Category

Automotive

CES 2016: Why Carmakers Pay Attention to a Consumer Electronics Show?

By Automotive One Comment

CES is Becoming the Most Influential Auto Show

Until not long ago, the landscape of car shows and automotive technology symposia was fairly easy to sort out.

Futuristic concept cars and new car models were typically introduced in a number of international, national and regional auto shows that attracted car aficionados, auto media, and some coverage from the local newspaper auto section.

If you were more into audio and infotainment systems and car accessories, you’d probably plan to visit the SEMA Show and mingle with a fair number of “pimp my ride” devotees.

On the other hand, if you were interested in automotive research and development and wanted to attend technical presentations about core vehicle technologies and network with like-minded automotive engineers, you would choose SAE’s World Congress. Automotive Standards?  Again, SAE. Read More

Elon Musk: Never Let a Good Crisis Go To Waste

By Automotive, Autonomous, Connected, Electric, Shared Vehicles 2 Comments

Following the Volkswagen emissions scandal, Tesla’s CEO Elon Musk and 44 CEOs, investors and environmental organizations sent an open letter to Mary Nichols, the chairperson of California’s Air Resources Board (CARB). (By the way, no other auto executive signed the letter; more on this later.)

In the letter, the authors argue that industry has reached the point of diminishing returns in extracting greater performance from diesel while reducing air pollutants. Therefore, they reason, any money spent by VW attempting to fix cars that cannot be fixed or removing these cars from the reads before the end of their useful lives will be wasted.

Instead, the signers encourage the CARB to direct VW to “cure the air, not the cars.” They suggest to release VW from its obligation to fix diesel cars already on the road in California and direct the company to accelerate the rollout of zero emission vehicles and to achieve at least tenfold reduction in pollutant emissions over the next 5 years.

Furthermore, VW will be required to invest in new manufacturing plants and/or research and development in the amounts that it otherwise would have been fined. Specifically, the letter suggests that VW will invest in building a large battery manufacturing plant.

I think this proposal deserves consideration.

Cynics might suggest that Musk is using this crisis to promote awareness to electric vehicle (EV) technologies and drive market activity in a space that continues to exhibit a disappointedly sluggish growth. Since its introduction in 212, Tesla’s global cumulative Model S sales just made it passed the 100,000 units mark, compared to 88 million cars sold annually worldwide.

You could also suggest that the announcement in 2014 that Tesla is releasing its patents to the public was a publicity stunt and a desperate attempt to prop the fledgling EV space.

Or, you might say, the ability to meet future demand for electric vehicle will be severely hampered by limited availability of battery packs. In 2014, Tesla broke ground on the Gigafactory battery manufacturing plant outside Sparks, Nevada. Forcing VW to spend some of its money on the same is going to further mitigate supply chain risks for Tesla, and for Tesla’s competitors, which, I believe, is the real motivation behind the letter.

Although Musk has an auto manufacturing company to run, he is looking farther than that. He truly wants to “cure the air” and has proven time and again he is willing to invest his own money and take financial risks for causes he believes in.

Musk is willing to share, collaborate and be in a “coopetition” where it accelerates innovation and spur more competition. Unfortunately, traditional automakers do not operate in the spirit of “the rising tide lifts all boats” and are unlikely to join Musk and the other executives in learning from the VW scandal and use it as an opportunity to move the industry forward.

(Photo: Francis Storr via Flickr)

 

2016: Trends, Predictions and Opportunities

By Augmented / Virtual Reality, Automotive, Internet of Things (IoT), Service Lifecycle Management (SLM) 5 Comments

The Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT): Still More Talk Than Walk

The torrent of breathless headlines, rosy economic predictions and novel business ideas will continue in 2016, but, overall, there will be more talk than walk. At the same time, the promise, even if overly optimistic, is real, meaningful and worth pursuing, and the number of companies exploring it will continue to grow.

Excitement over IIoT, bolstered by increased corporate budgets, will continue to fuel new initiatives and projects, although they will be mostly driven by the lines of business, resulting in one-off non-scalable implementations. Lack of adequate standards, and sometimes the availability of multiple of standards will contribute to the proliferation of “limited edition” IIoT.

Security and privacy concerns will linger.  Demonstrations of hackable devices and vulnerable industrial networks, especially with the United States presidential election campaigns that keep cybersecurity and rogue forces in the public eye, will impede large scale implementations, especially of public IIoT systems.  Companies that offer robust methods for securing the IIoT will get the attention of investors and industrial companies alike. Read More

Over the Air Software Updates Improve Customer Experience

By Automotive No Comments

The Thirst for Information

This year, the Millennial Generation will surpass Baby Boomers as the nation’s largest living generation.

Millennials are the archetype of the always-connected lifestyle and are a tremendous force in shaping the present and future of the ways we produce and consume information, an impact that is quickly becoming cross-generational. In studies, over 70% of Millennials say they influence and are influenced by their peers. They also believe they have significant influence on consumers in other age groups.

All consumers in today’s always-connected world, and Millennials in particular, expect uninterrupted access to highly personalized digital information and services throughout their waking hours, including while driving or being chauffeured.

While Millennials do not represent an affluent car buying demographic (in, fact, Millennials exhibit relatively low interest in owning or even driving a motor vehicle) they are extremely influential in shaping the future of the always-connected society, but OEMs struggle to understand the connected consumers and find the appropriate response.

Lessons from the Consumer Products Industry

Likening the car of the future to a “mobile phone (or a computer) on wheels” has become quite popular among consumers and non-experts. While this observation is a gross oversimplification of the complex technology, supply chain and manufacturing processes involved in getting a reliable and safe motor vehicle to the market, from a consumer’s point of view, the analogy between the IVI system and consumer products is not entirely without merit. Observing the engagement models employed by consumer product companies, most notably smartphone makers and wireless carriers, can be quite instrumental.

With a few exceptions, consumer electronics manufacturers can no longer make credible claims for superior technology or even quality. Rather, they establish brand differentiation by concentrating on user experience and customer service, and strive to achieve emotional attachments through deep customer intimacy and aligning the brand with consumers’ expectations and aspirations.

Car owners and drivers expect the same top-notch experience from their “mobile phone on wheels.” This analogy, of course, isn’t perfect, but contrasting connected car services delivered by mass market OEMs with consumer electronics vendors is eye opening. As an illustration, let’s take a look at the process of updating navigation maps and points of interest (POI) database:

  • Map and POI updates are available from the OEM periodically, typically only once a year. In contrast, smartphone users can access the most recent information from any number of information providers. Furthermore, POI, road condition and other navigation information are updated in real time from multiple sources, including active social media channels.
  • The consumer must pay for updates provided by the OEM, whereas mobile device information is free or, in the case of handheld navigation devices, it is often bundled with the purchase price.
  • Updating a car navigation system using an SD card or a DVD is a lengthy bewildering process that makes the less technology savvy consumer turn to the local dealership for help (which is not always free.) Even simpler tasks can be daunting: auto dealers know to expect customers lining up out the door when daylight savings time changes and the dashboard clock needs to be adjusted.  Smartphone users, on the other hand, are seldom even aware of software updates installed on their devices.

This outdated VIN-centric business model places the vehicle—not the consumer—at the center of the connected car universe, a model that is incongruent with the desire to have an uninterrupted experience that is independent of the car the consumer happens to be driving.

The Battle for Infotainment Supremacy

In-vehicle infotainment systems are becoming the predominant hub of driver-car interaction, integrating driving management, vehicle management and personal information.  Infotainment head units are the epicenter of rapid innovation in human ergonomics, display technologies and advanced driving features, innovation that comes not only from traditional automotive companies but also from heavyweight outsiders that threaten the status quo, such as Apple’s CarPlay, Google’s Android Auto, and Microsoft’s Windows Embedded Automotive.

Automakers recognize that in-vehicle experience is an integral part of the always-connected lifestyle and  consider car electronics, and in-vehicle infotainment in particular, as key enabler and differentiator in the fight to win the hearts of always-connected information-thirsty consumers—both drivers and passengers. But forward thinking OEMs also realize that they are in fierce competition with a superior user experience offered by consumer electronics manufacturers: better user experience accessing a broad, always-fresh, corpus of content and services.

On the other hand, built-in infotainment system offers a larger screen and more ergonomic user interface, tight integration with vehicle management data, and, most important, technology and user interface to reduce driver distraction.

But the pressure to cram more features and fancy user interfaces into an already busy IVI system isn’t simple. Ford’s bug-ridden Sync IVI created a consumer backlash a scathing Consumer Reports rating. This led Ford to abandon Microsoft and select Blackberry’s QNX as its infotainment platform provider. More recently, a major security vulnerability in Chryslers Uconnect infotainment software led to a recall of nearly 2 million vehicles.

Over the Air Software Updates Improve Customer Experience

The battle between the two screens: the large built-in and the smaller brought-in, isn’t likely to be settled in the near future. Carmakers make a strong case for the ability of built-in IVI to deliver better and safer user experience, integrating infotainment, active safety (ADAS) and vehicle management, but they struggle to deliver consistently reliable and user friendly software. On the other hand, mobile device vendors excel in providing excellent user interaction with always-fresh content, but they lack in vehicle integration and the significant risks in using mobile devices while driving are well documented.

Innovation, evolution of the AUTOSAR standard and GENIVI Alliance, and demand for greater vehicle software functional safety will continue to energize a rapidly changing landscape of not only technology innovators and IVI suppliers, but also of innovative consumer-centric content and services.

To stay relevant and competitive, and take advantage of new innovation, OEMs should adopt an open platform strategy that supports the integration of new technologies and incorporate content and services partners into vehicles in service. They need to be able to provide a continuous stream of software updates not only to keep infotainment content fresh across different and often incompatible infotainment platforms and operating systems, but also release new features and keep active safety features and vehicle management software up to date.

It should be clear by now that cost effective and user friendly vehicle software updates cannot be achieved utilizing the outdated service model that requires a visit to the dealership. Highly publicized accounts of Tesla’s remote software update to increase ground clearance in order to prevent incidents that led to Tesla cars catching fire or adding ADAS feature sans a dealer visit, are setting high consumer expectations for frequent, transparent and hassle-free software updates. In contrast, when Chrysler mailed consumers a software update via the U.S. Postal service, it only added to the damage the brand had already suffered.

OEMs should take advantage of innovation in over the air (OTA) software updates and use it as a convenient and low-cost technology to promote product quality, safety and customer satisfaction.

(Photo: FreeDigitalPhotos.net)

Jeep Uconnect

Connected Car Security: Real Threat or Media Hysteria?

By Automotive, Telematics 5 Comments

With the growing popularity of Internet-connected features in cars, they become attractive targets for remote hacking. While as far as I know no malicious hacking has been reported, there have been multiple demonstrations of serious software vulnerabilities and breaches of vehicles software. A recent Wired magazine article was particularly damming. With Wired support, experienced “white hat” car hackers Charlie Miller and Chris Valasek managed to gain access to a brand new Jeep Cherokee and control several functions, including dashboard display, steering and braking.

Read More