I used to be an infotainment software engineer for an Auto maker

That still just sounds like people not knowing what they're doing. In no world would automakers say, "Hey you know, we just did all of this tire engineering with this rubber, but let's change the composition at the last minute and not retest all of its physical properties." So, why should it be any different with software? Because some sucker PM didn't have the brains to say, "We can't actually do that."?

Dude Winamp was a clean, simple and wickedly responsive UI that allowed a multitude of real-time audio tweaks and supported playlists with thousands of files. This was in the late 90’s running on 166Mhz processors with maybe 16MB of system ram. Are you saying modern car infotainment systems have fewer resources allocated to the UI?

There's a 0% chance 4 yr old hardware can't handle what GP is asking it to do. > Product people have been picking at the design and asking for changes way too late Sounds like classic everything-bolted-on-never-refactored-always-add-features you see in the vast majority of companies. Which is fine if you're making a social app or CRM but not okay when talking about heavy machinery. No company ever prioritizes making things snappy and it's ultimately always on the engineers to push back. Sorry, this one is still on the software developers to me.

Even if the infotainment has been in development for 15 years, all new cars I've played with seem less responsive than a 1st-generation iPhone despite having a UI that is no more capable. Either the engineers aren't making the most of the hardware or the hardware is underpowered by a few decades.

I'm willing to credit this type of feature creep for some of the problem, but only some. Decades ago, we had hardware that was so much less capable than anything anyone has put in a car in ten years that the comparison is absurd. Nonetheless, those old systems were often very capable of doing useful things, and the UIs were often very, very fast by modern standards. And a lot of this was that the software stack was tuned for performance and latency and did not do things that hurt latency too much, and this came at a substantial modularity cost. Back when a TI calculator with a whole OS running on a Z80 was an order of magnitude or so faster than your average new car, it didn't have a compositor (which still eats a good frame or so of latency, maybe more, and, as an industry we still don't know how to solve this). It ran an OS that was surely far harder to tweak than a modern car stack, b…

It's great to get your perspective on this. Aside from the GPS/navigation features, aren't car infotainment systems extremely basic? We've been controlling heating, cooling, audio source, and audio volume since the dawn of time. How are technical requirements related to these basic functions changing such that their UIs haven't been absolutely perfected by now? Is the entire infotainment code being rewritten all the time so there's no chance to iterate and improve on the previous versions work?

the thing is, even the brightest of us are still terrible. There’s no such thing as a good software developer

I believe that the engineers are competent at developing software, and think that a lot of the quality issues are due to engineers abdicating authority over the software to managers and never saying "No, adding in that feature at this point in the timeline is going to make this a steaming pile of shit and I refuse to do it and still call myself a software engineer." I get that we have families to feed, but I've seen far too much of a mindset shift in fellow engineers into thinking that we're warcraft peons rather than professionals. "The business" has engineering feedback as a necessary input, and speaking individually with steakholders they expect this - they'll push until we push back.