5 ms·

No, people actually want feature-rich vehicles. Pretty much nobody outside of corporate actors is buying "bare" cars. And software doesn't actually cost that m

No, people actually want feature-rich vehicles. Pretty much nobody outside of corporate actors is buying "bare" cars. And software doesn't actually cost that much. Just look at the Chinese market.

bboygravity 2y ago
I don't think that's necesairily true for HN people? I regularly get mind-blown by the number of anti-features of modern cars v.s. my 32 y/o Camry. Some that come to mind: no physical buttons, no right/possibility to repair the car yourself, can't replace the car stereo by something else, extremely slow unusable navigation systems even in 2024 models (I just use my smartphone and put it where the screen would be in a modern car), beeping when not wearing seatbelt even at 5 km/hr on a parking lot, data plans/simcards to enable car spyware, extremely expensive tires with (broken) pressure sensors in them, headlights made of plastic instead of glass that get ugly after a couple of years, use of rusting materials instead of aluminum for body, active suspension systems that are extremely expensive to service, tons of unnecessary electronics that will break as the car gets slightly older and extremely expensive to service. I could go on and on.
- VariousPrograms 2y ago
  The first time I drove some new-ish Toyota that displayed a tap-to-dismiss advertisement for the navigation subscription every single time you started it up, I knew I would never own one of these smartphones on wheels.
- vv_ 2y ago
  > no physical buttons New cars are reintroducing physical buttons again. > no right/possibility to repair the car yourself Unless you're talking about electric vehicles, this isn't true. You can buy diagnostic equipment and do the repairs yourself on most modern cars. > can't replace the car stereo by something else Huh? > extremely slow unusable navigation systems even in 2024 models That's why you don't buy a car without Apple CarPlay or Android Auto. It's especially good on newer vehicles as there are integrations with the dashboard and HUD too. > beeping when not wearing seatbelt even at 5 km/hr on a parking lot This is because of government regulation. > data plans/simcards to enable car spyware You're not obligated to buy them. I don't think their software package is good enough to warrant such a purchase, but if they would be able to bring it up to what aftermarket guys are offering it would be a great addition. > extremely expensive tires with (broken) pressure sensors in them Huh? > headlights made of plastic instead of glass that get ugly after a couple of years You can restore them fairly easily. It's funny you ignore that the same issue happened to old cars too, on top of the fact their headlights were horrible to begin with. > use of rusting materials instead of aluminum for body This is partly because of regulation and partly because of cost-cutting. > active suspension systems that are extremely expensive to service Buy an expensive high-performance vehicle and it'll be costly to service. > tons of unnecessary electronics that will break as the car gets slightly older and extremely expensive to service The regulatory environment has changed significantly. Without these sensors you'd have a very inefficient or very slow car. Furthermore, the vast majority of these sensors you can change yourself.
HdS84 2y ago
I am mostly concerned by the ongoing maintenance cost of software. Cars live 20,30 years - how to keep the software running and in good condition? Foss is no solution, especially due to regulations (totally warranted, I want your car to have working braking systems...) and that this also involves systems at the producers.
- ldx1024 2y ago
  Software is only subject to entropy when you touch it. In most practical cases these days not being able to "improve" the software is a feature, not a bug.
- XorNot 2y ago
  Safety critical software is in a totally different league of development process to say, the infotainment system. The thing is we are basically at the point where infotainment systems should be on the way out - because the correct solution is basically "interface with the consumers phone". But any vehicle with software running which controls the brakes is either correct or unsafe when it ships - but you would never need regular maintenance updates to it.
- vv_ 2y ago
  Safety Critical Components (ECM, ABS, etc) need to be certified. This is very expensive and modifications are done very infrequently. I doubt that auto-manufacturers will use Embedded Linux for them.
  - HdS84 2y ago
    Yes, but what's about the components controlling speed, e.g. by detecting the speed limit from some map? Or the stuff implementing emergency calls? Also there is a plethora of features I (charging station maps) which probably need all maintenance, too.
silisili 2y ago
I don't believe this at all. I followed the Maverick for a while when it came out, not for me, but interesting strategy. The vast majority wanted the baseline, barebones. However, Ford produced the least of these, and gave people 1 year lag times. Most people who bought higher models did so begrudgingly. Yet Ford will claim higher sales on these upper models, so obviously "what the consumer wanted."
toast0 2y ago
Sure, nobody buys bare cars. But you can't buy them when nobody sells them. Selling them through fleet programs only doesn't really count. I recently purchased an 1981 Vanagon, and it's made me happier than any car I purchased new. It's not without a computer... it does have electronic fuel injection, but I think that's mostly a lookup table of pulse length given airflow and temperature. There's an aftermarket replacement if it goes bad (but let's hope it doesn't).
globular-toast 2y ago
What people want is to not drive at all. People detest driving, they're just not able to see any alternative. If people really wanted feature rich vehicles then they'd relish traffic jams as they'd get to spend more time in their car. But instead it's torturous and drives people insane.
Lanolderen 2y ago
Dacias are popular where I am and they are pretty simple. Cheap, light, durable and with the main extras (AC, backup/multiple cams and Android Auto/Carplay). People want feature- rich cars in the sense that everyone would 1:1 trade their Sandero for a W223 and they probably won't watch YT videos of Sanderos much but price/performance is a large factor.

No, people actually want feature-rich vehicles. Pretty much nobody outside of corporate actors is buying "bare" cars. And software doesn't actually cost that much. Just look at the Chinese market.

bboygravity 2y ago

I don't think that's necesairily true for HN people? I regularly get mind-blown by the number of anti-features of modern cars v.s. my 32 y/o Camry. Some that come to mind: no physical buttons, no right/possibility to repair the car yourself, can't replace the car stereo by something else, extremely slow unusable navigation systems even in 2024 models (I just use my smartphone and put it where the screen would be in a modern car), beeping when not wearing seatbelt even at 5 km/hr on a parking lot, data plans/simcards to enable car spyware, extremely expensive tires with (broken) pressure sensors in them, headlights made of plastic instead of glass that get ugly after a couple of years, use of rusting materials instead of aluminum for body, active suspension systems that are extremely expensive to service, tons of unnecessary electronics that will break as the car gets slightly older and extremely expensive to service. I could go on and on.

VariousPrograms 2y ago
The first time I drove some new-ish Toyota that displayed a tap-to-dismiss advertisement for the navigation subscription every single time you started it up, I knew I would never own one of these smartphones on wheels.
vv_ 2y ago
> no physical buttons New cars are reintroducing physical buttons again. > no right/possibility to repair the car yourself Unless you're talking about electric vehicles, this isn't true. You can buy diagnostic equipment and do the repairs yourself on most modern cars. > can't replace the car stereo by something else Huh? > extremely slow unusable navigation systems even in 2024 models That's why you don't buy a car without Apple CarPlay or Android Auto. It's especially good on newer vehicles as there are integrations with the dashboard and HUD too. > beeping when not wearing seatbelt even at 5 km/hr on a parking lot This is because of government regulation. > data plans/simcards to enable car spyware You're not obligated to buy them. I don't think their software package is good enough to warrant such a purchase, but if they would be able to bring it up to what aftermarket guys are offering it would be a great addition. > extremely expensive tires with (broken) pressure sensors in them Huh? > headlights made of plastic instead of glass that get ugly after a couple of years You can restore them fairly easily. It's funny you ignore that the same issue happened to old cars too, on top of the fact their headlights were horrible to begin with. > use of rusting materials instead of aluminum for body This is partly because of regulation and partly because of cost-cutting. > active suspension systems that are extremely expensive to service Buy an expensive high-performance vehicle and it'll be costly to service. > tons of unnecessary electronics that will break as the car gets slightly older and extremely expensive to service The regulatory environment has changed significantly. Without these sensors you'd have a very inefficient or very slow car. Furthermore, the vast majority of these sensors you can change yourself.

HdS84 2y ago

I am mostly concerned by the ongoing maintenance cost of software. Cars live 20,30 years - how to keep the software running and in good condition? Foss is no solution, especially due to regulations (totally warranted, I want your car to have working braking systems...) and that this also involves systems at the producers.

ldx1024 2y ago
Software is only subject to entropy when you touch it. In most practical cases these days not being able to "improve" the software is a feature, not a bug.
XorNot 2y ago
Safety critical software is in a totally different league of development process to say, the infotainment system. The thing is we are basically at the point where infotainment systems should be on the way out - because the correct solution is basically "interface with the consumers phone". But any vehicle with software running which controls the brakes is either correct or unsafe when it ships - but you would never need regular maintenance updates to it.
vv_ 2y ago
Safety Critical Components (ECM, ABS, etc) need to be certified. This is very expensive and modifications are done very infrequently. I doubt that auto-manufacturers will use Embedded Linux for them.
- HdS84 2y ago
  Yes, but what's about the components controlling speed, e.g. by detecting the speed limit from some map? Or the stuff implementing emergency calls? Also there is a plethora of features I (charging station maps) which probably need all maintenance, too.

silisili 2y ago

I don't believe this at all. I followed the Maverick for a while when it came out, not for me, but interesting strategy. The vast majority wanted the baseline, barebones. However, Ford produced the least of these, and gave people 1 year lag times. Most people who bought higher models did so begrudgingly. Yet Ford will claim higher sales on these upper models, so obviously "what the consumer wanted."

toast0 2y ago

Sure, nobody buys bare cars. But you can't buy them when nobody sells them. Selling them through fleet programs only doesn't really count. I recently purchased an 1981 Vanagon, and it's made me happier than any car I purchased new. It's not without a computer... it does have electronic fuel injection, but I think that's mostly a lookup table of pulse length given airflow and temperature. There's an aftermarket replacement if it goes bad (but let's hope it doesn't).

globular-toast 2y ago

What people want is to not drive at all. People detest driving, they're just not able to see any alternative. If people really wanted feature rich vehicles then they'd relish traffic jams as they'd get to spend more time in their car. But instead it's torturous and drives people insane.

Lanolderen 2y ago

Dacias are popular where I am and they are pretty simple. Cheap, light, durable and with the main extras (AC, backup/multiple cams and Android Auto/Carplay). People want feature- rich cars in the sense that everyone would 1:1 trade their Sandero for a W223 and they probably won't watch YT videos of Sanderos much but price/performance is a large factor.