3 ms·

Tesla has done a fantastic job of updating the software, adding useful features. They still do (some basic) updates of the cars of 10 years ago. They managed to

Tesla has done a fantastic job of updating the software, adding useful features. They still do (some basic) updates of the cars of 10 years ago. They managed to keep the UI fairly fast and responsive on old hardware, even as they have update the hardware for the console cpu etc many times. This is in contract to VW and many other legacy auto companies, that have struggled with software. I have worried about an upgrade killing my system or bricking the car but more than 10 years late it's good.

izacus 3y ago
Didn't they also redesign the UI, hiding useful features?
- NotSammyHagar 3y ago
  I'd say they made some good and some bad changes, but overall added useful features.
kibibu 3y ago
> an upgrade ... bricking the car That this is even plausible should be cause for concern.
- NotSammyHagar 3y ago
  Modern software for cars is like that for phones. You are not in control of it, you can't roll back, you can't usually pick a particular software version to install. In a decently designed modern car, you have a drivetrain computer system separate from the infotainment (the big console with a map in a tesla, for instance). This is frustrating for me as a software engineer. You have to trust the software maintenance and we all know software can go bad. In cars the general rule is legacy auto companies are terrible, although there are some companies doing okay. Tesla has done a great job, with apparent good boundaries between the UI/infotainment and drivetrain. You can reboot the screens while driving even (which is worrying but they seem to be well divided). They pay people for security attacks on the cars. Tesla has faster update paths for the main UI, and seem to update the drivetrain less frequently, but they do add and remove some features over time. They have "recalls" that are just software updates. A few other companies have done a good job designing and executing on frequent software updates, Rivian is one that has done a good job. Notably though, Rivian did push a bad update this year that messed up people's cars, had to install a new update a few days later. Before that I would say rivian was equal to tesla in quality. Other than they they are but that is a big difference. VW is kind of in the middle. Wants to have good software and updates, but it has been a very painful sequence. They had updates that took too long, they were afraid they'd run out the 12v battery during big updates, possibly bricking a car, so you had to bring them to the dealer. Lately I think I read they had a successful over the air update. Oh yeah, tesla and rivian do all their updates over the air. Park you car for an hour, pick "go". Don't do this on a trip ;0) Then all other legacy cars are terrible. Maybe the worst ever is the GM Lyriq which had a stop sale order it was so bad. Basically unusually, reboot the ui frequently and it keeps getting stuck on people. Hardly believable that they had those problems, apparently no related to a software update bug. There's android auto and apple carplay. A lot of people like them, I think they are very decent. Legacy auto has almost given up on writing their own UIs, they are mostly bad, but some companies are coming back and trying to stop using them so they can control the experince, and maybe charge people for new features eventually. Tesla and Rivian never charged for their main software. Tesla continues to sell FSD for outrageous prices and it is not done, drives like a scared and maybe drunk beginning teenage driver.
tivert 3y ago
> Tesla has done a fantastic job of updating the software, adding useful features. They still do (some basic) updates of the cars of 10 years ago. They managed to keep the UI fairly fast and responsive on old hardware, even as they have update the hardware for the console cpu etc many times. This is in contract to VW and many other legacy auto companies, that have struggled with software. I don't know about VW, but my Honda has decent (not great, but decent) software for the head unit (Android, basically). Because my car has no modem whatsoever, it's never been updated, which I vastly prefer to having to deal with "upgrades" of any kind. IMHO, car software should be developed like a pre-internet videogame: finish it, test the hell out of it before release, then bugfixes or minor enhancements only, distributed through a totally consumer-controlled channel. A car is a tool, and like a hammer, it's UX shouldn't change after you buy it.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
  > test the hell out of it before release Paradoxically, being able to fix mistakes later has had an adverse effect on software quality.

izacus 3y ago

Didn't they also redesign the UI, hiding useful features?

NotSammyHagar 3y ago
I'd say they made some good and some bad changes, but overall added useful features.

kibibu 3y ago

> an upgrade ... bricking the car That this is even plausible should be cause for concern.

NotSammyHagar 3y ago
Modern software for cars is like that for phones. You are not in control of it, you can't roll back, you can't usually pick a particular software version to install. In a decently designed modern car, you have a drivetrain computer system separate from the infotainment (the big console with a map in a tesla, for instance). This is frustrating for me as a software engineer. You have to trust the software maintenance and we all know software can go bad. In cars the general rule is legacy auto companies are terrible, although there are some companies doing okay. Tesla has done a great job, with apparent good boundaries between the UI/infotainment and drivetrain. You can reboot the screens while driving even (which is worrying but they seem to be well divided). They pay people for security attacks on the cars. Tesla has faster update paths for the main UI, and seem to update the drivetrain less frequently, but they do add and remove some features over time. They have "recalls" that are just software updates. A few other companies have done a good job designing and executing on frequent software updates, Rivian is one that has done a good job. Notably though, Rivian did push a bad update this year that messed up people's cars, had to install a new update a few days later. Before that I would say rivian was equal to tesla in quality. Other than they they are but that is a big difference. VW is kind of in the middle. Wants to have good software and updates, but it has been a very painful sequence. They had updates that took too long, they were afraid they'd run out the 12v battery during big updates, possibly bricking a car, so you had to bring them to the dealer. Lately I think I read they had a successful over the air update. Oh yeah, tesla and rivian do all their updates over the air. Park you car for an hour, pick "go". Don't do this on a trip ;0) Then all other legacy cars are terrible. Maybe the worst ever is the GM Lyriq which had a stop sale order it was so bad. Basically unusually, reboot the ui frequently and it keeps getting stuck on people. Hardly believable that they had those problems, apparently no related to a software update bug. There's android auto and apple carplay. A lot of people like them, I think they are very decent. Legacy auto has almost given up on writing their own UIs, they are mostly bad, but some companies are coming back and trying to stop using them so they can control the experince, and maybe charge people for new features eventually. Tesla and Rivian never charged for their main software. Tesla continues to sell FSD for outrageous prices and it is not done, drives like a scared and maybe drunk beginning teenage driver.

tivert 3y ago

> Tesla has done a fantastic job of updating the software, adding useful features. They still do (some basic) updates of the cars of 10 years ago. They managed to keep the UI fairly fast and responsive on old hardware, even as they have update the hardware for the console cpu etc many times. This is in contract to VW and many other legacy auto companies, that have struggled with software. I don't know about VW, but my Honda has decent (not great, but decent) software for the head unit (Android, basically). Because my car has no modem whatsoever, it's never been updated, which I vastly prefer to having to deal with "upgrades" of any kind. IMHO, car software should be developed like a pre-internet videogame: finish it, test the hell out of it before release, then bugfixes or minor enhancements only, distributed through a totally consumer-controlled channel. A car is a tool, and like a hammer, it's UX shouldn't change after you buy it.

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
> test the hell out of it before release Paradoxically, being able to fix mistakes later has had an adverse effect on software quality.