Firmware 6.2

[Andyw2100]

I did indeed miss this. That's way cool. I would think that Tesla has all these data, but guess that they are behaving like most companies: access to these data is probably limited and probably some of those who don't have internal access still find it very interesting and useful... and so they turn to Hank's site.

Here it is, in case you wanted to see the original post, and hadn't yet gone looking for it:

So this is interesting! I was just reviewing my webserver logs, and I found an IP address assigned to Tesla Motors hitting the Firmware tracking website almost daily since April 1st. So while we are collecting information for our own use and amusement, at least one person or group within TM is also finding it useful.. or at least keeping track of our progress. Hi Tesla! Glad you like the Firmware Upgrade Tracker!

 

[dirkhh]

Maybe this bunch isn't as creative as I thought.

Wait... we had six minutes and you're already disappointed?

 

[HankLloydRight]

For example, it seems to me that the roll-out of 2.5.21 was the quickest we've ever seen... actually that's visible even in the current format, I guess Oh well, I thought I had a point...

The logic is:

--today+2 weeks by day (15 columns)
--preceding 2 weeks (one column)
(with previous columns, that encompeses the last month)
--preceding 2 months by month - 2 columns
(with previous columns, that encompeses that last quarter)
-- preceding 3 quarters by quarter -- 3 columns
(with previous columns, that encompeses that last year)
-- Entire year to date -- one column

 

[dirkhh]

The logic is:

--today+2 weeks by day (15 columns)
--preceding 2 weeks (one column)
(with previous columns, that encompeses the last month)
--preceding 2 months by month - 2 columns
(with previous columns, that encompeses that last quarter)
-- preceding 3 quarters by quarter -- 3 columns
(with previous columns, that encompeses that last year)
-- Entire year to date -- one column

Totally obvious and systematic.
I admire how you came up with this intuitive scheme. :giggle:
Forget what I said.

 

[HankLloydRight]

Wait... we had six minutes and you're already disappointed?

I'm impatient.

 

[dirkhh]

I'm impatient.

Well I proposed a name already... or tell me how I can edit them... I'm sure I can create a few more
I even promise to keep it G rated (but not restricted to G rated movies / songs)

 

[HankLloydRight]

Well I proposed a name already... or tell me how I can edit them... I'm sure I can create a few more
I even promise to keep it G rated (but not restricted to G rated movies / songs)

What did you propose -- for which build?

I only remember Buzz Lightyear and Taylor Swift. I can change it.

 

[dirkhh]

Well I proposed a name already... or tell me how I can edit them... I'm sure I can create a few more
I even promise to keep it G rated (but not restricted to G rated movies / songs)

Oh, and in case you want to stick with names based on... names... how about "Kevin Mahaffey" for 2.5.21... He's one of the two researchers who found the vulnerability... the other one was Marc Rogers.

- - - Updated - - -

What did you propose -- for which build?

I only remember Buzz Lightyear and Taylor Swift. I can change it.

I proposed "The Interview" for 2.5.21 - the movie because of which North Korea hacked Sony pictures... or Kevin Mahaffey or Marc Rogers

 

[HankLloydRight]

I proposed "The Interview" for 2.5.21 - the movie because of which North Korea hacked Sony pictures... or Kevin Mahaffey or Marc Rogers

I like "The Interview". That goes along with the spirit of naming builds. Oh, snap -- right, *I* suggested naming that one "DEFCON". I think that's more relatable to the Model S situation.

 

[dirkhh]

so the 101.x series clearly needs the names of unicorns... I was first thinking of going with "Pegasus" and stuff like this, but how about this:
Uber, Xiaomi, Airbnb, Palantir, and Snapchat (see The Unicorn List - Fortune for reference)

 

[HankLloydRight]

Sounds good to me unless anyone has any objections.

 

[Andyw2100]

I just found something odd, I think.

I was looking back through the threads, to try to figure out which firmware version had been causing to Ds to just lose power and stop, so that I could think of an appropriate name for the version that fixed the problem. It looks like the version with the problem was .167, and the version that fixed it was .168.

P85D Lost power on road,

But in the update tracker, there is no record of anyone being updated to .167, though there are records of updates to .168.

 

[dirkhh]

I just found something odd, I think.

I was looking back through the threads, to try to figure out which firmware version had been causing to Ds to just lose power and stop, so that I could think of an appropriate name for the version that fixed the problem. It looks like the version with the problem was .167, and the version that fixed it was .168.

P85D Lost power on road,

But in the update tracker, there is no record of anyone being updated to .167, though there are records of updates to .168.

Yes, .167 was pulled after just a very few being rolled out. Another sign of just how agile Tesla is when it comes to firmware issue. at first I thought that none of the .167 owners ended up being part of the subset who record firmware upgrades in the tool... but one of the people posting about this was wk057 and he actually has posted to the tool... if you happen to read this, @wk057, is there a reason you didn't enter .167?

 

[Andyw2100]

Yes, .167 was pulled after just a very few being rolled out. Another sign of just how agile Tesla is when it comes to firmware issue. at first I thought that none of the .167 owners ended up being part of the subset who record firmware upgrades in the tool... but one of the people posting about this was wk057 and he actually has posted to the tool... if you happen to read this, @wk057, is there a reason you didn't enter .167?

Checking my trips spreadsheet, I had .167 from at least 02/23 to 02/27. I've also been religiously updating the tracker. This is odd.

Edit: Upon further digging...

We're talking about frimware version 6.1.2.2.167 as the buggy one, which predates the update tracker. The version .168 in the tracker is actually 6.2.2.4.168. There are many firmware versions in between.

Sorry for the false alarm.

 

[dirkhh]

Checking my trips spreadsheet, I had .167 from at least 02/23 to 02/27. I've also been religiously updating the tracker. This is odd.

Edit: Upon further digging...

We're talking about frimware version 6.1.2.2.167 as the buggy one, which predates the update tracker. The version .168 in the tracker is actually 6.2.2.4.168. There are many firmware versions in between.

Sorry for the false alarm.

Bingo... I was digging back to try to figure this out and came here to correct the misconception. You were quicker. Mystery solved.

 

[Andyw2100]

Bingo... I was digging back to try to figure this out and came here to correct the misconception. You were quicker. Mystery solved.

Actually I realize I was wrong, and version 6.1 doesn't actually predate the tracker. The tracker by default is only showing 6.2 updates. We need to click a different radio button to see the 6.1 updates.

Looking at all this a little more closely than I had before, I wonder if the label on the year column, at least for now, should be modified, so as not to incorrectly indicate it is reflecting a year's worth of data when the tracker hasn't yet been collecting data for a year. Perhaps this would be too much of an annoyance for Hank for the slightly improved accuracy. It's just something that came to mind when I looked at that column at the same time I was trying to figure out when data collection started.

 

[gpetti]

Actually I realize I was wrong, and version 6.1 doesn't actually predate the tracker. The tracker by default is only showing 6.2 updates. We need to click a different radio button to see the 6.1 updates.

Looking at all this a little more closely than I had before, I wonder if the label on the year column, at least for now, should be modified, so as not to incorrectly indicate it is reflecting a year's worth of data when the tracker hasn't yet been collecting data for a year. Perhaps this would be too much of an annoyance for Hank for the slightly improved accuracy. It's just something that came to mind when I looked at that column at the same time I was trying to figure out when data collection started.

so it is written?

 

[wk057]

Yes, .167 was pulled after just a very few being rolled out. Another sign of just how agile Tesla is when it comes to firmware issue. at first I thought that none of the .167 owners ended up being part of the subset who record firmware upgrades in the tool... but one of the people posting about this was wk057 and he actually has posted to the tool... if you happen to read this, @wk057, is there a reason you didn't enter .167?

I went through my phone pics (I usually snap a pic of the info screen before and after updates) and added any missing info, all the way back to 2015-01-09 / v6.1 (2.2.92). I may very well have not taken snap shots of a couple, but 2.2.167 is there.

I may not be as detailed with the P85 because my wife installs updates and I don't always snap a shot of them... and her car is almost always late to get updates.

 

[Pilot_51]

I'm starting to wonder if my car is capable of getting OTA updates any more. According to the tracker, it looks like about 90% of cars that got 2.5.21 also got 2.5.36. My car had to go to service to finally get 6.2 (2.5.21), coincidentally the same day it was pushed to everyone, and hasn't received an update since. Granted, it's still a bit early to be sure, but no doubt you'd think the same way if you haven't had an OTA update in over 8 months.

 

[jerry33]

I'm starting to wonder if my car is capable of getting OTA updates any more.

I don't know about OTA updates, but when I went in for the LTE upgrade and had a loaner and moved the thumb drive to the loaner, the time bar and all the artwork that I got when the car was new, but haven't gotten since the upgrade that enabled unicode, came back in the loaner. I had thought that it was just a problem with the later updates not getting the artwork, but now I see that it's just my car. (And no, the LTE upgrade didn't fix this. Very few tracks have artwork or the time bar.)