http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...ry-future-cars


This would be REALLY interesting.


I've been wishing for this for ever.
QNX is pretty **** amazing.

 

Yay!!!!!!

 

Chrysler has been using QNX for a while now ... Pretty sure thats what runs in all of their MYGIG systems ...

 

A lot of manufacturers use it. They just put their own front end on it.
QNX has been around for ages. Great rock solid microkernel architecture.
BB10/PlaybookOS is ultra smooth and secure.


Will be interested to see how Ford implements it and how it influences future car tech. Lots of possibilities here, especially with integrating with other phone architectures and apps.
BB10 has the ability to run Android Apps as well as BB apps. It would be great if the OS in the car could leverage

 

hope this is a right move...

 

QNX is well established. Been around since the early 80's.
The OS is built to power mission critical devices (healthcare, nuclear power plants, ultra high availability Cisco devices)


It's definitely not a bad thing.
Since it's just an OS, they can make it look like the current system and visually you wouldn't even notice.

Ideally, I'd love to see it integrate with the phones and their apps better. Bridge functionality could be pretty amazing.

 

I hope they don't use flash for the UI like they do now.

Stupid...

Sadly, I believe the 15 mustang will still be based on winderz.

-Matt

 

You're talking the current MyFordTouch?

 

Indeed. Out of all the awesome choices (even microsoft's own Silverlight) they ended up with Flash.

Flash front end with Windows Automotive backend, Embedded SQL server for database.

-Matt

 

Is QNX a separate company from BlackBerry? Because everything I read about BB is they are hanging on for their life.

 

What are the chances of updating our software to QNX down the road ? Is that possible or do we get left out with a unsupported MSFT ?

 

Its possible. Unfortunately I don't know the hardware specs of the QNX platform. But I would imagine it would be in Ford's best interest to support the old hardware.

Our current hardware uses a Freescale i.MX516 ARM A8 MCU. Its a very powerful unit and should support QNX without any issue. It really all comes down to the developers. I think some very shotty choices were made by the IVT team.

Anywho, well see.

-Matt

 

3 billion in cash and no debt. You tell me.
If that's life support, I want to be on it. They won't be going anywhere. QNX is also it's own division within the company, as is BBM, Devices, and enterprise software (BES).


I'll be the first to tell you I'm a Blackberry supporter.
2nd, I don't HATE or dislike any of the other platforms. They do what they do, and they all have their highs and lows.


Blackberry lost a lot of steam when they didn't keep up with the Jones' and kept hanging on to their legacy BBOS that most people associate with a Blackberry device.


BB10 is built from the ground up on QNX (whom they bought back in 2010) Both companies are Canadian homegrown.
Anyone who honestly says the platform sucks, is just a fan boy of a competitor and hasn't even used one for more than 30 seconds.

QNX doesn't equal Blackberry10 however.
BB10 was built on it, like many other OS's are.
The power in the way the OS is designed is in it's ability to be VERY lean, efficient, and stable OS. It's a microkernel OS compared to most others that are monolithic.


Coming from an IT background, BB are still the most secure mobile devices on the planet and there's a reason the government still uses them. Security is always baked into the OS as opposed to being on top of it.


The power in the car OS will be how it interacts with the current phones and systems. And I'm not talking just BBs either.
The current OS build of BB10 has Android runtimes allowing any BB10 device to install/run Android Apps, which will open up a lot of coverage for developers who don't want to recompile their apps for multiple eco systems.


I thought I read a quote somewhere that said it would be possible to update the old systems as well. Depending on how much of a hog the current MS setup is and if the architecture is the same, the QNX can do more with less.
Another reason why the current crop of phones are looked down on, as the specs required to run the OS aren't nearly as large as say Android. Apple does the same with its OS. It's optimized very well for the hardware its on.

But it all depends on what 'Sync2' is expected to do. There may be possibilities where the hardware just can't run the new OS, no matter WHO the vendor is. Newer system may require newer specs.

 

I have 2 fords and sync stinks. I have given up on it I use it for bluetooth audio and that's it. Bout time they found a better solution.

 

Taking the wifes Edge Limited in for the 7th time for the sync messing up

 

I have navigation and tech. Perhaps we have less issues over the basic Sync. The only thing I dislike is having to say "bluetooth audio" to listen to voicemail and every few starts reminding it of the playlist on my media stick. Also don't like the 911 reminder that takes over the system to let you know you are or are not connected to 911 in the settings.

 

On paper, there should be no reason that it would not work. Infact, if you looked at compiled sizes. QNX is indeed smaller than MSA.

But you have to take in account people with C's in their titles. They tend to kill things like this.

You can disable this.

-Matt

 

Please tell I tried to through the settings and still reminds me when off or on.....

 

Sorry, I may have misunderstood you. You are referring to your Mustang Sync system, not MFT?

-Matt

 

YES 2013 Sync msft