
Why Today’s Automobile Industry Looks a Lot Like IBM in 1985 - carlchenet
http://techcrunch.com/2015/05/17/why-todays-automobile-industry-looks-a-lot-like-ibm-in-1985/
======
dkyc
The author's point is that by using Apple CarPlay or Android Auto, they hand
over control over software and become "commoditized hardware providers", just
like IBM and the IBM-clone providers in the 1980s and 1990s.

I consider this argument ridiculous, as the in-car-software controls nowhere
near as much of the user experience as the operating system and applications
of a personal computer. Today's car builders have their profit margins because
of engine design, build quality, exterior design and branding. They don't lose
power by outsourcing their software stack. Actually a lot of them _already use
the same software over their entire model range_ (f.e. Volkswagen, Ford, BMW
all do) and it does not seem to hurt the sales & profits of their top-end
models, so the point that software is the crucial buying factor is basically
already refuted.

(I think they should rather be afraid of Tesla overtaking them in what
actually matters)

~~~
pjc50
I suspect this is going to be like the iPod launch itself: software doesn't
matter, until someone produces some that the non-enthusiast users find is a
great improvement in usability.

In-car entertainment is going to be a marginal thing in the smartphone era;
people just want to use the car as a peripheral display and speakers for the
phone they always already have. Maybe integrate some buttons so you can
control the navigation more easily.

The two threats are Tesla (battery changes the owner experience as charge
requires more active management by owner) and self-driving cars in general.

~~~
Spooky23
I'd argue that the latter is a reflection on the escalating costs. Self
driving is really a sharing scheme. I work in a place in a average cost city
where the average salary is north of $100k -- I'd guess the average car is 7
years old. Hell, I'm the boss and I'm driving a 13 year old Honda.

In the 90s, the average car in my high school student lot was newer!

~~~
Retric
That might be part of it, but car quality has increased dramatically over
time. In many ways the average 10 year old car now is in about the same
mechanical condition as a 5 year old car in 1990. Combined with the general
low mileage of most city cars and there is little reason to drive a new car.

------
PinguTS
This author has a lot of misconceptions what a car is and how it is composed
of.

The HMI/MMI or however you would like to call that thing in the middle is only
a small part of the software in a car. And even using standards like Apple
CarPlay or Android Auto does not mean, that they give anything away. Both
"platforms" are not even platforms, they are just proprietary versions of VNC.
Its like the current iteration of the Apple Watch: there is no application
running on the watch. The applications can display information and they have a
back channel for the user interaction. But the real application still runs on
the phone. That is also true for Android Auto and Apple CarPlay.

Then there is much more to control in this second display (the first display
is the dashboard), which is air condition, power sliding windows, roof, and
all the other car functions. Because anything in a car is controlled by
software. In a normal mid-sized car there are about 40 to 60 ECUs (electronic
control units), in a luxury car that can go up to 90 and some more.

Current estimates are that a modern car is comprised by about 30% software,
30% electronics, and 30% mechanics.

Seeing the reason decline of software quality by Apple, I am feeling pretty
comfortable that they are only doing user interface stuff, that is unimportant
to the cars performance.

------
kfk
Have you checked with the customers? I have never heard of a customer
commenting software features of a car. It looks to me that car buyers are
interested in other things in a car. I mean, at least for me (potential
customer?), an Audi with the shittiest software will always win vs a Fiat with
the best software. You can't just compare completely different industries and
draw conclusions like that, you should give some more factual stuff to prove
your argument I believe.

~~~
ethbro
_> Have you checked with the customers? I have never heard of a customer
commenting software features of a car. It looks to me that car buyers are
interested in other things in a car._

Even as a fellow auto enthusiast, I get the sense that we don't represent the
majority. There's a reason most car salespeople can't explain anything
technical about the vehicle they're trying to sell you -- most buyers don't
care about those details.

If Tesla (or anyone else) comes out with a cheap enough car that can't do over
50mph, runs on a user-friendly electric ecosystem, has terrible driving
dynamics, and can autopilot between home and work?

I feel like they'd seize 25%+ of US auto sales at least.

~~~
amyjess
Nah, at least not people where I live. While most people aren't enthusiasts,
almost everyone does 60mph on the main arterials, and 70-80 on the actual
highways.

~~~
ethbro
And I just threw out 50mph as a "cheaper" number.

You really think people would trade the ability to completely focus on
something else during their commute (autopilot) for the ability to go faster
but have to focus on the road?

~~~
amyjess
I think those of us who would do that are already using public transit (I
include myself in this group, by the way). It might get some people who say
"well, I _would_ take the bus if it ran where I live/work", but anyone who
lives and works on a bus route would already be using public transit if most
people felt this way, and public transit will continue to be cheaper for quite
some time.

~~~
ethbro
The cost of public transit for me is mostly time: imo bus connections are
terrible when you're doing it every day (or twice!). And I ride as often as
possible.

It also supposes your city has an efficient and reasonably cost effective
public transit network. Which isn't always the case.

Automated electric personal vehicles solve both these issues: it's as timely
as you can get (unless dedicated rail is weighed in, but...), and it requires
only a city electrical grid.

------
ChuckMcM
_Cars will become commodified, and as long as it’s running CarPlay or Android
Auto, I won’t care what I’m driving._

Somehow I don't think so. It doesn't help that the author gets the mechanics
of the PC transistion wrong as well. The biggest threat at the moment to
automobiles is self driving. If we get a self-driving Uber or Lyft we're going
to have an entire generation of people who just have their phone summon
transportation and never own a car.

~~~
amyjess
> If we get a self-driving Uber or Lyft we're going to have an entire
> generation of people who just have their phone summon transportation and
> never own a car.

This is going to be affected by cost. Let's look at the numbers.

A Lyft between work and home for me is about $10, plus tip (which is usually
$2 for me, except in the rare case the driver's a creep), assuming Prime Time
isn't in effect.

If I were to take Lyft both ways every day, that's about $24/day. If I work 22
days in a month, that's $528/month just on my commute. If I want to run
errands and Lyft it to places outside of work, that's even more money. Oh, and
until the beginning of this year, I worked much farther away from home than I
do now, and a Lyft would've run me about $25 each way (possibly closer to
$30), plus tip (which, by this point, would go up to $5). At $60/day, I'd be
spending $1320/month on commute alone.

How does this compare to other methods of transportation?

Looking at public transport, a monthly pass here is $80. This is a great deal
if you both live and work on a bus or train line, assuming you're willing to
put up a longer commute. For example, public transit was perfect for my last
job, because I lived and worked on the same bus line, and while my commute
took an hour (going from the suburbs to downtown by bus takes a while), I
didn't mind it because I could just spend the bus ride reading books and
comics on my phone, or if I'd been sleep-deprived, I could just zone out in my
seat. Also, the only benefit my last company offered was that they'd pay for
employees' transit passes (or for those who drive, they'd pay for a parking
pass at a local garage, but we could only pick one or the other), so I
basically got to commute for free. If you're off the beaten path, however,
public transport isn't an option, and if you're reliant on public transit, it
limits the companies you can accept positions at.

How does this compare to owning a car? I don't know. I'm not joking here: I've
never actually owned a car. Anyone else care to chime in? For the record, I
live in North Texas, where cost of living is relatively low, so I'd especially
like to hear from other people in my area. If owning a car is cheap enough,
then Lyft and Uber will have to drop their prices like a rock to supplant cars
for everyone.

~~~
mahyarm
You live in suburbia, where the distances are long because it's been designed
for cars, parking, roads and huge highways. The parking & roads are also
subsided. Also your transit is probably subsidized heavily. %80 of the cost is
probably paid by your local government / tax dollars.

Lets take the cost of owning a Prius V that drives 500 miles a day:

\- $260/mo car 'lease' ($8.6/day) [200'000 miles over 8 years]

\- $200/mo in repairs ($6.6/day) [Will probably be less in reality]

\- $200/mo in insurance ($6.6/day) [Will probably be less in reality]

\- $50/day in gas

Now the shift employees, that you pay lets say $15/hr on average for 18 hours
a day are $270/day. Their cost alone is 3.75 times greater than all of the
other costs combined of $72/day. Even if the robot service costed a crazy
$2000/month (which it wont be), that is still 4 times lower than employees. So
if the corporation passes the robot savings to you your commute costs, they
will be x2.5 lower even with my inflated estimates. Your $528 will become
around $220, and that is less than the cost of owning a car currently.

If we can convince governments to shift their subsidies to these robot cars to
make it %20 of costs, it will be $44/month, which is about half of your
transit ticket cost, for on demand travel.

In all cases, the majority of the costs is human labor.

By making cars shared, less cars will need to exist, so parking real estate
can be reassigned to other more productive uses. There will be less congestion
because these automated cars can synchronize properly. The total amount of
cars that would need to exist would only be needed to serve peak base load,
like a electrical utility.

Also the speed of trains comes from the fact that they have a dedicated 'road'
that only they can travel, so congestition doesn't exist and therefore the
service is predictable. You can do the same thing with busses and roads.

~~~
ChuckMcM
Exactly this, and the fact that self driving cars can replace all of the other
forms of transport (train, bus, taxi) and with electric versions of said cars
amortize maximize energy utilization and reduce waste, the numbers just get
surprisingly good all around. 80% of the population of the US lives in an
"urban" area and they won't personally own cars any more.

[1] [http://www.citylab.com/housing/2012/03/us-urban-
population-w...](http://www.citylab.com/housing/2012/03/us-urban-population-
what-does-urban-really-mean/1589/)

------
yitchelle
Software is only a small part of the car. The other parts to consider is the
build quality of a car. For example, compare a Skoda and a VW. Even though,
they are from the sample base platform, their build quality is very different.
They share plenty of the same software. Build quality includes items like
suspension, safety features and about 1000s other items.

~~~
brc
That's not actually quite correct. Build quality usually refers to the overall
integrity of the finished product, it's ability to withstand wear and tear and
reliability.

The difference between a skoda badged VW and a VW badged VW is more about the
finish quality - the differences in the seat materials, amount of sound
deadening, the amount of standard features and so on.

In most cases the active and passive safety features of a skoda/VW will be
identical for the same platform, especially when it comes to things like power
train components, which are purchased and built in bulk. The main difference
between a VW and skoda engine is that the skoda misses out on the plastic
engine cover.

------
S_A_P
This article is a stretch at best. There are too many subsystems in a car that
are already controlled by software from Bosch and a few select other companies
that have no or little interface into the UI of a car. The author here either
doesn't get that cars are a level of magnitude more complicated than computers
or he doesn't care. Electric cars can simply things somewhat as it takes a lot
of sensors and cpu power to make a gasoline or Diesel engine run and meet
emissions standards. However there is still a lot to manage in electric cars
too that goes way beyond Bluetooth control and maps.

------
higherpurpose
I think I'd trust Google or Apple more with my self-driving car's security
than say BMW.

[http://www.pcworld.com/article/2878437/bmw-cars-found-
vulner...](http://www.pcworld.com/article/2878437/bmw-cars-found-vulnerable-
in-connected-drive-hack.html)

Alex Stamos on Twitter recently:

> _If software is eating the world and all companies are software companies,
> then they all need to learn hard infosec lessons faster._

[https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/600075692731191296](https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/600075692731191296)

Couldn't agree more.

------
Aoyagi
This talk of connected cars is kind of disturbing. How long until cars serve
targeted ads on their HUD?

~~~
TheCondor
If the car can drive itself, what will the person inside be there for? If not
to view ads and consume media?

~~~
VLM
To take the blame when the software... err.. car... crashes, of course. The
corporation sure isn't going to take the blame.

------
lambdaelite
CarPlay is not great.

I don't have any experience with Android Auto or MirrorLink, but I installed a
Pioneer head unit (AVX-4000NEX) a few months ago in my car so I could use
CarPlay.

The head unit itself is great, gets good reception, sounds great (especially
after using the microphone calibration), and the Pioneer interface is fine. I
don't know that it's worth the price without considering the deep phone
integration. I considered reinstalling the factory head unit (a Scion Bespoke
w/ navigation), but I had sold it before I could come to a decision.

CarPlay would work great if Siri worked well, but I've never been able to get
Siri to work well in the car or elsewhere (and that assumes Siri is taking
requests at the moment). Text-to-speech works fine; dictation is a constant
frustration. The other week, I tried to send a message to my wife that "I am
in a little traffic so I'm running late, but should be there at 5:20". I don't
recall the erroneous outputs generated by Siri, but they weren't even close.
After multiple tries, I had to give up. The Maps colors are idiotically low
contrast and it can be very difficult to see what current traffic conditions
are as a result. The zoom levels in Maps never seem to be right, either too
much or too little. The touch interface itself requires too much attention to
use and is a car accident waiting to happen.

CarPlay has a long way to go before it is competitive with iDrive, MyFord
Touch, or Uvo, which are the systems that I've experienced. My experience with
CarPlay makes me question how much testing it actually got while installed in
cars with people driving, because there's a lot of glaring usability problems
and general interface quirks that should have been caught during testing.

I used to think that CarPlay, Android Auto, and MirrorLink were going to
destroy the car maker's infotainment systems. After using CarPlay, I'm
convinced it's going to be a while before that happens, if ever. The car
manufacturers have a lot of experience with "car UX" and aren't standing still
with their own products. Infotainment is also a minor part of the entire car
ownership and use experience, and I don't know that I can think of anyone that
bought or leased a car because "it has iDrive" or whatever. Drawing an analogy
between car manufacturers and 1985 IBM feels forced and is flawed.

~~~
epochwolf
> I am in a little traffic so I'm running late, but should be there at 5:20

I would phrase this as "Running late due to traffic, ETA 5:20" and this
usually works. Siri seems to trip up on articles especially if you don't speak
precisely. (And yes, this is extremely annoying)

------
SliderUp
This seems a silly thesis, if only because cars are already commoditized due
to years of competition. Early PCs has huge profit margins; current
automobiles generally do not.

~~~
ska
Commoditization is not the same as low profit margins.

The auto makers historically spend a ton of marketing money to keep the auto
market from being a commoditized market. So far they've been very successful.

Profit margins are pretty healthy in some segments, for that matter.

