4 ms·

>But trust me on this,... isn't a way to make a good argument. From TFA "Only dealerships have the software to make those parts work, and it costs hundreds of

>But trust me on this,... isn't a way to make a good argument. From TFA "Only dealerships have the software to make those parts work, and it costs hundreds of dollars just to get a service call. Schwarting worries about being broken down in a field, waiting for a dealer to show up with a software key." and from a comment above "Plus, many of them don't get any update after the product launch. When you are in rush to plant or harvest you just can`t afford to wait for an authorized dealer. And if they fail, good luck trying to find a replacement that is not 100x overpriced because it has been discontinued one year after you bought it." the problem seems to be that the process of updating software (a) takes too long (b) is too expensive (c) sofware is not updated once the tractor has been sold. In an ideal world, where such a break down can be instantly fixed by JD for a reasonable fee, and JD actively updates the software on the equipment they sell till End of Life, this problem wouldn't exist. Farmers don't care about open source etc. They just want to do their jobs. I'm astounded by the fact that JD takes no responsibility for updating software till end of life of the tractor.

kodfodrasz 10y ago
This may be related to farmers not taking the tractors to repair shops. The automotive component I worked on was firmware updated every time the customer took the car to a service for eg. to change oil, and an update was necessary. The tools needed for this were pretty expensive though, and needed some expertise, as the process was somewhat complicated. I understand why this is not trusted to owners.
- cjrp 10y ago
  If the lack of updates inconveniences their customers and potentially causes loss of earnings, isn't the onus on JD to improve the update mechanism? Make it as simple as inserting a USB stick, and then ship out those sticks periodically? It doesn't have to be OTA or anything fancy.
- criddell 10y ago
  > The tools needed for this were pretty expensive though, and needed some expertise, as the process was somewhat complicated. There's a pretty good chance that was done intentionally.
  - kodfodrasz 10y ago
    Yes, but not in the sense you suggest. Ironically to save costs for the consumers, and improve reliability. Making the system suitable for safe updates without proper disconnecting and partial disassembly and tolerant to untrustad (also in electrical not only in software sense) peripherials would have added a lot to the piecewise cost. (think: more I/O protection electronics, more testing of upgradeability testing with untrusted tools with many failure modes, durable upgrade connectors fitting the size and other constraints). Still no user could and should upgrade that software, as any complication or untrusted software would be a safety hazard, and lengthy official regulatory evaluation and approval process is needed needed for every new version. (think: Road Permission Level revalidation may be needed (overseen by authorities) to allow a firmware to take part in traffic) The repair shops can save lots of cost compared to end users, as these tools are not cheap, but compatible with most manufacturers, so are needed anyway.
- xorblurb 9y ago
  > The tools needed for this were pretty expensive though, and needed some expertise, as the process was somewhat complicated. This is a problem.
TheRealDunkirk 10y ago
I can guarantee you that all of these tractors will have the POSSIBILITY of over-the-air telemetry and software updates within a few years. The question still comes down to paying the support fees and getting the updates or modifications, but the physical act of "waiting for a tech" for software will be a non-issue very shortly, if not already. Can someone speak definitively about updates from JD? It would really surprise me that JD "doesn't update" their software after the sale. It's probably covered by a service contract you need to keep paying for, but I strongly suspect that they update and patch software for many, many years after the product release. Source: I work for a certain, huge diesel manufacturer, and am starting at a slide about telematics right this very moment.

kodfodrasz 10y ago

This may be related to farmers not taking the tractors to repair shops. The automotive component I worked on was firmware updated every time the customer took the car to a service for eg. to change oil, and an update was necessary. The tools needed for this were pretty expensive though, and needed some expertise, as the process was somewhat complicated. I understand why this is not trusted to owners.

cjrp 10y ago
If the lack of updates inconveniences their customers and potentially causes loss of earnings, isn't the onus on JD to improve the update mechanism? Make it as simple as inserting a USB stick, and then ship out those sticks periodically? It doesn't have to be OTA or anything fancy.
criddell 10y ago
> The tools needed for this were pretty expensive though, and needed some expertise, as the process was somewhat complicated. There's a pretty good chance that was done intentionally.
- kodfodrasz 10y ago
  Yes, but not in the sense you suggest. Ironically to save costs for the consumers, and improve reliability. Making the system suitable for safe updates without proper disconnecting and partial disassembly and tolerant to untrustad (also in electrical not only in software sense) peripherials would have added a lot to the piecewise cost. (think: more I/O protection electronics, more testing of upgradeability testing with untrusted tools with many failure modes, durable upgrade connectors fitting the size and other constraints). Still no user could and should upgrade that software, as any complication or untrusted software would be a safety hazard, and lengthy official regulatory evaluation and approval process is needed needed for every new version. (think: Road Permission Level revalidation may be needed (overseen by authorities) to allow a firmware to take part in traffic) The repair shops can save lots of cost compared to end users, as these tools are not cheap, but compatible with most manufacturers, so are needed anyway.
xorblurb 9y ago
> The tools needed for this were pretty expensive though, and needed some expertise, as the process was somewhat complicated. This is a problem.

TheRealDunkirk 10y ago

I can guarantee you that all of these tractors will have the POSSIBILITY of over-the-air telemetry and software updates within a few years. The question still comes down to paying the support fees and getting the updates or modifications, but the physical act of "waiting for a tech" for software will be a non-issue very shortly, if not already. Can someone speak definitively about updates from JD? It would really surprise me that JD "doesn't update" their software after the sale. It's probably covered by a service contract you need to keep paying for, but I strongly suspect that they update and patch software for many, many years after the product release. Source: I work for a certain, huge diesel manufacturer, and am starting at a slide about telematics right this very moment.