That would satisfy customers on both sides...I agree that GM should do this. Customers prefer choices in their products (a elementary concept that you would think GM would have figured out decades ago!)
| But I think the eventual goal is eleminating | switches and such. I have read reports about | the miles of wire in cars etc and how every | little bit of weight must be reduced to continue | increasing gas milage.
Perhaps. But I would think that having all of these unrelated items (parking brake, shift lever, radio,etc.) all tied into the control of the lights (I assume each "thing" has some sort of switch and associated wires in order to function) would be even more complex requireing even more wires than having only one switch (the light switch) handling all the lighting functions.
| Thats why they are going to the serial bus between the | radio and body and engine computers. Rather than having | three seperate boxes (radio, body compueter, engine | computer) as well as wiring between each and wiring two | and from light switches and lights going through the firewall. | If they can consolidate the body computer with the radio | and eliminate the switches and wires to and from them | they can have just a pair of wires from the radio/computer | to the engine computer and have a short wire from the | engine computer to the lights eliminating light wiring | through the firewall and to the light switch. It fits in | with all the technologies going into the smart | cars and such
Except you will still need the lighting control wiring to all of the other devices that affect the status of the lights...wouldn't you? I think it's more the fact that the customer will be locked into buying a $800 GM-built radio when their original one quits working since a 3rd party audio system won't work. That strategy will turn the customer off in the end and cost GM big time. You can't purposefully screw the customer and expect them to always like it. Again, the customer will prefer choices and options.