5 ms·
It's easy to underestimate how hard and expensive it is to build, deploy, and remotely upgrade software that runs reliably on a fleet of diverse cars (different
by cs702 3y ago
It's easy to underestimate how hard and expensive it is to build, deploy, and remotely upgrade software that runs reliably on a fleet of diverse cars (different models, different years, slightly different components from batch to batch, etc.). It makes updating a mobile phone OS look trivial in comparison.
So far, only Tesla seems to be able to update car software remotely, regularly and reliably. I'm certain it's neither easy nor cheap.
All things considered, physical buttons and dials are probably easier and cheaper, because they don't require software updates!
- Aurornis 3y ago> (different models, different years, slightly different components from batch to batch, etc.). It makes updating a mobile phone OS look trivial in comparison. Not really. Vehicle computers aren’t vastly different on every model year and every trim level or option package. These parts are standardized, tested, and carried across model years. Even with changes, the teams would be expected to have the different variants in their development and test cycles. The 2020, 2021, and 2022 model infotainment systems likely share a lot more in common than an iPhone 13, iPhone 14, and iPhone 15 with all of the non-Pro, Pro, and Max variants.
- wannacboatmovie 3y agoThis isn't a bunch of Windows PCs home-built from a hodgepodge of components. They designed, built, and shipped all the hardware. There is ABSOLUTELY NO excuse for not having a database of the exact hardware configs by serial number. They have the ability to test every single shipped configuration. If they don't, they have already failed as a car company.
- AlotOfReading 3y agoI guarantee they have a database with the hardware configs. It's required by NHTSA to do recalls and notices. They'll undoubtedly be using that to inform the right people to come in. The update servers almost certainly don't talk to that system though.
- xgbi 3y agoFrom what I read somewhere, Tesla was able to do that because they have remote ssh capability. In at least one instance, they fixed the cars manually by running a massive remote command on all cars after a messed up update: https://lobste.rs/s/v42zil/former_tesla_employee_ssh_d_as_many_cars_as https://lobste.rs/s/v42zil/former_tesla_employee_ssh_d_as_ma... I wouldn’t call that very reliable , but they indeed do it regularly
- SoftTalker 3y agoIt sounds like, in this case, the updates clobbered the ssh authorized keys (or equivalent in their system) and so now they cannot access the cars remotely. So they are going to have to go into the shop and have the authorized keys restored.
- FireBeyond 3y agoAnd it's not like they'd ever abuse that ability, like when someone pokes around in their car and discovers references to a new unannounced model, and then Tesla reaches in, force downgrades the vehicle to older software with no references, and then disables the ethernet port on the vehicle, and for a final fuck you disables its ability to ever get another update. They'd never do that, except when they did do that.
- kccqzy 3y agoThe Twitter thread linked by the link posted GP actually contained a reasonable explanation of why that happened. https://x.com/atomicthumbs/status/1032939644621545473 https://x.com/atomicthumbs/status/1032939644621545473
- wil421 3y ago> So far, only Tesla seems to be able to update car software remotely, regularly and reliably. I'm certain it's neither easy nor cheap. My Jeep Grand Cherokee has OTA for over 5+ years. BMW has been doing it since 2018. I’m almost positive a family member had it with GMC on star back in the late 2000s.
- willio58 3y agoI don't think the Jeep or BMW infotainment systems are nearly as fleshed out or complex as Rivian's, especially not Tesla's. Maybe I'm wrong!
- wil421 3y agoThat’s a huge plus for me. CarPlay or nothing. BMW is becoming closer to a Tesla like screen. GM is supposed to drop CarPlay in favor of whatever they are doing on their EVs. I don’t want my ICE/EV to become a SaaS app where I’m paying $500 a year to use my own car.
- vel0city 3y ago> GM is supposed to drop CarPlay in favor of whatever they are doing on their EVs IIRC its not just their EVs its all cars.
- fma 3y agoShouldn't make such a bold IIRC statement correcting someone without first doing a quick Google to verify. https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a43488135/gm-apple-carplay-discontinued-future-evs/ https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a43488135/gm-apple-carplay... Specifically it's for the new Ultium EVs. Bolts, Lyriqs, Hummers will still have it.
- vel0city 3y agoIf I had known it for a fact I wouldn't have prefaced it with "IIRC". Guess I didn't recall correctly. Thanks for pointing that out.
- etchalon 3y agoMy Volvo XC90 gets regular OTA updates without issue, and so did my Land Rover Discovery before it.
- bri3d 3y ago> All things considered, physical buttons and dials are probably easier and cheaper, because they don't require software updates! Almost all automotive control modules have firmware, whether that firmware is parsing touchscreen inputs or a rotary encoder.
- NotYourLawyer 3y agoWell sure, but the rotary encoder can’t get moved to a different menu tree by a software update, and I can use it without taking my eyes off the road. I know which I prefer.
- dylan604 3y agoif (cpu == A) do code else if (cpu == B) do other code They invited the multiple combination vampire into their house. They know what devices are being used. If you don't want a dedicated update per piece of equipment, it'll be a large binary with lots of branching. Saying they don't know what device is where is just lazy. Ask the device what it is, and have a branch for it. If the device IDs itself as something unknown, don't do anything.
- tech_ken 3y ago> All things considered, physical buttons and dials are probably easier and cheaper, because they don't require software updates! If it ain't broke it's ripe for disruption
- matrss 3y ago> All things considered, physical buttons and dials are probably easier and cheaper, because they don't require software updates! I am pretty sure there is a market for a dumb modern car, but no one is building it. I am thinking of an electric car without anything "smart" in it. Modern safety features can stay, if they work completely self contained and without requiring an external connection ever over the lifespan of the car.
- NotYourLawyer 3y agoI’d buy that car today.
- jacquesm 3y agoRegulatory pressure may well get you to do stuff you wouldn't want to do.
- iso8859-1 3y agoI wonder if it is somehow possible to use an open source battery management system to build a car like this. See https://foxbms.org/ https://foxbms.org/
- VyseofArcadia 3y agoForget updates entirely. My car is one of the few places I expect to get software that works the first time. If you absolutely must have updates, then at least not OTA updates. Have them done at the dealership or service center so any issues can be dealt with immediately. Come on, is this engineering or hacking? This is a car, not a CRUD app. Get. It. Right.
- w0m 3y agorandom new features via OTA updates was one of the deciding factors when i bought my car ... :) I also mostly WFH so... yea. lol.
- dalyons 3y agoeh i guess i disagree. We had that (& still do for some cars) for decades, and it universally resulted in terrible software that you were stuck with for the life of the car. Hard to update == hard to iterate == bad software.
- ClumsyPilot 3y agobad software is the one that kills people. Ugly software that works is fine
- dalyons 3y agoin cars it is often is ugly AND doesnt work.
- dagmx 3y agoThat’s how things used to be and it resulted in lots of long standing bugs because the update rates were low, and so manufacturers didn’t push updates. Many people don’t live near dealers or service centers or can afford the continued cost (it’s not free usually unless it’s a recall) OTA is better for consumer when done properly. Other manufacturers manage it fine, and one bad example shouldn’t be what we base things on. It’s what we should learn from and improve on.
- xyst 3y agoTech junk shouldn’t go in cars, period. Cars shouldn’t be as pervasive and prevalent in society (at least in USA). Yet here we are. Car manufacturers have spent an insane amount of money over decades to get to this point (buying legislators, forcing highway infra, subsidies, profit driven strategy over sustainability)
- treesknees 3y agoDecades? Try almost a century. For better or worse, our cities and various economies were built around the automobile. It's still a free market - these companies could choose not to put tech into their product. But look at the backlash against GM when they announced they wouldn't support Apple Car Play or Android Auto. Consumers want it.
- FireBeyond 3y ago> So far, only Tesla seems to be able to update car software remotely, regularly and reliably. I'm certain it's neither easy nor cheap. Tesla, whose computer systems quite regularly need to be hard rebooted while the car is driving? That Tesla?
- code_runner 3y agoI had to do this once or twice (its very very infrequent in my experience) and one time it was genuinely terrifying, as I had lost blinkers etc where a few interstates all intersect and merge etc. I still do love the car though.... but a very sketchy moment that I shouldn't have brought on myself while driving in that situation.
- xienze 3y ago> I had to do this once or twice (its very very infrequent in my experience) This is something that’s _never_ supposed to happen. > but a very sketchy moment that I shouldn't have brought on myself while driving in that situation. How on earth can you rationalize a Tesla performing an update/hard reset while driving as _your_ fault? It should never be allowed to happen!
- pcchristie 3y agoTesla doesn't do that, you're misunderstanding. You can do a hart reboot on the computer by yourself, by holding down both steering will scroll wheels for 10 seconds. Fixes any glitches with the screen.