing all the steam locomotives with diesel-electric locomotives in just one decade. So fast some of the gleaming steam locomotives made just one run, from Baldwin Loco Works, Philadelphia to the scrap yard. Seeing how the torque problem in the locomotives is solved using an electric motor they did not make the connection and try to replicate it in their automobiles. They only were interested in pissing contests involving the sizes of the engines. 4 liter engine, 5 liter, 6 liter. 8 cylinder, 12 cylinder... More and more complex transmissions, clutches, slip rings, torque converters... all pure mechanical systems. Could have been replaced by one clean electric motor. The diesel-engine-generator and electric motors in the locomotive are just torque converters. But no, they would not even think about it.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
I have read the article and I don't see the connection. A 1980's IBM PC without an operating system is just a noisy and expensive room heater. A 2000's Toyota without "general purpose platform software" will still get you any place you want safely and efficiently. What kind of added value is such an automotive software platform supposed to offer?
Well, the author provides a list:
- Keeping drivers consistently and happily surprised with new services.
- Taking advantage of usage patterns to help customers become better drivers.
- Offering reasonable, consumption-based insurance and maintenance packages.
- Treating their dealerships like genius bars, not check-out counters.
- Making cars that can talk intelligently with your home and your office.
None of those sound too compelling for me and they certainly can't beat the operating system's pitch of "being able to use the friggin machine at all".
Thay are already shaking up the industry, a focus on software might allow them to put the final nail in the coffin.
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
This is hardly a new phenomenon. To quote Don Henley:
Out on the read today, I saw a Deadhead sticker on a Cadillac.
A little voice inside my head said 'don't look back, you can never look back.'
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
no, we're not
i know alot of very wealthy people have invested alot of money and research into the idea that it is, but it's always been an over-reach to think they would be in general daily use...especially the google car with no steering wheel
self-driving vehicles are more advanced than ever, because *all automation is getting better*
i can definitely envision self-driving semi-trucks in dedicated lanes, or google car-type things at amusement parks and even in a central downtown area like Manhattan
i know it's hard to hear this but a truly autonomous car that interacts with daily traffic with no restrictions is much, much more complex than anyone other than the actual people who do the coding work will admit
talk to someone who actually codes the AI for this stuff...there's a bright future ahead, but the hype machine is in full effect
Thank you Dave Raggett