Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 6th Jan 2014 11:13 UTC
In the News
Audi, GM, Google, Honda, Hyundai and NVIDIA have joined together to form the Open Automotive Alliance (OAA), a global alliance of technology and auto industry leaders committed to bringing the Android platform to cars starting in 2014. The OAA is dedicated to a common platform that will drive innovation, and make technology in the car safer and more intuitive for everyone.

A potentially very lucrative market.

Order by: Score:
Tesla?
by ioconnor on Mon 6th Jan 2014 11:58 UTC
ioconnor
Member since:
2013-02-02

Wish Tesla's name were also on this list.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Tesla?
by kwan_e on Mon 6th Jan 2014 12:10 UTC in reply to "Tesla?"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

Wish Tesla's name were also on this list.


The problem Tesla would face if they joined the alliance is not only would they have to fight the misperception that their cars are more flammable despite the evidence, they'll also have to fight the misperception that their cars are more fragmented despite the evidence.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Tesla?
by ddc_ on Mon 6th Jan 2014 15:12 UTC in reply to "RE: Tesla?"
ddc_ Member since:
2006-12-05

If Tesla joined that I bet there would be claims that the whole cat is run by Android. I won't be surprised someone mentioning claiming that he crashed into other car because Google Hangouts hung on his Tesla.

Reply Score: 4

GENIVI
by zdzichu on Mon 6th Jan 2014 12:28 UTC
zdzichu
Member since:
2006-11-07

So Hyundai and nVidia have one leg in GENIVI and second leg in this new alliance?
GENIVI works on bringing standard (GNU/)Linux into vehicles, and this new thing works on bringing Android/Linux. Is seem like a conflict of interests.

Reply Score: 2

RE: GENIVI
by moondevil on Mon 6th Jan 2014 13:27 UTC in reply to "GENIVI"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

It is the first time I ever ear about GENIVI.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: GENIVI
by lemur2 on Tue 7th Jan 2014 02:47 UTC in reply to "RE: GENIVI"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

It is the first time I ever ear about GENIVI.


It was started in 2008.
http://linuxgizmos.com/linux-based-in-vehicle-infotainment-on-the-r...

A Linux Foundation executive revealed that the 2014 Toyota Lexus IS is the second major automobile to offer an in-vehicle infotainment (IVI) system based on Linux. Meanwhile, ABI Research projects that Linux will quickly grow to represent 20 percent of automotive computers by 2018, pulling closer to Microsoft behind industry-leading QNX.

Since the GENIVI Foundation was launched in 2009 to foster standardization on automotive computers built on open source Linux, the move toward Linux-based IVI and connected automotive telematics systems has been halting. Now, however, a second car manufacturer — Toyota — is introducing a Linux IVI system, according to the Linux Foundation.


There are a number of companies involved by now.

http://techcrunch.com/2012/09/19/coming-to-a-car-near-you-linux-goe...

Coming To A Car Near You: Linux Goes Automotive, Signs Up Harman, Intel, Toyota, Samsung’s Tizen, More

Today, the Linux Foundation announced that it was throwing its hat into the car-apps ring, with the creation of the Automotive Grade Linux Workgroup. Early sign-ups among car companies include Jaguar Land Rover, Nissan and Toyota. Tech companies include Harman, Intel, NEC, NVIDIA, Samsung, and Texas Instruments, along with Tizen, the Linux-based platform backed by Samsung and Intel.

So Google's group the OAA are not the only group active in using open source software in cars.

Open source software and collaboration amongst a group of companies is a perfect economic fit when the product uses software as a component, but the product is NOT the software itself.

Edited 2014-01-07 02:48 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: GENIVI
by moondevil on Tue 7th Jan 2014 07:04 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: GENIVI"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Open source software and collaboration amongst a group of companies is a perfect economic fit when the product uses software as a component, but the product is NOT the software itself.


There I agree, just not with Tizen.

Reply Score: 3

RE: GENIVI
by ddc_ on Mon 6th Jan 2014 15:19 UTC in reply to "GENIVI"
ddc_ Member since:
2006-12-05

GENIVI works on bringing standard (GNU/)Linux into vehicles, and this new thing works on bringing Android/Linux. Is seem like a conflict of interests.

I see no indication of conflict of interest. An attempt at sitting on two chairs - probably... Still, they have plenty of good faith options here:
• withdraw themselves from GENIVI;
• merge the projects;
• deprecate GENIVI silently;
• co-develop both options for different offerings (most likely they don't want the same amount of service for top- and bottom-tier products).

Reply Score: 4

Another OHA?
by wigry on Mon 6th Jan 2014 13:02 UTC
wigry
Member since:
2008-10-09

Will we witness another drakonian Google-directed alliance where any misstep will result in ban from access to Google services? So all automakers will install Android devices into their cars with Google services and there will be no more choice like is the case with Google Android right now?

Reply Score: 2

Touchscreens in cars yeah right
by nottorp on Mon 6th Jan 2014 13:09 UTC
nottorp
Member since:
2013-10-22

So in my next - possibly Android running - car i won't be able to adjust the radio volume or turn the a/c up/down without taking my eyes off the road?
Wait, some idiots already do that in current non-Android cars ;)

Reply Score: 5

sb56637 Member since:
2006-05-11

Very good point. As much as I love new technology, I hate it when it's used just for the sake of newness and when it doesn't improve functionality or even reduces usability. Most new appliances needlessly overuse technology. For example, there is absolutely no reason that a washer or dryer needs a digital screen or electronic "soft" buttons. The only washers and dryers that had big mechanical knobs that went "click" were usually much easier to use and provided the exact same functionality. And now in the case of cars, I do NOT want a big (or small) screen in my car that is hard to see in bright daylight, with digital buttons to change the sound system or adjust the climate control, and which often has an annoyingly slow to react interface. I want big, simple knobs and simple, single-function buttons that I can press/move with motor-memory without even looking. For me, luxury in a car is not defined by the number of digital screens or the number of buttons on the dash. I prefer good, solid engineering, which unfortunately appears to be a lost art in this day and age of outsourced drop-in dash modules and infoannoyance systems.

Reply Score: 4

nottorp Member since:
2013-10-22

Of course, that can go the other way. I present exhibit B, the buttons around the gear shifter on a Porsche Panamera:

http://image.motortrend.com/f/roadtests/alternative/1203_2012_porsc...

Reply Score: 3

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

sb56637,

I concur. I usually find the mechanical analog controls superior to the digital ones. The soft controls require much more attention to adjust. In some cases, it's possible to take an analog control and convert it to a digital signal, which can work well for certain things, however other times it's still far more frustrating to use than the physical control we used to have.

For an example, my old car had physical volume and balance knobs, which clicked into place when centered. They could be adjusted with muscle memory alone. In our new car most of these functions are replaced with a multi-modal digitized knob. Click the knob several times until the desired function comes up on the display, then turn the knob while watching the display to see what it's set to. What used to take one or two seconds without taking eyes off the road for any prolonged time now requires full attention for a much longer duration. Adjusting the car radio is unsafe BECAUSE of the use of soft controls.

This example is good because it highlights a fundamental safety issue, however it's happening all around us where the older physical controls get replaced with soft controls that are often more difficult to actually use. I strongly preferred well designed dedicated buttons. Software control can be cool and all, but it really sucks when all the vendors are jumping on the digital bandwagon and they collectively assume that's all that's worth investing in. They're all so desperate to be "innovators" that they loose sight of focusing on whether it works better than what we had.

Reply Score: 4

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Most new appliances needlessly overuse technology. For example, there is absolutely no reason that a washer or dryer needs a digital screen or electronic "soft" buttons. The only washers and dryers that had big mechanical knobs that went "click" were usually much easier to use and provided the exact same functionality.


And this goes double for mp3 players. They used to come with physical buttons that you could actually operate while the f**king things were in your pocket, instead of having to take them out and look at them. Now? Most of them have copied the iDevices and moved a lot of this functionality to the touch screen, or to soft buttons that you can't feel. Pointless.

Oh, and while cars are implementing this new technology, how about putting in a cell phone mount on the dash, so I don't have to use those goddamn suction cup things, NONE of which ever stick for very long.

Reply Score: 5

moondevil
Member since:
2005-07-08

As I keep on saying I am yet to see any commercial use of it.

Reply Score: 4

v IOS in the car
by Windows Sucks on Mon 6th Jan 2014 14:53 UTC
RE: IOS in the car
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 6th Jan 2014 15:17 UTC in reply to "IOS in the car"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

iOS is in cars?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: IOS in the car
by LGordon on Mon 6th Jan 2014 15:27 UTC in reply to "RE: IOS in the car"
LGordon Member since:
2005-10-25

I believe they are referring to this: http://www.apple.com/au/ios/whats-new/#carintegration

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: IOS in the car
by Windows Sucks on Mon 6th Jan 2014 15:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: IOS in the car"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10
RE[2]: IOS in the car
by Windows Sucks on Mon 6th Jan 2014 15:55 UTC in reply to "RE: IOS in the car"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

With Siri eyes free and iOSitC integration in some Honda models.

But should reaching a ton of car models by summer because it can use existing in car systems. (Even Android based systems)

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: IOS in the car
by BallmerKnowsBest on Mon 6th Jan 2014 19:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: IOS in the car"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

With Siri eyes free and iOSitC integration in some Honda models.

But should reaching a ton of car models by summer because it can use existing in car systems. (Even Android based systems)


You left out the "LOL" at the end of each sentence.

LOL You're welcome! LOL!

Reply Score: 4

RE: IOS in the car
by lemur2 on Tue 7th Jan 2014 02:58 UTC in reply to "IOS in the car"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

So I guess that by this time next week Android fan boys will totally act like Apple iOS in the car announcement wasn't first. And that this idea has been in the pipe line for years at Google. Its not a total copy of what Apple is trying to do. LOL!

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


iOS in the Car (abbreviated as iOSitC) is a new standard Apple Inc. is introducing for its iOS devices to be able to work with manufacturers' built-in in-car systems. It was unveiled during the opening keynote of the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) on June 10, 2013.

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

The GENIVI Alliance is a non-profit consortium whose goal is to establish a globally competitive, Linux-based operating system, middleware and platform for the automotive in-vehicle infotainment (IVI) industry.

The GENIVI Alliance was founded on March 2, 2009 by BMW Group, Delphi, GM, Intel, Magneti-Marelli, PSA Peugeot Citroen, Visteon, and Wind River Systems.


So getting back to your comment "fan boys will totally act like Apple iOS in the car announcement wasn't first" ... guess what? Apple iOS in the car most decidedly wasn't first. Not by a long shot. Linux in the car was negotiated in 2008 and has been up and running since 2009.

And I know, Microsoft has been in cars for years so that means Apple is following Microsoft and because of that they will get no credit for making it better and mass market if they do. LOL.

Sounds familiar.


Not only were Apple indeed following Microsoft, but both of them were following Linux.

Edited 2014-01-07 03:00 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: IOS in the car
by Windows Sucks on Tue 7th Jan 2014 03:09 UTC in reply to "RE: IOS in the car"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

Exactly.

First off I was being sarcastic. Second off I was talking about Google and Apple.

I mean shoot that like saying ohhhh Palm was first, danger was first but then totally forget things like the newton.

There is always something first. Question is He or she who will make it commercially viable will be who is left standing in the end. LOL

Reply Score: 1

VW
by maccouch on Mon 6th Jan 2014 15:40 UTC
maccouch
Member since:
2012-03-14

i find curious / don't understand why Audi is there but not the rest of the VW group?

Edited 2014-01-06 15:40 UTC

Reply Score: 5

ugh
by FunkyELF on Mon 6th Jan 2014 16:41 UTC
FunkyELF
Member since:
2006-07-26

I don't think Android should become the standard.

I'd rather have the car provide a standardized set of interfaces so that any OS, not just Android, could work with it.

Reply Score: 4

RE: ugh
by robmv on Mon 6th Jan 2014 17:34 UTC in reply to "ugh"
robmv Member since:
2006-08-12

The website FAQ say it is a two parts effort:

We're working with our partners to enable better integration between cars and Android devices in order to create a safer, car optimized experience. We're also developing new Android platform features that will enable the car itself to become a connected Android device. Stay tuned for more details coming soon.

As I understand this is:

1- Interface from you smartphone and the Car infotainment OS with enhancements to the smartphone side Android
2- Be able to use Android as the infotainment OS

So, car manufactures that are already implementing their own OS can interface with Android smartphones and those that want to use Android on the infotainment platform itself will be able to do it

Edited 2014-01-06 17:35 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE: ugh
by lemur2 on Tue 7th Jan 2014 03:08 UTC in reply to "ugh"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

I don't think Android should become the standard.

I'd rather have the car provide a standardized set of interfaces so that any OS, not just Android, could work with it.


I think you might find that quite often the car itself runs Linux. Automotive grade Linux.

http://automotive.linuxfoundation.org/

http://techcrunch.com/2011/07/06/toyota-joins-linux-foundation/

Toyota Joins Linux Foundation

Linux is very, very good at providing a standardised set of interfaces so that any OS, not just Android, could work with it.

Edited 2014-01-07 03:11 UTC

Reply Score: 2

absurd technology
by unclefester on Tue 7th Jan 2014 02:54 UTC
unclefester
Member since:
2007-01-13

The amount of technology in modern cars is totally absurd. The information load for drivers is approaching that of a modern commercial aircraft. However, unlike pilots, drivers have extremely limited training and are not certified for a particular model.

Reply Score: 4

RE: absurd technology
by Lennie on Tue 7th Jan 2014 12:25 UTC in reply to "absurd technology"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

Luckily we'll soon all have self-driving cars, euh... I mean: auto-pilots like in airplanes.

(auto-pilot is what will be on the market first, because of current laws, the driver will still be the one responsible)

Reply Score: 3

Makes me wonder
by ThomasFuhringer on Tue 7th Jan 2014 10:25 UTC
ThomasFuhringer
Member since:
2007-01-25

So I guess my next car will ask me to log in with my Google account before I can even start it.

Reply Score: 3