Firmware 5.14

[dirkhh]

Actually, I think it is a big deal. There are a number of possible interpretations, none good:

• It was a "random" occurrence. This is actually a screaming red flag. Are their release processes and controls so loose that a one time thing like this happens??
• It was an employee prank. Those wild and crazy firmware engineers... I doubt this was the case, though.
• They released it and then changed their minds. That says there is chaos in their release management.
• It was an intended release due to 6.0 not being solid yet. Uh, not good at all as other have expressed. But kind of unlikely given no one else has seen the release and the service center folks claim no knowledge of it.
• It's a fake. I think this has been fully debunked. Added here only for completeness.

Maybe there are other possible explanations (black helicopters?) but doubt they will be comforting.

My guess is that most of the FW team is focused on the Model X and they are giving the Model S 6.0 short shrift. I hope they have separate development and sustaining teams plus a world class test/release team but maybe we are seeing symptoms of just a single team trying to serve multiple masters.

The more I think about it, the more I'm leaning to this explanation:
- they started rolling this out, Cattledog was one of the first to receive it (and we believe who gets a new release when is somewhat random)
- one user (internally or externally) who isn't posting here also got it and had some very serious issue, serious enough for them to halt the roll-out

That would explain things rather rationally.

 

[PhilBa]

sure that is a possibility but it doesn't add comfort...

 

[dirkhh]

sure that is a possibility but it doesn't add comfort...

Why not? It's always possible that you miss one odd hardware combination or something else in internal testing.
And then to immediately pull this release makes sense. And if it really is triggered by a hardware combination so that it doesn't affect the other owners who have it... I don't see the immediate 'bad' here.

 

[L@urens]

I didn't get any new version today at the service center. The car was there for two days and got detailed, so plenty of time to do any firmware update pending.

I run the .22 release of 5.12 still. So they halted a 5.14 early, or 5.14 targets a very specific issue.

 

[SteveH]

There are still several of us on 5.9. So there are actually a string of releases that have been halted before going out universally of late.

 

[flashflood]

There are still several of us on 5.9. So there are actually a string of releases that have been halted before going out universally of late.

So, are we still at N=1 for sightings of 5.14? Strange.

I just wish Tesla was more transparent about the process. Almost any answer would be acceptable; what's annoying is being totally in the dark about everything -- the bugs (release notes should explain what was fixed), the roadmap, the release schedule, and the roll-out schedule. When a new update becomes available, I want to know exactly what's in it so that I can intelligently decide when to install it -- so that, for example, I don't have to load new firmware the night before a critical meeting or long trip (unless it addresses a problem that I'm actually having trouble with).

I don't mean to sound ungrateful. Every other car maker provides complete transparency: you won't get anything, ever. Tesla's offering is fabulous by comparison. But it could be much more awesome without any additional engineering effort, just a change in communication policy.

 

[ToddRLockwood]

I've had some bugginess with 5.12 (main screen not starting up, unable to reboot, etc.), hope this fixes that.

Evan, I believe that you will find that it does.

- - - Updated - - -

So, are we still at N=1 for sightings of 5.14? Strange.

I just wish Tesla was more transparent about the process. Almost any answer would be acceptable; what's annoying is being totally in the dark about everything -- the bugs (release notes should explain what was fixed), the roadmap, the release schedule, and the roll-out schedule. When a new update becomes available, I want to know exactly what's in it so that I can intelligently decide when to install it -- so that, for example, I don't have to load new firmware the night before a critical meeting or long trip (unless it addresses a problem that I'm actually having trouble with).

Listing bugs would be a public relations disaster for Tesla. Taken out of context, the information would likely become fodder for anti-Tesla folks and would cloud the fact that Tesla is highly proactive about addressing problems.

- - - Updated - - -

Or you're just reading way too much into this and it's not really a big deal either way.

I agree. 6.0 is obviously built on top of a lot of 5.12 code. If a significant bug was discovered in 5.12, it makes sense that they should deal with that first—with another incremental update. Releasing 6.0, knowing that it might contain an unresolved issue, makes no sense.

 

[iffatall]

...I just wish Tesla was more transparent about the process. Almost any answer would be acceptable; what's annoying is being totally in the dark about everything -- the bugs (release notes should explain what was fixed), the roadmap, the release schedule, and the roll-out schedule. When a new update becomes available, I want to know exactly what's in it so that I can intelligently decide when to install it -- so that, for example, I don't have to load new firmware the night before a critical meeting or long trip (unless it addresses a problem that I'm actually having trouble with)....

Release notes for most closed source software updates do not go into details of bug fixes. Neither do they throw more light on roadmaps than Tesla already does. Strict roll out schedules are also rare.

Also, when you have a critical meeting or long trip, don't install the update as a thumb rule - detailed release notes or not.

P.S.: It can never be 100% transparent. And in my experience, increasing transparency, if not to 100% invariably leads to craving for further transparency rather than satisfaction.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

Annual service was performed yesterday in Scottsdale. I was updated to 5.12 (1.64.38).

 

[araxara]

Annual service was performed yesterday in Scottsdale. I was updated to 5.12 (1.64.38).

Same here: Annual service performed in Scottsdale, yesterday 2-Sep-2014, and 5.12 1.64.38 installed.

 

[brianman]

Unless you have one of the buggy versions installed. Seems like every other release is a good one to skip (or at least hold off installing as long as possible).

... ME ... Vista ...

 

[chickensevil]

As far as a clear roadmap or release schedule o don't agree with that. There is nothing that is requiring them doing anything and when you go that far with transparency inevitably you end up with armchair programmers (its already bad enough here as it is) suggesting: " X feature is easy! Why it should only be two lines of code! They need to implement this now, why do they have Y feature on the roadmap for next month no one wants that, give me X! "

Leave that in the dark, it doesn't affect anything at all.

That being said, every other software I have ever used lists all the bug changes and what has been updated with pretty decent detail. Especially when it comes to patching exploits which I feel they need to up the transparency here. Security in your car is the new hot button issue and they shouldn't be hiding behind the bushes fixing holes in secret. It should be mentioned *somewhere* what was fixed. "A flaw in the navigation when you searched for 13 caused your car to instantly crash has been fixed" they don't have to tell you the gritting details of how to exploit the car... Microsoft, Adobe, Apple etc do not do that, but they tell you what was patched and why. This will need to happen sooner rather than later because as cars are attempted to be hacked more and more it is going to be forced into the light one way or another.

Second as has been stated numerous times you should be able to tell before install which version you are upgrading to, have the choice to cancel and potentially have the choice to revert to a previous version. You know, there are people still out there running Java 2.... Which is impressive because it wasn't even called Java 2 when it was released.... If you choose to continue to run outdated and unsupported firmware that is not Tesla's fault and they can refuse to give you service or support a claim like "my car randomly drove through a brick wall" "Oh yes, I see that was a problem with version two that was fixed 10 years ago and you never upgraded, sorry. Would you like to buy a new car?"

 

[russman]

I had some weird display issues, where the screen would be red in various parts of the screen. This happened twice, but was resolved with a reboot. I sent pictures to the service center and they asked me to come in to update the firmware to 5.12. This was last week.

 

[Gear]

Actually, I think it is a big deal. There are a number of possible interpretations, none good:

• It was a "random" occurrence. This is actually a screaming red flag. Are their release processes and controls so loose that a one time thing like this happens??
• It was an employee prank. Those wild and crazy firmware engineers... I doubt this was the case, though.
• They released it and then changed their minds. That says there is chaos in their release management.
• It was an intended release due to 6.0 not being solid yet. Uh, not good at all as other have expressed. But kind of unlikely given no one else has seen the release and the service center folks claim no knowledge of it.
• It's a fake. I think this has been fully debunked. Added here only for completeness.

Maybe there are other possible explanations (black helicopters?) but doubt they will be comforting.

My guess is that most of the FW team is focused on the Model X and they are giving the Model S 6.0 short shrift. I hope they have separate development and sustaining teams plus a world class test/release team but maybe we are seeing symptoms of just a single team trying to serve multiple masters.

Are those really the only possible scenarios? They all seem ultra-pessimistic to me. I've seen Occam's Razor references several times on this forum and never seen anywhere that it applied so well. So many people here are so paranoid. Maybe this update just applied to a few owners for some reason. There are endless reasons why this could be, and we're not privy to everything Tesla does behind the scenes. Getting all worked up over this and assuming the worst is just silly. Also, is it not reasonable to think that Tesla has several people working on development for future releases and a few that remain fixing bugs on current versions? Just because another 5.x release was sighted, I don't see why that proves the timeline of any future releases to be affected. Take a breath, calm down, and go hug a loved one.

 

[flashflood]

Release notes for most closed source software updates do not go into details of bug fixes. Neither do they throw more light on roadmaps than Tesla already does. Strict roll out schedules are also rare.

Also, when you have a critical meeting or long trip, don't install the update as a thumb rule - detailed release notes or not.

P.S.: It can never be 100% transparent. And in my experience, increasing transparency, if not to 100% invariably leads to craving for further transparency rather than satisfaction.

I hear you, but respectfully disagree. For comparison I offer the most opaque piece of software ever, Adobe Flash Player. It constantly asks me to upgrade without providing any specific reason. So I don't. Serious security bugs are just as likely to be introduced in the new version as fixed by it -- otherwise, after a decade of patches, the stupid thing would just work. Even hyper-secret Apple provides a high-level summary of what's fixed in each minor release of iOS.

 

[PhilBa]

Are those really the only possible scenarios? They all seem ultra-pessimistic to me. I've seen Occam's Razor references several times on this forum and never seen anywhere that it applied so well. So many people here are so paranoid. Maybe this update just applied to a few owners for some reason. There are endless reasons why this could be, and we're not privy to everything Tesla does behind the scenes. Getting all worked up over this and assuming the worst is just silly. Also, is it not reasonable to think that Tesla has several people working on development for future releases and a few that remain fixing bugs on current versions? Just because another 5.x release was sighted, I don't see why that proves the timeline of any future releases to be affected. Take a breath, calm down, and go hug a loved one.

I have run large software teams that have had to put out updates and build new versions at the same time. You have to get your processes locked down to make sure that things like that don't happen. Good release management doesn't just happen. A single team is hard pressed to serve 2 masters - the new version and maintenance releases. I've never seen it done well. What we are seeing is symptomatic of those kinds of problems. I hope I'm wrong but kind of doubt it.

 

[iffatall]

I hear you, but respectfully disagree. For comparison I offer the most opaque piece of software ever, Adobe Flash Player. It constantly asks me to upgrade without providing any specific reason. So I don't. Serious security bugs are just as likely to be introduced in the new version as fixed by it -- otherwise, after a decade of patches, the stupid thing would just work. Even hyper-secret Apple provides a high-level summary of what's fixed in each minor release of iOS.

Not sure I understood your point correctly. As I said, some software product updates are very transparent. I did not say there are no such examples; I said it was rare.
By the way, I am not sure Apple is a good example of releasing transparent updates. The 'summary of what's fixed' may just be the tip of the iceberg. For all we know, Tesla may already be more transparent.

My point is that I do not see Tesla as being too secretive at all. And I do not think there is any reason or benefit of increasing transparency.

We will always be curious, and we will also always crib and ask for more. That is just how it is, and frankly, I do not see it as a negative.

 

[apacheguy]

Without wading into the debate too much, I can say that having a more regular release cycle would largely quell the anxiety caused by firmware updates. It's only when a release is delayed on the order of 6 months (Elon said 6.0 was due in February) that owners start to get antsy and say, "Hey where's my update? Why is it delayed? We need greater transparency."

 

[Cattledog]

 

[dirkhh]

You got an update. The plot thickens. I'm guessing that they figured out whatever it was that made them stop the rollout and that we'll see more people with 5.14 soon...