[Limpid]

There is work in progress for IVI( In vehicle Infotainment) systems based on Linux / android and iOS by various OEMs along with device ( read smart phone) makers. Everyone is trying to make and push their own standard which car systems OEMs can adopt to. Of course IVI systems are much more than just a HU. I feel in couple of years, these so called ‘open’ systems will be in vague in all the cars. After smart phones, this is one area companies can cash in.

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by ssk3g5

... AFAIK about the industry its not far when we would have the entire car electronics driven from a OS ...

Are we trying to 'progress' to the days of centralized mainframes????? I think some understanding of object-orientation and the requirement of practical autonomous failure-free / fail-safe systems & components is imperative here.

Originally Posted by Limpid

... ‘open’ systems will be in vague in all the cars. After smart phones, this is one area companies can cash in.

Provided the companies can get themselves to agree with other companies. 'Open Systems', which are defined by 'Interface Standards', have always been produced in neutral environments - with at least 2 companies agreeing to it. For example, CAN bus was put together by Bosch (automotive requirements) and Philips (medical instrumentation requirements) working together towards a common goal. The investment that was put in by these companies for working towards the standard can kill / cripple most companies today.

'Open Systems' is not to be confused with 'Open Source Software' - which has been a commendable effort to bring down the TCO of applications / software. Currently what every one is doing - Google, MS, Nokia et al - is to push their own stuff under the guise of 'Open Systems'. And none of them comes even close to getting it right in the world of automotive, medical instrumentation and industrial systems (common requirements).

[Limpid]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Provided the companies can get themselves to agree with other companies. 'Open Systems', which are defined by 'Interface Standards', have always been produced in neutral environments - with at least 2 companies agreeing to it.

You are quite right, it's close to impossible to have a de facto interface standard in this case. Market will be fragmented and it will take some to see if there is any clear winner. Guys from Stuttgart are working with forbidden fruit company and Giants from far east are working with others at home turf. Both have deep pockets to see any new market.

Originally Posted by DerAlte

'Open Systems' is not to be confused with 'Open Source Software' - which has been a commendable effort to bring down the TCO of applications / software. Currently what every one is doing - Google, MS, Nokia et al - is to push their own stuff under the guise of 'Open Systems'. And none of them comes even close to getting it right in the world of automotive, medical instrumentation and industrial systems (common requirements).

I guess depends on what is the strategy of the company. In first case, nothing would be open, only interface standards will be, other OEMs could ‘comply’ with it to plug in their systems. In second case, everyone would be welcomed to join in the party.
At the end of the day, end user will get much more than HU and may be, just maybe, Feature set will also be defined by these end users

[KALINGA]

Here are some Head unit, I found on google.

http://www.androidcentral.com/double...un-android-too

http://www.androidauthority.com/andr...-stereo-68660/

I am not sure these are available in India.
Found an interesting comment in one web site about Android HU

"if this becomes mass produced, looks like cell phones are not going to be the only deadly distraction behind the wheel..."

[greenhorn]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Are we trying to 'progress' to the days of centralized mainframes????? I think some understanding of object-orientation and the requirement of practical autonomous failure-free / fail-safe systems & components is imperative here.

Provided the companies can get themselves to agree with other companies. 'Open Systems', which are defined by 'Interface Standards', have always been produced in neutral environments - with at least 2 companies agreeing to it. For example, CAN bus was put together by Bosch (automotive requirements) and Philips (medical instrumentation requirements) working together towards a common goal. The investment that was put in by these companies for working towards the standard can kill / cripple most companies today.

'Open Systems' is not to be confused with 'Open Source Software' - which has been a commendable effort to bring down the TCO of applications / software. Currently what every one is doing - Google, MS, Nokia et al - is to push their own stuff under the guise of 'Open Systems'. And none of them comes even close to getting it right in the world of automotive, medical instrumentation and industrial systems (common requirements).

Sorry for the offtopic, but had to post this here
http://xkcd.com/927/

I understand why hardware manufacturers are desperate to differentiate themselves else they would have to compete on a level playing field (the horrorr!), but am sure at least some chinese mfg would have picked up the opportunity

[ssk3g5]

This discussion is going off topic, but in any case, let me clarify my point.

I am not discussing about open systems or open software. Basically being from hardware and software design background, it’s a nightmare to integrate multiple components from different systems and make it work in harmony.

Every company may have its own implementation driven by its own OS. But as long as they can talk to each other with a common protocol the goal is achieved. I've worked on CAN and is a pretty nice protocol laid down by BOSCH.

But let’s go back to a point, failsafe option is not new it’s just too expensive to implement unless there is a paradigm shift by making it a commodity rather than product.

A centralized control system with high availability (redundancy) can always a be debated to be better than an heterogeneous approach.
With a centralized approach of a OS with a failsafe hardware, can replace the engine monitoring, car security, ICE, rear camera, wireless etc. etc. as a low cost solution.

All of this is possible today with a sub 5000 INR PC with appropriate software. If this can be made failsafe, then the possibilities are infinite.

[Pashin]

Found this product on alibaba made in PRC. Although the hardware config is quite dated, it should serve the purpose of being a audio/video/navigator.

Regards

Pashin

[John Jacob13128]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Wouldn't talking about OS instead of functionality be like putting the cart before the horse? An HU is supposed to provide functionality that doesn't need too much interaction with / intervention by the driver. Would a UI layer like Android (it can at best be called that on top of Linux) have anything to do with that? Or the UI heavy Apps that are currently around? Inappropriate, IMHO, for companies trying to make robust products for people who would simply want to listen the radio or listen to their music. For that, one doesn't necessarily need an OS!

Yes, the optical drives are redundant, and since last year almost all the after-market HU manufacturers have models without. However, as long as music is published on optical media, optical drives will be around. Of course, techies in India will still find it difficult to believe a majority of the people around the world still buy CDs. Around the world, OE systems come with Aux-in AND (iPod / iPhone capable) USB inputs in the car (albeit not in all cars in India, where one can buy a car WITHOUT a music system at all). That solves the Android, or for that matter ANY OS, issue - just connect the phone or tablet of your choice.

+1 Its the same as getting a HU with touch interface. How one manages to change tracks on the indian " roads " is just beyond me. On top of it adding a UI like andriod whose joy lies in heavy user interaction , to a HU would be a recipe for disaster er distraction. IMHO the HU is best " left alone"

[COUGAR]

Have been using an ANdroid based Galaxy Tab in the Gypsy for months now. Does everything I want it to, including OBD via the Bluetooth interface.

The only thing i miss is the ability to take phone calls using the blue-tooth which i could with the old JVC unit.

[manolin]

Originally Posted by John Jacob13128

How one manages to change tracks on the indian " roads " is just beyond me. On top of it adding a UI like andriod whose joy lies in heavy user interaction , to a HU would be a recipe for disaster er distraction. IMHO the HU is best " left alone"

Naay you can get a custom driving mode screen (like presently there on nokia phones) where the screen has minimal icons with huge size. Really easy to change songs then. All these and more customisations are possible with an software package which can be modified from time to time. The tweaks which an android HU could give:

1) larger icons,
2) choosing icons which appear on drive mode,
3) setting custom gains for specific genres of music (also say you on't have sub-woofers, so when it plays particular music it changes the gains)
4) real DIY for car interior lighting - auto lighting of footwells when its evening (based on the OS timings),
5) same as above, for genre of music to automatically play - say I have a playlist which i want to automatically play when I am going for late night drives,
6) read out the news (or tune into particular tv-radio channels) in the morning office commute,
7) hard to do, but am sure someone does it - controlling the climate control, to specific temperatures in the morning and evening.
8) say you have a siri- type assistant - make notes, schedule while you drive.
9) play out your voice msges/smses.
10) switching off the android screen at night (sometimes the car audio screens are too brightly lit), which can be re-activated with a wave over the ambient light sensor.
11) continous rear camera feedback with an auto dimming feature (as brightness automatically reduced).
12) auto-syncing songs/readable smses to your phone when you get into car.
13) GPS customisations - when you are going on an unplanned long trip - instead of turn by turn directions only (like a normal gps), you can have it reading out the possibilities for food, stay everytime all the time - so that you don't have to look at the GPS.
14) fuel expense tracker app - say with 3 buttons with fuel rates for delhi, noida and gurgaon. You choose 1 button, and then press the number of litres you filled. thats it. at the end of month you just get the complete picture.
15)

The same can be done over a phone also - but the screen size will never make it a substitute.

The possibilities are endless, especially because of easy availability of bluetooth controllers - basically you have gotten yourself an small computer to program whatever you want to happen in your car (as opposed to the other (non-programmable) computer in your car - the ecu).

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by ssk3g5

... Basically being from hardware and software design background, it’s a nightmare to integrate multiple components from different systems and make it work in harmony. ...

So am I, and I have always found it as easy as putting a power plug into the wall socket. Perhaps it maybe due to the difference in the way one looks at integration?

Originally Posted by ssk3g5

... But let’s go back to a point, failsafe option is not new it’s just too expensive to implement unless there is a paradigm shift by making it a commodity rather than product. ...

Failsafe = System is designed to go to Safe State, or the System can tolerate / ignore failure of a Component. This doesn't cost money (other than System designers' salaries). You must have heard of 'Limp Home Mode' of operation in the engine control ECU?

Originally Posted by ssk3g5

... A centralized control system with high availability (redundancy) can always a be debated to be better than an heterogeneous approach. ...

Hasn't been a debate for more than 15 years now - for any mission-critical control system. CNC machines and Telecom were the last bastions of 'Centralized Control' - even that changed a long while back.

Originally Posted by ssk3g5

... With a centralized approach of a OS with a failsafe hardware, can replace the engine monitoring, car security, ICE, rear camera, wireless etc. etc. as a low cost solution. ...

Heh heh please do the costing - it will throw up a lot of surprises.

Originally Posted by ssk3g5

... All of this is possible today with a sub 5000 INR PC with appropriate software. If this can be made failsafe, then the possibilities are infinite.

Sub-INR5K PC??? Where? I'll buy 2 right now!

Originally Posted by manolin

... The tweaks which an android HU could give: ...

Nice set of 'features'! And how much will an HU with these (software) features cost, ultimately? LOL All software engineers want higher salaries every year, and the cost has to be borne by consumers, right? Or does one assume the Open Source Software world will take care of these features, which we can download for free? TANSTAFL!

[manolin]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Nice set of 'features'! And how much will an HU with these (software) features cost, ultimately? LOL All software engineers want higher salaries every year, and the cost has to be borne by consumers, right? Or does one assume the Open Source Software world will take care of these features, which we can download for free? TANSTAFL!

Charge for it. I do pay for a normal head unit, don't I? VW is charging 5k to upgrade the stock polo head unit to receive bluetooth - thats a lot of money.

Honestly stuff like controlling home lighting, custom playlists based on timing, are all features which are already getting into apps. What we are talking about is not too far a step from that. For a start, all one is looking for is a custom homescreen, bigger icons for apps which are already there in the market.

I am no programmer, but I am a consumer. If software engineers want their salaries, they have to take into account what a consumer wants.

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by manolin

... I am no programmer, but I am a consumer. If software engineers want their salaries, they have to take into account what a consumer wants.

God bless you! I wish everyone understands that as well as you have!!!

The fundamental reason China has been able to build a lasting Numero Uno status in the manufacturing industry, outsourced as well as of their own, is because there is a predictability of costs. No one expresses a desire / expectancy for double digit annual raises, no one jumps jobs to accelerate earnings, and (judging by the number of Chinese tourists in other countries) everyone seems to be doing rather well. And that country is funding half the other countries around the world. If only ...

Sorry, severely OT!

[John Jacob13128]

Originally Posted by manolin

Naay you can get a custom driving mode screen (like presently there on nokia phones) where the screen has minimal icons with huge size. Really easy to change songs then. All these and more customisations are possible with an software package which can be modified from time to time. The tweaks which an android HU could give:

1) larger icons,
2) choosing icons which appear on drive mode,
3) setting custom gains for specific genres of music (also say you on't have sub-woofers, so when it plays particular music it changes the gains)
4) real DIY for car interior lighting - auto lighting of footwells when its evening (based on the OS timings),
5) same as above, for genre of music to automatically play - say I have a playlist which i want to automatically play when I am going for late night drives,
6) read out the news (or tune into particular tv-radio channels) in the morning office commute,
7) hard to do, but am sure someone does it - controlling the climate control, to specific temperatures in the morning and evening.
8) say you have a siri- type assistant - make notes, schedule while you drive.
9) play out your voice msges/smses.
10) switching off the android screen at night (sometimes the car audio screens are too brightly lit), which can be re-activated with a wave over the ambient light sensor.
11) continous rear camera feedback with an auto dimming feature (as brightness automatically reduced).
12) auto-syncing songs/readable smses to your phone when you get into car.
13) GPS customisations - when you are going on an unplanned long trip - instead of turn by turn directions only (like a normal gps), you can have it reading out the possibilities for food, stay everytime all the time - so that you don't have to look at the GPS.
14) fuel expense tracker app - say with 3 buttons with fuel rates for delhi, noida and gurgaon. You choose 1 button, and then press the number of litres you filled. thats it. at the end of month you just get the complete picture.
15)

The same can be done over a phone also - but the screen size will never make it a substitute.

The possibilities are endless, especially because of easy availability of bluetooth controllers - basically you have gotten yourself an small computer to program whatever you want to happen in your car (as opposed to the other (non-programmable) computer in your car - the ecu).

Well ,yea am aware of the pleasures of an andriod , just that i dont see myself spending too much time tweaking around with these settings once am inside the car, as all these settings cant be done on the go, or shouldn't be done as one has to take eyes off the road. I rather jump in crank her up and off i go.Added features like voice control is great as the New Ford Fiesta has but apart from these the repertoire of features can be more than necessary.But thats just me
But most of the features you mentioned seem to need an deep integration of the onboard system with the OS.Sounds futuristic.

[ssk3g5]

Looks like you do not like software engineers, lucky for me I am not one

But I see a very different point of view of how you look at centralized systems and how I look at it; Your point is valid for mission critical systems and larger scale solutions.

I see your approach is wall socket approach, similar to USB, my approach is why waste two hardware units to plug a USB .

What you gain with your approach is versatility, and what I achieve is low cost custom solution.

Costing is nothing compared to maintenance, note that software does not help you make money, its maintenance that does.

A simple reference is cost of technology which goes down every year, you can buy a higher spec gadget unit at same cost or lower than the previous year (sure beats inflation).

But I think this entire discussion is going off topic and has become a centralized to heterogeneous solution debate with reference to salaries.

I have a strong opinion with centralized approach for small systems, and would look at heterogeneous approach only for large scale systems.

A Pentium-1 or lower system with single core even today can replace the entire car electronics ( ICE, Security, lighting, multifunction display etc etc) sans ECU, this is what I was referring to a sub 5k PC.

But I don’t wish to start an argument, I fully respect your thinking and approach , but the final solution of approach is purely system driven.