6 ms·

Yuck: > MB.OS is designed and developed in-house to retain full control You better have some world class software engineers to pull this off, a LOT of them. A

Yuck: > MB.OS is designed and developed in-house to retain full control You better have some world class software engineers to pull this off, a LOT of them. And retain them. If not, you better go open source. You can still retain full control with open source. Good software is the KEY to good cars, especially electric ones. Why are we inventing 100 different models of cars every year? What a waste of human potential.

mackman 4y ago
I’d be surprised if this isn’t just another Android fork.
- mempko 4y ago
  It's not from what I read. MBUX, the UI is built using Qt.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - joezydeco 4y ago
    That kind of implies that the new Mercedes OS will have some kind of POSIX API, since Qt doesn't really work without it. Their new Qt/MCU bullshit doesn't count.
    - pjmlp 4y ago
      Windows isn't POSIX, and Qt does just fine there.
      - joezydeco 4y ago
        Sorry, was talking more about embedded systems bindings. Qt has shims, obviously, to work with Mac/Win/GTK etc but when you're setting up Qt as the windowing system, it needs POSIX.
    - dezgeg 4y ago
      I'd be pretty sure that any company can pay money to Qt Company and have them come and integrate Qt into any kind of weirdo OS whatsover.
  - Dig1t 4y ago
    Exactly like Tesla.
- delecti 4y ago
  I work there, and I'd be massively surprised if it were. Historically, their in-vehicle software has been handled by other companies they've contracted, and is radically different from generation to generation (different company each time).
whalesalad 4y ago
I disagree. Sometimes you need to invent things yourself. Mercedes is an absolutely massive company with many subsidiary brands. This is not an automatic bad move.
- ElijahLynn 4y ago
  But they are not a software company at the core. They need to be to pull this off.
  - cududa 4y ago
    I mean their self driving tech seems to be the most impressive out there
    - LanceJones 4y ago
      Umm, no. I tried their Drive Pilot L3 system in Germany over the Christmas holidays (MB EQS) and of 8 hours driving, it was only available for me to drive for 12 minutes (and not a continuous 12 minutes, either). Granted this does not mean the system is poor quality, but it's horribly impractical... if it's rarely to ever available.
      - cyberlurker 4y ago
        It sounds like they are more responsible than the other companies.
        hackernewds 4y ago
        Exactly. Using your customers as guinea pig data collectors for an undeveloped system seems to be the go-to. There have been noted fatalities due to this.
    - Cipater 4y ago
      What are you basing this assertion on?
oneplane 4y ago
Ecosystems are the key, not so much in which house or how public it is built. (see: iOS) It's also a system for a car, and probably a niche one at that. There are a few things that are relevant in Car-OS these days: - Ecosystems - Long-term maintenance - Integration with a phone that takes over most day-to-day interactions - Car should work without it If MB.OS and BMW's version and Audi and whoever else wants to build one doesn't support CarPlay or Android Auto (or whatever their future incarnations will be), it is already irrelevant. If anything, MB.OS is about as relevant to a consumer as QNX is. Or VxWorks for that matter. (spoiler: consumer doesn't care and doesn't really want anything to do with it) That doesn't mean that all car makers should just keep using an ancient QNX version statically forever, or whatever some OEM happens to install with the head units, but an in-house Linux distro with some vendor branding sauce really is about as relevant as blinker fluid.
- TheRealPomax 4y ago
  This makes an odd assumption about what drives, and does not drive, sales. Companies don't buy 300 company car because it has the best center console OS.
  - oneplane 4y ago
    No, it doesn't. What I wrote is the exact same thing you condensed here: > Companies don't buy 300 company car because it has the best center console OS. However, I centred mine more around personal consumers, rather can organisational buyers. It's also not just some console OS, but an ecosystem that also reals with sensors and self-driving features. I also went more into the technical aspects of operating system success, but rather than say something to the extent of "yet another QNX-style lineage is about as useful as Windows Mobile", I wrote a slightly more expanded story, just like Mercedes-Benz did on their announcement (but they added a whole lot of extra fluff about how their OS is a value add).
- solarkraft 4y ago
  > If anything, MB.OS is about as relevant to a consumer as QNX is QNX isn't exactly defining for an ecosystem, MB.OS probably will be.
HellDunkel 4y ago
The name MB.OS is misleading. It is not a new operating system but a linux or android based hmi sytem.
- tormeh 4y ago
  My bet is that the name is due to internal empire building or hype to shareholders. Being in charge of "MB.OS" sounds better than "another attempt at a good infotainment system". Add in trendy "digital" offices and you've got yourself an aesthetic.
  - HellDunkel 4y ago
    I think it is simpler. It used to be MBUX and that was hard to communicate to people on the street. MB.OS is a lit closer to iOS which helps.
erulabs 4y ago
> Why are we inventing 100 different models of cars every year? What a waste of human potential. Human efficiency and human potential are very different things. I don't want to be an efficient cog in a well designed efficient machine. I want to be a human being - building cars is cool and fun. Fun is probably a waste too, I suppose. "Two plus two makes four without my will", etc.
- corbulo 4y ago
  Think of all the cool and fun things that no one has built yet though.
  - trpv 4y ago
    Like all the cool cars that haven’t been built yet. Some people really enjoy them
    - corbulo 4y ago
      Those are definitely included
wyldfire 4y ago
What constitutes an "OS"? It's not entirely unfair for Mercedes to call a customization of Linux an "OS". If it includes GNU coreutils, the linux kernel, but a new init system and communication or UI libraries, you could call that "Mercedes Benz OS". A marketing whiz certainly would! Or you could even s/linux/QNX/g. But in any case, running a trusted and reliable kernel that wasn't designed by an auto manufacturer could still be what they're doing.
trpv 4y ago
Good cars are the ones that have the least software imo. I’d prefer my car to not have adaptive cruise control, brake or lane assist, etc. More failure points and less control over my own car

mackman 4y ago

I’d be surprised if this isn’t just another Android fork.

mempko 4y ago
It's not from what I read. MBUX, the UI is built using Qt.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- joezydeco 4y ago
  That kind of implies that the new Mercedes OS will have some kind of POSIX API, since Qt doesn't really work without it. Their new Qt/MCU bullshit doesn't count.
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    Windows isn't POSIX, and Qt does just fine there.
    - joezydeco 4y ago
      Sorry, was talking more about embedded systems bindings. Qt has shims, obviously, to work with Mac/Win/GTK etc but when you're setting up Qt as the windowing system, it needs POSIX.
  - dezgeg 4y ago
    I'd be pretty sure that any company can pay money to Qt Company and have them come and integrate Qt into any kind of weirdo OS whatsover.
- Dig1t 4y ago
  Exactly like Tesla.
delecti 4y ago
I work there, and I'd be massively surprised if it were. Historically, their in-vehicle software has been handled by other companies they've contracted, and is radically different from generation to generation (different company each time).

whalesalad 4y ago

I disagree. Sometimes you need to invent things yourself. Mercedes is an absolutely massive company with many subsidiary brands. This is not an automatic bad move.

ElijahLynn 4y ago
But they are not a software company at the core. They need to be to pull this off.
- cududa 4y ago
  I mean their self driving tech seems to be the most impressive out there
  - LanceJones 4y ago
    Umm, no. I tried their Drive Pilot L3 system in Germany over the Christmas holidays (MB EQS) and of 8 hours driving, it was only available for me to drive for 12 minutes (and not a continuous 12 minutes, either). Granted this does not mean the system is poor quality, but it's horribly impractical... if it's rarely to ever available.
    - cyberlurker 4y ago
      It sounds like they are more responsible than the other companies.
      - hackernewds 4y ago
        Exactly. Using your customers as guinea pig data collectors for an undeveloped system seems to be the go-to. There have been noted fatalities due to this.
  - Cipater 4y ago
    What are you basing this assertion on?

oneplane 4y ago

Ecosystems are the key, not so much in which house or how public it is built. (see: iOS) It's also a system for a car, and probably a niche one at that. There are a few things that are relevant in Car-OS these days: - Ecosystems - Long-term maintenance - Integration with a phone that takes over most day-to-day interactions - Car should work without it If MB.OS and BMW's version and Audi and whoever else wants to build one doesn't support CarPlay or Android Auto (or whatever their future incarnations will be), it is already irrelevant. If anything, MB.OS is about as relevant to a consumer as QNX is. Or VxWorks for that matter. (spoiler: consumer doesn't care and doesn't really want anything to do with it) That doesn't mean that all car makers should just keep using an ancient QNX version statically forever, or whatever some OEM happens to install with the head units, but an in-house Linux distro with some vendor branding sauce really is about as relevant as blinker fluid.

TheRealPomax 4y ago
This makes an odd assumption about what drives, and does not drive, sales. Companies don't buy 300 company car because it has the best center console OS.
- oneplane 4y ago
  No, it doesn't. What I wrote is the exact same thing you condensed here: > Companies don't buy 300 company car because it has the best center console OS. However, I centred mine more around personal consumers, rather can organisational buyers. It's also not just some console OS, but an ecosystem that also reals with sensors and self-driving features. I also went more into the technical aspects of operating system success, but rather than say something to the extent of "yet another QNX-style lineage is about as useful as Windows Mobile", I wrote a slightly more expanded story, just like Mercedes-Benz did on their announcement (but they added a whole lot of extra fluff about how their OS is a value add).
solarkraft 4y ago
> If anything, MB.OS is about as relevant to a consumer as QNX is QNX isn't exactly defining for an ecosystem, MB.OS probably will be.

HellDunkel 4y ago

The name MB.OS is misleading. It is not a new operating system but a linux or android based hmi sytem.

tormeh 4y ago
My bet is that the name is due to internal empire building or hype to shareholders. Being in charge of "MB.OS" sounds better than "another attempt at a good infotainment system". Add in trendy "digital" offices and you've got yourself an aesthetic.
- HellDunkel 4y ago
  I think it is simpler. It used to be MBUX and that was hard to communicate to people on the street. MB.OS is a lit closer to iOS which helps.

erulabs 4y ago

> Why are we inventing 100 different models of cars every year? What a waste of human potential. Human efficiency and human potential are very different things. I don't want to be an efficient cog in a well designed efficient machine. I want to be a human being - building cars is cool and fun. Fun is probably a waste too, I suppose. "Two plus two makes four without my will", etc.

corbulo 4y ago
Think of all the cool and fun things that no one has built yet though.
- trpv 4y ago
  Like all the cool cars that haven’t been built yet. Some people really enjoy them
  - corbulo 4y ago
    Those are definitely included

wyldfire 4y ago

What constitutes an "OS"? It's not entirely unfair for Mercedes to call a customization of Linux an "OS". If it includes GNU coreutils, the linux kernel, but a new init system and communication or UI libraries, you could call that "Mercedes Benz OS". A marketing whiz certainly would! Or you could even s/linux/QNX/g. But in any case, running a trusted and reliable kernel that wasn't designed by an auto manufacturer could still be what they're doing.

trpv 4y ago

Good cars are the ones that have the least software imo. I’d prefer my car to not have adaptive cruise control, brake or lane assist, etc. More failure points and less control over my own car