[Tomguy]

For the most part, the "Build and Price" tool on the CDJ sites is pretty much the same as it was when I first remember using it sometime in the 90's at 4adodge.com (or whatever the Dodge site used to be).

Everyone is moving to much better configuration systems... there's already a pretty nice one in house, wouldn't it be great if they'd update it to be like Lancia's?

http://carconfigurator.lancia.com/it_it/thema/default.aspx?outputxml=true

It's not in English but it's pretty straightforward, interactive and with a LOT better images than the current junk used. I can't see it costing much to use, since I linked basically the 300's builder The best part? Go to the "ACCESSORI" after picking the other stuff to "Unlock" it (mainly the engine).

 

[Stratuscaster]

Pretty sure that the build & price portion on the US sites is contracted out to a third-party provider. Not that it's any excuse for not being usable - or current.

 

[MoparNorm]

Pretty sure that the build & price portion on the US sites is contracted out to a third-party provider. Not that it's any excuse for not being usable - or current.

That's correct.
At sometime around 2001-2003, Jeep won an award from JD Powers for having the Industry's best website. It was just months later that Daimler sourced everything out to some cheaper, terrible configuration.
I seem to recall a vendor change after the BK, but no discernable improvement.

 

[Dave Z]

The people who set up the older web sites had been working with Chrysler since the 1930s. I actually spent about an hour talking to one of them when I was on vacation.

 

[jimboy]

I find the Chrysler websites inadequate, at best. Its hard to see the images, options aren't well described, very little interactivity. I rarely go there.

 

[Dave Z]

Almost as though they were designed by an advertising agency, for glitz rather than actual customer use, eh?

Corporations seem to have a really hard time with basic technologies. Some of that is because they tend to prefer proprietary (ColdFusion, Microsoft Anything, Flash, etc) which often leads to big problems. I think some of it is because the people who choose the vendors have no technical knowledge. Some of it is probably a matter of gigantism and the "need" to only work with very large, established vendors.

I suspect getting four internal people to do it, using standard open-source technologies, would cost them far less and result in far more control.

PS> The moment someone says "Siemens" in relation to IT, my blood runs cold. It means the user interface will never work, the project will be way expensive, and it won't last past the next technology-bump. My health insurer and the US Copyright Office both required IE6 for a long time... and their sites didn't work on IE6, either. (I find most places that demanded IE6 didn't work well even if you HAD IE6.)