coopny

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.

Similar and the same are different things, and it's also application dependent. The transverse V6 in certain Accords, TLs, MDXs, and Honda SUVs went really bad, especially in the MDX where the same powertrain was paried with a more poweful engine (subjecting the transmission to further strain). Same thing happened in the 90s with the Subaru SVX. It's hard to predict every possible failure that may happen. In the case of the Acura MDX, a lot of people failed just outside of the 50,000 mile warranty. In the case of someone I know, the entire transmission gave out at 51,000. The repair was done for goodwill before Honda formally extended the repairs on the transmission to 8yr/80K. Even if the technology of adding more gears in and of itself is not new, I'd rather wait so Ford can see how it does and learn from their mistakes. No matter how much you try to test it before you sell it, there's no way to discover all the problems before you start selling it. Same thing happens with TSBs for cars when they're redesigned for a year (tons of issues the first year, less the second and so on), except if it's a smaller problem you can repair the part if an issue occurs. If an entire transmission has an unforseen design flaw (e.g. it turning out that it was too small for the MDX, but even generally it ended up leaking over time worse and worse in vehicles that had it), it's not something you can just fix with a TSB. You can extend the warranty and fix it when it breaks, but it's a problem that will plague the car for the rest of its life, including when you end your coverage.

I'm curious to see how well this works from an efficiency, driving feel, and reliability perspective. Efficiency: In an auto transmission, more gears = more efficient shifts, in theory. Though wouldn't that depend on the ability of the transmission to change quickly/properly calculate the optimal time to shift. Driving feel: A lot of people say CVTs (and I know this isn't one) feel lifeless, perhaps this will be better. Reliability: I'll sit this one out and see how it does before I buy a car with one. The advancement of technology is great, but I'll sit out on beta testing a transmissiont that costs $$$$ to replace out of warranty.

They stripped those assets out of this code. It's possible to extract the Adobe Flash Lite files for the current Sync 3.7 from the update files for things like the driver assist and other dashboard displays, but they display in a jumbled mess without appropriate data to feed them.

I compiled and ran the Ford SmartDeviceLink core code. I was able to compile the HTML interface (The default). The newer, different interface (based on the QT graphical framework) I was not. It seems almost inevitable that Ford announces an update including AppLink at CES in early 2015. I don't know if they will mention a change to QNX at that time, but all the evidence seems to point to it. . I need to boot my Linux virtual PC again and take screenshots of the settings - all the settings were just related to AppLink. EDIT: Here is an album of screenshots from the HTML UI.

If people base car purchase decisions on infotainment options and smartphone integration, then Ford loses sales if it becomes a breaking point. Someone can always discontinue support for something. Onstar stopped working in older GMs when they used analog modems and they finally shut those cellular networks down. Most of the API is enforced against the operating system which controls what an app can and aannot send to the car. Apple doesn't share the API information publicly but seems to be limited to media player apps only in a predefined interface (other than the first party apps like maps, phone, etc.)... Google on the other hand discusses how the current Android Auto interfaces are audio apps (that provide spoken contact, like radio, or music content) and messaging apps (like whatsapp). I'm not familiar with the intracices of how Android Auto renders content to the screen, but the documentation seems to indicate that the phone casts the app as video, which means it'll likely be a standard API that offshifts most of the thinking and updates to Android itself, not the car manufacturer.

These third party protocols are not like MirrorLink in aftermarket receivers where we are copying whole interfaces as displayed on the smartphone screen to the phone dashboard. Both Apple and Google for round one have picked media player apps that populate a pre-made media player interface (which is the same as Ford AppLink). Ford has an application ID system in MFT in the AppLink 2.0 API to give a unique ID per app to allow tracking of approvals and blacklisting apps if they don't meet the needs of a non-distracting HMI. Apple and Google are both talking to the NHTSA about reviewing their approaches for driver distraction, and if the automakers don't like what they're seeing, they can refuse to iterate the protocol of those experiences further (so they won't support whatever is seen as distracting) or disable support for those protocols entirely. Both Google and Apple have a revocation system built in to their application stores, so if an app is presenting a distraction (and it can't be addressed on the Android Auto API level), they can pull the app from distribution until such a time where the developer is willing to fix it to their satisfaction.

I realize I am bumping a rather old thread but I figure it is more productive to do that vs. creating a new one. (Disclaimer: I don't work for FoMoCo or its affiliates. The below is educated speculation based on publicly available data). I went into a nerd discussion here on what supporting evidence Ford's open source SmartDeviceLink core (basically, the brains behind what Ford brands as AppLink) provides for a switch to BlackBerry's QNX operating system. It's a bit nerdy but view it if you care about the specifics. That said, as far as speculation: QNX and Blackberry/Future: The car platform is doing extremely well with somewhere between 40%-70% marketshare, ahead of all competitors. Most likely BlackBerry will trim its business of the fat and go lean with what is selling. Even if BlackBerry befalls a bad faith, QNX is a widely used real-time operating system in many applications. The most likely case during a BlackBerry bankruptcy is that it would be spun off or bought. Applink on MFT: Probably going to happen. Ford had a "Hackathon" in September inviting devs to learn about SDL/AppLink and develop apps. Ten finalists were given two months to polish their apps. The winner will be announced at the Connected Car Expo this Thursday will go with Ford to the International Consumer Electronics Show, and they will get to take part in a "feature announcement" at CES in Jan 2015. My guess is that the "Feature announcement" is about AppLink in MFT, else why bring an AppLink dev on stage. The slides (available on public internet) from that conference in September show screenshots of the MFT UI with applink, though it is scant on details. Update of existing vehicles to QNX: Likely. Ford has to pay licensing/support to Microsoft, to BSAFE, and potentially other parties for the original MFT system if they keep it. Re-writing the code was an expensive decision, and essentially points to saying that they believe the old system was so slow/badly developed/impossible to enhance that they would rather do it from scratch. There are guys on LinkedIn advertising publicly that they worked on the re-write of Sync from Windows Embedded for Automotive to QNX and that it would be a seamless update for the end user. Now does this include every model year that the Gen2 MFT system was ever included in?... My guess is this ties into the January announcement. Based on what I see, I would venture old systems are likely to be updated. Most references on the open source code are to a 2013 Fiesta and it requires installing QNX to run the open source code. UI on existing models, if updated to QNX: Unlikely to be changed. Ford went through the trouble to copy the existing MFT UI (on Windows/presentation layer based on Adobe Flash Lite) to two technologies friendly to QNX (HTML5 and QT) in the SmartDeviceLink core. UI on new models: Potentially changed. There are a couple of interfaces written in QT in the SDL core. They make distinct references to Ford features like the Vehicle Health Report, 911 Assist, etc... they are largely based on a blue and black color set very different from the current UI. I haven't set up a test environment to compile and run the UI, I've just reviewed the assets for it. Android Auto/Apple CarPlay: Too early to say anything. The SDL core I reviewed is for app integration against the automaker's interface and not these software company's experiences, and is not the entire MFT operating system with all components. If and when Ford makes an announcement is unknown. Ford is listed on the web pages for both Android Auto & CarPlay, and the CarPlay reference implementation is on QNX. Ford may choose to restrict this to the newer model years, or may wait to make it available until Sync Gen3 (scant references in the SDL core). Don Butler (Connected Car Chief, FMC) did say that these experiences would be alternative experiences and Sync is here to stay for when you don't want to use or don't use a smartphone, or prefer the automaker's experience. This obviously makes sense, as if the radio was a brick without an iOS or Android device, people would get ticked. Until 2015 I wouldn't expect a peep out of Ford on these matters and I would expect any big announcement at CES. They may just outline the future support of new experiences/features rather than advertising the operating system under the hood.

Do those logos only fit in the 1st row floor mats, or do they fit in the Weathertech Cargo Liner as well? Just curious if I should order just one pair or two.

This may be related: