chinese consumer telematics market

今天突然想起来点东西，最近在中国有很多车联网公司雨后春笋般的在中国成立，国家也把车联网当成了一个发展的一个战略方向放到了一个很高的高度，也加大了投资力度。但是今天突然想到了一个问题，车辆网，telematics如果基于现在的汽车的模型，那么汽车现在作为一个重要信息的载体，中国是否已经准备好了？

随着中国经济的飞速发张，中国最近出现了很多的很具规模的汽车制造公司（奇瑞，长城，BYD等等）但是要是谈论到车联网，根据现在一个比较流行的模式，对于终端的消费市场其实就是基于OBD的数据采集器，然后上传到后台的服务器存储分析，基本所有的厂商都是大同小异，没有质的区别。那么现在问题就来了，首先OBD最初是用来检测汽车尾气的一个标准，他是否是一个合适数据收集接口？（根据现在很多OEM的测试部门的经验，这个也许可以有）；下一个问题，要想做车联网，就需要一个稳定的标准，现在的OBD标准基本都是欧美市场制定的，而且很多车上一些高端的硬件和sensor现在基本上还在欧美的垄断之下，在中国是否可以真的做出中国自己的车联网产品？基于现在的模型，telematics主要是就是3大块

1. 车上的数据；
2. 无线网络；
3. 后台的数据处理分析；

第三个问题，其实就是软件开发的问题，现在中国在这个方面做一个基于最多也就是百万级别的应用，这个问题应该问题不大，中国已经有阿里和百度，这个应该不是问题；
第二个问题，基本上也没有什么特别的变化，主要就是标准化的问题，这个其实汽车和普通的通讯终端没有什么区别，只不过是已经镶嵌到车里而已，这个也不是什么大的问题；
第一个问题，这个问题就来了，汽车作为一个有百年历史的产业，尤其工艺层面，这个不是说想软件开发一样直接可以copy过来就可以用，由于汽车还不同于现在普通的消费电子，汽车的寿命相对较长，而且他所工作的环境非常苛刻，需要考虑到告诉雨雪等等复杂的自然环境，不是可以一直保证稳定的机房的环境（恒温恒湿等）。这就对车载电子设备提出了较高的要求。所以在这方面，在不久的将来一旦欧美的汽车制造强国改变了现在的生产流程或者对标准做出了修改，将会对现有的产品产生巨大的影响，虽然可以采用apple store的模式，更新手机端的应用但是对硬件的更改可不是一件很容易的事情。这将是未来所有创业型企业将面对的一个很大的潜在的风险。

不过这个问题也并不是不可以解决，我们可以加快硬件研发的速度，或者需要中国的企业家们齐心协力，制定出符合中国市场的标准化体系。

Finally BMW open sourcing its NGTP framework

http://ngtp.org/?page_id=42

MB connected and CUE

MB connected

As telematics solution provided by Benz, MB connected is very similar with BMW ConnectedDrive, both provides I/I/E call solutions, RTTI etc. But unlike BMW CD, the service activation mode is more like onstar's, the system can place call even without activation the account, the call can only reach to call center but without any vehicle information. Unlike iDrive system, MB's embedded computer has the dialing pad, which greatly increase the flexibility for the user to interact with IVR system. And i/b/e call is designed as three buttons which also greatly facilitate to service request process. And in back-end, it seemed that MB has the same CC structure as BMW does, icall center and CIC, and icall is not responsible for guiding the customer how to use on vehicle computer or any icall irrelevant questions, instead the agent would forward this request to CIC or somewhere where/who can answer this question. The call is transferred by agent so the customer does need to dial again the 400 number. This is sth that better to be improved, since right now MB's activation ratio is very low, %0.3 only, if such basic requirement takes more than 15 min to have the answer, the customer would get annoyed or even angry somehow.

Another very big problem for MB is that, the screen is too small, when you are driving, it is really hard to see anything clear on that screen, even it is a touch screen but it really feels suck.(the testing car is a top luxury E series...) And because of sales consultant's insisting, we have no chance to test its e-call service, when we did last time for e-call, the agent can not see the vehicle position they need ask the driver to grant them to do so by oral confirmation, then some DTMF likewise voice was heard from the phone, the GPS info is sent thru voice channel, then agent can see us. But this time, the icall agent can see us when we are calling and when she sent POI to us no service interrupted, maybe MB did something to change its data transmission method, maybe use SMS instead of 3G data channel. 

On vehicle computer

CUE

Cadillac's GUI for onstar, fancy looking, the same onstar service. They even provides three differences dash board GUI, which would greatly attract some young men. And I also found that only Cadillac at least from my experience, only highlight its onstar or CUE services to customers. I've seen it a little in Buick and Chevrolet dealer's shop but not like Cadillac, they even build a specific area only for CUE. But I noticed a very notable fact, it will take more 20 sec to get the onstar to make the call to ecall center, last time I did not try this in Chevrolet, (20 sec after, some music playing in the phone...). It takes too long to life saving service. 

CUE system

CUE Advertisement

On-star experience in China

Today I went to a Chevrolet dealer shop to do some a research for on-star telematics product. There are some interesting points there:

1. Dealer shop could use on-star button to demonstrate the on-star usage for POI sending and some remote service.
2. On-star must be explicitly activated by first call, it must be registered customer him/herself, it is like credit card activation process.
3. On-star has a turn-by-turn navigation, which could work even on some vehicles those without navigators, this is very interesting.
4. The voice recognition is still not well developed, now it is still recommended to use touch screen.
5. The on vehicle computer in Chevrolet is not very good, like Chinese low quality, but it provide the same service as some luxury brand, only looks and feels bad, but indeed they are the same. (May be CUE looks better, but on-star use the same back-end system only in vehicle computer differences)
6. There are two ways to extend the service, thru on-star button or thru on-star taobao shop (http://onstar.tmall.com/shop/view_shop.htm?spm=a230r.1.0.0.gXPfBF&source=suggest&suggest=navi_1_1). The on-star button activation process is very much like credit card activation process, for taobao one, it is just a like on-line shopping.

Golo3, "future telematics"

Today, I made some testing for Golo3, an after-telematics product. This production is made by a Shenzhen based company, now it is listed in HK stocking market. (http://www.cnlaunch.com/cn/) Golo is a small OBD reader which can read output from OBD interface and send out those data thru 3G to cloud and then someone could analysis those data for you. (http://launch.jd.com/)

But after today's test I found a lot of problems:

1. for vehicle, the vehicle must support those parameters, if not this function would not be enabled at all! If yes, the car itself can support this function itself the customer does not golo again for this help. (must be some app can support this).
2. 3G internet, this is very useful, but it only cost 180 rmb for 3G package, not 300;
3. Driving record, it is workable, but it is hard to say it is OK for customer, even the car parks in parking lot, sometime, golo would still record that parking spot in driving history?! At least, I do not get it how Golo determine what kind of driving behavior is driving which is not! And the time I got the notification from Golo, it is really random, sometime I got a notification when I am still driving the car, sometimes I got the message like 30 min later I parked the car!!
4. For technician and hot-line support, I never succeed to reach them!
5. For Car Inspection, like point 1, it really depends on whether OEM open those diagnosis data to Golo or OBD or not, if not, Golo really can do nothing, like today, I took a 2008 Buick, really less useful data from OBD, so only vehicle tracking function is properly worked, and diagnosis info, really helpless, I got some output, but those are only readable by professional engineer, not a normal car driver. (refer to vehicle health report)And for this, it is always reachable from cell phone, maybe because our test vehicle is too old or maybe golo is not well crafted, just not as my expected or as golo advertised.

vehicle health report

Even, I found a lot of problems today, I should say Golo is still a very good idea for after-telematics market, and I think after several around improvement, this product is still very competitive in the market. But right now, I should say, Golo is still far away from a reliable product, at least not worth 300 RMB. It adds more problems than it solved. But as a good idea, I think golo has a very bright future, if he can growth well and health. And for OEMs, I think it is time to sit down together and format some standard now ASAP, in the future, vehicle business will be more like PC business, car itself will become less and less important, it only matters which kind of value added service can you provide to customers or how can you make different with other OEM in terms of service but not engine itself.

Here are some pix I took today,

outlook

working status

Golo

Golo App