[Exclusive: An Inside Look At Ford's New 10 Speed Transmission]

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.

[Ford Sync 3 debuts]

I have a couple issues with Sync/MFT with my SHO:

 

Most of the time in the right hand side of the Instrument panel, the name/number of who I'm talking to on the phone comes up as unknown name/number, even though its perfectly fine on the primary touch screen.

 

Texts get repeated if I get one from one person, I get a repeated old text from my wife or friend that pops up right after that..but I'm assuming this is a phone issue vs a Sync issue

 

Sometimes the background on the primary display "blocks" the rear view camera (while I'm backing up) if I get an incoming call/text. Shifting the car to part then R normally fixes it.

I know, I can't say "[name of grocery store, a single word]", I have to say "[Name of grocery store] [Two additional words that have never appeard on their site, in the phone book, or any ad, but somehow ended up in the point of interest database]". Extremely annoying since there's no keyboard input during motion of the vehicle (I don't advocate the driver doing this while moving, but there should be a button for passenger override).

 

Regarding the voice command issue, the QNX Auto Platform has Nuance voice recognition (as the current one does), but it's a newer version of the engine with natural voice recognition capabilities. How the software responds to input is both how Ford configures supported features of the platform and how audio is passed to/from it.

Reviewing many pieces of the Sync code, there's SyncGen2_4_X.YY.ZZZZ_PRODUCT (which corresponds to the 3.x versions of the updates as listed on SyncMyRide). Current updates specifically exclude updating Sync Gen2_5, which would most likely correspond with a new major version of it. Certain Sync update manifests make reference to "Zodiac pre-release" in reference to Sync2_Gen5, which started appearing in Sync updates after May of 2013 - which, if you're to believe other sources (the people who claimed to rewrite MFT for QNX on LinkedIn) - is when the re-write had started.

I'm going to keep my fingers crossed and hope that Ford does a platform alignment and gets Gen2 on QNX. It would make it more likely for Ford to issue updates for Gen2, because portions of the underlying codebase could easily be common (most of the base operating system, the AppLink [smartDeviceLink] server). The interface of MFT is never going to change visually in a major way on existing systems, which is fine, but a platform unification would reduce development effort to keep MFT modern.

Of course, the other possibility is that Ford puts Gen2 on life support and we get little/nothing.

 

Ford's CES Keynote starts in an hour and a half, and this is the place for Ford to brag, if any. Let's see what gets said. Here's a link to CNET's stream.

 

 

Also, I totally understand where you're coming from WRT ATX boards. If you have glasses and know anything about computers, inevitably someone wants to you figure out why their PC is doing something weird. And I'm too much of a pushover to tell people to call the Geek Squad and get worked over by Best Buy.

 

And I can tell you that most vehicles are more like Macs than PCs---lots of stuff changes, and for no clearly discernible reason, and at the same time, other stuff stays the same for years--again for no clearly discernible reason. (Among Douglas Adams' recreational impossibilities: Determining if you can upgrade the processor on your Mac)

Little things definitely change. For instance, some of the places where they used the plastic fastening nubs that you have to pop with a special tool or flat head screwdriver in to move (not completely remove, but hang down for headlight work) on the Fusion were changed to regular metall screws (I'm guessing because they had a tendency to fall out). Amusing to see a plastic piece on a 2013 video tutorial and a metal screw on my 2015 Fusion. That's more minor, but I'm saying I appreciate your point. Car companies have been more like Apple in the past, and more in some ways now (with many radios not being anything close to a double DIN).

 

At this point we've seen it retrofitted within the dashes of a Taurus SHO (forum post), a Fusion (initial promo video), and Mustang (mock cockpit), but as you said, the Taurus may be an exception and the Fusion/Mustang may have changed internals. Particularly in mockups/prototypes, you can use a lot of glue and trickery/changes under the hood...just as long as it looks good from the outside.

[Ford Sync 3 debuts]

 

You're not going to be putting the same display back in because you're switching to a capacitive interface. That means a likelihood that there's going to be an adapter of some sort. Also, one would assume that the new APIM does not use the exact same form factor as the outgoing APIM, which means, again an adapter of some sort.

 

My assumption is that Ford is not hewing to the old system's form factors & install mounts, hence the allowance for service department training.

 

BTW: I see you overlooked my math error. I edited that post and threw in advertising costs, as I think you're looking at mid seven figures minimum to do a project like this on an absolute shoestring budget, and that a lot of car owners are going to be pretty irked by the thought of paying Ford $1k to upgrade to a more reliable system when their reasonable expectations were that the system operate reliably from day one.

 

And yeah, the long-tail sucks when it comes to most manufactured goods......

 

--

 

I would be curious to know why Ford is not going to do a 'transparent' substitution of QNX for Windows Embedded. My assumption is that there's a valid dollars and cents reason---and would tend to assume the cost of writing a system that would replace an OS on-the-fly off a USB stick was prohibitive.

 

Well, in regards to the same display - definitely true. That said, there's no reason you couldn't make a capacitive display of the same size, with the same mount points that fits in the existing dash. As far as making the APIM fit differently behind the dash, Ford would most likely avoid that if at all possible because that would mean you'd have different versions to fit the Gen3 APIMs in different cars - unless they were going to make changes internally to the mount point of the APIM. But that would introduce retooling costs when they could just make the new APIM fit in the area of the old one (they've done it this way in desktop computers with ATX since 1995). Albiet computer cases are a bit wider, but MiniITX has existed since 2001. Point is, for the reasons we cited earlier (Economies of scale, retraining, part costs, etc.) it doesn't really make sense to change the APIM mounting.

Now for a newer system with better noise cancellation, etc. they may have changed the plug to change the amount of power delivered, number and type of sensors, etc. - that would be a bigger reason. Apparently that has not happened.

 

Ford may not brag that they are substituting Windows Embedded for QNX on Gen2, that remains to be seen. It's still the worst kept secret in the industry, and many of the guys who worked on the rewrite explicitly advertise such on their Linkedin public profiles with these details. Since it's billed as a "seamless upgrade for the end user" and all signs in the open source code and other presentations point to AppLink finally coming to the MFT interface of old, it's very likely that QNX isn't mentioned at all for any gen2 upgrade and just performance/feature improvements.

 

Ford did go out of their way to explicitly clarify that QNX was being used for Gen3 when they announced it though, so who knows.

[Ford Sync 3 debuts]

 

Well, then you're probably looking at over $1,000 for a Ford upgrade.

 

And why wouldn't Ford do something like this when the parts are already going to be in warehouses?

 

Roll-out costs, thumbnail sketch.

 

Dealership training. Figure minimum 2 hours per tech, figure 5 techs per dealership trained to do installs, that's 10 hours per dealership and 4,000 dealerships in the U.S. 40,000 hours of training. Cost $50 per.: $2M in training costs.

 

Adapting to older CANBUS inputs/testing: minimum 2 man-years: 4,000 hours, cost $100 per. Another $4M in costs.

 

$6M to rollout----extra super conservative estimates----not counting over a million dollars to roll out direct marketing campaigns to get existing customers to update, POS displays, and service manager training. Nor does it count costs for inevitable bug fixes for edge situations on old CANBUS systems.

 

Assume that 5% of all MFT customers since 2011 will buy the upgrade, and that there are 3M installed users (25% of all vehicles sold, 2011-2014. That's $40 per unit @ 5%. $80 per unit @ 2.5%, and $200 @ 1% take rate.

 

Those aren't friendly amortization rates for a $1000 accessory.

Perhaps a lack of dealership service experience makes me ignorant to the overhead, but I just don't see thumbnail sketch or dealer training for something that is essentially identical to an already documented procedure (remove APIM/display, replace APIM/display with same) that is done so frequently a warranty extension was required for it. Now the debugging and ongoing support arguments are a stronger sway for me. And perhaps I massively underestimate the take rate for the upgrade. I'm not unfamiliar with the concept of economies of scale and that sometimes, enthusiasts don't make up enough of a pool to make something worthwhile, no matter how much we wish it were so.

 

I don't really care for the new interface, or about pinch and zoom capacitive touch, or any of that (nice to have but not huge). I just want the car to provide a small portal for my phone that gets upgraded much more frequently. And other manufacturers like Chevy have done this, and I have had experience with these experiences and they work much, much better than Sync. These are things that can be fixed in software.You're not going to get the same performance out of the 600mhz Cortex A8 from 2010 (MFT) as an OMAP5 with three display support at 1080P (Sync3)...obviously. If you take the current interface and don't add flashy animtaiton, it could definitely be improved.

 

If they come out with an upgrade that provides me with Applink and improves the performance/stability of the system, I would be really happy overall.

 

(As a side note, all of Ford's public source code for the smartdevicelink [open source standard for what ford calls AppLink) references the gen2 system and the default interface is the old MFT interface rendered in a much more lightweight technology [html5]. There are publicly visible sources that outright state Wipro was responsible to rewrite MFT on QNX for Ford and that it would be an end-user upgrade. If this does not come to pass, that would be the ultimate sign that Gen2 owners were being abandoned).

Ford really got burned on MFT because they trusted BSQUARE (full of Microsoft alumni) to make the Gen2 system properly and they shipped them a broken mess. Ford also mismanaged the project. They then had to go back and recode everything to work properly themselves. At some point in 2013, Ford approached Wipro about doing a rewrite on QNX, which (judging by public sources) was apparently done and work concluded in May 2014 on the re-write to QNX. I am familiar that 3.6 and 3.7 are tons better than what the system originally was, but I still find it frustrating.

As far as APIM failure, my dealer dismissed the idea. Still in warranty so if it continues to act up I'm probably going to push on this.

 

I'm a lot more optimistic for what Gen3 looks like than this, namely because I think ford learned from their mistakes and talks by Don Butler (ford) indicate that they're looking to embrace both Android Auto and Apple Carplay with the infotainment built in as the base experience with the user picking. Then you can upgrade the $600 smartphone every 1 to 3 years and not make major difficult changes to your car.

[Ford Sync 3 debuts]

The current MFT system is not broken. It works fine for what 99.9% of owners use it for.

 

The only significant feature that's missing is Applink and I'm not sure that was ever actually promised as a future MFT feature on a specific vehicle.

 

I just don't understand treating this like a $40K smartphone instead of a $40K vehicle with a nice infotainment system.

I experience frequent frustration in my vehicle with it.

 

Ford promised an App ecosystem for MFT in 2010 that never came (source) among other things.

 

I consider the system half baked and Ford to have abandoned it. Even if Ford never does a Sync 3 retrofit, they still have yet to meaningfully address the problems with performance (very likely tied to MS Embedded for Auto with the sluggish and abandoned Flash Lite 3.1 for all MFT interfaces). If the old system had applink and didn't frequently slow down/freeze for many seconds, I would just say that an upgrade would be nice and technology marches onwards.

 

Maybe I just have a bad part, but I asked the dealer service department and they say unless it utterly craps the bed or I can reproduce a set of actions to cause problems, there's nothing to fix.

[Ford Sync 3 debuts]

I don't think BLIS, HVAC, backup camera etc. are part of MFT. I think those are all separate modules that simply interface with the APIM. So yes, MFT and sync really are just infotainment features.

As I haven't developed the system I can only speak from what I know.

I have been able to crash the left and right displays in my fusion through innocous changes (e.g. using the directional arrows to change what was being displayed on each). When this occurred, it required a vehicle restart to get the displays back. When it happened, I tried to turn on my Lane Keeping system and deliberately near the lane (alone, no oncoming traffic, to the shoulder) and didn't get a peep. I don't know if it couldn't turn on from the switch on the column because sync was crashed but I tried to press the button multiple times to no avail. Very visible road paint so I don't think that it was just the environment and not being able to see the lines.

 

BLIS was not testable as there was no nearby traffic in that condition - I imagine it's a separate logic that just reports to sync. Can't say at this point.

 

I haven't yet crashed the whole system Sync headunit, although I have had it stall for up to 20 seconds on normal actions (POI lookup, click browse on the siriusXM input, etc.). The buttons for my steering wheel heater and heated/cooled seats are exclusively located within the MyFord Touch interface. Unless I came up with some way to emulate the input over some other channel, I have no idea how I would operate those features without Sync working properly and with stability. General HVAC - I would have to find some way to introduce a disconnect or freeze in the Sync head unit in order to test whether the manual HVAC controls below work properly. Even if they did, I have no idea how I would properly tell the temperature, as the only display of the temperature setpoints for driver and passenger in my car is located within the sync system. I guess blindly press up and down until its comfortable?...

[Ford Sync 3 debuts]

 

There's also a question of take-rate--if this package is priced fairly to cover warranty claims & shop install, are people going to buy it? You might be talking upward of $900.

 

If it's cheaper than buying a new car to get it, and the advantages/performance are better and the feautures are actually there (which should be observed in real world usage on the models that introduce it - doubtful they'll sell any sort of upgrade before it premiers in new models), then yes, I would do it. Eyesfree is exclusive to v3, AppLink is (we'll see if they announce anything about it coming to gen2 tomorrow though - CES keynote will discuss AppLink confirmed, but anything about Gen2 getting applink is speculation), Android Auto and Carplay almost certainly will be. The APIM and screen is a standard part, so you'd have Gen3 parts at warehouses to warranty service the Gen3 vehicles available, you could use them to upgrade Gen2 as well. Other than making the changes to CAN settings (which could be programmed out of the box for an upgrade instead of done manually) it's no different than removing an APIM and replacing it with a new one. So if the parts are going to be stocked for the newer vehicles anyways, it fits fine in the existing dash of the existing vehicles without modification (backed up by that poster and the fact that they retained the 8 inch screen size for Gen3)... what's the risk? You have to price the service for dealer time and profit plus coverage of warranty, but other than that...what is the risk?

 

A similarly capable aftermarket unit would have a similar cost (7 inch pioneer displays with the non-crap software and good smartphone integration are $700+, not including install). A lot of people upgrade systems 3-4 years down the line aftermarket. That can't be done here.

 

Ford's explanation of "well it's new hardware and software, so you'll need to buy a new car" is insufficient when the new hardware fits in the new car, can be swapped without modifying the car parts (other than the altered hardware). If there's some other reason they want to explain why it's not feasible, go ahead. But when a guy working for one of Ford's hardware/software partners says that it's very easy to do and nothing changed on the wiring/mounting and it's just software settings, it creates a compelling case that Ford is artificially restricting the upgrade as a reason to buy a new car - and leaving earlier buyers behind when they could offer it to them.

 

Ford can crunch the numbers and do the math and do whatever they please in regards to officially offering upgrades in whatever form (I can't imagine DIY upgrades would ever be allowed).When Ford talks about the road ahead and then leaves customers with a broken system missing half of what they promised - one that can be easily swapped if the parts are available - and the only upgrade option is $20K+, people will think about how Ford treated them.

 

Ford is the only upgrade option in the MFT system. Period. Nobody else makes an upgrade compatible with cars that have MFT. You can't say that you sell the system one way when it comes, and consumers have flexibility to do what they want later. You are the chokepoint, the restriction. If I want to keep a car for a long period of time rather than buy/lease a new one every three years, knowing I have no flexibility in adapting the entertainment (nor does the manufacturer provide one), then I'm going to have to consider seriously whether I ever want to buy a car from that manufacturer again.

 

I don't buy Apple hardware for that reason (lack of ability to upgrade storage/memory in many of their computers). And I don't buy products from certain companies because they were lacking on software/firmware updates, while others provided them in a timely fashion, introducing new features and enhancements, etc.

[Ford Sync 3 debuts]

 

It's one thing to sell it, it's another thing to warranty it and service it--and there's not really a precedent for Ford (or any manufacturer, really) to sell DIY entertainment upgrades.

It's a plug-and-play kit without modification, so basically you unscrew the old APIM and display and put in a new one. The CAN settings are in software. The APIMs for Gen2 fail enough that they had to extend the warranty on them to 5 years/unlimited mileage, and removal of the APIM requires removal/reinsertion of the screen and APIM (the parts you'd need to upgrade), so it's not like it's some esoteric, rarely/never done procedure at dealerships.

 

As far as precedent for entertainment upgrades, yes, manufacturers don't generally sell radio upgrades. However, you have to put this in perspective of two things:

 

1) The Sync system is not merely an entertainment device. Safety features such as the blindspot information system, backup camera, etc. are built into it, as well as the HVAC controls. Diagnostic information (e.g. vehicle health) is integrated as well. Failure, buginess, or slowness in the current system does not just impact ability to listen to some tunes. And this level of integration makes swapping for aftermarket impossible.

 

2) How quickly the market has changed. BlackBerry was king in 2007, by 2012 (5 years later) they were irrelevant in the phone space (QNX will do fine with or without blackberry - it would be sold or spun off). Ford can decide if they want to try "business as usual" in not offering an upgrade, but consumers have different expectations nowadays about compatibility and ability to upgrade/new software/smartphone integration.

 

3) The current system has drawn a ton of ire and people want a better experience.

 

If Ford wants to satisfy their most vocal critics, they should offer Gen3 upgrades at parts + labor and figure out a way to warranty and account for it. If they do, people can grumble that they ordered a car right before Ford upgraded the system, but they can't say Ford left previous owners behind with no choice. Parts + labor is a fair way where the user isn't left behind but Ford just doesn't give away hardware at a loss to people who already agreed to buy a car.

I also never said anything about Ford selling or sanctioning DIY upgrades. The guy who did it to the 2013 SHO posted a couple days after the Sync 3 system was announced that he's done the swap in other vehicles many times - clearly he worked on the system while it was being developed and has the expert knowledge to do the job himself. Getting to the APIM requires dissasembly of several parts of the dash and at least in the Fusion is not trivial for someone who hasn't done it before and is not aware of the exact steps of the procedure. Doing such a swap at a dealer where they are used to such things and are aware on how to do it is more realistic.

[Ford Sync 3 debuts]

With minimal difficulty, someone put in the hardware for Sync Gen3 into a 2013 Taurus SHO. They mentioned the CAN bus used for things like HVAC and other communications with the car to Sync and posted this a couple days after Ford publicly announced the system, so it's more likely than not that this person worked on the development of Sync v3 and that's why they would know how to tweak the software settings for it to work appropriately (something that could be made a part of an official update).

 

When Ford blames the faster processor and says the upgrade path is a new vehicle, and Sync Gen2 (MyFord Touch) is missing features promised in 2010, it's pretty galling to know that the wiring harness, APIM (sync brain) and display are all possible to swap interchangeably out without modification and that there's no reason Ford couldn't choose to sell a retrofit to customers that want it.

I like my 2015 Fusion, but things like this sour me on the brand.

[Ford Sync 3 debuts]

My $0.02 about updating current MFT to Sync 3, which is all speculation on my part:

 

Ford will likely port the current MFT interface to QNX and provide an update to current owners. A couple benefits could be easier support of a common O/S language between MFT and Sync3, reduced lag (QNX is much more efficient than Microsoft), etc. Basically the background stuff that the user wouldn't directly see sitting in the driver seat but would provide a better overall user experience now and in future updates.

 

I don't see them moving to the new Sync 3 interface for a couple of reasons:

1. The current hardware is too limited or lacks functionality to support it. For example, all of the pinch to zoom features would require a capacitive touchscreen to work smoothly. We currently have resistive screens that don't do well with swiping motions. It would be difficult to implement a Sync 3 "lite" version without the risk of having to remove so many features of Sync 3 that it would be a totally different experience than what is advertised. This would just create confusion for the users and dealers.

2. The Sync 3 interface itself is too much of a departure from what owners have become accustom to with MFT. Even when user interfaces are vastly improved, most people still find the change itself too much of an inconvenience to make it worth it.

 

If Ford does indeed update the current MFT interface to run on QNX, we could see some smaller features of Sync 3 such as the wifi updating, AppLink, etc added assuming the current hardware is capable of supporting it. But I think we are stuck with the current 4 corners interface (which isn't that bad as most make it out to be in its current V3.7 form!).

There are already guys citing on LinkedIn that they ported Sync Gen2 to QNX from Windows Embedded for Automotive and that they were done with this months ago (at which point they cited working on Gen3, many months before announced) and that it would be a seamless update for the end user.

 

The experience that Sync3 offers requires a capacitive touch screen supporting multitouch (which the Gen2 vehicles don't have) and a processor that is 3x faster by clock speed alone (bear in mind that speed in mhz/ghz is only useful within a processor of the same architecture; an Intel i5 from 2013 at 2.5 ghz will absolutely cream a Pentium 4 Extreme Edition @ 3.8ghz from 2004).

 

Even then you sold a device experience, documented it, have current owners used to it, etc. on the older vehicles. It isn't going to change drastically.

 

I'm kind of bummed that I didn't get Gen3 but I knew what I was getting into buying a 2015. Honestly I'm not wowed by the idea of capactive controls. A responsive system? That I want. Flowing animations, nice but not necessary. Press a button and interface responds? That I need.

 

The lack of AppLink and running on windows with flash lite (resource hog) though, I am not. It is easy to get the system to hang and I have gotten the instrument clusters (e.g. tach on left and entertainment/nav display on right) to freeze by moving faster than the system expected, at which point the display froze until the engine was shut down. This was on 3.7. If Ford does not get Gen2 with long promised features (AppLink) and a better platform long term (QNX), it would give me serious cause for doubt to buy another vehicle from Ford again. If MFT were perfect and it were a matter of the shiniest newest bauble, that would be one thing, but MFT is far from perfect, even now. I know relatively MFT is much better than it was.

[Ford Ditching Microsoft for Blackberry]

I'm guessing Ford doesn't provide access to the screen(s) in the gauge cluster to 3rd party apps....?

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.

[Ford Ditching Microsoft for Blackberry]

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.

[Ford Ditching Microsoft for Blackberry]

Thanks for the backgrounder.

 

I guess, as a grouchy cynic when it comes to tech, I worry that if Ford unilaterally decides that they don't like how Google is monitoring their apps and stops upgrading/supporting Android Auto, it's going to be tough for Ford to communicate that effectively to Android users, in the face of the vocal minority that is always ready to saturate social media with angry commentary.

 

In short, they assume a lot of risk, and the only benefit is that of keeping pace with other manufacturers.

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.

[Ford Ditching Microsoft for Blackberry]

Interesting info. Thanks.

 

I would expect Ford to eventually support Android Auto and CarPlay--with some reservations.

 

My primary concern w/these screen takeover protocols is this:

 

Liability

 

If Google or Apple permit *extremely* distracting functionality on the car's LCD, Ford seems to be as likely a target for lawsuits/grandstanding plaintiff's attorneys as Apple/Google.

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.

[Ford Ditching Microsoft for Blackberry]

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.

[Problem with fit of Weather Tech Floor liners]

 

That's why you get different logos for them.

 

http://www.diodedynamics.com/store/acrylic/ford/mustang/weathertech-replacement-badges-pair

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.

[My forgetful 2014 Fusion Titanium]

 

 

2) Ambiant lighting changes from my setting RED to the default BLUE on its own. When I go to the screen to change it back, it shows it is set at red for a second then rotates to blue. Again, no rhyme or reason. Second key, programed to #2 positon is also set RED but it doesn't seem to matter if the second fob is in the car or not. IE it isn't confusing the car.

 

 

 

This may be related: