will they ever be a push back on car technology?

[MCompact]

Originally Posted By: sleddriver
There's a reason I still drive the sled. It's a known quantity. Repairable. Fixable. Still relevant to the owner. I'm definitely in the minority. That suites me just fine. It's not about chasing the latest and the greatest: That's a Fool's Game. And an expensive one at that.

"You can check out any time you like but you can never leave."

Think about it.......

Oh no!
I'm doomed...

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: MCompact
Oh no!
I'm doomed...

hahahaha, as new cars are more and more reliable than ever. The only thing that has changed is now we know about the problems experienced by owners due to the internet.

 

[Triple_Se7en]

New vehicles without all these electronic gizmoes, should be made available.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
New vehicles without all these electronic gizmoes, should be made available.


They are. Just that no one buys them. Supply and demand.

The ones who really want them are also probably too cheap to buy a new car.

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: DweezilAZ
Originally Posted By: supton
I wanted to buy a Versa on the premise of it being dirt-simple, but for the want of a bit more sound deadner it was a no-go.


Ahhh, but the money you saved would have paid for a lot of Dyna Mat


Actually, I waited and then found my '99 Camry. It's a refugee from Arizona, so it was mostly rust (and paint) free. $1,500 to buy & $1,500 in maintenance and repairs, and I've managed 1.5 years & 45k. I don't use the cruise control often, but it's nice to have. And I hate to say it, but the electric seat is starting to "feel" like something I like having. I do miss having heated mirrors though.

Originally Posted By: Wolf359
Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
New vehicles without all these electronic gizmoes, should be made available.


They are. Just that no one buys them. Supply and demand.

The ones who really want them are also probably too cheap to buy a new car.


But they'll hang out on BITOG and proclaim otherwise...

 

[sleddriver]

Originally Posted By: MCompact
Originally Posted By: sleddriver
There's a reason I still drive the sled. It's a known quantity. Repairable. Fixable. Still relevant to the owner. I'm definitely in the minority. That suites me just fine. It's not about chasing the latest and the greatest: That's a Fool's Game. And an expensive one at that.

"You can check out any time you like but you can never leave."

Think about it.......
Oh no!
I'm doomed...

Are you?
Obviously, something I wrote touched a nerve....

 

[MCompact]

Originally Posted By: sleddriver

Obviously, something I wrote touched a nerve....


Not a nerve, just my funny bone...

 

[MCompact]

Originally Posted By: supton
But they'll hang out on BITOG and proclaim otherwise...

Exactly.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted By: MCompact
Originally Posted By: supton
But they'll hang out on BITOG and proclaim otherwise...

Exactly.

I'll have to pay more attention, the ones who wanted stripped down simple models also want ones that are 20 years old when things were "simpler" back then.

Me, I like to yell at people to use my power trunk closer button instead of slamming the trunk manually.

 

[jeepman3071]

My issue with the technology is the way it is designed. I work in IT, and the thing that scares me about a lot of car technology is when it breaks there is often no redundancy or ways around using it. An example would be the infotainment systems that integrate everything including drive modes, HVAC settings, etc.

Nowadays a software programming glitch could strand you with no way around it.

 

[JeepWJ19]

Originally Posted By: jeepman3071
My issue with the technology is the way it is designed. I work in IT, and the thing that scares me about a lot of car technology is when it breaks there is often no redundancy or ways around using it. An example would be the infotainment systems that integrate everything including drive modes, HVAC settings, etc.

Nowadays a software programming glitch could strand you with no way around it.


Where are you getting that information? As someone who designs and writes software for embedded vehicle controls we have lots of redundancies.

1. cyclic redundancy checks (CRC) to validate data being sent and received over the controller area network

2. Having multiple watchdog timers

3. Checksumming shadow RAM/flash data to make sure two data sets (one is a copy) are the same before it loads into RAM.

4. Boot loader has two app slots, one as backup.

To just name a few.

If it's safety-critical it has redundancy. As far as your infotainment - a lot is up to manufacturers of those devices - not due to the vehicle manufacturer.

You somehow want a way for software to self-diagnose it is glitched/broken and be able to allow you to bypass it?

 

[Brons2]

I read about the first 30 or 40 posts in this thread and then I couldn't take anymore of the whining.

I realize this is BITOG, but the amount of technology luddites around is pretty astonishing.

I'll take all the technology, and more please. I love the blind spot warnings on my wife's new Outlander. It also has rear cross traffic alerts, for the dummy who can't be bothered to look up from the rearview cam. Of course, I still look back to double check, but I get side warnings from farther away than I can see with my own eyes if I am in a crowded parking lot. Now someone tell me that's not helpful. It's been extremely helpful.

I also love factory Android Auto, it puts the most pertinent stuff from my phone right on the dash. And I don't have to touch it, or even look at it, I can just say Hey Google, then tell it to navigate somewhere, or play music, or pretty much anything the Google assistant does.

Ah yes and it has a power rear hatchback...LOVE IT. Saves time loading the car and makes putting heavy stuff in there way easier.

You guys can keep your 00s and before all manual stuff. I like the new stuff. I had a 2000 F150 V6 manual shift, crank windows, manual door locks, cassette deck, etc, etc, etc. Forget it, that [censored] wasn't better. You can't buy an F150 with a manual anymore, and probably not with crank windows and manual doorlocks either. Nobody except you guys miss it.

Your complaining won't change things anyway.

 

[jeepman3071]

Originally Posted By: JeepWJ19


You somehow want a way for software to self-diagnose it is glitched/broken and be able to allow you to bypass it?


That's not what I want at all.

Something like an electronic parking brake is just stupid, or electronic throttle body.

Ever read about those diesel trucks that were limited to 20 mph because of a malfunctioning DEF fluid sensor? Stupid.

 

[PimTac]

Imagine the howling almost 60 years ago when Valiant started putting pushbutton transmissions in their cars.

 

[JeepWJ19]

Originally Posted By: jeepman3071
Originally Posted By: JeepWJ19


You somehow want a way for software to self-diagnose it is glitched/broken and be able to allow you to bypass it?


That's not what I want at all.

Something like an electronic parking brake is just stupid, or electronic throttle body.

Ever read about those diesel trucks that were limited to 20 mph because of a malfunctioning DEF fluid sensor? Stupid.


Originally Posted By: jeepman3071

...
when it breaks there is often no redundancy or ways around using it.

...
Nowadays a software programming glitch could strand you with no way around it.


Then why say "there is no way around using it when it breaks"?

Saying something is stupid because you lack understanding is quite odd.

Electric throttle body:
1. Fewer parts
2. More control via software which means adding more safety. Mechanical only relies on user input to determine how far to open or close. Instead we can read input from the user, detect if wheels are slipping, detect steering position etc all to help driver control.

Electronic parking brakes:
1. More control over determining if the parking brake is actually set
2. Allows an independent braking system
3. Can help manual transmissions have smooth starts on hills

Faulty DEF sensor limiting speed:
That is a rule by the EPA. If no DEF is found (or in this case a faulty sensor) then run at limited speed. It's not because of some dumb glitch - it's a rule set and handled appropriately via redundancy checking *cough* by whatever monitors that faulty sensor or if your DEF is actually low. Do you really expect us to be able to provide you a way to bypass rules set upon us to follow?

So please, stop already.

 

[jeepman3071]

Originally Posted By: JeepWJ19
Originally Posted By: jeepman3071
Originally Posted By: JeepWJ19
You somehow want a way for software to self-diagnose it is glitched/broken and be able to allow you to bypass it?

That's not what I want at all.

Something like an electronic parking brake is just stupid, or electronic throttle body.

Ever read about those diesel trucks that were limited to 20 mph because of a malfunctioning DEF fluid sensor? Stupid.

Originally Posted By: jeepman3071

...
when it breaks there is often no redundancy or ways around using it.

...
Nowadays a software programming glitch could strand you with no way around it.

Then why say "there is no way around using it when it breaks"?

Saying something is stupid because you lack understanding is quite odd.

Electric throttle body:
1. Fewer parts
2. More control via software which means adding more safety. Mechanical only relies on user input to determine how far to open or close. Instead we can read input from the user, detect if wheels are slipping, detect steering position etc all to help driver control.

Electronic parking brakes:
1. More control over determining if the parking brake is actually set
2. Allows an independent braking system
3. Can help manual transmissions have smooth starts on hills

Faulty DEF sensor limiting speed:
That is a rule by the EPA. If no DEF is found (or in this case a faulty sensor) then run at limited speed. It's not because of some dumb glitch - it's a rule set and handled appropriately via redundancy checking *cough* by whatever monitors that faulty sensor or if your DEF is actually low. Do you really expect us to be able to provide you a way to bypass rules set upon us to follow?

So please, stop already.

You do realize there is a way to contribute without being condescending right? You act as if I'm attacking you directly because you happen to work as a software engineer. I obviously struck a nerve, which was not my intention.

 

[Andrew1972]

Originally Posted By: JeepWJ19
Originally Posted By: jeepman3071
My issue with the technology is the way it is designed. I work in IT, and the thing that scares me about a lot of car technology is when it breaks there is often no redundancy or ways around using it. An example would be the infotainment systems that integrate everything including drive modes, HVAC settings, etc.

Nowadays a software programming glitch could strand you with no way around it.


Where are you getting that information? As someone who designs and writes software for embedded vehicle controls we have lots of redundancies.

1. cyclic redundancy checks (CRC) to validate data being sent and received over the controller area network

2. Having multiple watchdog timers

3. Checksumming shadow RAM/flash data to make sure two data sets (one is a copy) are the same before it loads into RAM.

4. Boot loader has two app slots, one as backup.

To just name a few.

If it's safety-critical it has redundancy. As far as your infotainment - a lot is up to manufacturers of those devices - not due to the vehicle manufacturer.

You somehow want a way for software to self-diagnose it is glitched/broken and be able to allow you to bypass it?


I had a conversation about how interesting your work is with my brother in law who is a professor in computer science at a top 20 CS school. He is not into cars but the custom OS, all the inputs and it cannot fail is a real challenge and very interesting to him about cars.

Not even in same realm as what most IT people face with PCs and a network.

 

[JeepWJ19]

Originally Posted By: madRiver

I had a conversation about how interesting your work is with my brother in law who is a professor in computer science at a top 20 CS school. He is not into cars but the custom OS, all the inputs and it cannot fail is a real challenge and very interesting to him about cars.

Not even in same realm as what most IT people face with PCs and a network.


We are moving ever so closely to automated vehicles, pair that with the "internet of things" buzzword and things are now starting to get interesting.

Controllers/modules/brain boxes on F1 cars of today will soon be on our vehicles tomorrow.

 

[JeepWJ19]

Originally Posted By: jeepman3071
You do realize there is a way to contribute without being condescending right? You act as if I'm attacking you directly because you happen to work as a software engineer. I obviously struck a nerve, which was not my intention.

It would help a lot of you didn't speak in absolutes then. It comes off to me that you're claiming you know the subject in which you are using them in. (no redundancy, stupid electronic implementations)

 

[UncleDave]

I would say no. Ever increasing technology is the route the industry has been on and I see no possible deviation from it continuing.

Example - An analysis of a loaded model 3's control electronics show military grade density and layout - they have been compared to that of an F35 stealth fighter by Sandy Munro - a guy that actually knows of what he speaks.

As more and more collision avoidance and driver aids become standard features even base cars will have a level of tech unheard of in decade prior.

UD