
Ford Ditches Microsoft for QNX in Latest In-Vehicle Tech Platform - hugopascal
http://techcrunch.com/2014/12/11/ford-ditches-microsoft-for-qnx-in-latest-in-vehicle-tech-platform/
======
blinkingled
The whole thing reeks of NIH and some poor saps trying to save their butts by
trying to be forcefully relevant.

Apple and Google already solved the UI problem - you don't need to have the
damned ugly in-car UI anymore. Just stick decent hardware with Android Auto
and CarPlay support and be done with it. Make decent looking apps for each
platform to provide functionality outside of platform supported features.

I just don't understand why on earth would Ford need to have their own system
with QNX, WiFi updates and Maps that are not free. What problem does it solve
that is worth solving at the expense of reinventing the wheel and making users
deal with yet another system?

Edit: One way Ford to justify it is to think of the non-SmartPhone, non-Apple,
non-Google users. Though in terms of numbers, at least in the US this bunch is
a tiny minority. Ford could give them a Moto G free with every Car for not
having to pay for QNX licensing fees, maps and updates etc.! OR they could
limit the QNX based independent system to lower end cars and make the higher
end ones compatible with Android Auto and CarPlay.

There's also the question of longevity - what if in 2017 Apple and Google stop
being compatible with the older version of Carplay/Auto compatible
implementation Ford shipped in their 2014 car? What if users switched to non-
Apple, non-Android phones? In that case it would make the in-car system
useless for the user. So given people use cars for way longer than SmartPhones
- I guess it makes some sense for Ford to have an independent system.

Regardless they should still rid themselves of the NIH and stick with Android
based UI and not have their own based on QNX. That part hardly makes sense.

~~~
emcrazyone
I was one of the architects working on Ford SYNC. Internally, Ford has a big
problem with open source software from a legal stand point. You have a
fortune-5 company here. Translation for you: They are a very large target for
lawsuits. The open source software provides no indemnification.

You also have to remember when SYNC was in the planning stages long before the
public knew about it. I was part of the original team responsible for taking
the whole concept to reality.

I can tell you that internally, it was one of the most well run software
architecture teams I was ever apart of. The middle level managers really know
how to run software teams which is not something you might expect from a big
old automotive company.

But in many ways, our hands were tied. Recall about the time Bill Gates and
Bill Ford riding around in a model-T. A lot of us didn't want Windows for
automotive and were trying to champion Linux. Also, the iMX3 which was in the
first generation SYNC modules was at the time a slow processor.

And to top things off, a fair bit of the software running on the SYNC module
is not written by Ford. Ford partnered up with a crappy company called
B-Squared.

The Maps are not Ford's either. When I was on the team, Ford had partnered
with INRIX for Maps, traffic and direction.

SYNC is just not a simple single board computer with some apps running on it.
There is an entire eco-system build around the SYNC module because it's
connected to the vehicle networks (CAN Bus). Microsoft & Ford being partners
(Windows servers in data center), Microsoft wanted to handle some of the
software development but when Ford asked Microsoft to sign off on some legal
agreement asking MS to take any and all responsibility for things like
inadvertently deploying an air bag, they backed off.

Also, Ford SYNC as I said has an eco system of roughly 20-30 backend
applications that support it. Some of these have to do with 911 assist and the
TREAD act. The TREAD act is the US Federal Government's oversight on safety
claims.

Because via SYNC you can report problems and have your vehicle serviced, their
is a lot internal logic that keeps track of what is called EOL (End of Line)
data about a vehicle which needs to funnel into TREAD act reporting.

Think about the not so long ago Toyota problem where they tried to blame floor
mats for gas peddles getting stuck.

EDIT: Also, the GUI is not Microsoft CE native. The WindowsCE is just the OS
running on the SYNC module. The GUI was Adobe ActionScript. Trust me, many of
us yelled very loud about how stupid an idea this was but because B-Squared
own the implementation (not the architecture), they were aloud to chose
whatever they wanted to meet Ford specs. The results are a history less: JD
Powers gave it SYNC poor ratings and many of us (myself included) got the hell
out of dodge.

Middle managers, managing the day to day software architecture and
specifications, were caught between a rock and a hard place with senior
management (Allan Mullaly, Mark Fields, Bill Ford, Marcy Klevorn) pushing
these partnership relationships we were forced to work within.

~~~
JohnTHaller
> The open source software provides no indemnification.

Just as Google and Apple do, QNX contains multiple open source components from
other parties that QNX does not own the copyright to including code licensed
under APACHE, BSD-2C, BSD-3C, BSD-OPENSSL, BSD-V, ISC-V, GPL2-EX2, MIT, MIT-V,
MPL, MPL10, PYTHON, UL, ZLIB (this is copy-pasted from QNX's own open source
license compliance documentation). Anyone can sue Ford directly for using
those components just as they can with the use of Google or Apple software.

Now, if QNX itself provides a _complete_ indemnification from both copyright
and patent lawsuits arising from the use of said code and Apple and Google do
not, that's a different story. But unless that is the case, Ford is no safer
with QNX.

~~~
emcrazyone
I'm not a lawyer but sat in many of the internal meetings. From what I
understand, anyone who signs up to work with Ford Motor also signs a legal
agreement saying you take on legal responsibility for your actions....

As an example, Ford is also a big Linux shop but they do not use any old Linux
distro. They have partnered with Novell (SUSE Linux) who indemnifies them from
all open source code found in the SUSE distribution.

When I was on Ford SYNC, no Google code ran on the module. The feature they
are talking about is called Send To Sync and it's a web service where the SYNC
module can receive a map planned on Google Maps. The mapping software in Ford
SYNC is simply given the data output in the form of lat/long info.

~~~
fnordfnordfnord
There is no way that Novell or QNX are big enough to indemnify Ford unless
we're talking about some kind of huge business or E&O policy or something; in
which case Ford is paying the bill for that.

------
kabdib
Windows CE is an unbelievable pile of crap under the hood, easily some of the
worst code I've ever seen. It should never have been shipped; it was certainly
never made better, at least at a level that mattered. Instead, Microsoft kept
adding features. CE speaks volumes about the lack of caring about quality and
good design from Microsoft's upper management.

Yes, it was killed a few years ago. But it lasted way too long, and did untold
amounts of damage to Microsoft's ability to execute in mobile. They spent a
lot of time recovering from many bad decisions, mostly politically driven
nonsense having nothing to do with making CE any good.

~~~
drzaiusapelord
Considering every sysadmin spent yesterday uninstalling rollup 8 for Exchange
2010 and KB3004394, I'm very worried that MS, as an organization, has fallen
from grace on a level never before seen. On top of a million other issues like
the failure of Office 2013 and Windows 8 in general.

I imagine the politics at Microsoft still remain at, "Catch up to Apple, make
our own iPad, iPhone, etc" instead of delivering a good product in the dozen
other realms they compete in. Of course the automakers were going to ditch the
MS product. Its substandard.

I really wish MS would find a way to up their game. Nadella's tenure isn't
looking so bright 8 months in. Not sure if MS is salvageable, to be honest. I
sometimes think how much better the products would be if Clinton actually
tried to split up the enterprise stuff from the home stuff during the anti-
trust settlement, instead of allowing MS to continue as-is and continue to
force IE6 on the web for 4 or 5 more years than it deserved to.

~~~
freehunter
>Nadella's tenure isn't looking so bright 8 months in.

I think many here would disagree with that, as shown by the last... 8 months
of news about open source this, Linux that, iOS/Android apps, web standards,
and GitHub.

I've never heard any complaints about Office 2013, and I haven't heard any
complaints about Windows 8 that haven't been solved by Windows 8.1 or Windows
10.

~~~
RyJones
Office 2013 apps are incredibly slow to start and run. Outlook, in particular,
will lock up for minutes at a time with no network or CPU activity. Some
people in my office use OWA instead of Outlook to get around the lockups.

~~~
sz4kerto
Really? On my >3 yo hardware Word 2013 starts well below half a second
(actually in like 300 msec, I've made many measurements).

------
DigitalSea
How much did Ford pay Techcrunch to write this glowing advertisement? The
interface doesn't look nice at all, look at those harsh shadows and bezels on
the edges (especially the buttons). It looks outdated in comparison to iOS and
Android. Not to mention the article mentions how smooth the experience is, if
you watch the video you can see lag (on maps in particular), UI flicker and
other animations for the sake of animating (see the keyboard come into view).
It might be faster than SYNC2, but it is not as perfect as this paid-for
looking piece proclaims.

The article fails to also mention that QNX is owned by Blackberry, they
acquired QNX Software Systems in 2010. I am honestly surprised that this isn't
a stated fact in the article. In-fact, it is a known fact that QNX dominates
the in-car operating system market and have contracts with a few other car
manufacturers, notably BMW.

The real story here is: Microsoft loses out to market dominating Blackberry
QNX.

------
MrZongle2
From the article: "Sadly, since the new Sync runs on a totally different
hardware, vehicles that shipped with the old version will not get the new
hotness."

This is the #1 reason why I'm not interested in high-tech displays and car
automation from the car manufacturers.

I drive an 18-year-old car, mostly because I enjoy not having a car payment.
I'd rather deal with an ancient cassette deck than have _more_ of my dashboard
functionality imprisoned in an ancient (and possibly poor-performing) UI that
cannot be upgraded.

~~~
sliverstorm
_dashboard functionality imprisoned in an ancient (and possibly poor-
performing) UI that cannot be upgraded._

Doesn't that pretty much describe a cassette deck? :)

It's easy to fall into the version-chaser trap with easily upgradable digital
systems. But I've come to realize, when it comes to digital appliances, do
they really _need_ to be upgraded? I don't think so. My Toyota has a basic
touchscreen UI that will probably never receive a software update, but you
know what? That's fine. The CD player works, the radio works, the bluetooth
works, and it will all continue to work. It really isn't all that different
from the cassette decks of my past cars.

~~~
MrZongle2
_Doesn 't that pretty much describe a cassette deck? :) _

LOL, yes, if the manufacturer components aren't intended to be upgradeable via
software. A virtual speedometer or gas-gauge, for instance, should be simple
enough to never need a patch.

Navigation and entertainment systems, on the other hand, can be a lot more
complex. Not only does mapping software need to be upgraded, but I think there
can be some temptation on the part of content publishers to endlessly tweak
potential revenue channels (the continuously increasing number of apps on my
AppleTV comes to mind).

What happens when one of these updates results in degraded performance? Again
with an Apple comparison: I think about my iPhone 4S' performance after iOS7
rolled out. A vehicle's performance degrades as it gets more mileage, but it
can be offset by care and maintenance. What happens when a manufacturer (or
their subcontractor) pushes an update that turns your 2-year-old responsive
console system into a sluggish mess? Would you have purchased the car if it
had performed like that?

~~~
sliverstorm
Which is why it doesn't need to be upgraded at all! All you need is map
database updates- that road closed, this new road was put in, end of story. My
Garmin works like that, and I've seen first-hand with it that map databases
tend to stay current "enough" for years.

Through that lens, you could view the fact that pre-WiFi, pre-cellular dash
systems can only be upgraded by invasive action at the dealer as a blessing...

------
chiph
Ford is missing the mark by charging for map updates. They should offer free
updates with oil changes - which gives them an opportunity to get the owner
back in the dealership and to talk with them. "How's your car doing? Good. Let
us know when you're ready to trade it in. In the meantime, we've updated your
maps for free."

~~~
emcrazyone
They certainly did but consider at the time the WIFI module does not connect
to the Internet. It was only for inside the vehicle to sync with your device
or give your device an Internet connection. The internal software never looks
at the Internet; it's firewalled. And there are a ton of good reasons for this
(see my post above).

Also, because SYNC is not connected to the internet it does not have an always
on connection. SYNC uses data over voice. Think old school dial up internet
connection. SYNC, however, dialed into a partner company that provided a
strict set of customer experienced data like ball scores, get your horoscope,
etc...

So to update maps, requires you to plug an update stick into the USB port.
MAPs are also very large data and would take too long to update on a dial up
connection. Again, it has WIFI but the WIFI is not internally used by SYNC or
wasn't when I was on the program.

Secondly, because of the partnership with INRIX, I think INRIX gets some
kickback for maps updates. And after the trial period, if you decide to keep
traffic and direction subscription, I think INRIX also got a kickback for that
too.

It will be interesting to see where SYNC goes in the future with 4G now
available. When I was at Ford, they wanting to have a celluar data service
that was vendor agnostic but it gave them problems for 911 assist. Maybe that
has improved.

My point is that there are a whole host of problems a first mover has to over
come. Yea they made some mistakes but dam, you have to give them credit for
being one of the first to start putting some of this out there.

~~~
chiph
I'm not saying it's a bad system - Sync 1.0 was pretty revolutionary. Sync 2.0
had some issues around the UI design, for sure.

What about updating the maps over the diagnostic connector? You'd just send
over the deltas, obviously.

~~~
emcrazyone
too slow. CAN maxes out a 1Mbps. Besides, if you have to connect to something,
it might as well be the faster USB port.

------
51Cards
Interestingly, not a single mention of the word Blackberry in the entire
article. Not that it's required, QNX is being pushed as a separate brand but
still, makes me wonder if that is intentional. Scoring Ford for QNX is a
pretty nice win for Blackberry.

~~~
ufoolme
QNX is still run as an entirely separate company, its one of the only
remaining jewels in Blackberry/RIM's treasure chest. While they are developed
with somewhat common and aligned goals, development is still fairly separate.
Additionally QNX has been slow (partly due to funding) to take up the QT BB10
side of things as it is not generally part of their core business.

------
dingdingdang
Message to QNX people; would it be possible to re-instigate the tradition from
the late 90s where QNX was released as demo version for enthusiasts to play
around with? The sheer stability and performance of that 1.3mb-floppy-ready OS
still amazes me to this day (came with full gui, 3d models, editor and web
browser..!).

~~~
GoodIntentions
>> Message to QNX people; would it be possible to re-instigate the tradition
from the late 90s

second this. I was really impressed with QNX - I played with it a bit and
stopped when the licensing changed.

~~~
Animats
They really botched that. QNX went from closed source to free-for-hobbyists to
closed source to fully open source to closed source.

This killed open source development efforts for QNX. There used to be a
Firefox build for QNX. The underlying QNX OS technology is great, but the
organization, which has now been acquired twice, is a pain to deal with.

------
bndw
"Software updates come by way of Wifi. All cars equipped with the new version
of Sync will also be loaded with a WIFI receiver, allowing Ford to push
software updates to Sync"

Either the author is confused, or you're literally going to have to connect
your car to a WiFi network to receive updates.

~~~
exelius
That sounds about right, actually. In practice, this shouldn't be a big deal
for people who live in a house where WiFi reaches the garage, but I can see it
being a PITA for anyone who lives in an apartment.

~~~
vardump
Nearly every phone I've seen in last few years has a WiFi access point
feature. So shouldn't be a big issue even for apartment dwellers.

~~~
tnorthcutt
How many people actually know how to use that feature, though?

~~~
foofoo55
On a Blackberry Z10 it's just two touches: the first touch gets the main
settings menu from the top (I think the same as any Android), then hitting the
Hotspot icon. I use this all the time to feed the Internet to my laptop and
even a couple pieces of remote machinery. I'd expect to do this to update such
a car as well. And I'm really old in HN years.

How can carriers know when the phone is acting as a hotspot, and why are those
bytes more expensive?

------
scrumper
Recently I moved my family to the 'burbs and needed a car after 5 city years
without one. I did not buy a Ford Flex - an otherwise perfect and very
desirable 7 seat family car - simply because of its horrid touchscreen. In
every other way it was brilliant, but I just couldn't do it.

Ford's recent models are truly excellent cars (I've rented many Tauruses,
Explorers, and Fusions over the last couple of years), but they were all
utterly ruined by that dreadful system with its awful, ugly, laggy console
you're forced to use for everything that isn't actually driving.

Good on them for moving on.

~~~
sswaner
I agree, I remember the first time I had the option to rent a Ford and was
excited to try out Sync. It is horrible.

For me, the test was to pair my phone before I left the rental car garage.
Ford was the most difficult compared to Nissan, Chevy, Dodge and Toyota.

~~~
scrumper
I never once got that to work (Blackberry or iPhone). The USB port did charge
the phone though.

I did manage to get music from an iPhone through the USB port, but that was on
an Expedition which has a different system (and it also only worked
sporadically, requiring lots of re-plugging).

Such a crying shame. Since the company moved to the global platform and
started making ROW-quality cars in the USA, I've been so impressed. They look
good, drive well, ride comfortably, have good engines, have fantastic
interiors (by mass-market US standards)... Then you go to turn up the AC and
you realize that the rotting turd in the center console means that Ford hates
you.

------
Lagged2Death
_Nair stated emphatically that there is a “hard and fast” firewall between
Sync and “mission critical systems” in the car._

Wow I sure hope that's a dumbed-down explanation for the press, because I
don't want my radio and (say) my ABS or traction control to have enough of a
connection to each other to even establish any kind of "firewall" between
them.

~~~
tdicola
In a lot of cases there are multiple CAN or similar buses, like one for engine
components, one for accessories, one for emissions (OBD2), etc. There
definitely are valid concerns with malicious attacks, but they can be
mitigated a bit by separating devices to different buses.

~~~
emcrazyone
See my response above. There is a firewall. I won't divulge too many details
other than what anyone can learn by simply disassembling a SYNC module but
will say all software for SYNC must be signed and approved by Ford. The SYNC
module has two CPUs. The Freescale iMX handles all the graphics and I think it
was a V850 from Renesance that handles all vehicle bus communication. Between
these two CPUs there is a firewall which restricts what the graphics processor
(iMX) can & can't get out on the CAN bus. The communication is essentially
proxied; 3rd party software doesn't have a direct connection to any vehicle
network.

And the concern is precisely as you said. They don't want 3rd party software
setting off air bags as the inside joke always was.

------
pjmlp
Regardless of what the real reason was, it is nice to see mikro-kernels being
used in production.

Funny how many successful embedded OS are micro-kernels while desktops OS are
still struggling to achieve similar designs, the best being the Mac OS X and
Windows hybrid designs.

------
bobx11
The Microsoft Sync system in my current Ford (2015) and last Ford (2013) were
the worst onboard computers I've used. They crash when restarting your iPhone
if connected by usb. They loose connection with my phones. They require you
use buttons on the steering wheel to select usb input and can not do it via
the touch screen display when all other input sources are available. There are
countless reasons why consumers should rejoice for the fact that a superior
solution was picked here.

Ford committed to the hacker community that their systems could be open and
maybe a standard connector will be made... but anything is better than Ford
Sync.

~~~
notatoad
Im able to select USB by tapping the voice command trigger and saying USB.
Seems easy enough?

~~~
bobx11
Great, now I have two workarounds instead of using a giant screen that's
installed in the front of the car that you have to use for everything else.
The voice commands suck if you're speaking English as a second language BTW.

------
ufoolme
This is unfortunate, as it does signal less competition which is never good.

QNX is excellent and has been the clear dominant player in the auto world for
decades. However I think is unlikely Ford will go with QNX for the major in-
vehicle display in a wider capacity, Intel/Apple/Microsoft will throw cash at
the pie to make it worth using their suite of technologies. Also don't forget
Ford would have already used QNX already, its in embedded system everywhere!
QNX just needs a better good IoT pitch yet for it to become better known or
popular in the mainstream software world.

------
elandybarr
I got a Ford CMAX (which I really love!), and the dealer tried to eagerly sell
me the SYNC system.

I found a car that had all I wanted, but SYNC was there so I told him I would
walk away and find one that didn't have the SYNC, and was ready to do it too.
In the day they lent me it to test drive, it had all sorts of WTF and features
not working.

So eventually they gave me the car without charging the $1200+ for it.

I live in the Redmond area. As I was leaving he mentioned that most Microsoft
employees declined that system too.

------
jread
Thank God, I own 2 Fords including a Focus Electric. Sync has been by far the
most painful part of ownership. Unintuitive, slow, buggy, flakey bluetooth -
just a terrible user experience.

~~~
phkahler
How do you otherwise like the electric? I might have done some work on that.

~~~
jread
Its good for around town driving, stressful for longer trips due to varying
range (50-80 miles). Biggest complaint is because it is FWD, and the battery
in back, traction is terrible going from a stop up hills, or on wet surfaces.

------
nirajd
This looks absolutely awful. Great features, bad execution. Shouldn't this UI
look at least as nice as the Blackberry Playbook from 2011?

------
guyzero
Maybe this is Blackberry's chance to pivot to a different market?

~~~
maxerickson
QNX was already a player in embedded car info systems before RIM bought them.

------
MichaelCrawford
Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications dropped CE for Android because Microsoft
refused to fix its bugs.

MS would acknowledge the bugs - but then it wouldn't fix them.

