Beyond | IT : in-vehicle software

S+S Example #1: Ford Work Solutions

john.mullinax — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 11:01:00 GMT

Computers and software can do lots of interesting things, and more every day. While I love websites -- I don't want to be completely constrained to them. For example, i like having things like Zune, my smartphone, Windows Live Writer, etc. as part of my life even though (actually, because) the experiences are not completely contained within a browser. The Tao of S+S is that all platforms should work together.

One of the most recent examples of how this S+S ethos can transform users expectations and experiences comes from Ford Motor Company, the folks who brought you the Ford SYNC, and is called "Ford Work Solutions". More here, including this video:

<\/param><\/param><\/embed><\/object><\/div>";" mce_src="http://blogs.msdn.com/blogfiles/johnmullinax/WindowsLiveWriter/SSExample1FordWorkSolutions_15148/video3a5e16a2a568.jpg" galleryimg="no">

Aside: did Ford hire the away Microsoft's naming strategy people!? Name aside, Ford Work Solutions is pretty cool -- claiming 4 industry firsts:

An in-dash, center stack computer with built-in broadband wireless from Sprint, based on the Microsoft Auto software platform (Windows CE-based). Hardware includes 2 GB memory, an SD card slot, USB port, Bluetooth, SYNC-like features for hands-free calling and texting, 6.5 inch touch screen. It has GPS and navigation system augmented by real time traffic, points of interest, AND gas prices. You also get a keyboard, mouse, stylus and a Ford-certified bluetooth inkjet printer. There is of course a web browser. No word yet on .NET Compact Framework. Built by Magneti Marelli.
An RFID tool tracking system developed with DEWALT and ThingMagic so you can tag your tools and your in dash computer can tell you if you have everything you need for a job when you head out, and also tell you if you're taking all your tools home when you're done. Uses a scanner in the bed of the truck to light up the passive RFID tags.
Crew Chief - a telematics and diagnostics system for small fleets to dispatch workers, manage vehicle fleets, and ease maintenance tracking. In this scenario, the Ford Work Solutions delivers a software application in the vehicle and also is a data source for a more "conventional" SaaS application, too -- with fleet managers able to manage their vehicle fleets based on data sent from the truck up to Ford.
Cable Lock system, developed with Master Lock to help you lock tools securely in an open truck bed. Ok -- this one's not even computer-related. Still, quite handy!

Adding it up, this solution provides a software platform (Microsoft Auto), local RFID, texting, and hands-free phone services, is a data source for conventional SaaS application (e.g., the diagnostic and location data for fleet management), and is a consumer for cloud services (e.g., the gas prices and real time traffic)! Nice! Can't wait to try it. :-) BTW, might be "interesting sport" to compare the Ford Work Solutions offering with my "free advice" here. :-)

This one is hot off the presses -- I'll post additional details as they surface.

Technorati Tags: Ford,in-vehicle softare,Ford Work Solutions,Microsoft Auto,SYNC,S+S

Filling the Boomer Gap in Automotive, post-SYNC what comes next?

john.mullinax — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 20:11:00 GMT

Ed Wallace has a great article in Business Week about the impact of mass demographics on the auto industry -- fun to read, and insightful. Years ago, I remember walking through Ford WHQ and seeing a distinct focus on Gen Y. Gen X isn't big enough to offset the void the boomers will leave. The auto industry has 2 great hopes to fill the Boomer Gap -- good healthcare to keep boomers driving longer, and Gen Y.

Gen Y didn't grow up loving cars the way the boomers did. And what reason did they have? Not a lot of great cars were made during their formative years. Today, cars are much better. Maybe even better than ever. But that by itself that's not enough by itself to attract Gen Y. Gen Y has a lot of other stuff -- a lot of other toys that they've wrapped their hearts and identities around.

Of course, people still like cars, and want their cars to continue getting better on many dimensions. One of those dimensions that is especially relevant to Gen Y is that they want their cars and other their toys to "just work together". IMO, this explains the energy around Ford Sync - simple in concept, simple in use. At some point down the road, every OEM will have something like Ford Sync. A question to consider: what then will differentiate the OEMs?

Imagining the future a bit... I think there are two answers to this question. The first centers around Sync itself -- if an OEM can turn something like Sync into a true platform that others (even owners) can innovate on top of, they will move far ahead of those who do not. In one way, this is simply another dimension to the already big business of vehicle personalization. BTW, this is also the platform business model that fuels so much of Microsoft's success.

The second answer continues to be Design, (with a Capital D, as my colleague Chris Bernard might say). Post-Sync, I think the mental model of designers, and the subsequent designs, will extend to the complete vehicle ownership experience in totality - beyond what is strictly in the car. How you select, finance, purchase, service, dispose, and replace your vehicle. Today these things happen -- but certainly not as part of a cohesive design. Design will thoughtfully embrace not just how we use our cars, but why we use or cars across the full vehicle ownership lifecycle.

This won't seem unnatural, it's what Gen Y (and later generations) will expect as the physical and virtual worlds become more fully integrated in all parts of our life. More over, they'll expect very personal experiences and significant control in defining their own experiences (see the first answer about being a platform). More than bringing our digital life into our cars, this kind of "Design thinking" will bring our cars into our digital life.

This will require OEMs to think differently about how they serve consumers, and how to be more relevant in more parts of a consumer's life. But I'm hopeful it will happen. Learning lessons from OnStar, ATX, and the Lincoln RESCU service that proceeded them, and especially from the failed Wingcast JV with Qualcomm, Ford and Microsoft have broken the ice with the SYNC implementation of Windows Automotive. Ford SYNC is just the first volley in a revolution that may take many years to play out, and for which the outcome is uncertain, but make no mistake, the revolution has begun.

Technorati Tags: Automotive,Design,Ford,Innovation,In-vehicle software,SYNC,Microsoft

High quality music streaming over the Internet to your car stereo

john.mullinax — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:57:00 GMT

You may have heard that Ford SYNC (based on Microsoft's Windows Automotive) will play music from your mp3 player, or even from a USB drive, as the video here shows. Turns out you can also stream music from either a phone or a laptop via a mobile phone Internet connection and Bluetooth using the A2DP profile. If you're like me, you may have wondered how good the music would sound streaming over first a cell phone connection and then Bluetooth.

TheRadio.com conducted an experiment to answer this and other questions about the real world experience of streaming music to Ford SYNC. A few excerpts:

"It's hard to believe we were listening to Internet streams of this quality."

"I am quite pleased at how seamless the handoffs were from one cell tower to the next, added Laramie Guest. Not once did the data session fail to be properly handed off to the next tower."

Read about the test setup and get the entire results here.

Technorati Tags: Ford SYNC,Microsoft,Windows Automotive,streaming music,internet radio

Ford SYNC - Beyond cool, it sells cars, too!

john.mullinax — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 23:19:00 GMT

Regular readers of this blog know that I've been excited about Ford's SYNC for quite a while now. For those that don't know, SYNC is Ford's implementation of Windows Automotive inside their vehicles to provide hands free access to media and phone. For a great, quick demonstration of SYNC reading/sending text messages and playing music from a USB flash drive, see here.

But the obvious $64,000 dollar question -- the one that will ultimately determine the future of SYNC -- has been this: Will SYNC help Ford sell cars?

With only four months on the market, the early indicators are a resounding YES! According to Ford's press release today, vehicles with SYNC moved off dealer lots twice fast as those without SYNC during the month of November. With days of inventory on lot being one of the key indicators of both dealer and automaker health, cutting the number of days to sell a car in half is a huge impact!

Technorati tags: SYNC, In-vehicle software, Automotive, Ford, Windows Automotive

I'm so excited about Ford SYNC (aka Windows Automotive)!

john.mullinax — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 02:39:00 GMT

I can't wait to get my new Ford with SYNC! See a review here . Pricing is just $395. Learn more about SYNC here here . In one way or another, I've been involved in this domain for the last 7 years. In fact, I moved from Seattle to join Ford back in 2000...(read more)

Siemens and Microsoft team up on in-vehicle computing

john.mullinax — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 19:58:26 GMT

Technorati Tags: Cars , Automotive , In-vehicle software , manufacturing , Car OS Interesting story came out today here . It's interesting for a few reasons: Siemens VDO (the automotive unit) will build solutions for Auto OEMs on Microsoft's consumer...(read more)

Toyota's Car OS vs. Ford's Sync (Microsoft Windows Automotive), Part 2

john.mullinax — Thu, 05 Apr 2007 00:19:00 GMT

Welcome back for Part 2! I didn't expect this to be a series when I wrote the original post , but two things happened recently that might (I hope :-) ) make a second post interesting. First, Reuters picked up a story from the Nikkei business daily headlined...(read more)

Toyota's Car OS vs. Ford's Sync (Microsoft Windows Automotive)

john.mullinax — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 01:29:00 GMT

Ok -- let me come clean right up front: the headline here is slightly misleading because Toyota's Car OS and Ford's Sync are not really directly comparable. For one thing, Toyota's Car OS does not appear to exist yet -- though it reportedly is under development....(read more)

Computers and cars... what's not to like?

john.mullinax — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:06:00 GMT

Just wrapped up 3 days of a great SAE Convergence 2006 conference at COBO Hall in downtown Detroit. This is the world's premier conference about the convergence of computing and automotive engineering. Believe it or not, the conference has been going every two years since the 1970s. Even more surprising, back then 75% of the world's electronics were used in cars and trucks. Wow!

Automotive no longer dominates the embedded and electronics industry the way it used to, but the average vehicle today has about 20 electronic controllers (i.e., computers) in it. With 60 million vehicles produced each year, that's over a billion embedded computers per year (vs. 37 million Dell's last year)! If the industry could act in a coordinated fashion, it could still move the electronics market. Of course, this large numbers of controllers is really one of the industry's primary problems. After all, does it make sense that an average vehicle would have 20+ computers? Or that a luxury vehicle like the a Mercedes E-Class or BMW 7-series would have 70+ embedded controllers (many 32 bit)? This has actually been a problem for a long time, but one of the positive things that emerged from Convergence 2006 is that the industry now seems to recognize this is an issue -- which was not the case the last time I was at Convergence back in 2002.

Among the complementary realizations is this: 90% of the new features and vehicle innovations in the next 10 years are expected to be implemented in software. 90%! In software! This means that managing this innovation effectively can not be separated from managing the software development lifecycle processes. This is a huge challenge for the industry. Add to that: 40%+ of vehicle warranty issues can be traced to software. And finally, one more eye-popping factoid: both the source of today's issues and the source of future innovations are from (will be from) the interaction of what started as independent software modules.

For example, ABS and electronic throttle control interoperating in an intelligent way form Electronic Stability Control. Add a gyro sensor, and you can create Roll Stability Control, as Ford and Volvo did for their SUVs. Add an active chassis system, and you can level a vehicle during hard breaking events to apply greater force to rear tires and reduce stopping distance by 15% or more. This integration of software and hardware modules -- originally designed (and tested) as separate, unrelated entities, is where the most excitement, greatest opportunities, and potentially the biggest pitfalls, all lie.

How can the computing and automotive industries manage this transition? And who will be the winners and losers along the way? These questions, and some potential answers, will guide the next few posts and be a recurring topic here.

What do you think?

From Convergence - Signs of Life

john.mullinax — Mon, 16 Oct 2006 19:56:00 GMT

[Note to readers: This post is a flashback, but I believe the business dynamics it explores in the automotive computing space are still relevant. This was written as my first post back in October 2006, but never published. I'm publishing it now, and I hope that you'll find it helpful in understanding the industry -- or at least my view of it. :-) ]

This morning I sat in on the "Blue Ribbon Panel" on the first day of Convergence 2006. For those who don't konw, Convergence conference happens every 2 years and is the premier conference dedicated to the "convergence" of the automotive and computing industries. Get it? Ok, it's not so clever now, but the name came out in the 1970's when the conference first began and automakers consumed something like 75% of the world's electronic controllers (really).

The focus of this year's event is re-invention -- reinventing infotainment, alternative powertrains, safety systems, and every thing else. The Blue Ribbon Panel was about the challenges and opportunities for Suppliers and OEMs in embedded electronic controls, and was moderated by Gerhard Schmidt, VP of Research at Ford Motor Company. The panelists were senior engineering executives from GM, Continental Tevis, ZF Friedrichshafen, and Delphi.

Each panelist gave a presentation before the floor was opened for Q&A. Many grand words were spoken. All parties called for more trust and openness between suppliers and OEMs. All parties discussed the increasing complexity of software in the vehicle. All parties pointed to the continuing -- and increasing -- complexity in vehicle software as both a necessity and also giant challenge for the industry. All parties called for better development and testing process in software systems development. All good things.

Some of the most notable evidence of evolution in the industry include:

A wide-spread recognition that OEMs can not continue to deliver each new vehicle feature with a separate electronic control unit -- a practice that has been the norm from day 1, thanks mostly to accounting, incentive, and organizational design structures that conspired to pervert logic and behavior.
An emerging realization that the OEMs and traditionaly suppliers do not completely control their destiny when it comes to vehicle computing. Consumer devices are driving behaviors and demands for vehicle computing capabilities, and things that were formerly 'built in' and provided by an OEM are increasingly 'brought in' by consumers. IMO, this is not because consumers really want lots of different computing gadgets, but because they want the capabilities of these gadgets -- and OEMs have failed to deliver these capabilities for so long (at a reasonable price) that the marketplace at large is providing alternatives. Whatever the case, the trend is accelerating and it's not clear OEMs still have a choice in the matter. One panelist went so far as to say he believed that cars would soon have the same input/output options as PCs (e.g., USB and others) and also the same operating systems and software as PCs.
A recognition that being a successful OEM or supplier of electronics and software required continued advancement in software development and testing processes, including validation at every step along the process -- rather than treating validation as a step that happens at the end of development, as has traditionally been the case. Significantly, this need for better testing and development processes includes a need for better modeling, model driven development, and virtual simulations.

Although the panel spent a lot of time agreeing, Gerhard did his job as moderator to find the gaps. My favorite moment was when he asked, "Are we going to leave this event with agreements, or are we just going to agree to form a committee to talk about agreements?" Jeff Owens of Delphi was first to react, saying, "Well, if you agree all agree to what we agree, then we'll do it"!

This highlights one of the key issues that has plagued this industry and this topic for so long. People still can't agree on what the basis of competition should be. People think electronics and software in the vehicle is so strategic that they're afraid to compromise on anything for fear of losing competitive advantage. I think to some degree this is justified, but the problem is that that simply doing nothing is not a winning strategy. The folks who don't want to make agreements because they are afraid of losing intellectual property have a poor record of actually getting that IP implemented!

So while people recognize the need for change, they don't necessarily agree on what changes should be made. Cooperation? Trust? Commonality? Standards? Sure! But standardize what? I believe it's true that being able to deliver high quality solutions in a very nimble fashion is going to be a major differentiator in the future. And I believe it's true that standardization at one level makes innovation at higher levels possible. But everyone wants the standards to be at a level that enhances the value of what their company knows how to do well.

So in some respects, the Blue Ribbon Panel showed the industry is making good progress in learning what's important for successful delivery of computing in the vehicle, but in other ways the industry is still fighting about the same things it always has.