1962 Chrysler Newport on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Amazon is showcasing its big push into cars and transportation at CES

From making cars talk using Alexa's voice to managing data from factories full of robots, Amazon wants a big piece of the action in transportation, and next week at CES will unveil more about its strategy to achieve that goal than ever before. The Seattle retail and cloud services powerhouse plans to use the annual technology show in Las Vegas to unveil its plan to be a major player in self-driving vehicle technology, connected cars, electric vehicles and management of the torrents of data generated by automakers and drivers, company executives told Reuters. Amazon Web Services, which provides large-scale cloud computing and data management services, is central to Amazon's strategy. "We really are extending ourselves more and more out in the ecosystem from manufacturing to connected car," Jon Allen, head of professional services in Amazon Web Services' automotive practice, said in a telephone interview. "The takeaway message on this is if you go to CES this year we really are taking it as a 'One Amazon' view." Until now, Amazon has shown its transportation strategy to investors — and rivals — one piece at a time. Amazon has invested in self-driving software startup Aurora. It also has signed deals with automakers to deliver packages to vehicle trunks, help develop electric vehicle charging networks and use AWS to network their factories. The Seattle company will share the CES stage with partners such as virtual reality firm ZeroLight, electric vehicle startup Rivian, Canada's BlackBerry Ltd and video game software development company Unity Technologies. "It's our attempt to weave everything together in a single experience for our customers," Dean Phillips, AWS' automotive technical leader, told Reuters. "Customers don't distinguish AWS from Alexa from Amazon.com. It's Amazon."   Related: As GM readies Alexa convenience for vehicles, we ponder its dark side   At CES, ZeroLight and GM's Cadillac will demonstrate how they are partnering to develop an online vehicle configuration experience that will allow high-fidelity images of vehicles that consumers build online to be taken with them on visits to dealers, Phillips said. The process can open the door to dealers better meeting customer needs by knowing what users focused on when building their dream car. It has already boosted profit per vehicle at Volkswagen's Audi brand by an estimated 1,200 euros ($1,340), he said.

Suppliers love Toyota and Honda: Why that matters to you

You might think that a survey of automotive suppliers and their relationship with OEMs is the automotive equivalent of nerd prom. In some ways that's what the North American Automotive OEM-Supplier Working Relations Index (WRI) is. The study, the 17th annual conducted by Planning Perspectives Inc., is based on input from 652 salespeople from 108 Tier One suppliers, or, PPI points out, 40 of the top 50 automotive suppliers in North America. Suppliers to General Motors, Ford, FCA, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan. But the results have consequences in terms of tens of millions of dollars for OEMs - and in the quality, technology, and cost of the next vehicle you buy. There are a couple of ways to look at the results of the WRI. One is, "So what else is new?" And the other is, "Damn! How did that happen?" The study looks at five relationship areas — OEM Supplier Relationship; OEM Communication; OEM Help; OEM Hindrance; Supplier Profit Opportunity — within six purchasing areas — Body-in-White; Chassis; Electrical/Electronics; Exterior; Interior; Powertrain. In the overall rankings, Toyota is on top for the 15 th time in 17 years, with a score of 328. Honda, the only company to best Toyota (in 2009 and 2010), comes in second, at 319. Those two companies, explains John Henke, president of PPI, have collaborative working arrangements with colleagues and suppliers alike built into the very fabric of their cultures. This, however, is not a situation where one can readily conclude it is about "Japanese companies," because the third company with headquarters on the island of Honshu, Nissan, came in dead last. This is the "How did that happen?" portion. The Nissan score of 203 puts it 125 points behind Toyota. There hasn't been a number that low since the then-Chrysler Corp. scored 187 in 2010, when the company was clawing its way out of the recession. Clearly, the suppliers don't feel particularly engaged by the buyers at Nissan. Henke explains that whether a company does well or not on the WRI is rather simple. All people do things based on what they're measured on. "If you're measured on taking 10% out of your annual buy, you immediately know how to do it. But if you're also measured on improving relations, suddenly there is a new dynamic as to what you can do to achieve both.

The problem with how automakers confront hacking threats

More than anyone, Chris Valasek and Charlie Miller are responsible for alerting Americans to the hacking perils awaiting them in their modern-day cars. In 2013, the pair of cyber-security researchers followed in the footsteps of academics at the University of Cal-San Diego and University of Washington, demonstrating it was possible to hack and control cars. Last summer, their research established which vehicles contained inherent security weaknesses. In recent weeks, their latest findings have underscored the far-reaching danger of automotive security breaches. From the comfort of his Pittsburgh home, Valasek exploited a flaw in the cellular connection of a Jeep Cherokee and commandeered control as Miller drove along a St. Louis highway. Remote access. No prior tampering with the vehicle. An industry's nightmare. As a result of their work, FCA US recalled 1.4 million cars, improving safety for millions of motorists. For now, Valasek and Miller are at the forefront of their profession. In a few months, they could be out of jobs. Rather than embrace the skills of software and security experts in confronting the unforeseen downside of connectivity in cars, automakers have been doing their best to stifle independent cyber-security research. Lost in the analysis of the Jeep Cherokee vulnerabilities is the possibility this could be the last study of its kind. In September or October, the U.S. Copyright Office will issue a key ruling that could prevent third-party researchers like Valasek and Miller from accessing the components they need to conduct experiments on vehicles. Researchers have asked for an exemption in the Digital Millennial Copyright Act that would preserve their right to analyze cars, but automakers have opposed that exemption, claiming the software that runs almost every conceivable vehicle function is proprietary. Further, their attorneys have argued the complexity of the software has evolved to a point where safety and security risks arise when third parties start monkeying with the code. Their message on cyber security is, as it has been for years, that they know their products better than anyone else and that it's dangerous for others to meddle with them. But in precise terms, the Jeep Cherokee problems show this is not the case. Valasek and Miller discovered the problem, a security hole in the Sprint cellular connection to the UConnect infotainment system, not industry insiders.