logoalt Hacker News

AlotOfReading06/24/20252 repliesview on HN

This is basically AUTOSAR reinvented, by mostly the same companies. That's not a bad thing, AUTOSAR is a flaming pile of trash and this is at least picking a better foundation. It doesn't solve the core issue though, which is that the auto industry struggles to understand software.


Replies

RealityVoid06/24/2025

AUTOSAR is a spec, this seems to tackle an actual implementation.

As the other commenter said AUTOSAR had some good ideas, but now it has too much cruft and it's hard to decrusity it. If they trimmed 80% of the standard, had an actual open source reference implementation, overhauled the tooling to make it not suck and added solid observability capabilities and did something about the god awful RTE experience, it would be pretty good. The API's are sane, interactions make sense.

bluGill06/24/2025

AUTOSAR had some good foundations, but consultants who didn't understand anything (as normal) over sold what it did and then sold companies on a lot of bad ideas because management didn't understand the real problems.

If your program is hello world complexity then it isn't worth the cost to make it reusable, just write and maintain 100 different copies - meanwhile elsewhere there are only 5 copies of the transmission controls and since it is only 5 it didn't get to the top of the list to fix redundancy - but those controls are very complex and making one version would be well wroth the effort.

show 1 reply