Ford Mustang celebrates 45 years on the road

I guess this dates me, but I remember when the very first Mustangs came out. Loved the look. Still do.

My left brain insists that a car should always be reliable, convenient, inexpensive, and "green." But when I see an original Mustang, my right brain reminds me that cars are also about emotion. And sometimes, an automaker gets the emotion right.

So why am I waxing on about this? Because tomorrow, April 17, the Mustang celebrates its 45th birthday. In fact, the state of Alabama has even declared April 17 Mustang Day.

You don't generate such a high level of brand loyalty by creating a car that's reliable, convenient, and inexpensive, but ultimately boring. Automotive bean counters, take note.

ESC Best of Show awards go to multicore tools and operating system

Late last week, VDC Research handed out its Best of Show awards for ESC Silicon Valley 2009. The results were interesting: The winner, CriticalBlue, took top honors for its multicore analysis tools, and the runner-up, QNX Software Sytems, received an honorable mention for its multicore-enabled secure RTOS.

The analysts at VDC follow the embedded market closely, so their choice of two multicore-related products speaks volumes, IMHO. It's their way of stating that multicore processors — and the software tools that support them — are becoming increasingly important to embedded developers.

To read VDC's complete report on ESC Silicon Valley, click here.

Is Segway making a segue into automotive?

Desperate times make for strange bedfellows. Or perhaps this is a case of honest-to-goodness forward thinking. Either way, the alliance between GM and Segway has piqued my interest. On the one hand, you have a major player looking for new niches to play in. On the other hand, you have a niche player looking for a major breakthrough.

Yesterday, the two companies unveiled a prototype PUMA mobility pod — basically, a Segway with two seats and a roof. Picture a two-wheeled golf cart, and you get the idea.

Mind you, this Segway will do more than keep you dry in the rain. According to GM's vice president of R&D, PUMA vehicles could eventually drive themselves and avoid collisions by taking advantage of vehicle-to-vehicle communications, such as those provided by the QNX-based OnStar system. Which means, I assume, that the target market could include people who don't know how to drive. (Not sure how I feel about that one.)

Doubts aside, I hope that this vehicle, and others like it, gain market traction. Because let's face it, most people don't need a 4000-pound behemoth to drive to work. That said, a PUMA couldn't share the road with cement trucks and probably couldn't ride on a lot of existing bike lanes, either. So its success may ultimately depend on whether cities are willing to install the necessary infrastructure.

Cash for clunkers: Economically sound, but environmentally questionable?

Should governments bail out automakers directly, or should they boost automotive sales by giving consumers cash for upgrading to new vehicles? If you've been following my recent posts, you know that I prefer door number 2.

Germany, for example, launched a "green" program that pays consumers about $3000 to trade in their old vehicles for new, more fuel-efficient models. Economically, the program has had dramatic short-term results, with 21% growth in auto sales. But from an ecological perspective, I've expressed my doubts that such programs are truly green.

Well, it seems that I'm not the only one. Yesterday, the Green Inc. blog of The New York Times stated that "a growing chorus of critics say such programs may do little for the planet." In fact, George Monbiot, a columnist for The Guardian claims that cash incentives to scrap old cars and buy new ones are a "scam," both economically and environmentally.

What do you think? Are governments muddying the conceptual waters by promoting such programs as "green"? Is it enough that the incentives give a short-term boost to the automotive industry? Or should the government simply forego all cash handouts and allow Adam Smith's invisible hand restore balance to the market?

Nikon unleashes smokin' new Nikon D4.1 digital SLR

APRIL FOOL'S IS OVER IN MY TIMEZONE, SO IT'S TIME TO FESS UP:  THE NIKON D4.1 ISN'T FOR REAL, FOLKS. IT'S "4.1" AS IN "4.1.2009" :-) CONGRATS TO EARTHBOUND LIGHT FOR PULLING OFF SUCH A SUCCESSFUL GAG.

I've been a Canon man for more than a decade. But you know, I've always envied Nikon users, especially when it comes to lens quality. And I really love how Nikon bodies can do wireless flash without any need for an external controller.

The problem is, I've invested so heavily in Canon gear that migrating to Nikon has always been too painful to think about. But you know, I think Nikon has finally pushed me over the edge. I just read about their upcoming D4.1 SLR — and man, is it cool.

According to the article, the "technology behind the New Nikon D4.1 DSLR is an outgrowth of Nikon's patents for VR ("vibration reduction") lenses. By very, very quickly moving the lens in front of a single pixel sensor the entire image can be captured using the "sweet spot" of a lens."

Is that freakin' amazing, or what?

To read the entire article, click here.

By the way, is it April yet?

Need to parallelize your code for multi-core execution?

I'm always on the lookout for websites and tutorials dedicated to writing parallel code, so I was glad to see that Intel's Clay Breshears has written a new programmer's guide called The Art of Concurrency.

I don't know anyone who has used the book — not a surprise, given that it only comes out in May — but the premise looks good. Rather than focus on theoretical programming models, the book promises to provide a hands-on, experience-based approach to parallelizing existing code.

To learn more about the book, visit the O'Reilly website.

The world's shortest product demo?

I feel sorry for some of my QNX colleagues. They'll be at the Embedded Systems conference next week, shilling the QNX fastboot demo. The problem with the fastboot demo is that it, well, boots fast. You flip the button, and it turns on. End of story. If the person viewing the demo isn't paying attention, they miss the whole thing. Fortunately, the solution is simple: you just flip the button again.

The demo is pretty impressive, in its fleeting way. Historically, x86 systems (like the one on your desktop) use a BIOS to boot. Now, the BIOS is useful on a desktop or laptop system, but serves little purpose on an x86 embedded system -- aside from making it boot slower. QNX fastboot technology eliminates the BIOS, allowing systems based on the Intel Atom and other x86 chips to achieve "instant on".

For evidence, check out the YouTube video and fast forward to the 1:50 mark. You'll see how QNX fastboot technology reduces boot time from about 17 seconds to under a second. But, please, pay close attention. Or you'll miss the whole thing.