Jump to content

The Ford Order Tracking System Is No Longer Available.  THANKS Cyberdman For Making Available All Of These Past Years.  More Here.

coopny

Member
  • Content Count

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral
  1. Instrument cluster resets while driving taking out both information displays and the speedo (screens go white, speedo needle light goes out and speedo needle falls to zero while driving) Recovers within 10 seconds. First time it happened scared the crap out of me Severe bluetooth issues on iOS (although Apple seems to have some issues here on non-Ford vehicles and devices, so I can't entirely blame MFT for this one). Random freezing and slowness (freezing means requiring a fuse to pull, slowness means intermittent slowdowns where the system is non-responsive for periods up to 20 seconds). Issues when using navigation and switching back to the radio from the navigation "corner" where the navigation replaces the background on non-navigation pages (climate, radio). Some smaller ones - I am trying to keep a running list to see if there's any possibility some bugs may be caused by another part (I know that MFT is connected to portions of the vehicle beyond itself, so if anything else is wrong, I want it fixed in the bumper-to-bumper warranty). I'm going in for my first major service (1yr/10k mi) and the problems seem to have been getting worse within the past couple months (e.g. higher frequency) so I'm going to mention that and see what they say. Maybe the APIM is just bad. Of course I need to test 3.8 and see if it fixed any of this (The phone bluetooth issues are still not resolved, but at least the automatic reconnect increases the chances that it comes back after a disconnect). I'm really hopeful that there's a downport of the QNX core because QNX as a RTOS is much leaner than WinCE and a more modern leaner package for infotainment that's still being supported (Microsoft has basically lost interest in the field) and may result in some features (beyond Siri Eyesfree) being more likely to be ported down. It remains to be seen. Reviewing the 3.8 update file timestamps, it's clear that development on the update took ~1yr and features fixed according to the changelog is a small list (but they aren't reporting bug fixes), and it's also clear by filetypes and content that it's still running on WinCE with Adobe Flash Lite 3.1 for the screen elements.
  2. At the risk of being one of the people you're talking about, I'm happy that Ford came out with this update. It's incremental, but definitely beats nothing. That being said, the class action is pending around Ford, and in response to an amended complaint, Ford asked for portions of their complaint to be redacted in regards to claims by Plaintiff that the MFT system was being "abandoned": And Ford asking for redaction: (Note that this would just remove said sentences from the public view, and not from the complaint or the judge/jury to consider). I'm not expecting a free upgrade to Sync 3 (or any for that matter) or for them to magically make my existing touch screen capacitive at this point, but I'm still having a lot of issues. FWIW, someone (I forget which forum and would have to check) has quoted a TSB that cites several possible MFT issues (not mentioned in the update release notes on Syncmyride) that points to upgrading to 3.8 as the solution for the tech to implement. So clearly there's some bugfixing going under the hood in this release. Bringing my Fusion into the dealer with a couple weeks with an itemized list to see what can be done. Part of the frustration is how intermittent some of the issues can be though... Need to test some things more now that I've receieved the update and see if some of my outstanding bugs have been squashed.
  3. So I purchased the Driver Assist package in my '15 Fusion Titanium, which includes the blindspot detection system. That has been working reliably, but one of the features it adds (since it puts sensors in the rear quarter panels) is that when the car is in reverse, it uses said sensors to warn if a car is approaching from the left or right (it makes a different sound than the forward/reverse sensing systems and displays "car approaching from left/right" in the dash on the left screen). While it works properly some of the time (very useful in parking lots as a secondary check when backing up), it does seem to randomly activate while in reverse. Like, put in reverse, be still, and no objects to left/right/combination behind for fifteen feet- it'll start beeping "CAR APPROACHING FROM LEFT". Anybody observe this behavior or know of a TSB? I plan to bring it up during my next service so my dealer can check on it.
  4. coopny

    Ford Sync 3 debuts

    I would go back on the definition of "working fine" except I think I've enough... Buyers may still try the MFT system and see how its performing now (which is not as fast as every competitor) and compare features and decide against. Either they already planned a switch to QNX and giving feature parity may cost very little because the overwhelming majority of code is identical (other than interface code, which is minimal) or they're going to stay with Windows, in which case why go through all the effort to put any new features on a dead platform.
  5. coopny

    Ford Sync 3 debuts

    You have to keep in mind that MFT will continue to be sold in the 2015 and 2016 MY. Ford says that it will premier in a 2016 model year vehicle, but only promised full availability of Sync 3 at the end of calendar year 2016. Which means 2015 vehicles on lots now are stuck with it and at least some 2016 vehicles will come with it. If availability of a 2017 is early (e.g. Spring 2016), it could theoretically ship with MFT and have Sync 3 as a late availability option - although I doubt they would launch a 2017 with MFT. Owner goodwill has to be considered, but you are correct in stating that the majority of future revenue will come from Sync 3. I agree with the statement that unless the code is easily portable for a feature, it's not likely to be backported to MFT. Ford does have to compete with MFT until Sync 3 is in the entire Ford/Lincoln fleet, so anything they could do to enhance its position would be helpful. Devil's advocate, getting Sync 3 right is a bigger deal.
  6. coopny

    Ford Sync 3 debuts

    512MB of memory and 2GB of storage, and the MFT updates are just under 2GB. You don't have the space to stage the downloaded files before overwriting the current ones. OTA updating is never going to come to MFT, the hardware is insufficient. As far as further updates for Sync 2, there have been no feature updates and no substantial bugfixes since 2013. Now you can interpret this in a few ways: 1) Ford shoved 3.6 as an update that made things "acceptable" out the door, then worked on Sync 3 (maybe a sync2 rewrite on same platform too, maybe not) and focused on making that perfect instead of trying to fix things that are already broken; 2) Ford gave up on MFT and went full steam ahead on Sync 3 and it's just an empty promise. I hope it's the former, but it could be the latter. Time will tell. At this time, Ford reps will not provide any timeline on when MFT updates will occur or whether any features are being developed at all. If the documentation indicating Ford went through the time and effort to port Gen2 to QNX is true, then porting the backend code (most of the work) to make new features work correctly should be trivial, and the main additional effort would be to modify the interface to add the feature in. The Smartdevicelink code (Ford brands it applink) supports a web HMI that looks exactly like MFT, and QT4/QT5 HMIs that look different from Sync3, but is almost certainly what the Sync 3 UI is based on (for QNX Auto platform, those are generally the two choices). If Ford keeps MFT on Windows, I would expect a total EOL and no real bugfixes. I remain hopeful (but not optimistic) that MFT was actually rewritten on QNX and Ford releases it. While code can be buggy at any speed, Ford picked essentially the two worst choices for an operating system and user interface for performance (Flash Lite 3.1, which came out in 2009, and all development ended by Adobe in 2010 because it was too slow is used for the interface, and Windows Embedded as the OS). Now you could make bad choices on QNX to use all the hardware and make it crawl, but it would be a lot harder. QNX predates Blackberry devices and has been in use in embedded devices since the eighties.
  7. coopny

    Ford Sync 3 debuts

    Most news articles from the Sync 3 announcement in December of 2014 say that it will be available starting late 2015 in some 2016MY vehicles, with full availability in the fleet by the end of 2016 (the actual year). So yes, I would say it's safe that a 2017 will have it.
  8. coopny

    Ford Sync 3 debuts

    My point of the post you're replying to was merely: 1) Ford is terrible with deadlines. Any developer hoping or waiting on AppLink 3.0 as a viable integration optionis pinning hopes on something that doesn't exist yet and, with Ford's track record, may never exist. If you want to develop an AppLink app for integration, do it for the market you can do it for, not the market that "could" exist. 2) Ford seems content to let the past be the past and not take any steps to mitigate the fallout at all other than giving lip service on MFT continuing to be "supported", to solely focus effort on Sync 3 in new vehicles. Ford took the effort to port Sync 2 to QNX for performance reasons, going as far as to hire Wipro to do it, after Ford had already decided to base Sync 3 on QNX (by all publicly available information, both projects were started in early 2013). As far as "new to the discussion", some people earlier in this thread claimed that things like AppLink were not promised as future capability by Ford but instead merely expected and that I was "ranting" I was quoting my sources on Ford materially promising things and then failing to follow through. They didn't keep their promises from CES 2014, why would they follow anything they promised now? You can't please everyone all of the time, but you can please some people some of the time. I'm not expecting Ford to recall every vehicle ever made with MFT and replace it with Sync 3 for free, but Ford has a really bad track record with Sync: 1) They promised a lot of features on MFT. Some god cut to stabilize, fine. Key functionality they promised is still missing. Ford won't even commit to fixing it with an uncertain deadline, they just say it's not there and there are no plans. And that the old system isn't getting features that were promised when people were researching and buying vehicles but were later abandoned. And stability/performance still isn't there. 2) Meanwhile, they're promising the moon and the stars if you buy Sync 3 in a new Ford vehicle, and it's going to wash your clothes, fold your towels, and be your robot butler, etc... obviously I am being facetious here, but Ford is already getting into the territory of promising features for Sync 3, a product that isn't even commercially available yet, that will come as a software update after said product is launched. Ford can't use the power of love to make all MFT hardware more powerful for free, so they're not going to please every naysayer. They can't go back and add a variety of physical controls for HVAC and such that were eliminated in 2011-2014 that are now only controllable through the MFT system. They can go back and add one of the key features they promised and improve performance further (merely getting away from Flash Lite 3.1 would be a huge performance boon vs. essentially any other interface technology out there), and they can implement a key smart integration feature to MFT. Neither of which approaches inordinate cost territory.
  9. coopny

    Ford Sync 3 debuts

    June 2013: Then Jan 2014: And then December: Ford says Applink 3.0 support will come out in 2016 (as in the year 2016, not the 2016 model year), but Ford is notoriously horrible with deadlines, but Ford consistently over promises (web browser, Applink update for MyFord Touch and non-MFT vehicles) and then... failure to deliver. Forgetting the web browser, Ford actively removes features (AM/FM browse, 3D music rotation on USB, display GPS lat/long coordinates, customizable home screen, wallpaper only display) from MFT with no indications they're ever going to reimplement them. And they removed features as they continued to update it in the name of stabilization. As far as the party line on aftermarket Sync 3 (link): The rep on that account (primarily Rebecca on most forums) is kind of getting shot as the messenger, but the point still stands that I'm hardly the only person that thinks the lack of an upgrade path for MFT is ridiculous. The response has pretty much been that line and when people say they want it aftermarket that they'll pass along the feedback. Probably sent straight to /dev/null :P
  10. coopny

    Ford Sync 3 debuts

    IBITimes says "SYNC 3 will first be available on late 2015 models, including the popular Mustang and F-150 pickup." It's not clear whether they mean models available to order in late 2015 (e.g. the 2016 model year) or late availability within the 2015 model year. Or if they misunderstood ford (which has happened before in news articles by third parties). I would guess that if you're talking an April 1 job date that it's not ready. Since Ford hasn't specified which vehicle will debut the new system or the timing of that debut, it's all speculation.
  11. coopny

    Ford Sync 3 debuts

    From the Ford news site: AppLink 3.0 is vaporware at this point like the internet browser in MFT and the AppLink update announcement from Jan 2014 that never came to fruition. If and when Ford launches it, it may be worth developing against. Developers haven't stopped building websites because they're waiting for HTML6 and CSS4, whenever those may come to fruition. They're promising AppLink 3.0 some time in 2016 (they say "next year" in a press release dated today). If you have an app that can benefit from the new HMI capabilities such as projection of images for navigation, then you can start development based on the APIs of 2.0, and then when 3.0 is finally released (if you have more faith in Ford), you can add the remainder on top. However, a lot of apps would derive 80% utility from the 2.0 version.
  12. coopny

    Ford Sync 3 debuts

    They haven't announced any future version of Applink at this point in time, and generally standards like HTML are designed to fail gracefully. Your iPhone still supports Bluetooth 2.0 and 3.0 and 3.0 EDR devices despite having a 4.0 chip. Developers didn't stop developing iPhone apps because retina models with a different aspect ratio were coming out (iPhone 5), they added conditional code to optimize the display if it was on an iPhone 5 or higher and conditional code to use the older size if on a 4S and lower. Even if Ford makes enhancements in Sync 3, it doesn't prohibit devs from utilizing the classes or compatibility of Sync 2. Plus having the base communication code in that's common across all users allows developers to streamline addition of Sync 3 features later. Just like how CSS 2.0 didn't drop all the classes of 1.0, and browsers didn't stop rendering 1.0, and you could use a combination of 1.0 and 2.0 classes, and same for CSS 3. Browsers incapable of rendering CSS 3.0 elements would render as much as they could. It's also a compelling argument on why many sites use HTML5 elements (e.g. drag and drop files instead of a traditional selection prompt) and still have a traditional selection prompt anyways, for users who have browsers that don't support it. By developing only against Sync 3, you would cut out the potential to have millions of users with older Sync systems that support applink using your app. I get what you're saying in that Ford may decide to move on and not implement an Applink server and client code in MFT to focus on making Applink in sync 3 better, but the argument that it isn't worth it for developers to develop against both older and newer properties doesn't really make sense to me.
  13. coopny

    Ford Sync 3 debuts

    My local dealer tells me that both are fine, although I'm going to press the issue on my next service. As far as nobody having these problems, you wouldn't have numerous lawsuits including pending class actions if nobody was experiencing these problems. Nor would you have APIM warranty extensions. I'm not saying that every single person with MFT has issues either.
  14. coopny

    Ford Sync 3 debuts

    The code to hook into the voice system is voice recognition system agnostic. Regardless, Nuance provides the voice recognition capabilities in both MFT and Sync 3. The Applink protocol is text based to specify commands you expect and to pass the input back to the app. Nothing is propietary or exclusive to Sync 3 in that regard, unless Ford came up with a 3.0 protocol and only gave it access to third parties. However, all the apps they showed on screen at CES used the 2.0 version of AppLink and everything worked. Ford has spoken on the future of in vehicle infotainment and they see the manufacturer solution coexisting with the phone driven experiences. Time will tell if this holds true or not. Right now, from a capability perspective, AppLink is far more flexible than Android Auto or CarPlay. Both of those experiences right now are severely limited (Carplay only permits media apps i.e. music/radio/podcasts; Android auto permits same plus text message apps where incoming texts are read aloud over the speakers and replies can be composed via voice command). AppLink is capable of far more including detailed hooks into the vehicle state (tach, trouble codes, fuel level, temperature, etc.).
  15. coopny

    Ford Sync 3 debuts

    Applink, for driver distraction reasons and backwards compatibility, focuses on letting the infotainment system control the HMI. You can poll for events and hook into voice commands and buttons, but you don't get to freely draw buttons on the screen or capture raw movements. Nothing in the Applink 2.0 (the latest, very new) SDK supports multitouch or free drawing of graphics or anything that would be a limitation of the 2.0 system. This is because Ford wants a very controlled, safe, non-distracting display so somebody doesn't sue them over the behavior of an AppLink app distracting them. It is a lightweight platform agnostic protocol for smart devices to offer capabilities. Support of the capabilities on 2.0 would not hinder apps or render them incompatible in any way with 3.0, unless Ford wants to say "screw you" on backwards compatibility on their existing apps. Which would be suicide for keeping the Applink ecosystem relevant at all.
×