Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.
New KITT Attack Mode revealed at Comic Con
London 2008: Honda OSM concept roadster says, "Cheerio!"
London 2008: Lotus unveils the Evora
2010 Chevy Camaro - Official Details and Images
2010 Chevy Camaro - LIVE from the reveal
In the Autoblog Garage: Aprilia RSV 1000 R
First Drive: Maserati Quattroporte S in Europe
First Drive: 2008 MINI Cooper S JCW
In the Autoblog Garage:2009 Nissan GT-R
North American Exclusive First Drive: Alfa MiTo
Reader Comments for
Subscribe to this threadMicrosoft ready to expand beyond Ford SYNC
(Page 1 of 1)
mk @ Feb 20th 2008 9:25PM
I want my external devices to work in my car, I don't need more devices IN my car.
Bluetooth speakerphone, audio input from my music player, power for a portable GPS maybe... Homelink for garage door opener.
What else does your car need to control that isn't driving related?
How out of date is SYNC going to be when those cars are trying to be re-sold as used to the second or third owners?
I don't want a car with a Windows 3.1 or Windows 95 computer in it. I won't want one later.
And if Vista's reliability is any indication, (I am an IT worker, and fix vista problems EVERY DAY) I don't think I want Microsoft anywhere near my car, let alone built into it.
sw @ Feb 20th 2008 11:53PM
I'll agree with that. A Linux box that's completely open source though would open up a world of neat stuff for guys like us
MasterCKO @ Feb 21st 2008 5:28AM
"Bluetooth speakerphone, audio input from my music player, power for a portable GPS maybe... Homelink for garage door opener."
So let me get this straight. You'd rather have to use the devices in question with your hand (and probably have to look AWAY from the road) than to allow them to hook up to SYNC and be able to control them with your voice? ooookay.
"How out of date is SYNC going to be when those cars are trying to be re-sold as used to the second or third owners?"
As long as phones still use Bluetooth and mp3 players still use USB, it won't be out of date at all.
oh, and your Vista blurb is pointless. For a number of reasons. But I don't want to press the issue any further.
Mallory @ Feb 21st 2008 8:45AM
Wow mk, you're really all over the map on this one. First you say "I want my external devices to work in my car, I don't need more devices IN my car." but that's the whole point of Sync. Don't build a phone into the car, use the one you already have. Don't build an MP3 player into the car, use the one you already have. Or maybe I misunderstood and you're saying you like Sync? Not real clear on that one.
As far as updates go, it updates automatically, and as long as your devices support Bluetooth or USB they'll always work fine. Don't let your fear of Vista bias your opinion on Sync. As the common IT saying goes, I was sad about supporting Windows, until I met the man who had to support Linux.
mk @ Feb 21st 2008 11:17AM
A bluetooth speakerphone or headset has one button. Accept/End. I would even prefer a non-built-in bluetooth speakerphone in my car, with just a provision for the car to power the device. Bluetooth's protocol will likely be upgraded or replaced within a model year 2008 car's operational lifetime.
A music player is no more complicated, and in some cases, less complicated, than the rest of the stereo controls. If you want voice activation, why not build it into the music playing device, or a regular head unit? Why does it need to be some giant display running a modified version of Windows CE?
If the CAR is going to get new tech, why not HUD, so that you don't have to take your eyes off the road?
A bright LCD screen in the dash is just as distracting to the driver as any portable device, especially at night.
And homelink is hardly a problem. You can memorize the button location, and open your garage door, just like with a separate battery-operated garage door opener remote. Hardy a new and negative distraction.
A piece of hardware and a lot of Microsoft software BUILT INTO THE DASH is not going to stay current over the lifetime of a car, which can be more than 10 years, if the car is maintained.
I would rather that the advanced tech functions that SYNC seems to be touting, be built in to my phone, or my music player (or both in one device, like iPhone and others) and have those features outside of the car, or in ANOTHER car just by carrying my device over. I don't want those features built into the dashboard of a car that I will either use for a long period of time, or try to re-sell when the system is no longer current.
Built-in Navigation systems are already starting to negatively effect the value of used cars, because used car buyers see it as being saddled with outdated technology that is hard to upgrade, or remove, without leaving a giant hole in the dashboard.
Ten years ago, we were using Windows 95 and Windows 98, or Mac OS 8. USB2 was not even on the table. USB3 is already being discussed now, and may not be entirely backward compatible over the long term.
In TEN YEARS, music players, phones, and other devices are going to CHANGE. And it is a lot easier to buy those devices every couple of years, than upgrade the computer in your 7-year-old Ford Fusion in 2015.
Keep the car-side of the interface as SIMPLE and REPLACEABLE as possible, and let the portable devices be portable, and replaceable with newer technology, as it arrives, faster than cars get replaced, usually.
I DON'T WANT PLANNED-OBSOLESCENCE COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY IN MY CAR! Cars have enough planned obsolescence as it is, but at least it isn't as fast at turning over as computer standards are.
And my Windows Vista issues are not "fear". They are frustration. I am not afraid of Vista, I am frustrated with it, because so far, it has only made my job harder, not easier. That is experience, not rumor or conjecture.