but we seem to be an OCD bunch.
.
Hell yeah. That's why they're called "threads" - because we pick and pick and pick ;-)
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Hell yeah. That's why they're called "threads" - because we pick and pick and pick ;-)
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
People paid $100k+ for a car advertised WITH THAT FEATURE (and several others that aren't even in the latest beta) a year ago. Oh, the car that I bought also gets map updates every year. Etc.
Yes. I understand all the people who as a reflex defend Tesla. Because we love the company. Because they are still small (no, they really aren't). Because we want them to succeed. Because... whatever.
Fact is that there are quite a few expectations that were sold to us but that haven't been delivered.
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
I haven't taken a strong position on either side of this issue, but I will point out that I don't think the argument that the software is being called Beta software holds a lot of water. I think for all intents and purposes, the software is Beta in name only, and what Tesla is really saying by calling it a Beta is "we're not done working on it yet." But the Early Access Program is Tesla's beta testing program. They put this firmware out to general release. People were not given a choice between using one release version, and one newer beta version, to help test. Tesla is not actively seeking feedback from beta testers of this so-called beta version the way companies do when they are beta testing software.
There are sound arguments that can be made on both sides of this issue. I just don't think "The software is in beta" is one of them.
The other problem is "I paid $XXXXXX for this so I feel it is unreasonable to expect me to keep having to check/test new functionality every few months."
Which I understand. Someone has coined the phrase "upgrade anxiety", which we are prepared to accept with smartphones and computers; much cheaper devices which have always been sold with the expectation of upgrades - but crucially, we get to choose that new functionality by installing/uninstalling apps/software. OS changes are a pain but traditionally - optional.
The apps/additional software model is sort of beginning with Tesla. The Supercharging "App" can be enabled/ purchased at a later date (but for the price of professional CAD/3D Animation software!)
Many on this forum have migrated from Audis BMWs etc which may have featured unfathomable Sat Navs etc, but at least the cars maintained a fixed functionality. Sport was always Sport; Launch was always Launch.
With Tesla you are never quite sure if the car you drive away this morning will behave in exactly same way as the one you parked last night.
And if it doesn't, you sit there wondering a) is this the weather? b) has the car developed a fault? c) is this an upgrade? d) is it one or more of the above? e) what else might have changed that I don't know about? f) why isn't there a "shut up and drive" button which stops this nonsense? f) why can't the S have fixed functionality like the Roadster? g) damn I just missed my junction.
I don't have an answer. Truth is, there has never been a car like this - and that's both good and bad.
Which I understand. Someone has coined the phrase "upgrade anxiety", which we are prepared to accept with smartphones and computers; much cheaper devices which have always been sold with the expectation of upgrades - but crucially, we get to choose that new functionality by installing/uninstalling apps/software. OS changes are a pain but traditionally - optional.
The apps/additional software model is sort of beginning with Tesla. The Supercharging "App" can be enabled/ purchased at a later date (but for the price of professional CAD/3D Animation software!)
Many on this forum have migrated from Audis BMWs etc which may have featured unfathomable Sat Navs etc, but at least the cars maintained a fixed functionality. Sport was always Sport; Launch was always Launch.
With Tesla you are never quite sure if the car you drive away this morning will behave in exactly same way as the one you parked last night.
And if it doesn't, you sit there wondering a) is this the weather? b) has the car developed a fault? c) is this an upgrade? d) is it one or more of the above? e) what else might have changed that I don't know about? f) why isn't there a "shut up and drive" button which stops this nonsense? f) why can't the S have fixed functionality like the Roadster? g) damn I just missed my junction.
I don't have an answer. Truth is, there has never been a car like this - and that's both good and bad.
MikeBur
ManualPilot
+1, this is a new model. Innovative in cars, though common in high tech.
There are ways to mitigate the negatives and reinforce the positives though:
1) Enable consumers to choose to upgrade based on release notes AHEAD of the upgrade. Rolling back upgrades are often very hard and burn a lot of validation cycles that could otherwise be used to increase the quality and/or speed of new features.
2) Enable advanced features / features in "beta" to be turned on/off independently
3) Staff a communication mechanism that RESPONDS to feedback, even if these responses are based on common trends/themes.
This really isn't rocket science. Item 2 has been done for some features already. Experience shows that items 1 and 3 are likely solved with one anointed person. The new guy, forget his name, hopefully understands this from his consumer-oriented previous endeavours...
It's an opportunity to participate, versus a view that some amount of money can fix any problem; which tells me you understand how nothing works.
This is about reconciling how you think the world works with how the world actually works. If this seems challenging, good luck with using the internet.
thegruf
Active Member
I specifically proceeded with the delivery of my 85D based on the release of the "autopilot".
(yeah I know there is a bunch of other reasons to buy a Tesla but for me the "autopilot" was the clincher
I am expecting it to be improved over time not neutered.
Didn't expect to see a software release severely restricting it within days of me picking up the vehicle
(yeah I know there is a bunch of other reasons to buy a Tesla but for me the "autopilot" was the clincher
I am expecting it to be improved over time not neutered.
Didn't expect to see a software release severely restricting it within days of me picking up the vehicle
He is going under 45 so this limitation wouldn't have restricted him at all.
Last edited:
Nope. Happy with how things work thanks. I was just reposting what seems to be coming from a few on the forum. I agree, in an ideal world we should embrace the opportunity to participate.
Talking of which, would there be less confusion over Release Notes if they came with embedded links to video clips showing how a new feature is intended to work?
Would be a lot of work for someone, but some might find this useful.
Interesting... and positive! I wonder if may this was some sort of "trial balloon" to see how the restriction would be received?
Fingers crossed.
Nosken
Active Member
If you notice the car is going over a slight hump in the road, this is happened to me quite a few times. If there is a rise or hump in the road, like at a railroad crossing or something else, where the car is confused on what lines are going straight ahead, rather than continue straight ahead, it wants to veer to the left sharply. Should be easily fixed, and the default should be that the car go straightahead unless something shows up that it should turn.
Last edited:
Soolim
Member
This happens even on divided highway while I am on right most lane, everyday. The car sharply veers to the left
. So I hold the steering wheel to prevent that from happening while travelling that portion of the road. However, if someone is not aware of that behavior accidents can happen. Tesla should fix this soon.
Last edited:
MikeBur
ManualPilot
This happens even on divided highway while I am on right most lane, everyday. The car sharply veers to the left
it would seem logical for autosteering to follow the majority situation when it is unsure. Unless this is a poor programmed heuristic, I would have imagined the "machine learning" to have modified this also.
bugbug: autopilot veers off existing vector when road view distance below confident distance. Expected behavior: car continues on inputted front wheel angle or ML predicted if available
easy to say, though maybe this is what is being done already with 7.1 and the note on restriction was solely for EAP builds? (Too much of a hope? ;-))
From what I've seen the autopilot software is pretty poor at sensing how fast a road is curving. It seems to always assume a very gentle curve even on roads with well marked lanes. It often shows the car in front outside the lane markers even though it's just following the curve. From a software standpoint, I'd think the car would be building a model of the road and should be able to include various amounts of curvature. In the case of going over a hump, I don't think the correct algorithm is to go straight, I'd rather have it follow the same curve in the road that was present leading up to the hump. Roads with a constant curve combined with a rise are pretty common, but if the curve changes rapidly just over the rise, that would be difficult for a human driver too.
garwood
Member
I understand this is a firmware change, but is firmware only installed by the SC or should we expect and over the air notice? And is the only way to get launch control is to get the restrictions on the autopilot?
jgs
Active Member
You mean the restrictions that are now being reported as non-existent by the people who have the firmware? (Who knows about future firmware but that's always going to be true.)
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
It would appear, at least for now, to be a firmware change that is only being installed at Service Centers. I posted the following in another thread late yesterday:
