Samsung Enters Auto Industry To Make Electronics For Autonomous Cars (computerworld.com)

Lucas123 writes: Samsung has become the latest electronics company to create a division specifically for manufacturing parts for the automotive industry. South Korea's largest smartphone maker said it will begin manufacturing electronics with a specific focus on autonomous vehicles and infotainment systems. In October, General Motors announced a strategic partnership with South Korea's LG Electronics for it to produce a majority of the key components for GM's upcoming electric vehicle (EV), the Chevrolet Bolt. Having formerly balked at the automotive electronics market as too small, consumer computer chipmakers are now entering the space with fervor.

Dutch semiconductor maker NXP is closing an $11.8 billion deal to buy Austin-based Freescale, which makes automotive microprocessors. The combined companies would displace Japan's Renesas as the world's largest vehicle chipmaker. German semiconductor maker Infineon Technology has reportedly begun talks to buy a stake in Renesas. Thilo Koslowski, a vice president at Gartner, said the industry is entering the age of "software-defined vehicles." There are easily 80 to 100 processors in a vehicle depending on their sophistication," Koslowski said. "Automotive software and hardware capabilities will become one of most sophisticated device platforms out there."

Comments

competition is awesome

[slazzy]

Look forward to seeing what they come up with.

Re:competition is awesome

[Anonymous Coward]

Look forward to seeing what they come up with.

On the other hand it's Samsung who aren't able to make a smart TV that would work reliably. And now they want to control something heavy that careens in public.

Re:competition is awesome

[Big Hairy Ian]

I anticipate a ford Galaxy with a beveled windscreen

Re:competition is awesome

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought the fashion on slashdot was to moan about capitalism?

Dupe

[bigdavex]

http://tech.slashdot.org/story...

easily 80 to 100 processors

[Anonymous Coward]

our 35 year old ford runs great, is approaching 00,000 miles for the *tenth* time, starts easy in the winter, hardly needs repairs, drives and rides great, is super cheap to insure and to title/register, and is even more fuel efficient than our comparatively-sized and powered 6 year old chevy... all without a fucking computer inside it (well the am/fm probably has a teeny tiny one inside it).... we expect it to last another 10-20 years at our usage pace, at least.. while the chevy, which gets driven about as much, won't make it another 4 before its junked rather than fixed due to ridiculously high repair bills (because electronics and other bullshit that needs dealer attention and can't be fixed at home).. it's in shop very few months with some sensor or electronic wizbang gizmo gone bad or acting up.. and they can't diagnose it properly *even though the damn thing has computerized diagnostics* -- the old ford on the other hand... when there's a problem, can usually diagnose exactly what's wrong by sound either at idle or during a quick trip around the block.

Re:easily 80 to 100 processors

[Anonymous Coward]

goddamn you Rust, where are you?

Re:easily 80 to 100 processors

[Sique]

On the other hand, the 35 year old Ford probably sucks at any crash, while the Chevy gives you decent survival rates. Most of the increased weight and thus the increased energy consumption for anything else than cruising along a straight highway is mostly caused by the enforced body structure to withstand diverse impact scenarios, and another cause is the increased glas surface compared to a car from the late 1970ies/early 1980ies. The electronics got introduced when emission standards forced the introduction of engine characteristic maps to control the ignition, and the widespread adoption of anti locking brakes.

Re:easily 80 to 100 processors

[reboot246]

Did you miss the part where he said, "it's in shop every few months with some sensor or electronic wizbang gizmo gone bad or acting up"?

Okay, now imagine a self-driving car with sensors that are that unreliable. Instead of having a car that won't start or that has some minor function not working, you have a car that takes itself over a cliff with you and your family inside.

I can tolerate a few annoyances, but I draw the line at death.

Re:easily 80 to 100 processors

[Sique]

I didn't miss the passage. But if you want to go back to the '80ies fatalities rates, be my guest. And bad building quality is not an inherent electronics problem.

Re:easily 80 to 100 processors

[Anonymous Coward]

My late 90's Jag has plenty of computer trickery and the only electrical problem I've had with it is water ingress in the ABS sensor connector. That'll be fixed as soon as I can be bothered to stick some silicone lubricant on the connectors.

There's no reason electronics have to be unreliable.

Number of computer

[bobstreo]

I want in my car?

0, not including the media device.

I hate having a car computer, always watching, always judging, always waiting to be used as evidence against me in a court of law.

Re:Number of computer

[Anonymous Coward]

Trust me, you don't want a car with a carburether or drum brakes with no anti skid control. There are quite a few good reasons why the old VW Beetle is obsolete.

Re:Number of computer

[Anonymous Coward]

Even the Beetle had electronic fuel injection in the latter days.

Re:Number of computer

[thegarbz]

Number of computers you have in your car? Like 20. I'm willing to bet you owe your life to several of them already.
Once they become completely autonomous people won't be coming after you in a court of law at all. Unless that is you knowingly did the incredibly dangerous task of attempting to drive a car yourself.

Re:Number of computer

[drinkypoo]

Number of computers you have in your car? Like 20. I'm willing to bet you owe your life to several of them already.

I have two German luxo-barges. The old one has about two computers in it (not counting the aftermarket stereo) and can continue to operate even if you remove the electrical system completely from the car, until you shut it off; the key is backed by a vacuum switch which controls the motor run function. In theory you can then go on to pull-start it (no bump starting, it has 22:1 compression and an automatic) and drive it some more. The new one is a rolling fleet of computers and all of them are stupid. The sunroof is prone to going full-open and staying there. If there is a problem with the connector to the gauge cluster (common) then the vehicle will die if running, or not start if stopped. The ABS controller module is inside of the cab, and the guts are under the hood, but the controller actually would not scan until I cleaned the under-hood connector, through which the diagnostic line does not travel. It was just so befuddled by whatever it saw on its connector due to corrosion bridging and/or breaking connections that it lost its mind. When the ABS doesn't work, the traction control doesn't work, and the brake bias shifts rearward because the car was built basically without a proportioning valve... because the ABS also runs the EBD, which is where you use ABS to simulate having a limited-slip differential by clamping the spinning wheel in a loss of traction situation. That increases the chances of a spin if you should lock up the wheels... and we're talking about an ABS problem here.

The old car doesn't have traction control, it doesn't have ABS, it doesn't have EBD. What it has is reliability. Even when things are leaking or flopping around, it will keep going down the road. Even when the alternator fails and the electrical system shuts down, you can still drive it to where you're going — or to someplace you can get a new alternator and battery. The new car has everything down to an electrically operated rear sun shade, but if battery voltage is poor it throws a code to let you know that it might shit itself.

There are clear benefits to each approach. Let's not pretend otherwise, on either side.

Re:Number of computer

[thegarbz]

The old car doesn't have traction control, it doesn't have ABS, it doesn't have EBD. What it has is reliability. Even when things are leaking or flopping around, it will keep going down the road.

If things are leaking or flopping I would prefer my car not to keep going down the road. You say there's clear benefits to either approach but really no one should be praising reliability over ABS. Or take it the next level, you don't drive with seatbelts because you're afraid the seatbelt tensioner will break down and the check engine light comes on. Most cars even if the ECU fails completely will give you a limp mode so you can drive to the local garage at 30mph.

Driving is the most dangerous activity most of us will do in our lives. The sooner humans hand over to even an unreliable computer the better.

Re: Number of computer

[Anonymous Coward]

News flash: disc brakes don't require a computer. Even fuel injection has been done effectively without.

Re:Number of computer

[drinkypoo]

If things are leaking or flopping I would prefer my car not to keep going down the road.

Oh, so if you get into a collision, you would like it to explode immediately, spreading you across several counties? I, personally, would like something which still continues to function so that I can at least get it off of the road. Or if I'm 300 miles from anywhere, I want to be able to limp to a service station.

Most cars even if the ECU fails completely will give you a limp mode

Well no, your ignorance is staggering. If the ECU fails completely, the car is dead. It's not doing a goddamned thing. It won't even fire the spark. That's the obvious advantage of cars that don't have them, which they stopped making in 1992. The only vehicles which persisted even that long which fit the description in the US market were the Chevy and Ford 3/4 and 1-ton trucks with the diesel engine and manual transmission, and the Mercedes-Benz 300SDL and 350SDL. But the pickups used [the same shitty] Stanadyne DB-2 injection pump with fuel shutoff solenoid, so if the electrical system goes tits up the truck dies and won't run without supplying 12V to that solenoid... which is quite power-hungry. If you're lucky enough to have a complete electrical failure which leaves you at least one battery, and you have some wire, you might be able to rig up the solenoid to run. And if you have the automatic transmission, it absolutely requires power. It will only limp in 1st and 3rd. The Mercedes will limp home without apparent issue, albeit without signals or climate control. The transmission is controlled by load and by a cable which connects to the accelerator linkages. And the Mercedes OM617.951 engine is considered to be one of the most reliable ever made, even taking as a package the Bosch Jetronic injection pump attached to it. It's probably more reliable than any modern engine in a production car today, in spite of or perhaps in part because of its mechanical regulation.

I was for auto-autos but now I'm not.

[Anonymous Coward]

If the driver no longer needs control of the vehicle, the inside of cars will become non-stop marketing spam and malware because a distracted driver is no longer a factor.

Re:I was for auto-autos but now I'm not.

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome to the world of tomorrow! (Hopefully, I'll be dead before that happens. I love my stupid, manually driven, offline car.)

Prediction

[Anonymous Coward]

It will be indistinguishable from the Apple car.

They already make cars!

[iONiUM]

This story is misleading, Samsung has been making cars for years for Korea only. Anybody who's been to Korea has seen them they're everywhere. They aren't entering the market.

Re:They already make cars!

[Anonymous Coward]

That's Renault Samsung Motors, a company owned mostly (80%) by Renault.

Re:They already make cars!

[slew]

That's Renault Samsung Motors, a company owned mostly (80%) by Renault.

And Renault Samsung Motors is what is left over from Samsung Motor (SMI) after SMI went belly up and the remnants were sold to Renault in 2000 and the 20% Samsung share of RSM is actually held by their credit card holding company.

Initially, SMI built cars based on a Nissan platform and sold into Korea, but now they build on a Renault platform and sell only as RSM in korea (outside korea the same cars are badged as Renault). As part of financial agreements, RSM is currently allowed to use the Samsung name in the products they sell (until 2020) when it is likely to be retired (since it appears that Samsung wants back into the auto market).

Eh, dupe.

[blind biker]

http://tech.slashdot.org/story...

Samsung enters auto industry?

[papamicd]

Samsung has been making cars since the 90s!

No way in bloody h*ll!!!

[p51d007]

Our company sells, repairs office machines. One of our vendors is Samsung. Their hardware is pretty good, but their SOFTWARE SUCKS. Even into their 4th generation of machines, it still has glitches, issues etc. Oh, I can see it now...your car hits a tree, call Samsung...oh, that is fixed with a new software update, just update your software. The brakes just locked up....no problem, reboot your car.

Whoops forgot one

[drinkypoo]

Also the Dodge pickups with the Cummins, maybe allll the way up to 1998? I want to say it's the 1994-1998 trucks that have the good injection pump. But maybe it was 1990-1994.