-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Firmware 6.2
- Thread starter spentan
- Start date
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
MarcG
Active Member
Perhaps different models have branched off to different releases? So far it looks like S60 models are getting the funky versioning.
Last edited:
I remember when the P85D was introduced, they were spied having some above-100 release numbers as well. Seems like Tesla uses those for their development branches. I wonder if this was just a mistake where the release did not get properly numbered before release.
Kipernicus
Model S Res#P1440
On Tuesday I received the update to 2.4.153, and tonight I received 101.36.2
Can't tell any differences so far.
Similar here. Monday evening (popped up after we got home from a hike on the coast), and today ready when I got in to drive home from work. Both times the download at least completed if not happened entirely on 3G although I have a dedicated WiFi at home. That WiFi connection is unreliable, though, as discussed by others before.
I hope it's improved software
BTW on Monday I got an iPhone notification, but none today.
Just installed the funkiness, on my old, slow, blind "that's so 2013" S85. The compile and install worked, have to wait until tomorrow for the execution testing
FairFrank
Member
My P85 also updated from 2.4.136 to 101.36.2 today.
It's a big jump. Now you can send via voice control commands to speed control officers to look the other way. Great!
It also introduces the mother in law ejection seat button. That's what we call... insane!
It's a big jump. Now you can send via voice control commands to speed control officers to look the other way. Great!
It also introduces the mother in law ejection seat button. That's what we call... insane!
Looks like Tesla decided to change their software version labeling.
It happens with companies every so often. Intel had the 286 chip, then 386, 486, then Pentium. Changed the labelling of new versions.
Microsoft did it several times, most memorable going from Win 98 to Win NT.
It will be interesting to see the next release after 101.10.12 to see if it was an error or not.
It happens with companies every so often. Intel had the 286 chip, then 386, 486, then Pentium. Changed the labelling of new versions.
Microsoft did it several times, most memorable going from Win 98 to Win NT.
It will be interesting to see the next release after 101.10.12 to see if it was an error or not.
Funny you mention this example because actually Microsoft has maintained a fairly consistent numbering scheme for the actual version numbers (not the marketing version names). Other than adding the name NT to the version names for the NT series, they still maintained consistent numbering. Windows 95 was actually Windows 4.0 (and NT 4.0 came out around the same time). 98 was 4.1 and Windows 2000 was 5.0. Vista, Windows 7, and Windows 8 were 6.0, 6.1, and 6.2 respectively.
I still think this is some kind of mistake where something didn't get renumbered properly or something was released when it shouldn't have been. If it was a mistake, the issue they might have now is the upgrade code might not allow for downgrades, so a car with a 101.x.x version might not be able to "downgrade" to a future 2.4.x version without a service center visit. Hopefully that's not the case.
It might just be to identified development release that is not considered stable released... Though they do seem to push it to a lot of people. Maybe they saw remotely issues from car running the 6.2 update and forcing it to them.
From the 14 car I track, only one have 101.36.1. 5 have 2.4.153, 5 have 2.4.136, 3 have 2.4.124.
From the 14 car I track, only one have 101.36.1. 5 have 2.4.153, 5 have 2.4.136, 3 have 2.4.124.
Ah, now Microsoft's numbering makes sense. I only knew the marketing names.
It's nice that Tesla keeps us guessing at these things, right? If it is a mistake, then I expect the role-out of this new release to stop. Let's see how many get it in the next few days.
