4 ms·

I think this has been misreported. This message is actually reporting that the car lacks the required AC hardware for that function. It's not a software feature

I think this has been misreported. This message is actually reporting that the car lacks the required AC hardware for that function. It's not a software feature. Although I agree that if the car isn't capable of a function, it shouldn't have a button for it, that is a very different story. It's not a paywall any more than any other hardware addition is a "paywall".

modeless 5y ago
Yeah it's funny that this is making the rounds as some kind of outrage when the hardware actually isn't present. There are plenty of real cases where the hardware is installed but disabled. Tesla has done it several times (battery capacity, rear heated seats, "acceleration boost").
- TheDong 5y ago
  > Tesla has actually installed hardware in cars and locked it behind software paywalls, multiple times (battery capacity, rear heated seats, "acceleration boost", maybe more I'm unaware of). The most vaunted feature of teslas, "Full-Self-Driving" (note, not actually full self driving) is also a clear example of this. It's $10k, and it's a 100% software update for all modern teslas. The FSD stuff, as I understand it, is all on-car (i.e. no remote tesla-run service involved), so you really are just paying to unlock use of hardware already there.
  - grp000 5y ago
    I don't have a Tesla, but the hardware side of things is probably not close to $10k, and probably already being used in a multipurpose fashion. What I'm saying is, aren't you paying the $10k to use the self-driving model?
  - modeless 5y ago
    This is equivalent to saying that Microsoft shouldn't charge for Office because "you really are just paying to unlock use of hardware" to do word processing. It's not immoral to charge for software. There's a difference between charging money to add a toggle button for already existing heated seats on the touchscreen vs. charging money to license the most advanced driver assist software available to the public, still under development.
    - salawat 5y ago
      See, your statement of "charging for software not being immoral" is still a hotly ongoing topic of debate. It's just that the economic architecture that carried us out of a world primarily constrained by material scarcity is being naively applied to an area of one which does not. Introducing scarcity dynamics where none exist, is to me, one of the most immoral of willful actions to undertake.
      - disillusioned 5y ago
        Isn't the scarcity dynamic simply... shifted left? Your point is that it's trivial to duplicate software and distribute it and there's no (or extremely low) incremental cost in doing so, but we both know the cost of software comes from, you know, people who have spent time to learn how to write software and then dedicating their waking hours to do so for years on end. There's scarcity in the number of developers available to perform that job. Now, a situation where I agree with the core thesis of "to introduce scarcity dynamics where none exist" is around, say, virtual real estate, or the most obvious one of them all: NFTs.
      - modeless 5y ago
        I am actually sympathetic to this view somewhat. Copyright is not an inalienable right, it's something that we decided as a society to grant to people because we think the benefits outweigh the costs, and that may not be true. Personally I would be in favor of radical changes to copyright such as reducing the duration to something like 5 years. Artificial scarcity is useful but life+70 years of artificial scarcity is far beyond reasonable.
    - lodovic 5y ago
      It would be similar to Microsoft offering Office in the Start menu, and when you try to run it, it says you need a license.
      - sokoloff 5y ago
        That’s pretty close to what they do with their 30-day trial of Office 365 installed on a lot of PCs.
  - ceeplusplus 5y ago
    The difference there is that Tesla still gets value out of putting FSD hardware in cars that don't buy it because they can collect data. You can't say the same about an air conditioner.
  - disillusioned 5y ago
    Oh buddy, it's _$12k_ now. And yeah, the calculus here was to outfit every vehicle with the hardware, whether purchased or not, because the cost of the hardware is made up for not merely in potential future conversions/purchases, but in the ability to collect reams of data from a fleet of vehicles constantly annotating and sending back information to their model. To wit, the FSD stuff is indeed all on-car, but the FSD-as-a-work-in-progress-constantly-evolving requires significant tesla-run services: they ML work is being done centrally, and then updated models are pushed down to the cars to, hopefully not run down innocent pedestrians in the street.
- mongol 5y ago
  If the hardware is not present, why is the button present?
  - t0mas88 5y ago
    To have only one version of the control unit, saves money on logistics.
  - xeromal 5y ago
    Probably an accident, but assembly lines are often optimized. I know that my old Isuzu trooper had wiring for heated seats. I just had to install a button to activate it and get a seat from the junkyard to hook in. It really depends on how a manufacturer does it but in some cases, it's cheaper to install the part and just deactivate it if the user doesn't purchase it instead of tooling two different lines in the factory
seszett 5y ago
> Although I agree that if the car isn't capable of a function, it shouldn't have a button for it, that is a very different story Maybe I misunderstood something but isn't that the whole problem discussed here? The important quote is this one: "Blank buttons aren’t rude," wrote the owner. "This one is reminding me that I’m cheap.". Obviously nobody expects to have functions when they haven't been paid for, but having a hardware button for it plus a message telling you you haven't purchased what was attached to this button is pretty bad.
henriks 5y ago
Are you sure? I have a VAG group car with the same sync button and it simply ensures that the set temperature is the same on both sides of the car. As this car already looks like it has automatic AC that shouldn’t require additional hardware, unless this is some fancier ”sync” than mine..
- t0mas88 5y ago
  This car apparently doesn't have the separate temperature per area. So the button should just do nothing.
  - eps 5y ago
    This button shouldn't be there. That's how it is in older Audis. You don't order a feature - you get a plug for a button. If you retrofit it later, they add a button. What they did here is absolutely 100% tacky, shame on them. All of it, but especially the wording of the message. I sure hope they learn from this and never do it again. Saying as a die-hard Audi fan.
    - netsharc 5y ago
      Why tacky? I get it, from their point of view, it saves costs of manufacturing and logistics ("Customer wants car with button that does feature X, dealer only has cars without this button, now customer has to wait for a different car to be shipped or the button to be shipped and installed by the dealer, which will cost a few hours of the service department's time"). Of course they should've had a "Customer experience" department who would've told them how this improvement of their workflow would annoy the customer and look bad for them.
      - seszett 5y ago
        Well, it makes sense for them to save cost, but it doesn't make having a useless button with a condescending message any less tacky.
brigade 5y ago
Ehh.... Audi's functions on demand does explicitly say that "the hardware for the functions that can be activated subsequently is installed in all vehicles at the factory" to reduce production costs [1], and the e-tron is one of the vehicles they're pushing this hard in. According to the reddit poster, the Denmark e-tron doesn't come with multizone climate standard, unlike most of Europe. And the function on demand store doesn't appear to have rolled out to Denmark yet, and climate zones doesn't appear to be one of the functions you can buy elsewhere (because it's standard outside of Denmark?) So it is literally true that it's not a post-sale option/paywall right now. But I strongly suspect that whatever hardware is needed is actually there and that this specific car will get the option to purchase the usage of it in the future once the store is rolled out to Denmark. [1] https://www.audi.com/en/company/sustainability/core-topics/products-and-services/audi-functions-on-demand.html https://www.audi.com/en/company/sustainability/core-topics/p...
- Linosaurus 5y ago
  That sounds plausible. So if they want to upsell this feature in the future, the actual cost of installing the physical button (five minutes in a workshop) would dwarf the cost to install the hardware (0, already there). And so they decided to apply asshole interface design towards these customers. That's not a great solution.
  - sandermvanvliet 5y ago
    “Someone spent time to make it shit” It, unfortunately, applies to a ton of situations where instead of doing the simple, not asshole kind of thing, they chose to make the thing annoying and/or hostile
mdmglr 5y ago
Most cars (and I would expect this in a luxury car) have at minimum dual zone. The article mentions the car does not have the tri-zone option. So the sync button should set the same temperature on two zones and if they already are the same do nothing. I don’t understand why this message is necessary at all.

modeless 5y ago

Yeah it's funny that this is making the rounds as some kind of outrage when the hardware actually isn't present. There are plenty of real cases where the hardware is installed but disabled. Tesla has done it several times (battery capacity, rear heated seats, "acceleration boost").

TheDong 5y ago
> Tesla has actually installed hardware in cars and locked it behind software paywalls, multiple times (battery capacity, rear heated seats, "acceleration boost", maybe more I'm unaware of). The most vaunted feature of teslas, "Full-Self-Driving" (note, not actually full self driving) is also a clear example of this. It's $10k, and it's a 100% software update for all modern teslas. The FSD stuff, as I understand it, is all on-car (i.e. no remote tesla-run service involved), so you really are just paying to unlock use of hardware already there.
- grp000 5y ago
  I don't have a Tesla, but the hardware side of things is probably not close to $10k, and probably already being used in a multipurpose fashion. What I'm saying is, aren't you paying the $10k to use the self-driving model?
- modeless 5y ago
  This is equivalent to saying that Microsoft shouldn't charge for Office because "you really are just paying to unlock use of hardware" to do word processing. It's not immoral to charge for software. There's a difference between charging money to add a toggle button for already existing heated seats on the touchscreen vs. charging money to license the most advanced driver assist software available to the public, still under development.
  - salawat 5y ago
    See, your statement of "charging for software not being immoral" is still a hotly ongoing topic of debate. It's just that the economic architecture that carried us out of a world primarily constrained by material scarcity is being naively applied to an area of one which does not. Introducing scarcity dynamics where none exist, is to me, one of the most immoral of willful actions to undertake.
    - disillusioned 5y ago
      Isn't the scarcity dynamic simply... shifted left? Your point is that it's trivial to duplicate software and distribute it and there's no (or extremely low) incremental cost in doing so, but we both know the cost of software comes from, you know, people who have spent time to learn how to write software and then dedicating their waking hours to do so for years on end. There's scarcity in the number of developers available to perform that job. Now, a situation where I agree with the core thesis of "to introduce scarcity dynamics where none exist" is around, say, virtual real estate, or the most obvious one of them all: NFTs.
    - modeless 5y ago
      I am actually sympathetic to this view somewhat. Copyright is not an inalienable right, it's something that we decided as a society to grant to people because we think the benefits outweigh the costs, and that may not be true. Personally I would be in favor of radical changes to copyright such as reducing the duration to something like 5 years. Artificial scarcity is useful but life+70 years of artificial scarcity is far beyond reasonable.
  - lodovic 5y ago
    It would be similar to Microsoft offering Office in the Start menu, and when you try to run it, it says you need a license.
    - sokoloff 5y ago
      That’s pretty close to what they do with their 30-day trial of Office 365 installed on a lot of PCs.
- ceeplusplus 5y ago
  The difference there is that Tesla still gets value out of putting FSD hardware in cars that don't buy it because they can collect data. You can't say the same about an air conditioner.
- disillusioned 5y ago
  Oh buddy, it's _$12k_ now. And yeah, the calculus here was to outfit every vehicle with the hardware, whether purchased or not, because the cost of the hardware is made up for not merely in potential future conversions/purchases, but in the ability to collect reams of data from a fleet of vehicles constantly annotating and sending back information to their model. To wit, the FSD stuff is indeed all on-car, but the FSD-as-a-work-in-progress-constantly-evolving requires significant tesla-run services: they ML work is being done centrally, and then updated models are pushed down to the cars to, hopefully not run down innocent pedestrians in the street.
mongol 5y ago
If the hardware is not present, why is the button present?
- t0mas88 5y ago
  To have only one version of the control unit, saves money on logistics.
- xeromal 5y ago
  Probably an accident, but assembly lines are often optimized. I know that my old Isuzu trooper had wiring for heated seats. I just had to install a button to activate it and get a seat from the junkyard to hook in. It really depends on how a manufacturer does it but in some cases, it's cheaper to install the part and just deactivate it if the user doesn't purchase it instead of tooling two different lines in the factory

seszett 5y ago

> Although I agree that if the car isn't capable of a function, it shouldn't have a button for it, that is a very different story Maybe I misunderstood something but isn't that the whole problem discussed here? The important quote is this one: "Blank buttons aren’t rude," wrote the owner. "This one is reminding me that I’m cheap.". Obviously nobody expects to have functions when they haven't been paid for, but having a hardware button for it plus a message telling you you haven't purchased what was attached to this button is pretty bad.

henriks 5y ago

Are you sure? I have a VAG group car with the same sync button and it simply ensures that the set temperature is the same on both sides of the car. As this car already looks like it has automatic AC that shouldn’t require additional hardware, unless this is some fancier ”sync” than mine..

t0mas88 5y ago
This car apparently doesn't have the separate temperature per area. So the button should just do nothing.
- eps 5y ago
  This button shouldn't be there. That's how it is in older Audis. You don't order a feature - you get a plug for a button. If you retrofit it later, they add a button. What they did here is absolutely 100% tacky, shame on them. All of it, but especially the wording of the message. I sure hope they learn from this and never do it again. Saying as a die-hard Audi fan.
  - netsharc 5y ago
    Why tacky? I get it, from their point of view, it saves costs of manufacturing and logistics ("Customer wants car with button that does feature X, dealer only has cars without this button, now customer has to wait for a different car to be shipped or the button to be shipped and installed by the dealer, which will cost a few hours of the service department's time"). Of course they should've had a "Customer experience" department who would've told them how this improvement of their workflow would annoy the customer and look bad for them.
    - seszett 5y ago
      Well, it makes sense for them to save cost, but it doesn't make having a useless button with a condescending message any less tacky.

brigade 5y ago

Ehh.... Audi's functions on demand does explicitly say that "the hardware for the functions that can be activated subsequently is installed in all vehicles at the factory" to reduce production costs [1], and the e-tron is one of the vehicles they're pushing this hard in. According to the reddit poster, the Denmark e-tron doesn't come with multizone climate standard, unlike most of Europe. And the function on demand store doesn't appear to have rolled out to Denmark yet, and climate zones doesn't appear to be one of the functions you can buy elsewhere (because it's standard outside of Denmark?) So it is literally true that it's not a post-sale option/paywall right now. But I strongly suspect that whatever hardware is needed is actually there and that this specific car will get the option to purchase the usage of it in the future once the store is rolled out to Denmark. [1] https://www.audi.com/en/company/sustainability/core-topics/products-and-services/audi-functions-on-demand.html https://www.audi.com/en/company/sustainability/core-topics/p...

Linosaurus 5y ago
That sounds plausible. So if they want to upsell this feature in the future, the actual cost of installing the physical button (five minutes in a workshop) would dwarf the cost to install the hardware (0, already there). And so they decided to apply asshole interface design towards these customers. That's not a great solution.
- sandermvanvliet 5y ago
  “Someone spent time to make it shit” It, unfortunately, applies to a ton of situations where instead of doing the simple, not asshole kind of thing, they chose to make the thing annoying and/or hostile

mdmglr 5y ago

Most cars (and I would expect this in a luxury car) have at minimum dual zone. The article mentions the car does not have the tri-zone option. So the sync button should set the same temperature on two zones and if they already are the same do nothing. I don’t understand why this message is necessary at all.