Cars Are Now Computers, So How Long Will They Get Updates? Automakers Can't Say
wired.com
wired.com
Because of this, it should be mandated that 3rd parties be allowed full hardware access/documentation once the warranty period expires.
Automaker wants you to use their software forever? Good. They can out-compete the third parties.
You are allowed to buy third party auto parts, no reason you shouldn't be allowed 3rd party software.
[0] https://www.nbcnews.com/technolog/one-way-get-facebooks-atte...
They're working damn hard to prevent that with signing.
Mandating that would also mean the 3rd party also would have to take responsibility that the updated software conforms to spec and doesn't kill someone. Who's going to pay for that?
Besides it's not like people have only "swapped parts". People have basically entirely rebuilt engines and many other systems in the car. You are underselling what what has commonly always been done.
So yeah, I don't really feel like you've answered my original question:
> Haven't third parties been repairing cars for all automotive history?
Software 'repair' consists of managing thousands of dependencies and building new firmware from scratch. Modern cars contain a lot of mandatory safety systems, from ABS to emergency braking, pedestrian detection, emergency SOS calls, active steering with lane assist, speeding notifications, driver fatigue detection etc. Knowing how software companies operate, I presume they got it just about working per spec. I don't know if you can expect a third party to manage such a complex stack and update it in a way that's up to spec and satisfies all legal requirements. And even if that's possible I don't think it will be cheaper anyway. Computers are a very different world, just as car manufacturers are still discovering.
Why are cars different? Personally, I would rather not have the UX of my car be subject to arbitrary change.
Unless they are connected to the internet and end up as part of a botnet due to shoddy firmware. Or the manufacturer decides to shut off a cloud service that is needed for their operation for some reason and they get bricked.
IoT devices are the opposite of the example you want to use for stable, functional computers in electronics.
You basically sign up the consumer to an ever-escalating security war against devices by malicious actors.
I just don't want my car to be connected to the internet, full stop, ever. Let it receive GPS signals, and that's it.
Safety
There's no need for regular updates. Fix problems the way they're normally fixed, and other than that, don't update anything.
As opposed to my car getting an OTA update overnight and the only thing I notice is the reversing beep is now a slightly different tone.
That's progress to me.
I disagree, cars should be fully updated OTA. It's cheaper than a recall and easier for the consumer. New features increase the longevity of the car.
Also, do you have a single example where there was a security vulnerability in the update mechanism of a car that resulted in an attack? Do you have a single example of a loss caused by an update (that would not also occur during offline servicing)?
Price.
However maps data is licensed so the cost makes more sense for that.
It was never updated.
Possibly because I wasn't going to give them $70 a month for On-star, internet, and GM super naggy status stuff. (Hey! Come pay more for an oil change with us, your car told us you neeeed it!)
It's interesting that you mention GM because they are ditching CarPlay / Android Auto support in some of their vehicles. They think doing so will generate billions in revenue for them.
Noone is interested in Software. Software is what is outsourced to India. Software is the super-annoying thing on there very annoying thing(electronics) that is sadly necessary to keep the mechanical marvels developed by the wrench-swinging monkey equivalents of real engineers relevant.
Most in-car ecus are not updatable, that would be 10ct more expensive per part.
If updates are possible, please pay through your nose at the certified repair shop for them to plug a SD card in you have to buy.
Most Car Execs think of software as something that is developed in the same process as a bearing. And it shows.
I do not know if I would take a bet that a user can seamlessly connect CarPlay on their 2014 car with their brand new iPhone 25.
Because they have Internet connections now, which means they can have remotely exploitable security vulnerabilities.
But this is what I expect, unless you maintain your auto at the dealership paying exorbitant prices for simple things, no updates will ever be done.
It is time for a federal law on this.
With the history of the automobile industry, they have a fabulous amount of data on how long vehicle bits last in different configurations. The only minor variable is the computerized bit. I say "minor" because they can use older COTS electronics to do all the things a car needs, and then stick an iPad[1] on the console.
1 - another tablet, touchscreen, whatever. Notwithstanding the arguments against touch interfaces in cars.
An "old" phone is what, 4 or 5 years old? At least on the iPhone side, Apple is [in]famously vertically integrated, to have the all the resources needed to update iOS.
And Apple kinda-famously issued a security patch for iOS 12 (released Sept'18) in Jan'23, because pre-2015-ish iPhones could not run any newer version of iOS.
Vs. the computing hardware and software in a modern car comes from how many different supplies, spread across how many tiers, with how little visibility from the PoV of the computers-ain't-their-forte auto makers?
And an "old" car can easily be 10 to 25 years old.
I expect at some point that stops being feature updates because new features rely on different hardware, but at minimum it means 15 years of security updates... in which case 15 years isn't enough. My last two cars were both on the road longer than 15 years. Thankfully they weren't connected to the internet.
And the other thing they don't commit to is that they'll have 15 years of updates where the maps app runs at more than 2 frames per second. So this had better not be anything like phone updates, where a 5 year old phone is sometimes allowed to run the modern OS update, but it doesn't run well. Will they maintain multiple branches based on different hardware requirements so they can keep shipping performant OS updates on old hardware?
It's a big reason I won't buy a car without CarPlay, I need the escape hatch of being able to run the new maps app from my phone manufacturer, on eventually 10+ years newer phone hardware. Even if the car's infotainment is amazing today, there's no guarantee it will be any good in 10 years and I'd rather have a backup plan.
Isn't it a bit naive to suppose CarPlay will still be a thing in 10+ years? Maybe the iPhoneVR 28 glasses will have a completely different UX and the idea of letting it take over a small part of your car dashboard will be a historic curiosity.
Rivian's position is "you would have to close CarPlay to use the vehicle menus to open your frunk" which is a) not true, and b) says more about their being too cheap to have a frunk release button than it does about CarPlay.
Cars also depend almost entirely on the road infrastructure. The automakers don't support that. People need to realise if they want interoperability they need to choose open standards that their community can maintain. This isn't just a problem with cars.
It's like calling a window a door. Yes, they are holes in walls that can be used for ingress or egress, but they completely different expected use cases and designs.
One could make the point that cars contain electronics with firmware which is so hopelessly broken that it needs constant updates. But the point in the article is even further from that and just that they are expected to interoperate with other things like remote services etc.
But like I said, the word is lost and people call iPhones computers too. I wish I hadn't written it now because it wasn't really my main point...
> What do people say now if they specifically mean a general-purpose computing machine?
"General-purpose computer" seems fine to me.
Newer cars are probably less likely due to how arbitrarily locked down they are, rather than being incapable. The manufacturer could run DOOM on their car that you bought, but you probably can't.