windows and BMW's! Bad idea?

I just read this story here and couldn't but post about it.

Will Beemers be crashing all over the place for no apparent reason, or will the car produce errors when its started, will microsoft try to get a monopoly on every component put into the cars (brakes made by microsoft! not good) .

Me thinks that James Bond should change his car, or else when he is trying to catch the latest international terrorist he jumps into his Z3 (or is it Z8) turns on the ignition and hears "Please wait while windows searchs for missing files", and meanwhile his new arch-nemisis is making a clean getaway. :brickwall

Not to bash your post or offend anyone but you people have the tendency to rant against Microsoft all the time while 90% of the AO users run Windows on their dekstop PC`s.
If you think a BMW running windows is crazy then what about your home computer?

My prob with m$ is that lone coders writing usually just for the fun of it rather than profit can usualy turn out better progs with less bugs than m$ does with all their billions of $$$ backing and thousands of staff

v_Ln

I ment this post to be a bit of light relief, not to be taken too seriously.
Sorry if I offended anyone.

On the serious side, cars do have computers,
and the number of functions monitored or
controlled by them is growing.

If I'm not mistaken, there is at least one model
that has replaced the physical link between
accelerator pedal and engine with an electronically
operated servo.
:cool:

Perhaps now those threads on "if msoft made cars" are less amusing....

Software is already on planes, including theirs, so ---

Quote:

---

My prob with m$ is that lone coders writing usually just for the fun of it rather than profit can usualy turn out better progs with less bugs than m$ does with all their billions of $$$ backing and thousands of staff

---

not that i like microsoft, but... i think that the programmers that work there are good. the screening process alone is insane. these lone coders you speak of are prolly not writing complex operating systems. and even if they are, they are not working with insane production deadlines. it is not the coders fault, it is the management. plus as for the quality (gui and such, not bug content) that is also decided by management, not the coders. they are given criteria and do as they are told. don't blame the programmers.

It´s not the tech department that is to blame, they don´t have **** to say @ Microsoft it´s the marketing department that decides everything. MS wants to market their products so they sell better.
Look at windows 95, the only reason they didn´t put any security features whas because marketing whas affraid that people would think that running win 95 whas too hard.
If MS had implemented encryption and a firewall in win 95 then it could have been a better product then it turned out to be.
MS has many talented hackers working for them and Bill Gates used to be one in his old days too, they just turened greedy.

Cars and computer software...hmmm, I think it could be either a big sensation or a real fizzer. It all depends on how the public first view it. If Microsoft end up doing some software for BMW (as stated in the article) and it turns out buggy and has problems and the public hears about it, it could bring the whole thing to a big halt (that's not saying it's all over). If it all goes smoothly and there a many benefits and people see these benefits, then I think it could be a big hit.

Whichever it is, I think it's gonna happen, whether it happens quick, with the public liking it, or slowly, with the public first doubting it, but then getting it forced onto them with advertising and the amazingly fast evolution of technology.

Greg

exactly focmaester.

just a note... i like the term lone coder... it makes it sound all cowboy-esque. like spcae cowboy... or cyber samuria. ;) lol

As stated many times before about MS' programmers, it's a two way street. I *do* blame the programmers who never learn the right way to do things. I *do* blame the ones who write sloppy code without checking it just because they're trying to meet a deadline so someone's boss can get that hefty bonus. I also blame the management because of the deadlines they impose on their staff, slave-driving them so that they burn out in a few years and then hiring fresh-out-of-college people to do it all over again. That's not the entire case in all of MS, but from what we've all seen since Win95 and up, it's never improved and if you're a programmer at MS for say, 7 years, and you still write like a n00b, then you deserve to be shot.

As for the 'lone coders', is that why there's a flight sim in Excel? Instead of fixing bugs and making things more stable and secure, these idiots have to make games?! Give me a break.

Also, good old Bill is a marketing whiz...not some genius programmer at all. His company is founded on ripping off other people's ideas and products and marketing the crap out of it. You would think, as long as they've been doing it, embedding everything into the OS' kernel that they'd be good at it. So far, haven't seen much.

Spy ware in your car? What if M$ started investing in oil, tires, brake pads, etc.? Would your new M$ BMW not work with components from competitors? Probably not gonna happen.... just a thought.

I got this e-mail from a friend, seems to fit the thread, and I enjoyed it so I thought I'd share:

For all of us who feel only the deepest love and affection for the way computers have enhanced our lives, read on:

At a recent computer expo, COMDEX, Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated, "If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon."

In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release stating: If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics:

1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.

2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car.

3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this.

4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.

5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would run on only five percent of the roads.

6. The oil, water temperature and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single "General Protection Fault" warning light or a "You have performed an illegal operation."

7. The airbag system would ask, "Are you sure?" before deploying.

8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.

9. Every time GM introduced a new car, car buyers would have to learn to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.

10. You'd have to press the "Start" button to turn the engine off.

What would happen if you got a BSOD?

delstar,

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by delstar
What would happen if you got a BSOD?

---

Two options:

1. You lose control of all board equipment and you fly off the road at the next turn

2. Your car comes to a complete and immediate stop, with no indication whatsoever, making the car behind you slam straight into you.

:D

BrainStop

In case the attachments still don't function:

and add for a BMW convertible stating "Our hardware runs better without Windows"

thought u might like...

sorry edited: replaced runs with works in origional