ECU supplier: Microsoft?

[Ciro Pabón]

This must be a bad joke...

http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press_Re ... 06-01.html

And, why in heaven did the WSMC meet before the F1 Commision? They are all in Paris this week: normally, the Commission meets before the WSMC so it can ratify things... what is going on?

[RH1300S]

Voted yes to the poll........I think for certain parts it gives the FIA control where you could argue it is needed (i.e. driver aids)

Your other question - for sure someone here will figure it out, but it seems so nonsensical that you have to suspect foul play

[DaveKillens]

THis is contrary to the spirit of competition. If a spark plug manufacturer, or tire manufacturer, or anyone else cannot compete against their competitors, it becomes NA$CAR, most components are mandated, with a drop in quality. Goodyear is the "official" supplier to NA$CAR, and those tires have a sad history or frequent wear issues, or failure.
And for a component to qualify as a mandated Formula One part, it doesn't have to be cutting edge, or even superior performance. It just needs that "official" label which is usually obtained by money and politics, not merit.

[Ciro Pabón]

Voted yes to the poll........I think for certain parts it gives the FIA control where you could argue it is needed (i.e. driver aids)

I am against driver aids control. If we had this kind of control in 1930, the spark timing would be advanced manually. But even if I were for them: we are talking Microsoft here. Where did they get the experience?

What's next? GM designing the McLaren chassis? They make a lot of cars, you know... and seeing McLaren this year it could be a gain.

Hey, hey, I have an idea: how about Kentucky Fried Chicken designing the wings?

I agree with Dave: they do not care about fans realizing money and politics rule. The FIA used to be a little more discrete.

[NickT]

I have to agree with limited sole supplier parts on several grounds:

Cost: Anything that brings the costs down to a more reasonable level and prevents the teams with the biggest budgets finding performance steps that would require a huge drain on the smallest teams has got to be beneficial.

Removal of driver aids: Microsoft might seam like a strange choice with their lack of experience but they are impartial and also have the ability to monitor/police the system to prevent tampering and pseudo traction control.

Drivers Championship: Again anything that gives us more of a drivers championship has got to be a plus. Conversely anything that detracts from this, like the current tyre war, needs to be looked at carefully.

Expensive Disposables: No body really gains from having carbon brake disks, as everyone has them. So why not single source steel brakes that are significantly cheaper or impose extending the mandatory life of the disk so that it is more relevant to real world.

We want to see real racing again where the driver can make the ultimate difference to the performance of the car. Were if something goes wrong in qualifying he can calve his way through the field slipstreaming out of the bend and late brake off line.

I don’t know if any of you guys saw last weekends British Moto GP round, but it was awesome. Lots of overtaking and Rossie coming up through the field to secure second on the podium. The crowd were rapturous, as was I, with his performance; you would have thought he had won from the noise. But I suddenly understood why he chose not to join F1, his talent, or indeed any other drivers talent, is not enough to be champion unless the team’s car is in the top 2. In Moto GP he can ride a lesser machine and hustle it home to a podium position

[Ciro Pabón]

Microsoft might seam like a strange choice with their lack of experience but they are impartial and also have the ability to monitor/police the system to prevent tampering and pseudo traction control.

But, Nick, currently, 28 out of 141 Secunia advisories for Windows XP Professional, are marked as "Unpatched" in the Secunia database. Windows Genuine Advantage was cracked in 24 hours. Currently, 21 out of 105 Secunia advisories for Internet Explorer, are marked as "Unpatched" in the Secunia database.

What is the possibility they can offer "better" ECU protection on tampering? They probably are going to use the same "corporate" approach. I wonder, after many years of system development, if it wouldn't be smarter to pick a smaller, independent team, like the one behind successful security stories (Unix, McIntosh, Opera).

But even if Microsoft (BTW, I was going to write MS as usual, and suddenly realized these initials were taken... coincidence? ), if, I repeat, Microsoft is qualified for preventing system tampering, this is one of the most boring and potentially troublesome areas these new rules thrown us into. Besides, cracking somehow into this would be a hacker dream come true...

You have to think if FIA was saying to itself: mmmm... let's pick an impartial and security conscious software house: I know, I know! Microsoft!

I would like you to consider another point: FIA has limited suspension development, new materials for engines, traction control, tyres, ECUs and whatnots, all standard issues on a decent new car. A simple question: when was the last time a "small" team won, after all those years of "cost containment"? I mean a team different from Renault, Williams, McLaren or Ferrari. That was six years ago, at least; correct me, I am not sure, was it a Jordan? It does not seem very effective. We could wonder: is cost containment or royalty enhancement?

Another thing to ponder: what should we call a small team? Perhaps a team that has "barely 100 million dollars" to spend on two cars? A medium size developing country spends on its entire road network maybe half the money spent on that grid. You have to wonder if they could get any more money if FIA lifted all bans...

Maybe we could adhere to Colin Chapman's proposal: limit the amount of fuel (and, of course, the length of the race and the weight of the car).

[RH1300S]

What experience did Microsoft have and why did the FIA select them????

"Although the exact identity of the 'Microsoft MES' company that was announced by the FIA yesterday was unclear, sources have confirmed that the firm involved with Microsoft is McLaren Electronic Systems" - Autosport

Yes..that McLaren.

Bet Ron's laughing right now - maybe that was a little secret he shared with Fernando a while back.

[Ciro Pabón]

Yes..that McLaren.

Well, this complies with my "small team" condition, at least... but not the independent one. And, I would like to point out, a team called Microsoft - MES complies moooore than well with the "royalty paradise" condition. I guess there will be an F-1 screensaver in our Windows Vista.

Man, this breeze from the beach is killing me... What a beautiful day around here!

[DaveKillens]

Microsoft does not have a history of impartiality. They have been through countless anti-monopoly court cases. They also have a nasty reputation of being harsh with competitors, witness Netscape.
So my first question would be.. just how impartial could they be towards BMW which carry the Intel sponsorship, versus Ferrari, with AMD?
If the FIA wants one standard ECU, let the teams nominate one supplier and model number, and the winner of the vote gets a contract.

[Scuderia_Russ]

I am against driver aids control. If we had this kind of control in 1930, the spark timing would be advanced manually. But even if I were for them: we are talking Microsoft here. Where did they get the experience?

Would you have prefered AMD to get the gig?!

[Scuderia_Russ]

McLaren company wins ECU bid.

"McLaren Electronic Systems, an independent developer within McLaren's group of companies, is behind the successful bid with Microsoft to supply ECUs in Formula One from 2008"

-Autosport.com-

[Ciro Pabón]

Would you have prefered AMD to get the gig?!

Yes, I would. I only use AMDs... This is a measure of my despair: they are a hardware manufacturer, not a software house.

My AMD LCD screen is glowing right now against the beautiful sunset of Parque Tayrona, while a warm breeze moves the palms and I wonder what in heavens am I doing discussing ECUs, instead of going to the beach for a last dip. Probably, is the glass of old rum retaining me here...

They have been better than Intel for the last year. I know Intel is trying to catch up, but they haven't yet. And AMD has less money than Intel: sort of "Renault on silicon", my dear Scuderia_Russ.

Well, the sea is warm and the sand is still hot, see ya....

[NickT]

Alright maybe Microsoft are not perfect, but they still do a pretty good job considering they are the target of every hacker in the world and his dog.

[Bender]

so is microsoft going to supply the ECU hardware, software or both?

if its just the hardware, i'm positive there are about a dozen more qualified companies, motec comes to mind.

if its the sofware then does that mean that M$ controls the air/fuel mixture and TC of all the engines? or can the engineers work within set parameters for the mixture and other functions of the ECU

this whole thing makes no sense at all, M$ has no experience with this, so my bet is they will just outsource the entire thing to an established ECU manufacturer and slap a M$ logo on all the cars

[NickT]

Bender I think you must have missed this one

McLaren company wins ECU bid.

"McLaren Electronic Systems, an independent developer within McLaren's group of companies, is behind the successful bid with Microsoft to supply ECUs in Formula One from 2008"

-Autosport.com-