2 ms·
I'd accept software that helped with efficiency and battery longevity. It's not all bad. But those pieces of software are much more limited that what is packed
by giantg2 3y ago
I'd accept software that helped with efficiency and battery longevity. It's not all bad. But those pieces of software are much more limited that what is packed in today.
They reason they won't build vehicles that you or I want is because people aren't willing to pay the $50k+ prices for an EV that has the equivalent options as a basic $35k work truck.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago>I'd accept software that helped with efficiency and battery longevity. The embedded software doing that quietly in the background is not the problem. It's the user facing software that thinks it can replace the hardware UX that has already worked for decades that's the problem.
- giantg2 3y agoI mean, some of the embedded stuff is iffy too. I mostly agree though. For example, the Active Fuel Management in GM V8s requires the TCC to slip around 10-15 RPM all the time, so that if it goes into 4 cylinder mode the vibrations won't transfer through the drive train. Not a recipe for a long transmission life.