Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Say what? (Score 1) 391

The code for differing emissions profiles has a valid reason to be there (different rules for different markets, plus test tunes that stress various components, so there will be many tunes in the codebase).

Logically you are correct -- tunes are made up of a lot of different maps, and each region gets its own set of these maps. These maps are just tables that get interpolated -- e.g. for this RPM and this amount of air, use this much fuel and this timing.

However, each tune only contains a single region. If you look at it economically, there is no reason for them to put all the regions on a single ROM -- this just takes more space. They already need to configure by region, so why not make the entire ROM the configuration and save space?

I can't speak for all car makers, but the ones I'm familiar with do this.

Comment Re:You really make it hard (Score 4, Insightful) 308

I just had to post something against the classic /. hivemind. What do I do to myself. You see, I mentioned APIs specifically, because I was talking about their APIs. Not Office. Not their latest shiny UI throw up. Their APIs. I'm a dev, I've been using their APIs extensively for close to two decades, and that's the perspective I wanted to give. I wasn't commenting on the quality of Linux vs Windows IOT, or the benefits (or lack thereof) of backward compatibility.

you can go look up how .NET's incompatibilities between versions cause havoc. Don't forget to look up Win32 System API calls, especially in the security area.

Yes, you can.

Newer .NET versions tend to, in the vast majority of cases, be backwards compatible with apps compiled for older versions. They have broken this in some very niche cases, but only where strongly justified. Their wont for backward compatibility is so great, they will leave in bugs and even keep the internal structure of objects the same to ensure any apps relying on that continue to work. I've submitted my share of bugs that ended up in the "won't fix" pile due to this.

Their Win32 API is probably the single largest working example of "backward compatible" you'll find in an API. The thing is for better or worse riddled with deprecated functionality, "Ex" functions to replace it, and structs which need to know their own size. Run an old Win32 app from the Windows 95 days and there's a really good chance it'll still work today. There are very few cases where they've made something specifically not work, and that has sometimes been because people have been using it wrong to the detriment of the user (i.e. retrieving the Windows version).

Their driver side tends to fluctuate a bit more as they make performance or safety enhancements by replacing the various APIs, but there's really no way around that.

Comment Re:You really make it hard (Score 1, Interesting) 308

Dumping a system that works and does what I want for a system that spies on me and will change at the whim of its maker with but a "swallow bitch" if I complain.

You jest, but Windows is far and above king of backward compatibility as far as APIs are concerned.

One does wonder how efficient it is compared to Linux, though.

Comment Re:Ahhh, well. (Score 1) 87

Ok, my basic question is...What the hell is an immobilizer chip?

Just about all cars made in the last several years have immobilizer chips in their keys. When you start the car, the chip is read and the car won't start if it is missing or has an unknown identifier. If you've ever had to replace a key, this is why that is so expensive.

It's designed to make cars harder to steal. There is no remote capability.

Comment Eye tracking (Score 3, Informative) 46

It seems the long-term solution will involve eye tracking so that the device can "focus" with you. Tough problem, I imagine, to solve in such a tiny area without interfering with the experience. It would also likely need even better latency than the current setup, which is asking a lot.

Comment Re:Don't buy based on any promises (Score 1) 35

Last summer I bought a Nvidia Tegra Note 7 tablet based on promises that Android 5 (Lollipop) was coming out for it "real soon". They even stated that it was easy to port Lollipop on the Tegra Note 7 since it was basically a stock Android design with little or on deviation from the standard design. That "real soon" slipped to February of 2015 and when February 2015 came and went Nvidia became strangely mute on the subject, ignoring customers' inquiries.

What you describe is basically every tablet seller out there save for Google themselves. They save the new versions for their upcoming products, and only after those get put out do they update the old stuff.

The Wright Bothers weren't the first to fly. They were just the first not to crash.