4 ms·
I can't upset the NDA Gods on this one, unfortunately. I can say one is a traditional OEM that you wouldn't necessarily expect to be the sort to take vanguard s
by im_down_w_otp 5y ago
I can't upset the NDA Gods on this one, unfortunately. I can say one is a traditional OEM that you wouldn't necessarily expect to be the sort to take vanguard steps like this and the other is a newer OEM that's not as encumbered by tradition (though due to the supply-chain also can't rid themselves of it).
Shameless plug WARNING: we (https://auxon.io https://auxon.io) are hiring for engineering, marketing, and BD if industrial & operational technology is your thing.
- VLM 5y agoI never signed the NDA, although I follow the space distantly, and they went public on their own website a couple years ago with a list: BMW, Bosch, Continental, Daimler AG, Ford, General Motors, PSA Peugeot Citroën, Toyota, and Volkswagen. I always rooted for an older competitor GENIVI which (very handwavy in a general sense) boiled down to "make dbus great again". I just always have a soft spot for anything that replaces CORBA and DCOP. More or less GENIVI had the same players as AUTOSAR. I believe AUTOSAR suffers from trying to do too much; GENIVI's "all you need is a compatible bus" is the minimum you need so simplicate and add lightness and that's what should win; doesn't really matter if that guy runs QNX and that other guy runs FreeRTOS as long as the busses talk; whereas AUTOSAR tries to own and control everything top to bottom which just ends up stifling any productivity.
- im_down_w_otp 5y agoIf you look through the "Adaptive AUTOSAR" literature and documentation that's out there you can find that enormous chunks of it are lifted straight from GENIVI's stack/specs. However, GENIVI/Adaptive-AUTOSAR tends to serve a different function in the vehicle architecture. It's mostly cockpit and less control/platform. AUTOSAR Classic is still the champ on the MCU side of the house.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]