[brk]

Save a few dollars, times 10's of thousands of vehicles in higher production models.

I've posted this before in more detail, but the short version is that when I was working at Ford Motor Co in the late 90's I remember seeing some internal documents championing how they saved ~$200 off a production Taurus (at the time a ~$20,000 vehicle) via a bunch of $10 and $20 individual cost savings. It was a big deal, added up to real dollars.

[gcbirzan]

Yes, but this is a few dollars (and that's optimistic), PER CAR. That, and you'd need to invest a lot in changing the whole way you do networking.

[brk]

There is more cost savings than you might think in a simplified wiring harness. Some 3rd party organization builds the harness, then it ships to the manufacturer, where it is usually installed by humans.

Besides the material savings of less actual wire, you most likely have labor savings on the harness build, and possibly on the installation if the new harness is easier to install based on the reduced overall weight and complexity.

The networking methodology side would likely not be overly complex. We already have CANbus device networks, and the associated software stacks. Changing to an ethernet based approach is a well-understood transition that would not require major changes, at least not beyond the incremental updates and other things that the engineers are already likely to be working on.

[AlotOfReading]

There are benefits weight and cost and system complexity and network specifications, etc. There are certain things you just cannot do with CAN bus that manufacturers want to do. Using traditional Ethernet is possible (and I've done it), but the second you bring it up to penny pinchers they get a headache and the conversation is over. Having something like this allows you to make the transition while not just increasing capabilities, but actually decreasing costs.