Really? If the car contained no software, people would still buy it over alternatives that contain software at various levels for a better driving experience, comfort, and entertainment?
Most of the time the hardware team doesn't get to choose their hardware. There is usually a budget and in automotive you can select only hardware that has some specific certifications for use in a car so that narrows the list even further.
Our company recently purchased some Hardware I/O devices that came with software (both made in Germany). Lets just say, I'd much rather buy their cars than their software.
Then companies that traditionally make their money with hardware will have a hard time accepting that. There are millions of lines of code in a modern car, but car manufacturers don't see themselves primarily as software companies.
I do actually want the ability to program the CPUs in my car the same way I'm able to buy parts and mods for every mechanical bit in there down to the engine. In fact we have laws about that sort of thing that don't apply to the software.
As opposed to "you need a special piece of hardware" it's "you need a readily available piece of hardware with the right affordances".
Doesn't sound particularly bad, especially when compared to the situation in other industries (e.g. cars and all the special proprietary OBD stuff they do).
Using a computer and extending a computer are two different problems. If I'm test driving a car, I'm not judging it for how serviceable the tires are. However, I'd factor that in for a purchase.
The modern car is an appliance, just like the modern computer. Yes, there's a minority (sometimes vocal) who like to hack on their cars (computers), but the majority of users want something they can push a button and go.
It's a tool to achieve a goal, a means to an end, not a destination itself. I didn't buy my car because I like driving, I bought my car because it gets me from A to B safely and comfortably.
Most people don't buy cars (computers) because they want to spend all their configuring/troubleshooting/updating/optimizing them.
Well apple may be forced to sell physical hardware to shops, I agree with many here you can’t force them to provide everything. Mercedes for example has tons of software and software tools just for mostly internal and some dealer use, that allow you to do many more things with the car (like changing configuration flags, updates for the ecu and entertainment systems…).
Well, if they're interested in selling more cars, I'm in the market for a car that I can diagnose, repair and customize via a usb connection to my laptop.
There's an aversion to transparency in a lot of software stuff because you can't prevent people from stealing your hard-earned work, but in giving your customers more accessibility you'll have an immediate edge in the car market, which, after all, is how you make money.
The word hardware does a lot of work here for them. Technically the car has the hardware required for the features described, that does not mean it has the software yet, in fact the software demonstrably is not there yet and that is why the word hardware is in there. The implication is they can be upgraded to FSD in future with a software update.
Too late. Every car since about 1993 is entirely reliant on electronic computers, and many were even in 1980. Most of them reprogrammable, though usually cumbersome to do so.
I'd love instead a car that has software I can fully customize. Not the life threatening stuff I can shoot myself in the foot with, but all the dashboards, button placement, sensor logic,entertainment system, live APIs, downloadable logs etc. That's where most of the annoying bugs are anyway. An "open source" car would be a dream come true.
Most people either feel comfortable with a software cut-off or feel comfortable with it present.
reply