6 ms·
I would argue that the software quality of ADAS systems is very different from Infotainment. Infotainment systems are a race to the bottom on BOM+SW price poin
by DoingIsLearning 1y ago
I would argue that the software quality of ADAS systems is very different from Infotainment.
Infotainment systems are a race to the bottom on BOM+SW price point. ADAS OEM's understand that there is a human cost, liability, and reputational cost for failure.
The real risk with these monoliths is when companies start to remove the distributed/redundant nature of safety critical systems, in order to reduce hardware costs.
There are multiple very good reasons for a distributed system in a car. However, irrespective of how clever your architecture is, there is only one good reason for centralized systems in a car and that is cost. It benefits no one but shareholders and C-suite.
OTA updates are sold as a key benefit but again it's marketing, they only reduce costs for the manufacturers and effectively remove a lot of the penalties of recalls. I would argue that difficult/costly recalls put pressure on manufacturers for 'first time right' design, OTA favours happy-go-lucky software.
- graemep 1y agoOTA updates scare me, as does any type of constant connectivity that is even indirectly linked to safety critical systems.
- mdavid626 1y agoI believe you, that these systems work. However, I watched too many videos about cars on which it doesn’t. Many of them were expensive cars. Phantom breaking is really scary to me. I’d rather have full control of the car, than letting some system randomly emergency brake the car for no reason. ABS and ESP one can anticipate. ESP usually can even be turned off.
- DoingIsLearning 1y agoI am not working directly on this but as far as I understand phantom breaking was mostly a calibration issue with earlier versions of front radar AEB.