Firmware 5.8.6/7/8/9/10

[MikeC]

You win. I saw 5.9 on an MS at Hawthorne yesterday.

Cottonwood, how are you going to write a post like that and not give us some details?!

 

[Jello]

I charged at Hawthorne today and saw a really beat up silver Model S in the bay next to mine. The driver was a young guy who drive down from SF with a few friends. He was in a Model S Beta, with VIN 00056. The oldest VIN that wasn't crash tested is 00054, that's still around, but apparently that car has almost no interior trim. His car had dangling wires inside and lots of missing trim pieces, and the sunroof was being held closed by black duct tape. He was running software version 6.10 (or something like that, it was way above 6). I saw moving video on the browser as his front seat passenger was browsing reddit.com.

The car will be in the LA area this weekend, it has a number 56 sticker in the rear windows and a manufacturer's plate.

I should also add that he didn't let me play with the center screen, and told me he was working on developing the software for charging in China.

 

[andrewket]

What's wrong with you? You didn't over power him and his friends and take pictures of the release notes?

 

[scaesare]

Seriously, release notes. If it does have the auto lowering and it's starting to come out to people, then the NHTSA clearance should follow straight after. That's quite relevant for short term TSLA price movements

I've seen this mentioned several times, typically as conjecture. Here you are stating such as if it were fact.

Has there been any confirmation that the NHTSA is "clearing" anything as a precursor to 5.9?

 

[AlMc]

I've seen this mentioned several times, typically as conjecture. Here you are stating such as if it were fact.

Has there been any confirmation that the NHTSA is "clearing" anything as a precursor to 5.9?[/QUOTE]

No. Purely speculation. There are reports/speculation of 5.9 having auto lowering back. probably being beta tested...but while it has been speculated that the release of the autolowering function is tied to NHTSA clearance (logical if TM wants to be politically correct) I have seen nothing concrete to say that one is married to the other.

 

[scaesare]

I've seen this mentioned several times, typically as conjecture. Here you are stating such as if it were fact.

Has there been any confirmation that the NHTSA is "clearing" anything as a precursor to 5.9?

No. Purely speculation. There are reports/speculation of 5.9 having auto lowering back. probably being beta tested...but while it has been speculated that the release of the autolowering function is tied to NHTSA clearance (logical if TM wants to be politically correct) I have seen nothing concrete to say that one is married to the other.

That's my understanding as well... it would be useful for folks stating conjecture/opinion to make such clear.

 

[Mario Kadastik]

It's purely logical thought. If the auto lowering removal was the result of the incidents and reaction to the NHTSA starting the probe, then return of the auto-lowering i.e. creation of the same situations that can lead to such incidents does indicate that at least Tesla knows the NHTSA result. Or at the very least that the lowering is not considered part of the NHTSA issue if there is any issue. Of course, Tesla might know it in advance and roll out the firmware in advance, but it may still take NHTSA weeks/months of paper pushing to finally announce anything so yes, the timing may be anything, but I'm fairly certain that return of auto-lowering without impediments means NHTSA is fine with it and therefore likely means that it's going to clear the Model S.

So yes, conjecture, but through logic.

 

[jerry33]

It's purely logical thought. If the auto lowering removal was the result of the incidents and reaction to the NHTSA starting the probe, then return of the auto-lowering i.e. creation of the same situations that can lead to such incidents does indicate that at least Tesla knows the NHTSA result. Or at the very least that the lowering is not considered part of the NHTSA issue if there is any issue. Of course, Tesla might know it in advance and roll out the firmware in advance, but it may still take NHTSA weeks/months of paper pushing to finally announce anything so yes, the timing may be anything, but I'm fairly certain that return of auto-lowering without impediments means NHTSA is fine with it and therefore likely means that it's going to clear the Model S.

So yes, conjecture, but through logic.

I suspect that the main reason is that they were going to try to roll it in V6, which appears to have several major changes such as an SDK, and found the V6 was so far behind schedule that they decided to put it in V5.9 instead. Of course, it took some time to shift gears from V6 to V5.9. It probably also put V6 further behind.

 

[hans]

I suspect that the main reason is that they were going to try to roll it in V6, which appears to have several major changes such as an SDK, and found the V6 was so far behind schedule that they decided to put it in V5.9 instead. Of course, it took some time to shift gears from V6 to V5.9. It probably also put V6 further behind.

Where did you hear that V6 has an SDK?

 

[jerry33]

Where did you hear that V6 has an SDK?

There are some rumors in the forum based on an Elon Tweet. (Of course, he didn't specify V6.0)

 

[hans]

There are some rumors in the forum based on an Elon Tweet. (Of course, he didn't specify V6.0)

Do you have a link to the tweet? I don't see anything that could be seen as a reference to the SDK being released.

I see this one with a reference to V6 and the Lego movie, but alas, us Master Builders have no SDK onto which we could build our software. We need the "piece of resistance".

 

[Trnsl8r]

What's wrong with you? You didn't over power him and his friends and take pictures of the release notes?

Pretty sure that a version in such early stages doesn't even have release notes, but you probably knew that...

- - - Updated - - -

I charged at Hawthorne today and saw a really beat up silver Model S in the bay next to mine. The driver was a young guy who drive down from SF with a few friends. He was in a Model S Beta, with VIN 00056. The oldest VIN that wasn't crash tested is 00054, that's still around, but apparently that car has almost no interior trim. His car had dangling wires inside and lots of missing trim pieces, and the sunroof was being held closed by black duct tape. He was running software version 6.10 (or something like that, it was way above 6). I saw moving video on the browser as his front seat passenger was browsing reddit.com.

The car will be in the LA area this weekend, it has a number 56 sticker in the rear windows and a manufacturer's plate.

I should also add that he didn't let me play with the center screen, and told me he was working on developing the software for charging in China.

Ah, that one has been around... See here: Random Model S sightings - Page 9

 

[jerry33]

Do you have a link to the tweet?

This thread, and sorry it wasn't a tweet, that was my bad memory.

 

[brianman]

I saw moving video on the browser as his front seat passenger was browsing reddit.com.

You sure it wasn't an animated GIF? Significant difference.

- - - Updated - - -

Where did you hear that V6 has an SDK?

I really wish we could somehow auto-banish rumors and conjecture (vs. fact) from threads like this.

 

[Doug_G]

It's purely logical thought. If the auto lowering removal was the result of the incidents and reaction to the NHTSA starting the probe, then return of the auto-lowering i.e. creation of the same situations that can lead to such incidents does indicate that at least Tesla knows the NHTSA result. Or at the very least that the lowering is not considered part of the NHTSA issue if there is any issue. Of course, Tesla might know it in advance and roll out the firmware in advance, but it may still take NHTSA weeks/months of paper pushing to finally announce anything so yes, the timing may be anything, but I'm fairly certain that return of auto-lowering without impediments means NHTSA is fine with it and therefore likely means that it's going to clear the Model S.

So yes, conjecture, but through logic.

Pretty sure NHSTA does not have any direct influence over Tesla's firmware release schedule, including auto-lowering. Remember, Tesla voluntarily disabled auto-lowering after the two battery pack impact fires. NHSTA did not make them do it. The only place this hypothesis has appeared has been on the forums.

 

[gregpet]

There are some rumors in the forum based on an Elon Tweet. (Of course, he didn't specify V6.0)

I was taking a test drive with one of the guys in the Houston store and he mentioned that the SDK & valet mode were both coming out soon...

 

[DingDingDao]

You sure it wasn't an animated GIF? Significant difference.

- - - Updated - - -


I really wish we could somehow auto-banish rumors and conjecture (vs. fact) from threads like this.

I'm the source of those "rumors and conjecture." My source was this Q&A with Elon Musk in Amsterdam. At 3:40 he discusses V6.0 and the SDK and at 5:00 he mentions that they expect to have 3rd party applications by 2015.

My original comment was in error, but I went back and researched it so that we could be clear on Musk's comments at that Q&A. That being said, Brianman, I know that you are a senior and longstanding member of the community and I respect your contributions here, but I don't appreciate being made to seem like I'm making up rumors. I'm just a lowly junior member, but I'm merely trying to contribute to the discussion. Feel free to "auto-banish" me.

 

[chrisdl]

At 3:40 he discusses V6.0 and the SDK

That is correct, but at no point in time in the video does Elon ever say that V6 will have an SDK. They're two separate things.

 

[tomas]

That is correct, but at no point in time in the video does Elon ever say that V6 will have an SDK. They're two separate things.

Right but it is fair deduction to suggest it might. This forum is chock full of fiction and conjecture far more tenuous than that, so don't jump on a poster for making that connection. I think he was contrite enough about implying it was fact.

 

[andrewket]

Right but it is fair deduction to suggest it might. This forum is chock full of fiction and conjecture far more tenuous than that, so don't jump on a poster for making that connection. I think he was contrite enough about implying it was fact.

Agree