8 ms·

75 Percent of car buyers don’t want features locked behind subscriptions

throw03172019 5y ago
Yeah, no shit we don’t! It’s disgusting they think it’s an option.
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  I really would like to meet someone from the other 25%. Just out of curiosity to experience a completely different kind of reasoning. Perhaps they believe the product would be cheaper with abdicating the feature?
  - jleyank 5y ago
    To me, the only people who might not care about such limited-duration features are those looking for a 2-3 year lease. Maybe the manufacturers are trying to get everybody to lease but man, it just pisses me off. Wonder if the state/province's lemon laws can get involved when sh*t just stops working. But based on our top-of-line 2019 RAV4 the computerization of the car is way more brittle and pointless than the traditional engineering. I expect to have a collection of dead stuff long before the car dies.
  - jerlam 5y ago
    I can think of one feature that I'd pick the subscription over the upfront cost: Tesla Full Self Driving (FSD). It's $12,000 or $200/month. Five years is the breakeven point, assuming that the prices stay the same (which is a bad assumption). $12k is a big chunk of change - could be around 10% of the car's value. There are also some question marks around whether the FSD is transferable to a new owner. I've driven in a Tesla with FSD, and it's underwhelming. There's no guarantee that in five years, it will perform significantly better - maybe even require additional hardware or a newer car/platform.
    - t0mas88 5y ago
      Tesla "Full Self Driving" is vaporware so far. In previous versions "Autopilot" as a name only implied self-driving to some customers, while it wasn't. Now they've gone a step further and branded advanced driver assist as FSD, which really isn't all that self driving at all.
  - randomdata 5y ago
    > Perhaps they believe the product would be cheaper with abdicating the feature? Or, perhaps, believe it would get updates? Software in cars tends to grow stale quickly, which is an annoyance if you plan to keep for more than a few years. My eight year old car, for example, has features (had features) that don't work properly anymore because the software didn't anticipate how the rest of the world would change around it and there isn't an update provided to restore it to the original working condition, let alone adding new features that would be nice to have.
    - t0mas88 5y ago
      Exactly, and cars aren't that hacker friendly. Underneath the design isn't that bad, can-bus makes sense, most modern cars have a good sort of internal network. But there is zero documentation to allow anything aftermarket to plug in later or software to be upgraded past what the manufacturer provides. And car manufacturers are still very much in a mindset that you make a certain model-year, release it, and then forget about it while you work on the next ones. No upgrade path on software whatsoever.
  - 4oo4 5y ago
    I believe the correct term is "financial masochist". Who are we to kink shame?
LinuxBender 5y ago
I suppose one could count me in that 75%. This is just my personal preference but I will never buy any equipment that requires a subscription or that has telemetry. As a side note I just bought a 1947 Ford Ferguson 2N tractor and already love it. To my pleasant surprise there is a massive community of people and manufacturers keeping these things alive. Might there be similar communities for the older cars and trucks? Which older cars and trucks are the most popular to keep running in the U.S.?
lp0_on_fire 5y ago
I was ready to purchase a new Rav4 this year. But apparently you need to pay a subscription to use the remote start. So now we're looking at Fords.
reset-password 5y ago
If it becomes ubiquitous I'd expect an underground market to form around activating features which are physically present but locked out by software. And now I'm curious as to what the legal consequences could/would be of something like that, especially when you go to resell the vehicle later.
- lostlogin 5y ago
  Lockout from features happens on medical hardware - I’ve seen it regularly on MRI scanners from Siemens, GE and Philips. Send them money and the feature gets unlocked. Some options are less expensive, some more. The most expensive I’ve seen is US$50k for enabling a feature. They do it then you restart the system to enable it. I know of a physicist who used to be able to unlock some things, but now there are much more elaborate security measure.
  - Decker87 5y ago
    That does seem pretty different from a subscription.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 5y ago
  > ... what the legal consequences could/would be ... I would expect a judge to determine that someone has exceeded their authorized access to a computer and, as such, their behavior is in violation of the CFAA. (Granted, this is actually clearly in the spirit of that particular law. Not saying I agree or disagree with it but there you go.) > ... especially when you go to resell the vehicle later. That reminds me of the Tesla that wrongly had a feature enabled, which was then disabled after the car was resold as a used car.
  - EMIRELADERO 5y ago
    > I would expect a judge to determine that someone has exceeded their authorized access to a computer and, as such, their behavior is in violation of the CFAA. How would that work if the computer is owned by the supposed infringer? Has there ever been a judge who ruled that the CFAA applies to computers the defendant owns?
MR4D 5y ago
It depends on the feature. If the car’s map was a subscription I’d prefer it, but only because car maps suck compared to Google and Apple, so it would save me money.
josephcsible 5y ago
There's an important distinction that this article doesn't make: features that exist entirely within the car and that the manufacturer already paid for in full when they made it (e.g., heated seats and key fob remote start), vs. features that involve external entities and do have real ongoing costs (e.g., with OnStar, paying the salary of the advisers you have on call, and paying for the car's cellular data). Only the former is evil.
- dzhiurgis 5y ago
  Remember when Kindle had free data forever everywhere in world, for like extra $20? In most places you can get smartwatch esim for like $5? And of course there’s places where this buys unlimited data. Kinda think gov should just pay for cellular data in exchange of your location data for traffic planning and security purposes. Like why OnStar shouldn’t just be part of 911?
BizarroLand 5y ago
So, paying for wifi hotspot should be handled through my cell company, not my car manufacturer. Same with vehicle tracking (through onstar, not the OEM), XM radio through XM. I don't mind paying a one-time fee to have the hardware installed, and if they offered a version of, say, XM radio or OnStar or a wifi hotspot with unlimited internet for my duration of ownership for a larger one-time upfront fee, I would consider it. I can't think of anything that I would want my automobile manufacturer to be responsible for as a continuous monthly payment in addition to my loan and insurance though. Not a damn thing. They're trying to charge monthly fees for built in safety features like advanced braking? That's a lawsuit waiting to happen. "GM allows family to die in burning agony because they did not pay their $9.99 braking fee for 2 months" will make excellent headlines.
kirykl 5y ago
> Cox Automotive’s Research and Market Intelligence team conducted a survey from Jan. 19 to Jan. 26, 2022, of 217 consumers who intend to buy a new vehicle in the next two years.
rufus_foreman 5y ago
Wait, 25 percent of car buyers want features locked behind subscriptions?
- giuliomagnifico 5y ago
  Well, I can understand maybe, for example during the summer months, you can disable the renew for the “heated seats”, or during the winter the “a/c in car purchase” etc… I font have other explanation.
kurupt213 5y ago
I can’t believe 25% do. I don’t even like subscription software
more_corn 5y ago
I personally will never buy any car from a company who does that. That dystopian future is not the one I want and I’m never engaging with any company who does it. People ask me for my advice on cats often. I’d never recommend one from a company who does it.
tubalcain 5y ago
Who are the 25% that do?
egberts1 5y ago
It is better to closed the system so that its state machine can be fully anticipated by its owner than to keep introducing new state machines for its owner to constantly relearn … and be mocked by the press, hated by the survivors and shunned by consumers. After all, airline manufacturers keep things steady and all options available … within a model. Or there will be no end to Press Headlines like: “Opted-Out ABS Family Killed” “On-Star Ad Pile-Up” “$5/yr PopUp Snuff 7” “CarSeat Crush 1, Killed 9” “Racist Camera Mow 11 Down” “Expired Sub Left 3 Afire” “AI Car Influenced To Kill” “Easter Bunny Strikes Again” “Cosmic Ray Crippled AI Autos; Muscle Cars Survives” “Elec. Tape Shortage; Pesky AD Blinds At Night” “Driver Convulsed; Strobe AD Fault” “Digital Mower-er For Hire” “Driver Fought Upgrade and Died” There is no end until a closed system is attained.

throw03172019 5y ago

Yeah, no shit we don’t! It’s disgusting they think it’s an option.

raxxorrax 5y ago
I really would like to meet someone from the other 25%. Just out of curiosity to experience a completely different kind of reasoning. Perhaps they believe the product would be cheaper with abdicating the feature?
- jleyank 5y ago
  To me, the only people who might not care about such limited-duration features are those looking for a 2-3 year lease. Maybe the manufacturers are trying to get everybody to lease but man, it just pisses me off. Wonder if the state/province's lemon laws can get involved when sh*t just stops working. But based on our top-of-line 2019 RAV4 the computerization of the car is way more brittle and pointless than the traditional engineering. I expect to have a collection of dead stuff long before the car dies.
- jerlam 5y ago
  I can think of one feature that I'd pick the subscription over the upfront cost: Tesla Full Self Driving (FSD). It's $12,000 or $200/month. Five years is the breakeven point, assuming that the prices stay the same (which is a bad assumption). $12k is a big chunk of change - could be around 10% of the car's value. There are also some question marks around whether the FSD is transferable to a new owner. I've driven in a Tesla with FSD, and it's underwhelming. There's no guarantee that in five years, it will perform significantly better - maybe even require additional hardware or a newer car/platform.
  - t0mas88 5y ago
    Tesla "Full Self Driving" is vaporware so far. In previous versions "Autopilot" as a name only implied self-driving to some customers, while it wasn't. Now they've gone a step further and branded advanced driver assist as FSD, which really isn't all that self driving at all.
- randomdata 5y ago
  > Perhaps they believe the product would be cheaper with abdicating the feature? Or, perhaps, believe it would get updates? Software in cars tends to grow stale quickly, which is an annoyance if you plan to keep for more than a few years. My eight year old car, for example, has features (had features) that don't work properly anymore because the software didn't anticipate how the rest of the world would change around it and there isn't an update provided to restore it to the original working condition, let alone adding new features that would be nice to have.
  - t0mas88 5y ago
    Exactly, and cars aren't that hacker friendly. Underneath the design isn't that bad, can-bus makes sense, most modern cars have a good sort of internal network. But there is zero documentation to allow anything aftermarket to plug in later or software to be upgraded past what the manufacturer provides. And car manufacturers are still very much in a mindset that you make a certain model-year, release it, and then forget about it while you work on the next ones. No upgrade path on software whatsoever.
- 4oo4 5y ago
  I believe the correct term is "financial masochist". Who are we to kink shame?

I suppose one could count me in that 75%. This is just my personal preference but I will never buy any equipment that requires a subscription or that has telemetry. As a side note I just bought a 1947 Ford Ferguson 2N tractor and already love it. To my pleasant surprise there is a massive community of people and manufacturers keeping these things alive. Might there be similar communities for the older cars and trucks? Which older cars and trucks are the most popular to keep running in the U.S.?

lp0_on_fire 5y ago

I was ready to purchase a new Rav4 this year. But apparently you need to pay a subscription to use the remote start. So now we're looking at Fords.

reset-password 5y ago

If it becomes ubiquitous I'd expect an underground market to form around activating features which are physically present but locked out by software. And now I'm curious as to what the legal consequences could/would be of something like that, especially when you go to resell the vehicle later.

lostlogin 5y ago
Lockout from features happens on medical hardware - I’ve seen it regularly on MRI scanners from Siemens, GE and Philips. Send them money and the feature gets unlocked. Some options are less expensive, some more. The most expensive I’ve seen is US$50k for enabling a feature. They do it then you restart the system to enable it. I know of a physicist who used to be able to unlock some things, but now there are much more elaborate security measure.
- Decker87 5y ago
  That does seem pretty different from a subscription.
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 5y ago
> ... what the legal consequences could/would be ... I would expect a judge to determine that someone has exceeded their authorized access to a computer and, as such, their behavior is in violation of the CFAA. (Granted, this is actually clearly in the spirit of that particular law. Not saying I agree or disagree with it but there you go.) > ... especially when you go to resell the vehicle later. That reminds me of the Tesla that wrongly had a feature enabled, which was then disabled after the car was resold as a used car.
- EMIRELADERO 5y ago
  > I would expect a judge to determine that someone has exceeded their authorized access to a computer and, as such, their behavior is in violation of the CFAA. How would that work if the computer is owned by the supposed infringer? Has there ever been a judge who ruled that the CFAA applies to computers the defendant owns?

MR4D 5y ago

It depends on the feature. If the car’s map was a subscription I’d prefer it, but only because car maps suck compared to Google and Apple, so it would save me money.

josephcsible 5y ago

There's an important distinction that this article doesn't make: features that exist entirely within the car and that the manufacturer already paid for in full when they made it (e.g., heated seats and key fob remote start), vs. features that involve external entities and do have real ongoing costs (e.g., with OnStar, paying the salary of the advisers you have on call, and paying for the car's cellular data). Only the former is evil.

dzhiurgis 5y ago
Remember when Kindle had free data forever everywhere in world, for like extra $20? In most places you can get smartwatch esim for like $5? And of course there’s places where this buys unlimited data. Kinda think gov should just pay for cellular data in exchange of your location data for traffic planning and security purposes. Like why OnStar shouldn’t just be part of 911?

BizarroLand 5y ago

So, paying for wifi hotspot should be handled through my cell company, not my car manufacturer. Same with vehicle tracking (through onstar, not the OEM), XM radio through XM. I don't mind paying a one-time fee to have the hardware installed, and if they offered a version of, say, XM radio or OnStar or a wifi hotspot with unlimited internet for my duration of ownership for a larger one-time upfront fee, I would consider it. I can't think of anything that I would want my automobile manufacturer to be responsible for as a continuous monthly payment in addition to my loan and insurance though. Not a damn thing. They're trying to charge monthly fees for built in safety features like advanced braking? That's a lawsuit waiting to happen. "GM allows family to die in burning agony because they did not pay their $9.99 braking fee for 2 months" will make excellent headlines.

kirykl 5y ago

> Cox Automotive’s Research and Market Intelligence team conducted a survey from Jan. 19 to Jan. 26, 2022, of 217 consumers who intend to buy a new vehicle in the next two years.

rufus_foreman 5y ago

Wait, 25 percent of car buyers want features locked behind subscriptions?

giuliomagnifico 5y ago
Well, I can understand maybe, for example during the summer months, you can disable the renew for the “heated seats”, or during the winter the “a/c in car purchase” etc… I font have other explanation.

kurupt213 5y ago

I can’t believe 25% do. I don’t even like subscription software

more_corn 5y ago

I personally will never buy any car from a company who does that. That dystopian future is not the one I want and I’m never engaging with any company who does it. People ask me for my advice on cats often. I’d never recommend one from a company who does it.

tubalcain 5y ago

Who are the 25% that do?

egberts1 5y ago

It is better to closed the system so that its state machine can be fully anticipated by its owner than to keep introducing new state machines for its owner to constantly relearn … and be mocked by the press, hated by the survivors and shunned by consumers. After all, airline manufacturers keep things steady and all options available … within a model. Or there will be no end to Press Headlines like: “Opted-Out ABS Family Killed” “On-Star Ad Pile-Up” “$5/yr PopUp Snuff 7” “CarSeat Crush 1, Killed 9” “Racist Camera Mow 11 Down” “Expired Sub Left 3 Afire” “AI Car Influenced To Kill” “Easter Bunny Strikes Again” “Cosmic Ray Crippled AI Autos; Muscle Cars Survives” “Elec. Tape Shortage; Pesky AD Blinds At Night” “Driver Convulsed; Strobe AD Fault” “Digital Mower-er For Hire” “Driver Fought Upgrade and Died” There is no end until a closed system is attained.