19 ms·

Ex-Apple VP Mike Abbott Joins General Motors as Exec Vice President, Software

95 points by smugma 3y ago

gowings97 3y ago
Infotainment has been commoditized by way of Android Automotive and Carplay. The perception that there is a subscription revenue opportunity for intotainment is misguided - the TAM is insignificant, and the net loss of prospective Customers that refuse to buy a vehicle without Android Auto or or Carplay far outweighs any potential subscription revenue. This will go over about as well as Cadillac Cue did from 2013-2017. Source - I work in the automotive industry, live in the Detroit suburbs, and live and breathe this stuff every day.
- steveBK123 3y ago
  Yup, this reads like they decided to "buy a guy to build GMplay" rather than just use CarPlay. unlikely to go well.
  - gowings97 3y ago
    They have this misguided perception that EVs require some deep level integration via some customized build of AAOS, that can't already be solved by individual apps on a smartphone. Namely - customizing charging times at home for off-peak rates / usage, identifying chargers on a specific route or daily commute, pre-warming or pre-cooling a car (which can be done already today because all these vehicles have LTE or 5G modems already), saving profiles that save mechanical preferences / functions like mirror / seat settings. People want buttons and knobs to control mechanical functions like HVAC, mirrors, and seats. People don't see the value associated with the premium price of having an driver to passenger end to end full screen display, such as what was first implemented on the Mercedes EQS and is now being implemented on the (Chinese made) 2024 Lincoln Nautilus.
    - jmole 3y ago
      a fully integrated OS is a better experience, if done right. unfortunately, the trend here is towards monetization (enshittification?) of everything in the UX: monthly data plan, onstar, required GM login for any smart features to work, mandatory mobile app installation.
    - mattbrewsbytes 3y ago
      I downsized vehicles from a new one with Carplay to one with no touch screen and once your hands+fingers learn locations of buttons it is blissful to drive. I can adjust nearly anything without taking my eyes off the road. I miss Carplay for the maps functionality but a properly placed phone holder can accomplish the same. I don't need 14" display of maps and entertainment options. I would also suggest that EV's that require a large screen to explain charging options, rates, usages, etc. are doing it wrong. If the EV and its charging systems (internal and external) are that complex to monitor and manage then you have larger problems about UX.
- ghaff 3y ago
  I wouldn't go so far as to say that lack of Carplay would be a complete deal-breaker for me but it would sure be a huge entry in the "cons" column.
  - tshaddox 3y ago
    It wouldn’t be a dealbreaker for me if I was buying a low cost used car, although at this point it has been around for long enough that even the beater Camry rental I’m driving right now has it. But if I’m paying big bucks for a new car I can’t imagine not having CarPlay. Ironically it’s the expensive “high-tech” brands like Tesla and Rivian that don’t support it.
    - smileysteve 3y ago
      My Tesla driving friend let his Tesla subscription lapse over a card failure last week, and the infotainment system, that has Spotify -- with an account he pays for -- no longer functions. But like, if he paired his bluetooth, he'd get Spotify playback capability, he'd just have to use his voice to explore Spotify music. Meanwhile, me in my 2004; with an aftermarket radio - with wireless tethering to my phone OR a google Fi sim, can do Carplay OR independently run maps and spotify -- for $0 extra a month.
      - msh 3y ago
        You can still do wifi tethering and then the build in service will work.
      - nanidin 3y ago
        According to the email I got from Tesla about an upcoming end of free Premium Connectivity, Music Streaming still works when tethered to a smartphone. The main drawback of letting the subscription lapse is loss of live traffic data on the map. The other lost feature is satellite view maps. Everything else works when tethered via wifi.
  - glanzwulf 3y ago
    Having used proprietary infotainment systems in the past and currently using carplay, for me it would 100% be a complete deal-breaker. (Unless of course I'm buying a car that predates the technology)
- dboreham 3y ago
  It has the feel of the recorded music industry when Napster was in full swing.
- function_seven 3y ago
  Yup. All buyers who care about having a good infotainment setup will avoid GM, leaving them with only buyers that don't care about it as much. Are these the buyers they think will then pony up $30 a month for their store-brand version? OnStar is dead, guys. It's not coming back. Don't destroy your actual business (cars) by trying to cosplay as a "tech company SaaS vertical"
altairprime 3y ago
Presumably related to: GM plans to phase out CarPlay in EVs, with Google’s help https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35389021 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35389021 (38 days ago, 377 comments)
- gowings97 3y ago
  Kind of, but not really. What GM is proposing here goes even deeper. There are three current solutions - - (2018 -> Today) Some existing solution that runs QNX as the base OS, that runs Android Auto / Carplay as an Application - (2023 - > Today) A new based OS that is a skinned version of Android Automotive OS (AAOS / https://developers.google.com/cars/design/automotive-os https://developers.google.com/cars/design/automotive-os) that runs both Android Auto Carplay and Carplay as an application, with the Automaker working with Google to incorporate customizations along with patches and updates to the base OS. Think Samsung's customized version of Android, and how they work to implement patches for major OS updates from ASOP. The infotainment used on General Motor's Global B architecture uses this. - This proposal (2025 Model Year -> Future) - runs a customized version of AAOS that does not have Android Auto / Carplay support. My guess is that Google is throwing them a bone here and offering extra support for the Automaker (deferring the Automaker's costs) if the Automaker allows Google to retain the usage data.
  - r00fus 3y ago
    I figured it was this. I mean, my car runs Ford Sync3 that runs CarPlay/AA (built by MS) and AAOS seems to compete directly with that. The flamebait position trumpeted by GM CEO seems to be "we won't enable the CarPlay/AA app" but that could be reversed quite quickly when they realize customers don't want the builtin AAOS or AAOS doesn't do what CarPlay/AA can do. The alternative is that AAOS has Apple Music and other apps built in (probably not Apple Maps) - like what you see with Tesla. I wonder if Apple will concede to this.
  - robszumski 3y ago
    Red Hat is also making a move here, not at the UI layer but supporting RHEL in an automotive environment. It could be interesting to make these systems accessible to more software developers and appear a bit closer to cloud/web service/AI software stacks.
glanzwulf 3y ago
Hope he convinces them to go back on the stupid decision that is to abandon Carplay/Android Auto.
- jdelman 3y ago
  I think it's probably the opposite -- they've probably hired him to help build their new entertainment+surveillance stack.
  - throw9away6 3y ago
    Probably, I just don’t think executives can drive that kind of innovation. Especially those who are in sustaining roles in already large and successful companies.
    - interestica 3y ago
      But you just came up with his new slogan for their software+vehicles : "driving innovation"
      - tough 3y ago
        Maybe GM needs to hire throw9away6 for driving innovation in their software dpt
        throw9away6 3y ago
        I’d Probably be just as ineffective but you could pay me less
        OnlineGladiator 3y ago
        > ...pay...less Get this man a raise!
        3y ago
raincom 3y ago
Mike Abbott was kicked out of Apple where he didn’t make any meaningful contribution. Why GM is picking him up? Another wasteful move.
- eganist 3y ago
  > where he didn’t make any meaningful contribution. Super curious about this, what more can you share?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - throwaway63728 3y ago
    Throwaway, It was chaotic, plenty of technical and leadership missteps. But at the core, he was incapable of confronting deeper issues. The proficiency of Apple does not lie in cloud or infrastructure. It's a simple truth.
    - AlotOfReading 3y ago
      You can certainly argue that Apple isn't good at cloud or infra in the same way Google and Amazon are (which would still be a weird argument), but it seems undeniable that cloud and cloud infra is a fundamental part of their product offering. Things like universal sync, iCloud, email, etc are important parts of the value prop for Apple devices.
    - wlesieutre 3y ago
      From a user perspective, Apple had a rough time with "cloud" for a long time (iTools, .Mac, MobileMe) and the recent era of iCloud feels like they've finally gotten their cloud services in a good direction. It does what I need it to.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- spacedcowboy 3y ago
fundad 3y ago
His specialty is keeping Apple tech out of cars.
LarryDarrell 3y ago
The 2022 Chevy Silverado I rented died at 488 miles on the odometer. The roadside assistance mechanic said the transmission "lost data connection to the engine". Later, a tow truck had to drag it onto it's flatbed as the rear wheels were locked up. Also, apparently the tailgate is electric now. And for some reason it stopped working when the transmission died. Also also, there is no way to turn the truck off? When it entered the error-state, the dash stayed on and the cabin motor stayed blowing, but the "Start" button wouldn't turn anything off. I know I'm an odd case, my newest car is from 1997... but I am gobsmacked at just how terrible modern vehicles are. I know customers are dumb and are easily impressed by cheap gadgetry, but why did we have to throw the baby out with the bath water? So when I hear that GM is going to build their own CarPlay or whatever I can't help but laugh. They can't even build a good fleet pickup truck.
- caycep 3y ago
  This brings to mind the CANBUS hack article on HN a few weeks ago...horrifying but fascinating to think you can steal a car by attacking it's IoT headlight..
- bombcar 3y ago
  The computerization of vehicles can be done exceptionally well or exceptionally bad, and some of them are just phenomenally bad.
  - mnky9800n 3y ago
    yes i have always enjoyed every time i drive a vw id.3. i have not enjoyed so much tesla or any other american made computerized car.
    - bombcar 3y ago
      It's even beyond the UI and how the components work with each other (the example of the transmission dying killing everything). Some of the vehicles will shut down entirely, some will cut out into limp mode, etc.
  - 3y ago
ubermonkey 3y ago
I'm stunned someone like GM could entice anyone from top-tier tech firms AT ALL, regardless of compensation.
- bastawhiz 3y ago
  Some folks really love what they do, and being given the keys to the castle to do what they love the way they want to do it is an awfully enticing opportunity.
  - kevstev 3y ago
    Yeah, I mean its one thing to take a seat in a rocketship and go along for the ride, but its quite another from a challenge and career perspective to turn the rocket thats falling to earth around and pointing it in the right direction. Generally at this stage in my career, I would probably enjoy the latter more. I was a smallish part of two turnarounds like this, and its just a real joy watching people get unshackled. Just stripping away busy work like requiring accounts to get approvals by 3 people (and why not just give everyone in the tech org a gitlab/pagerduty/whatever account and write a script that if they don't use it for a month, its automatically deactivated). Just asking why repeatedly until you finally get to the "scary" person no one wanted to confront who can't give you a good answer so you just say ok, lets just get rid of this... Removing the busy work, getting rid of bureaucracy, which I hear exists in enormous amounts at GM and other automakers... yeah taking that and just turning everything on its head can be wonderfully rewarding. I would take a job like that again in a heartbeat. And tbh, he is a big enough deal at this point its not like its going to be career ending if he fails. And if he does fail, its likely just going to be from not being given enough authority to make the changes he wants. One kind of argument that may be very difficult to swallow for his upper management- allowing fully remote workers/teams. I am sure there are a lot of people that will want to work on something like this, but not a lot of them are going to want to move to Detroit to do so. So then you pivot to "well are you open to opening an office in the Bay area" and they reply "well that sounds expensive!" and you say... well we can also do it cheap and hire remotely, maybe even save on salaries... and then you get the "but what about [how do we know if they are working|Corporate Culture|That sounds scary" and on and on it goes until someone blinks. Anyway, getting into the weeds, but this is just a small facet of what goes into a role like this, before even getting into anything technical.
olliej 3y ago
The problem isn't "can GM make software" (though that is of course _a_ problem). It's "can GM continue to produce updates to a car's entertainment system for years after it was released, including matching new features from Android Auto or CarPlay". I'm not even sure it's a "will", I think it's legitimately a "can they" - the benefit of Android Auto and Car Play is that if a new feature requires improved hardware someone just needs a new phone. If GM needs new hardware for a feature they need at minimum a mechanic visit.
- lallysingh 3y ago
  I don't see why they would do that. Outside of safety or security updates, why would they? Updated infotainment is a feature of a new car.
  - olliej 3y ago
    > Updated infotainment is a feature of a new car. The whole point of the android and iPhone car thingies is that is not the case. New features no longer require buy a new car, you just get the free software update with your phone, and get whatever new features your phone hardware supports. Maybe you eventually get to the point your phone can no longer provide all the features of the OS update, but if you really want the new features a new phone costs substantially less than a new phone (even the stupid expensive top end ones). That's why everyone is going "wtf" about GM saying "we're punting android and iOS car APIs". It's not just that car companies don't have a good track record of software design and UI, it's that they don't have any motivation to improve any car after it has been sold.
    - lallysingh 3y ago
      Do you mean new apps?
      - olliej 3y ago
        Both google and apple's car software are updated annually afaict, including major things like the mapping/navigation and turn-by-turn support. I have an old car so know nothing more than: * Android Auto and CarPlay exist * They are regarded as being better than manufacturer provided software (but again I haven't used them) * They get updated regularly The last point is the one that I just don't see manufacturers doing, and even if they did I assume they'd require that to be a service center visit.
Zigurd 3y ago
It's a strange hire if you focus on software in the car, which GM says is Android Automotive (not Android Auto). He would not know a lot about Android. But it looks sensible if he is more about cloud services: Dash cam video uploads, content management, etc.
tonymet 3y ago
Quick poll: who here doesn't want infotainment software in their car? How about keeping cars limited to 1990s level logic: basic ICs, fuel / emissions / safety control (abs, airbags). Something like 1990s Mazda with a japanese-size pickup, miata & basic sedan / hatchback.
- freedomben 3y ago
  Can't, at least in the US. Regulations won't permit making dumb cars like that anymore.
  - tonymet 3y ago
    This is a big problem, and a major reason why average car cost is ~ $40k now
    - danans 3y ago
      The cost of a cars has risen lower than the rate of inflation for nearly the past 90 years, and for much of the time period when cars were getting computerized (since the late 90s) average new car prices dropped rather than went up. All the while cars were getting safer (seat belts, airbags, crumple zones) and far more reliable. https://www.in2013dollars.com/New-cars/price-inflation https://www.in2013dollars.com/New-cars/price-inflation The most recent price spike is a direct result of the pandemic supply chain issues and car makers shutting down manufacturing capacity in anticipation of a consumer collapse that didn't happen (instead the opposite happened). https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-used-car-price-kelley-blue-book/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-used-car-price-kelley-blue-...
      - linksnapzz 3y ago
        The cost of a basic economy car, from the start of the emissions & safety era to today, is about double in constant dollars.
        3y ago
recursv_thnkng 3y ago
Mike is going to be shocked when he learns the majority of GM's software talent are nearing retirement or are fresh out of college with barely any background in programming. The company isn't the best at enticing and retaining software talent.
- raincom 3y ago
  At least he can get another $30M c-level job elsewhere. Since the size of the pool of people at his level is small, bigger and better opportunities exist elsewhere. That’s what executive hunters do these days: pedigree, but not the results.
- bradlys 3y ago
  Somehow doubt he’s unaware of this. I’m sure this move is primarily a financial one paired with wanting a bit of change from being at Apple. He joined Apple a bit over four years ago. I’m guessing whatever his stock grant refresher is wasn’t worth the stay.
  - cududa 3y ago
    It's going to utterly fail and he'll get very wealthy off of it and I'm sure he's aware of this. He's not a product guy by any stretch of the imagination and seems to have a disdain for "all that UI fluff junk" (as he once called some of my work in a pitch meeting). The company was building database access control tools. He was viscerally offended that we deigned to abstract technical concepts into a graphical interface. Good luck to him on <checks notes> a graphical interface that abstracts technical concepts for cars.
rqtwteye 3y ago
Reminds me of JCPenney hiring the Apple Store guy. They seem to think that a big name from a functioning organization like Apple can fix their own dysfunctional organization. And pretty much always the new guy will fail because he can’t do miracles in a bad organization.
- tmpz22 3y ago
  > And pretty much always the new guy will fail because he can’t do miracles in a bad organization. Or the individual only appeared talented as a result of the structural support from their original organization.
  - rqtwteye 3y ago
    That's exactly what I meant. They performed well because they were in a high performance environment.
VectorLock 3y ago
Worked with him at Twitter. Doing software at GM seems like the right place for him.

95 points by smugma 3y ago

Infotainment has been commoditized by way of Android Automotive and Carplay. The perception that there is a subscription revenue opportunity for intotainment is misguided - the TAM is insignificant, and the net loss of prospective Customers that refuse to buy a vehicle without Android Auto or or Carplay far outweighs any potential subscription revenue. This will go over about as well as Cadillac Cue did from 2013-2017. Source - I work in the automotive industry, live in the Detroit suburbs, and live and breathe this stuff every day.

steveBK123 3y ago
Yup, this reads like they decided to "buy a guy to build GMplay" rather than just use CarPlay. unlikely to go well.
- gowings97 3y ago
  They have this misguided perception that EVs require some deep level integration via some customized build of AAOS, that can't already be solved by individual apps on a smartphone. Namely - customizing charging times at home for off-peak rates / usage, identifying chargers on a specific route or daily commute, pre-warming or pre-cooling a car (which can be done already today because all these vehicles have LTE or 5G modems already), saving profiles that save mechanical preferences / functions like mirror / seat settings. People want buttons and knobs to control mechanical functions like HVAC, mirrors, and seats. People don't see the value associated with the premium price of having an driver to passenger end to end full screen display, such as what was first implemented on the Mercedes EQS and is now being implemented on the (Chinese made) 2024 Lincoln Nautilus.
  - jmole 3y ago
    a fully integrated OS is a better experience, if done right. unfortunately, the trend here is towards monetization (enshittification?) of everything in the UX: monthly data plan, onstar, required GM login for any smart features to work, mandatory mobile app installation.
  - mattbrewsbytes 3y ago
    I downsized vehicles from a new one with Carplay to one with no touch screen and once your hands+fingers learn locations of buttons it is blissful to drive. I can adjust nearly anything without taking my eyes off the road. I miss Carplay for the maps functionality but a properly placed phone holder can accomplish the same. I don't need 14" display of maps and entertainment options. I would also suggest that EV's that require a large screen to explain charging options, rates, usages, etc. are doing it wrong. If the EV and its charging systems (internal and external) are that complex to monitor and manage then you have larger problems about UX.
ghaff 3y ago
I wouldn't go so far as to say that lack of Carplay would be a complete deal-breaker for me but it would sure be a huge entry in the "cons" column.
- tshaddox 3y ago
  It wouldn’t be a dealbreaker for me if I was buying a low cost used car, although at this point it has been around for long enough that even the beater Camry rental I’m driving right now has it. But if I’m paying big bucks for a new car I can’t imagine not having CarPlay. Ironically it’s the expensive “high-tech” brands like Tesla and Rivian that don’t support it.
  - smileysteve 3y ago
    My Tesla driving friend let his Tesla subscription lapse over a card failure last week, and the infotainment system, that has Spotify -- with an account he pays for -- no longer functions. But like, if he paired his bluetooth, he'd get Spotify playback capability, he'd just have to use his voice to explore Spotify music. Meanwhile, me in my 2004; with an aftermarket radio - with wireless tethering to my phone OR a google Fi sim, can do Carplay OR independently run maps and spotify -- for $0 extra a month.
    - msh 3y ago
      You can still do wifi tethering and then the build in service will work.
    - nanidin 3y ago
      According to the email I got from Tesla about an upcoming end of free Premium Connectivity, Music Streaming still works when tethered to a smartphone. The main drawback of letting the subscription lapse is loss of live traffic data on the map. The other lost feature is satellite view maps. Everything else works when tethered via wifi.
- glanzwulf 3y ago
  Having used proprietary infotainment systems in the past and currently using carplay, for me it would 100% be a complete deal-breaker. (Unless of course I'm buying a car that predates the technology)
dboreham 3y ago
It has the feel of the recorded music industry when Napster was in full swing.
function_seven 3y ago
Yup. All buyers who care about having a good infotainment setup will avoid GM, leaving them with only buyers that don't care about it as much. Are these the buyers they think will then pony up $30 a month for their store-brand version? OnStar is dead, guys. It's not coming back. Don't destroy your actual business (cars) by trying to cosplay as a "tech company SaaS vertical"

altairprime 3y ago

Presumably related to: GM plans to phase out CarPlay in EVs, with Google’s help https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35389021 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35389021 (38 days ago, 377 comments)

gowings97 3y ago
Kind of, but not really. What GM is proposing here goes even deeper. There are three current solutions - - (2018 -> Today) Some existing solution that runs QNX as the base OS, that runs Android Auto / Carplay as an Application - (2023 - > Today) A new based OS that is a skinned version of Android Automotive OS (AAOS / https://developers.google.com/cars/design/automotive-os https://developers.google.com/cars/design/automotive-os) that runs both Android Auto Carplay and Carplay as an application, with the Automaker working with Google to incorporate customizations along with patches and updates to the base OS. Think Samsung's customized version of Android, and how they work to implement patches for major OS updates from ASOP. The infotainment used on General Motor's Global B architecture uses this. - This proposal (2025 Model Year -> Future) - runs a customized version of AAOS that does not have Android Auto / Carplay support. My guess is that Google is throwing them a bone here and offering extra support for the Automaker (deferring the Automaker's costs) if the Automaker allows Google to retain the usage data.
- r00fus 3y ago
  I figured it was this. I mean, my car runs Ford Sync3 that runs CarPlay/AA (built by MS) and AAOS seems to compete directly with that. The flamebait position trumpeted by GM CEO seems to be "we won't enable the CarPlay/AA app" but that could be reversed quite quickly when they realize customers don't want the builtin AAOS or AAOS doesn't do what CarPlay/AA can do. The alternative is that AAOS has Apple Music and other apps built in (probably not Apple Maps) - like what you see with Tesla. I wonder if Apple will concede to this.
- robszumski 3y ago
  Red Hat is also making a move here, not at the UI layer but supporting RHEL in an automotive environment. It could be interesting to make these systems accessible to more software developers and appear a bit closer to cloud/web service/AI software stacks.

glanzwulf 3y ago

Hope he convinces them to go back on the stupid decision that is to abandon Carplay/Android Auto.

jdelman 3y ago
I think it's probably the opposite -- they've probably hired him to help build their new entertainment+surveillance stack.
- throw9away6 3y ago
  Probably, I just don’t think executives can drive that kind of innovation. Especially those who are in sustaining roles in already large and successful companies.
  - interestica 3y ago
    But you just came up with his new slogan for their software+vehicles : "driving innovation"
    - tough 3y ago
      Maybe GM needs to hire throw9away6 for driving innovation in their software dpt
      - throw9away6 3y ago
        I’d Probably be just as ineffective but you could pay me less
        OnlineGladiator 3y ago
        > ...pay...less Get this man a raise!
        3y ago

raincom 3y ago

Mike Abbott was kicked out of Apple where he didn’t make any meaningful contribution. Why GM is picking him up? Another wasteful move.

eganist 3y ago
> where he didn’t make any meaningful contribution. Super curious about this, what more can you share?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- throwaway63728 3y ago
  Throwaway, It was chaotic, plenty of technical and leadership missteps. But at the core, he was incapable of confronting deeper issues. The proficiency of Apple does not lie in cloud or infrastructure. It's a simple truth.
  - AlotOfReading 3y ago
    You can certainly argue that Apple isn't good at cloud or infra in the same way Google and Amazon are (which would still be a weird argument), but it seems undeniable that cloud and cloud infra is a fundamental part of their product offering. Things like universal sync, iCloud, email, etc are important parts of the value prop for Apple devices.
  - wlesieutre 3y ago
    From a user perspective, Apple had a rough time with "cloud" for a long time (iTools, .Mac, MobileMe) and the recent era of iCloud feels like they've finally gotten their cloud services in a good direction. It does what I need it to.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
spacedcowboy 3y ago

fundad 3y ago

His specialty is keeping Apple tech out of cars.

LarryDarrell 3y ago

The 2022 Chevy Silverado I rented died at 488 miles on the odometer. The roadside assistance mechanic said the transmission "lost data connection to the engine". Later, a tow truck had to drag it onto it's flatbed as the rear wheels were locked up. Also, apparently the tailgate is electric now. And for some reason it stopped working when the transmission died. Also also, there is no way to turn the truck off? When it entered the error-state, the dash stayed on and the cabin motor stayed blowing, but the "Start" button wouldn't turn anything off. I know I'm an odd case, my newest car is from 1997... but I am gobsmacked at just how terrible modern vehicles are. I know customers are dumb and are easily impressed by cheap gadgetry, but why did we have to throw the baby out with the bath water? So when I hear that GM is going to build their own CarPlay or whatever I can't help but laugh. They can't even build a good fleet pickup truck.

caycep 3y ago
This brings to mind the CANBUS hack article on HN a few weeks ago...horrifying but fascinating to think you can steal a car by attacking it's IoT headlight..
bombcar 3y ago
The computerization of vehicles can be done exceptionally well or exceptionally bad, and some of them are just phenomenally bad.
- mnky9800n 3y ago
  yes i have always enjoyed every time i drive a vw id.3. i have not enjoyed so much tesla or any other american made computerized car.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    It's even beyond the UI and how the components work with each other (the example of the transmission dying killing everything). Some of the vehicles will shut down entirely, some will cut out into limp mode, etc.
- 3y ago

ubermonkey 3y ago

I'm stunned someone like GM could entice anyone from top-tier tech firms AT ALL, regardless of compensation.

bastawhiz 3y ago
Some folks really love what they do, and being given the keys to the castle to do what they love the way they want to do it is an awfully enticing opportunity.
- kevstev 3y ago
  Yeah, I mean its one thing to take a seat in a rocketship and go along for the ride, but its quite another from a challenge and career perspective to turn the rocket thats falling to earth around and pointing it in the right direction. Generally at this stage in my career, I would probably enjoy the latter more. I was a smallish part of two turnarounds like this, and its just a real joy watching people get unshackled. Just stripping away busy work like requiring accounts to get approvals by 3 people (and why not just give everyone in the tech org a gitlab/pagerduty/whatever account and write a script that if they don't use it for a month, its automatically deactivated). Just asking why repeatedly until you finally get to the "scary" person no one wanted to confront who can't give you a good answer so you just say ok, lets just get rid of this... Removing the busy work, getting rid of bureaucracy, which I hear exists in enormous amounts at GM and other automakers... yeah taking that and just turning everything on its head can be wonderfully rewarding. I would take a job like that again in a heartbeat. And tbh, he is a big enough deal at this point its not like its going to be career ending if he fails. And if he does fail, its likely just going to be from not being given enough authority to make the changes he wants. One kind of argument that may be very difficult to swallow for his upper management- allowing fully remote workers/teams. I am sure there are a lot of people that will want to work on something like this, but not a lot of them are going to want to move to Detroit to do so. So then you pivot to "well are you open to opening an office in the Bay area" and they reply "well that sounds expensive!" and you say... well we can also do it cheap and hire remotely, maybe even save on salaries... and then you get the "but what about [how do we know if they are working|Corporate Culture|That sounds scary" and on and on it goes until someone blinks. Anyway, getting into the weeds, but this is just a small facet of what goes into a role like this, before even getting into anything technical.

olliej 3y ago

The problem isn't "can GM make software" (though that is of course _a_ problem). It's "can GM continue to produce updates to a car's entertainment system for years after it was released, including matching new features from Android Auto or CarPlay". I'm not even sure it's a "will", I think it's legitimately a "can they" - the benefit of Android Auto and Car Play is that if a new feature requires improved hardware someone just needs a new phone. If GM needs new hardware for a feature they need at minimum a mechanic visit.

lallysingh 3y ago
I don't see why they would do that. Outside of safety or security updates, why would they? Updated infotainment is a feature of a new car.
- olliej 3y ago
  > Updated infotainment is a feature of a new car. The whole point of the android and iPhone car thingies is that is not the case. New features no longer require buy a new car, you just get the free software update with your phone, and get whatever new features your phone hardware supports. Maybe you eventually get to the point your phone can no longer provide all the features of the OS update, but if you really want the new features a new phone costs substantially less than a new phone (even the stupid expensive top end ones). That's why everyone is going "wtf" about GM saying "we're punting android and iOS car APIs". It's not just that car companies don't have a good track record of software design and UI, it's that they don't have any motivation to improve any car after it has been sold.
  - lallysingh 3y ago
    Do you mean new apps?
    - olliej 3y ago
      Both google and apple's car software are updated annually afaict, including major things like the mapping/navigation and turn-by-turn support. I have an old car so know nothing more than: * Android Auto and CarPlay exist * They are regarded as being better than manufacturer provided software (but again I haven't used them) * They get updated regularly The last point is the one that I just don't see manufacturers doing, and even if they did I assume they'd require that to be a service center visit.

Zigurd 3y ago

It's a strange hire if you focus on software in the car, which GM says is Android Automotive (not Android Auto). He would not know a lot about Android. But it looks sensible if he is more about cloud services: Dash cam video uploads, content management, etc.

tonymet 3y ago

Quick poll: who here doesn't want infotainment software in their car? How about keeping cars limited to 1990s level logic: basic ICs, fuel / emissions / safety control (abs, airbags). Something like 1990s Mazda with a japanese-size pickup, miata & basic sedan / hatchback.

freedomben 3y ago
Can't, at least in the US. Regulations won't permit making dumb cars like that anymore.
- tonymet 3y ago
  This is a big problem, and a major reason why average car cost is ~ $40k now
  - danans 3y ago
    The cost of a cars has risen lower than the rate of inflation for nearly the past 90 years, and for much of the time period when cars were getting computerized (since the late 90s) average new car prices dropped rather than went up. All the while cars were getting safer (seat belts, airbags, crumple zones) and far more reliable. https://www.in2013dollars.com/New-cars/price-inflation https://www.in2013dollars.com/New-cars/price-inflation The most recent price spike is a direct result of the pandemic supply chain issues and car makers shutting down manufacturing capacity in anticipation of a consumer collapse that didn't happen (instead the opposite happened). https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-used-car-price-kelley-blue-book/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-used-car-price-kelley-blue-...
    - linksnapzz 3y ago
      The cost of a basic economy car, from the start of the emissions & safety era to today, is about double in constant dollars.
      - 3y ago

recursv_thnkng 3y ago

Mike is going to be shocked when he learns the majority of GM's software talent are nearing retirement or are fresh out of college with barely any background in programming. The company isn't the best at enticing and retaining software talent.

raincom 3y ago
At least he can get another $30M c-level job elsewhere. Since the size of the pool of people at his level is small, bigger and better opportunities exist elsewhere. That’s what executive hunters do these days: pedigree, but not the results.
bradlys 3y ago
Somehow doubt he’s unaware of this. I’m sure this move is primarily a financial one paired with wanting a bit of change from being at Apple. He joined Apple a bit over four years ago. I’m guessing whatever his stock grant refresher is wasn’t worth the stay.
- cududa 3y ago
  It's going to utterly fail and he'll get very wealthy off of it and I'm sure he's aware of this. He's not a product guy by any stretch of the imagination and seems to have a disdain for "all that UI fluff junk" (as he once called some of my work in a pitch meeting). The company was building database access control tools. He was viscerally offended that we deigned to abstract technical concepts into a graphical interface. Good luck to him on <checks notes> a graphical interface that abstracts technical concepts for cars.

rqtwteye 3y ago

Reminds me of JCPenney hiring the Apple Store guy. They seem to think that a big name from a functioning organization like Apple can fix their own dysfunctional organization. And pretty much always the new guy will fail because he can’t do miracles in a bad organization.

tmpz22 3y ago
> And pretty much always the new guy will fail because he can’t do miracles in a bad organization. Or the individual only appeared talented as a result of the structural support from their original organization.
- rqtwteye 3y ago
  That's exactly what I meant. They performed well because they were in a high performance environment.

VectorLock 3y ago

Worked with him at Twitter. Doing software at GM seems like the right place for him.