4 ms·

I'd counter argue that it's maybe not that bad to have proven, formally validated software in the field, which is what traditional software developers in the au

I'd counter argue that it's maybe not that bad to have proven, formally validated software in the field, which is what traditional software developers in the automotive sectors did for decades. You tend to push out less crap if you are forced to make sure it works well from the start due to lack of updates. At least the German Automotive industry relies very much on formal verification and model driven development for this reason.

mschuster91 7y ago
The firmware for the components that drive the car is one thing and I agree with you there (though still, OTA capability should be a must-have). The software of the driver-facing stuff however is a different game and honestly there is so much utter crap out there it hurts - badly (if at all) tested phone integrations, no touch UI at all, maps which my four year old phone can render more fluently...
solarkraft 7y ago
Except the UI stuff they push out is utter crap. It's slowly improving, but I if I understand the industry correctly the efforts that are leading to that started many years ago. Meanwhile when Tesla releases a bug they can ship a fix within days. Why arbitrarily limit your development like that? To make some money off your customer being forced to go to the dealer to get an update? That's just terrible UX.