Technology

I hate these proprietary systems because companies have very bad track records in terms of maintenance, since they'd rather you buy a newer product.

In 2022, the automaker told drivers of the affected cars, some only three years old, that a technical solution was delayed by the pandemic. Now, more than two years later, those drivers still don’t have access to telematics services. [...] Vehicles from Hyundai and Nissan, some as late as model year 2019, also lost some features after 2022’s 3G sunset.

In a country with good consumer rights, this would be a valid reason to return it and get a replacement or refund: It's no longer offering functionality that was advertised and that you paid for as part of the purchase price.

Without right to repair, there will be planned obsolescence.

My Citroen EV developed an on board charger fault. It wouldn't charge. The part was a "coded part" which meant it had to specifically programmed with my EV's ID by Citroen at manufacture. It took months to finally be fitted and ready. So basically, not only does the coded parts system make service shit, but also means when the manufacturer is done making the part, the car is dead. You can't swap parts between cars and there is no third party parts. It's meant to be about car theft, but it's very convenient it blocks competition and long product life....

Cars should just come with a big open socket up front, where I can buy (or build) my own infotainment system to install there. That way I can replace it over the course of the car's lifetime. Or, give me the option to just plug it up or install a traditional car radio or something. I should be able to cram an 8-track player in if I want.

Keep all automobile controls as physical buttons, knobs, and levers.

I haven't owned a car in over 10 years, but whenever I look at what's available, I can't get past how much planned obsolescence is baked into newer cars. I would never buy one...

If automakers focused on cars, and let tech companies and focus on building the infotainment systems, we'd have better choices and less vendor lock-in.

I'm disappointed to find this article is mainly about losing premium subscription features that use mobile internet, which I see as little more than expensive spyware. I don't want them in the first place, and although I believe that some people might, it doesn't seem like one of the important issues around car technology or transportation in general.

The promise is a “smartphone on wheels”: a car that automakers can continue to improve well after an owner drives away from a showroom.

I feel a more worthwhile discussion would be about how a long a “smartphone on wheels” will remain useful compared to one that doesn't depend on continually updated software. How much more often will they need to be replaced? How much more will that cost people? How much more waste and pollution will be generated because of shorter car lifetimes? What sort of right-to-repair laws do we need here?

Seems like a missed opportunity.

It's not just cars. Anything with electronics (appliances, smarthome devices, healthcare, transportation) that is designed to last more than three years will hit a wall.

The host devices are designed to last 10-15 years, but the electronics will be out-of-date in 3-5 years.

The processor manufacturer will have moved on to new tech and will stop making spare parts. The firmware will only get updated if something really bad happens. Most likely, it'll get abandoned. And some time soon, the software toolchain and libraries will not be available anymore. Let's not think of the devs who will have moved on. Anyone want to make a career fixing up 10-yo software stack? Where's the profit in that for the manufacturer?

So as an end-user, you're stuck with devices that can not be updated and there's still at least 10-20 years of life left on them. Best of luck.

Solution: go analog. Pay extra if you have to. They'll last longer and the ROI and privacy can't be beat.

Cellular enabled cars are conceptually dumb. That's a hill I'm willing to die on.

Locked bootloaders should be illegal. Manufacturers should have to provide enough specs that third parties can write code that runs on the hardware.

I dream of an open source car. Something simple but reliable, say a legally-distinct 2004 Honda Accord, bog standard, no frills, no detail package options, just A Cheap Car with standardized parts and open source software. It's the only car the company makes, you can buy one for 10k or build your own for 6k out of parts and a couple months worth of weekends, car nerds will fork the software for infinite tuning customization, and it doesn't report your location back to headquarters. Parts are standardized across every car we've ever made so your local parts store will have them in stock. The new model year is the same car as last year, we just built some fresh ones for people to buy new.

I have no way of making this dream a reality. But I dream of it nonetheless. American car culture has gone off the rails, and the number of people I see already driving around old 5-owner Hondas and Toyotas and Buicks tells me that there is definitely a market for a cheap basic car that runs.

Phones are supported well beyond their average ownership lifetime.

Are they?

I've been screaming about this for years and no one listens. My old car will run longer than my new one because I can change the head unit in the old one

When you car can connect to the Internet, it becomes a data-mining tool that tells everyone your business. Companies would LOVE to have all that juicy location data that only Google has right now (from your phones). Insurance companies would LOVE to know your driving habits to have any excuse at all to jack up your premiums.

Just another way to force you to buy a new one

.......linux cars? Pretty please?

And this is why I drive a 1980 Volkswagen rabbit pickup. better gas mileage then modern cars (50mpg+ on the highway) I can replace about any part in it for under a few hundred in most cases even a new engine can be done under 1000. And everything is dead simple to work on no fancy computers or anything.

How is the 3G sunset not solvable by just swapping out a modem module for an LTE or 5G one and maybe installing some new modem firmware? A lot of cars are running a Linux kernel under the hood, so I'd think it's pretty well swap and go

If only. They are more like rolling SmartTVs. Once they stop getting updates, only the offline features will work.

Then whatever is fucked in the electronics will be fucked forever.

Just like it has been for the last 20 years or so.

What's wrong with just a pot box, a motor and some batteries?

this should be part of car safety and legislated by the govt, no?

in the uk it would be part of the MOT to see that your software is up to date and working

Late stage capitalism

You don't need a computer in a car, especially an electric one. Sure, you want some electronics, but do you think 1970s milk floats had computers in them. Today's EVs are basically the same thing with better motors and batteries.

Software control should be kept for luxury aspects of the vehicle. Nothing critical.