Paging Greenie! BATTERY DRAW
01-28-2004, 01:44 PM
#12
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OBSERVATIONS. [LONG]
I have had the 2004AL foe six months now. It scores an A+ for the solidity and reliability of the mechanical/drivetain components. Even in the extreme cold, the car is darned unflappable. [At -50 degrees centrigade, my 2004 Lincoln Navigator did not start. It lost all power functions. Since then, the touchscreen center pad lost its background lighting and so on... ]. In any weather condition, the A8L is extremely composed.
Creature confort, creature pampering, ergonomics and the absolute sporty feel are also A - A+.
The problem always comes back to the interphase between software and hardware. In any car, German or Japanese, the electronics in the A8L is probably the most advanced, and likely blazing a trail. My 'paperless office' requires IT input almost monthly. Then, are the problems with the MMI to be expected or did Audi rush the MMI to consumer use, too early?
I agree with forum members that technology must march on and Audi's own philosophy implies that it should deliver. I am not happy I could not voice-dial when I had the flu, 3 weks ago, and there was no retractable or steering-wheel pad to allow me dial out. Frequently used functions such as radio stations and CD parameters, should default in a seperate pop-up box on the MMI so that I don't need to go through multiple processes to switch between functions.
It will be interesting to hear from the owners of the new Lexus and Acura on software/electronic reliability in their cars. It is interesting though that the Japanese are not pushing the edge of electronics technology.
Audi should listen to the complaints at the user level, and continually improve on the MMI. But, are we just paying the price for being techno-lovers, playing with the technological edge?
Creature confort, creature pampering, ergonomics and the absolute sporty feel are also A - A+.
The problem always comes back to the interphase between software and hardware. In any car, German or Japanese, the electronics in the A8L is probably the most advanced, and likely blazing a trail. My 'paperless office' requires IT input almost monthly. Then, are the problems with the MMI to be expected or did Audi rush the MMI to consumer use, too early?
I agree with forum members that technology must march on and Audi's own philosophy implies that it should deliver. I am not happy I could not voice-dial when I had the flu, 3 weks ago, and there was no retractable or steering-wheel pad to allow me dial out. Frequently used functions such as radio stations and CD parameters, should default in a seperate pop-up box on the MMI so that I don't need to go through multiple processes to switch between functions.
It will be interesting to hear from the owners of the new Lexus and Acura on software/electronic reliability in their cars. It is interesting though that the Japanese are not pushing the edge of electronics technology.
Audi should listen to the complaints at the user level, and continually improve on the MMI. But, are we just paying the price for being techno-lovers, playing with the technological edge?
01-28-2004, 03:13 PM
#13
AudiWorld Super User
I agree with you and here is my computer geek view of this....(long)
I dont own an 04 A8. But having taken a few rides in Greenies and studying the owners book to help resolve his rear heating issues I've come to this conclusion.
If we put things into the context of microsoft, vehicles like mine (Audi S4, <2003 A8's were running on DOS) Hell look at the Navi system. The CD's were simple its involved command lines and ran in some sort of quasi command line mode. The graphical interface or GUI was basic monochrome or two color text. (remember computers back in the 80's??) Not much complication not a whole helluva a lot things to test to and areas where things could lock up or go wrong. The car didnt have computer controlled this or computer controlled that, not much software was powering the hardware. ABS had some software to it as did ESP and ECU's were reasonably complex but very stable. Componets didnt really talk to each other much or if they did it was one way and it was just reporting info to the ECU, or to various VAG tools.
Navigation+ an item that never really made it here in production forum, though through the aftermarket a few hundred units are floating around in cars here. That system was like a windows 3.1. It still has its DOS roots but with a nice interface and visualized maps that go beyond variations of right and left arrows. If you look at the software that runs behind Nav+ and the original Nav you'll find some similarities.
Then we move up to MMI. This system draws together items that have never talked to each other before. From ECU information, to suspension, climate control, radio, self dianostics to some extent. All of this software running in the back requires testing and extensive testing. Since its many times more complicated then its DOS brothers and sisters its subject to flaws errors and occasional irradic behavior. Think of it as windows xp! Some bad code here and bad code there you could have quite a problem on your hands.
Look at the BMW 745's. Some government figure in hong kong got trapped into his car when the computer locked up and would not come back to life.(the computer locked up as did the rest of the car) He became trapped in his own car! Couldnt get out couldnt restart the car. Lucky for him he was just about at work. He had to call over building security guards with hand signals, and instructed them to break the windows out. (They didnt want to do it at first) Trouble was the car had BMW's security glass! After about 5 minutes of a total assault on one window they broke into the car and freed their boss. This was in 100 degree heat so the inside of the car got pretty warm pretty quick.
Imagine if your Audi decides to go Christine on you one day? Its not going to be fun but I imagine it will happen to someone someday. In case if it does I dont know if the A8's have rear seats that can fold down or not. But you can exit the car via the trunk and the emergancy MANUAL trunk handle thats located inside. (requirement of all cars built 2002 and later) ---Tony Soprano is gonna have to disable this feature in his rides...
Where am I going with this post? I am not sure where I am going with this except to say that MMI is a great interface and one heck of fun toy. Have any of you had to restart the car or restart MMI to get it working right again?
To have it take over the car like it has might not have been the best idea in the world. I understand its the next big preverbial step. The interface is smooth and in my opinion is much better then the 7-series interface that I played arround with once. Ironically the 7 is based on a highly modified windows CE platform, which might spell its own disaster right there. (might also explain why that guy in hong kong had all that trouble)
I am not sure what MMI is based on though I could probably figure it out if I opened up one of the Nav discs on my desktop and went through it with a hex editor.
I did some sniffing around and I found someone who was directly involved with the MMI creation...check this out!
2003 June -2003 September
In assignment of MegaPart GmbH, Karlsruhe, for Siemens VDO automotive, a large automotive supplier, in Regensburg. As team leader of an integration team of 5, I was responsible for the software integration of the head unit of a new infotainment system for Audi AG (4500 source files for 2 processors). The head unit additionally contains a tuner module as well as a navigation module, and communicates with external components through a MOST ring.
The challenges were to newly structure and define the integration process, to speed up both compilation/link times as well as the integration times, and to increase the stability of the system by specifying a set of guidelines for the merge process.
In addition, I have actively supported the debug team on various occasions.
Technical environment: SH3 and ST7 processors, Operating System VxWorks, Wind River 'Tornado' development environment using C++, Rational ClearCase configuration management, Clearmake/GNU make, IDL using self-made tools for class generation, UML using I-Logix' Rhapsody. Debugging using CANoe/CANalyzer from Vector and OptoLyzer from Oasis. Defect management using Rational ClearQuest. Documentation using Microsoft Office. Workstations Windows NT4 SP6a.
If we put things into the context of microsoft, vehicles like mine (Audi S4, <2003 A8's were running on DOS) Hell look at the Navi system. The CD's were simple its involved command lines and ran in some sort of quasi command line mode. The graphical interface or GUI was basic monochrome or two color text. (remember computers back in the 80's??) Not much complication not a whole helluva a lot things to test to and areas where things could lock up or go wrong. The car didnt have computer controlled this or computer controlled that, not much software was powering the hardware. ABS had some software to it as did ESP and ECU's were reasonably complex but very stable. Componets didnt really talk to each other much or if they did it was one way and it was just reporting info to the ECU, or to various VAG tools.
Navigation+ an item that never really made it here in production forum, though through the aftermarket a few hundred units are floating around in cars here. That system was like a windows 3.1. It still has its DOS roots but with a nice interface and visualized maps that go beyond variations of right and left arrows. If you look at the software that runs behind Nav+ and the original Nav you'll find some similarities.
Then we move up to MMI. This system draws together items that have never talked to each other before. From ECU information, to suspension, climate control, radio, self dianostics to some extent. All of this software running in the back requires testing and extensive testing. Since its many times more complicated then its DOS brothers and sisters its subject to flaws errors and occasional irradic behavior. Think of it as windows xp! Some bad code here and bad code there you could have quite a problem on your hands.
Look at the BMW 745's. Some government figure in hong kong got trapped into his car when the computer locked up and would not come back to life.(the computer locked up as did the rest of the car) He became trapped in his own car! Couldnt get out couldnt restart the car. Lucky for him he was just about at work. He had to call over building security guards with hand signals, and instructed them to break the windows out. (They didnt want to do it at first) Trouble was the car had BMW's security glass! After about 5 minutes of a total assault on one window they broke into the car and freed their boss. This was in 100 degree heat so the inside of the car got pretty warm pretty quick.
Imagine if your Audi decides to go Christine on you one day? Its not going to be fun but I imagine it will happen to someone someday. In case if it does I dont know if the A8's have rear seats that can fold down or not. But you can exit the car via the trunk and the emergancy MANUAL trunk handle thats located inside. (requirement of all cars built 2002 and later) ---Tony Soprano is gonna have to disable this feature in his rides...
Where am I going with this post? I am not sure where I am going with this except to say that MMI is a great interface and one heck of fun toy. Have any of you had to restart the car or restart MMI to get it working right again?
To have it take over the car like it has might not have been the best idea in the world. I understand its the next big preverbial step. The interface is smooth and in my opinion is much better then the 7-series interface that I played arround with once. Ironically the 7 is based on a highly modified windows CE platform, which might spell its own disaster right there. (might also explain why that guy in hong kong had all that trouble)
I am not sure what MMI is based on though I could probably figure it out if I opened up one of the Nav discs on my desktop and went through it with a hex editor.
I did some sniffing around and I found someone who was directly involved with the MMI creation...check this out!
2003 June -2003 September
In assignment of MegaPart GmbH, Karlsruhe, for Siemens VDO automotive, a large automotive supplier, in Regensburg. As team leader of an integration team of 5, I was responsible for the software integration of the head unit of a new infotainment system for Audi AG (4500 source files for 2 processors). The head unit additionally contains a tuner module as well as a navigation module, and communicates with external components through a MOST ring.
The challenges were to newly structure and define the integration process, to speed up both compilation/link times as well as the integration times, and to increase the stability of the system by specifying a set of guidelines for the merge process.
In addition, I have actively supported the debug team on various occasions.
Technical environment: SH3 and ST7 processors, Operating System VxWorks, Wind River 'Tornado' development environment using C++, Rational ClearCase configuration management, Clearmake/GNU make, IDL using self-made tools for class generation, UML using I-Logix' Rhapsody. Debugging using CANoe/CANalyzer from Vector and OptoLyzer from Oasis. Defect management using Rational ClearQuest. Documentation using Microsoft Office. Workstations Windows NT4 SP6a.
01-28-2004, 08:31 PM
#18
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eh? Can you put the last 2 paragraphs in simple English?
Seriously, Audis or VW's 4Life, thank you for putting in a computer expert's viewpoint. I am now more convinced that the MMI's reliability can only improve parallel to software progress. Mr. Ricco implied that leaders are likely to pay the cost of innovation, and I agree with him.
On the issues you raised, Audi's OS is Linux. And, yes, I have had to restart thr car [reboot] to get the MMI to correct transient anomalies on a few occasions.
The thought of being locked in my car by a 'drunken' MMI has crossed my mind.
A simple question for you, though. Why can't Audi write a SPECIFIC OS for its own exclusive electronic needs? Wouldn't such a program be more reliable? Or are R & D costs prohibitive?
On the issues you raised, Audi's OS is Linux. And, yes, I have had to restart thr car [reboot] to get the MMI to correct transient anomalies on a few occasions.
The thought of being locked in my car by a 'drunken' MMI has crossed my mind.
A simple question for you, though. Why can't Audi write a SPECIFIC OS for its own exclusive electronic needs? Wouldn't such a program be more reliable? Or are R & D costs prohibitive?
01-29-2004, 06:00 AM
#20
AudiWorld Super User
Translation----(really long)
<i>In assignment of MegaPart GmbH, Karlsruhe, for Siemens VDO automotive, a large automotive supplier, in Regensburg. As team leader of an integration team of 5, I was responsible for the software integration of the head unit of a new infotainment system for Audi AG (4500 source files for 2 processors).</i>
In other words this guys job was to lead a developer group in creating part of the MMI interface. It was through Siemens automotive because thats who Audi contracted out to create the MMI interface and computer boxes. (they're also the people that make the VAS diagnostic computers our stealerships use. This guy was more involved with the cross communications of the CANbus and MMI.
<i> The head unit additionally contains a tuner module as well as a navigation module, and communicates with external components through a MOST ring. </i>
MOST® (Media Oriented Systems Transport) technology was originally designed by Oasis SiliconSystems AG in cooperation with BMW, Becker Radio, and DaimlerChrysler for multimedia applications in automotive environment. It is intended to replace bulky and expensive wiring harnesses that have been used by automobile manufacturers to satisfy multimedia connectivity requirements. Based on Plastic Optical Fibers (POF), MOST® networks not only provide substantially higher performance but are more robust (no ground loops etc.) at lower cost.
that was taken right from:
http://www.telos.de/most.htm ---incase you want to read more about it.
More basic english it means your car has a network in it like computers have networks. Though this is a specific type of network. Its designed to handle multimedia applications. Think of it as your home entertainment system. You have your stereo receiver, your cd changer, tv, and your MMI rotary **** is your remote control, and you have digital cable or satalite so its got interactive menus.
This is not to be confused with your vehicles CANbus network. That mainly controls the actual critical vehicle hardware---airbags, abs, dsc,thats a different network all together in your car.
More or less they're two distinct networks packed inside your car. They do talk to each but both of them have a different purpose.
<i>The challenges were to newly structure and define the integration process, to speed up both compilation/link times as well as the integration times, and to increase the stability of the system by specifying a set of guidelines for the merge process.
In addition, I have actively supported the debug team on various occasions. </i>
It sounds like this guy ran the show for the operating system that gets the CANbus and MMI to talk to each other. CANbus and the MMI computer networks to talk to each other on a lower level. It was basically trading information back forth between the two networks on certains things like which ride selection mode you wish to use.
<i>Technical environment: SH3 and ST7 processors, </i>
Like the Pentium chip in your computer those are the brains inside your car. SH3 is made by Hitachi, and ST7 is made by ST Microelectronics.
<i>Operating System VxWorks, Wind River 'Tornado' development environment using C++, Rational ClearCase configuration management, Clearmake/GNU make,</i>
This is the OS that allows the two networks to talk its like a middleman. (Vxworks) Tornado used for development. Basically its an aid or a compiler that will take what the programmer wrote and put it into a language the computer can understand. C++ was the language used by the programmers. Clearcase is a program heavily used in the software development industry to track changes to builds of software programs. It stores versions and allows programmers to check older versions if something goes wrong etc. does a few other things but I'll spare you the details. I use at work actually...
<i> IDL using self-made tools for class generation, UML using I-Logix' Rhapsody.</i> Tools the developers used to help them build the program. Mainly in visualization of what there were creating with lines of codes. It can help to serve as road map at times.
<i> Debugging using CANoe/CANalyzer from Vector and OptoLyzer from Oasis.</i>
Well they did exensive testing of the software and how it reacted in the CANbus by useing tools that could actually "watch" the signals going back and forth and determine if they're correct or not.
The post that I have further up goes into more details on the Actual MMI infotainment portion of the system. This was just the middleman...
Why doesnt Audi do this stuff in house??? By now that question probably answers its self. Car companies are into building cars not developing one specific part. Car companies basically create body panels and engines. Even then they sometimes find an outside source for that! They design and build cars and decide what will go into them. The parts come from their vendors. They put it together like a big jigsaw puzzle and put it out on the market. For them to develop a system that is complex as this would be insane. They instead put it into the hands of people that know the business of computers and electronics. Siemens in this example. Lucky for you guys they didnt let MSFT in like BMW did. Then again they allowed Bangle to design their cars so may as well invite the rest of the amatures.
Do you think it was Audi/VW's fault when all of those coil packs were recalled a year or two ago? Not really they just had a manufacturer/supplier that didnt do quality control on their own stuff, and shipped Audi/VW the dud parts. They got reemed for it by Audi/VW but the rest of the world that had this problem turned on Audi/VW and reemed them.
Things that they can be blaimed for? The crappy design of the door area on 00-02 S4's. You can take one with a screw driver! If any of you had an Audi 5000 or other earlier generation Audi's with the hydralic brake system from h*ll. Thats a design fault on their part and a poor choice of parts and equipment. In a way they can be blaimed for MMI since they ordered it up. They did spefcify a system to Siemes, and Siemens delivered. They probably also wanted it to be fault free (who wouldnt) Siemens came much closer then MSFT did with the 7 series.
In other words this guys job was to lead a developer group in creating part of the MMI interface. It was through Siemens automotive because thats who Audi contracted out to create the MMI interface and computer boxes. (they're also the people that make the VAS diagnostic computers our stealerships use. This guy was more involved with the cross communications of the CANbus and MMI.
<i> The head unit additionally contains a tuner module as well as a navigation module, and communicates with external components through a MOST ring. </i>
MOST® (Media Oriented Systems Transport) technology was originally designed by Oasis SiliconSystems AG in cooperation with BMW, Becker Radio, and DaimlerChrysler for multimedia applications in automotive environment. It is intended to replace bulky and expensive wiring harnesses that have been used by automobile manufacturers to satisfy multimedia connectivity requirements. Based on Plastic Optical Fibers (POF), MOST® networks not only provide substantially higher performance but are more robust (no ground loops etc.) at lower cost.
that was taken right from:
http://www.telos.de/most.htm ---incase you want to read more about it.
More basic english it means your car has a network in it like computers have networks. Though this is a specific type of network. Its designed to handle multimedia applications. Think of it as your home entertainment system. You have your stereo receiver, your cd changer, tv, and your MMI rotary **** is your remote control, and you have digital cable or satalite so its got interactive menus.
This is not to be confused with your vehicles CANbus network. That mainly controls the actual critical vehicle hardware---airbags, abs, dsc,thats a different network all together in your car.
More or less they're two distinct networks packed inside your car. They do talk to each but both of them have a different purpose.
<i>The challenges were to newly structure and define the integration process, to speed up both compilation/link times as well as the integration times, and to increase the stability of the system by specifying a set of guidelines for the merge process.
In addition, I have actively supported the debug team on various occasions. </i>
It sounds like this guy ran the show for the operating system that gets the CANbus and MMI to talk to each other. CANbus and the MMI computer networks to talk to each other on a lower level. It was basically trading information back forth between the two networks on certains things like which ride selection mode you wish to use.
<i>Technical environment: SH3 and ST7 processors, </i>
Like the Pentium chip in your computer those are the brains inside your car. SH3 is made by Hitachi, and ST7 is made by ST Microelectronics.
<i>Operating System VxWorks, Wind River 'Tornado' development environment using C++, Rational ClearCase configuration management, Clearmake/GNU make,</i>
This is the OS that allows the two networks to talk its like a middleman. (Vxworks) Tornado used for development. Basically its an aid or a compiler that will take what the programmer wrote and put it into a language the computer can understand. C++ was the language used by the programmers. Clearcase is a program heavily used in the software development industry to track changes to builds of software programs. It stores versions and allows programmers to check older versions if something goes wrong etc. does a few other things but I'll spare you the details. I use at work actually...
<i> IDL using self-made tools for class generation, UML using I-Logix' Rhapsody.</i> Tools the developers used to help them build the program. Mainly in visualization of what there were creating with lines of codes. It can help to serve as road map at times.
<i> Debugging using CANoe/CANalyzer from Vector and OptoLyzer from Oasis.</i>
Well they did exensive testing of the software and how it reacted in the CANbus by useing tools that could actually "watch" the signals going back and forth and determine if they're correct or not.
The post that I have further up goes into more details on the Actual MMI infotainment portion of the system. This was just the middleman...
Why doesnt Audi do this stuff in house??? By now that question probably answers its self. Car companies are into building cars not developing one specific part. Car companies basically create body panels and engines. Even then they sometimes find an outside source for that! They design and build cars and decide what will go into them. The parts come from their vendors. They put it together like a big jigsaw puzzle and put it out on the market. For them to develop a system that is complex as this would be insane. They instead put it into the hands of people that know the business of computers and electronics. Siemens in this example. Lucky for you guys they didnt let MSFT in like BMW did. Then again they allowed Bangle to design their cars so may as well invite the rest of the amatures.
Do you think it was Audi/VW's fault when all of those coil packs were recalled a year or two ago? Not really they just had a manufacturer/supplier that didnt do quality control on their own stuff, and shipped Audi/VW the dud parts. They got reemed for it by Audi/VW but the rest of the world that had this problem turned on Audi/VW and reemed them.
Things that they can be blaimed for? The crappy design of the door area on 00-02 S4's. You can take one with a screw driver! If any of you had an Audi 5000 or other earlier generation Audi's with the hydralic brake system from h*ll. Thats a design fault on their part and a poor choice of parts and equipment. In a way they can be blaimed for MMI since they ordered it up. They did spefcify a system to Siemes, and Siemens delivered. They probably also wanted it to be fault free (who wouldnt) Siemens came much closer then MSFT did with the 7 series.