![\"Software](\"https:\/\/www.globalvillagespace.com\/tech\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/the-shift-from-cars-to-code-do-drivers-really-care.jpg\" "\\"Software")
<\/a><\/p>\nMany car companies are becoming ‘software-defined’, but that won’t necessarily resonate with their customers<\/p>\n
When is a car company not a car company? There are a couple of\u00a0paths into this way of thinking.<\/p>\n
One \u2013 and this is among my least favourite topics, but I suppose we must delve into it \u2013 is the idea that car makers are gradually becoming software companies that just happen to also make cars. Eek.<\/p>\n
Volvo\u2019s Jim Rowan<\/a>, several\u00a0weeks ago uninvited from being Volvo\u2019s Jim Rowan, spoke positively about this trend in March.<\/p>\n He talked of \u2018cloud architecture\u2019 and \u2018full-stack software\u2019 and, I know, I know, I should actually understand what those things mean and what the implications of them are, but even though I\u2019m skinny and bald and my spectacles are thin-rimmed, I\u2019m just not tech bro enough to get my head around it all.<\/p>\n Software is essential: I do understand that much. And I get that if a car can talk to other cars and a base some distance away, if it can send and receive reports on incidents and accidents, that will make for safer and easier journeys. But as a driver\/owner\/user, I don\u2019t need to know and honestly don\u2019t care how any of this is happening.<\/p>\n Then there are the user-facing parts of software, which I do care about and which some important people clearly believe are going to\u00a0be deciding factors in what defines their company\u2019s characteristics and what\u00a0separates it from a competitor.<\/p>\n I think the user interface and user experience are really important, but I also don\u2019t buy into the theory that software will define a car company.<\/p>\n I used to put this down to the fact that I\u2019m increasingly an old man yelling at clouds, but the more I hear from younger drivers, the more I think they feel the same way. There\u2019s only so much software you can use in a car. I just don\u2019t believe people are going to fall in love with a car brand because it has the best software.<\/p>\n It\u2019s not like shopping for furniture or the choicest ingredients to make a great dinner. There I\u2019ll pick my favourite things. I don\u2019t, though, have a favourite shopping website, which is what car software most reminds me of: it\u2019s not a thing in itself but a conduit to get to a thing.<\/p>\n I just want the easiest conduit, the least bad version, something that works every time and is deliberately designed to be unannoying.\u00a0<\/p>\n For me, this is the optimum that user-facing\u00a0car software can be. I\u2019m not convinced it\u2019s enough reason alone\u00a0to buy a car, although I am 100% sure that\u00a0it\u2019s enough reason to not buy one. Does\u00a0that amount to the same thing?<\/p>\n Which brings me to part two of how not to be a car company: for want of a less cringey phrase, be a lifestyle company.<\/p>\n In the past month, I\u2019ve driven new cars<\/a> from, and spoken to the bosses of, Rolls-Royce<\/a> and Morgan<\/a>. They\u2019re different companies in that one makes uber-luxury limos<\/a> and the other makes driver-focused sports cars<\/a>, but in so many ways they\u2019re the same.<\/p>\n They sell you a beautiful object and also an experience, and while both make cars, a buyer isn\u2019t necessarily contemplating a new vehicle as an alternative place to put their money.<\/p>\n Anything from an old Land Rover<\/a> to a house extension or a boat or a small island is\u00a0a rival to what these companies make.<\/p>\n