dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
Are you planning to make this "classic Model S"-only or broader? In the latter case I'll add my name, of course!
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Firmware 7.1 - For Classic Model S
- Thread starter Cyclone
- Start date
HankLloydRight
No Roads
I think for now, just non-AP, because the biggest issue doesn't exist for AP cars (speedo numbers, or lack there-of).
If we can get that addressed/fixed, then we know we have at least some influence on the dev team. Then we can work on the other broader issues.
But that doesn't mean you can't add your name in support of us luddites without AP.
Nearly every piece of hardware w/firmware of any consequence has a rollback capability. Even failed Tesla updates rollback, if my memory serves one time I had an update fail.
I think rollback is probably already there in reality, but we don't get to touch it.
Tesla should not have to support every software variant for ever and ever. Heck, I'm typing this on a browser that reminds me every time I launch it that I'm no longer supported on this 6 year old Mac. Manufacturers have a right to draw a line around how many and what versions they will support.
When 7.0 was first getting ready to come out, two posters accidentally got a Beta push. They both got updates a few hours after posting. One applied and say he was back at 6.2. The other didn't accept the apply, but the car applied it overnight anyways. Now maybe this was different since the EAP is more managed, but there does seem to be some support for rollback.
If you update your iOS device, you can't roll back. There are some devices with limitations. I'm not defending one or the other; just clarifying that the MS isn't alone in this category.
You can reinstall the prior iOS release for a short period of time (typically a few days) of the new OS's release. But that is wiping and reinstalling (presumably from a backup), not exactly a rollback either.
It is possible to reliably implement rollback - but that likely has to be designed into the software, and may be expensive to add at this point by Tesla, if they didn't plan for it from the beginning.
Rolling back to previous releases can be more than just changing the software - sometimes software updates re-organize saved data - and a rollback would have to undo that.
I agree that some rollback should be available - though there are much better ways to solve this problem than providing rollback - addressing the reasons why owners want the software to rollback.
The primary reasons for wanting rollback are an unacceptable change in functionality (like when Tesla disabled auto-air suspension for a few months or the unexpected side effects of the recent user interface changes) or major bugs (like the phantom USB music playback overnight, or losing the ability to use both chargers).
And while I wish Tesla had rollback, I'd rather they address the bigger issues - not providing owners information about software changes BEFORE installation - and major problems continuing to make it through Tesla's testing program.
Rather than making the major software changes needed to add rollback, I'd prefer they:
1. Provide more complete releases notes when new updates are being distributed, so we know exactly what changes are in each release - before we hit OK
2. Open up the beta program to owners - let us opt in, providing more owners the opportunity to provide feedback while the software is under development (which should avoid some of the obvious problems - like the position of date & time!), and getting more owners to help in testing (hopefully finding more of the problems)
3. Give owners more control over when software releases are distributed to their cars. Microsoft has implemented a "ring" system, allowing users to indicate how quickly they want to see the latest changes. Tesla owners could do something similar - indicating if they always want the latest & greatest, or if they'd prefer to wait a few weeks to get the latest software (and give it more time to be stable)
4. And, provide owners an opportunity to comment on planned software changes - before most of the implementation has started. If that had happened, that surely would have avoided some of the complaints owners have had about basic things like the speedometer, useless "toy car" on the dashboard or eliminating the source select button on the console. Plus, with UI changes - getting more owner input would surely benefit everyone.
It's surprising how tolerant Tesla owners continue to be about some of the software issues we're seeing. Will the much larger number of Model 3 owners be this forgiving?
Rolling back to previous releases can be more than just changing the software - sometimes software updates re-organize saved data - and a rollback would have to undo that.
I agree that some rollback should be available - though there are much better ways to solve this problem than providing rollback - addressing the reasons why owners want the software to rollback.
The primary reasons for wanting rollback are an unacceptable change in functionality (like when Tesla disabled auto-air suspension for a few months or the unexpected side effects of the recent user interface changes) or major bugs (like the phantom USB music playback overnight, or losing the ability to use both chargers).
And while I wish Tesla had rollback, I'd rather they address the bigger issues - not providing owners information about software changes BEFORE installation - and major problems continuing to make it through Tesla's testing program.
Rather than making the major software changes needed to add rollback, I'd prefer they:
1. Provide more complete releases notes when new updates are being distributed, so we know exactly what changes are in each release - before we hit OK
2. Open up the beta program to owners - let us opt in, providing more owners the opportunity to provide feedback while the software is under development (which should avoid some of the obvious problems - like the position of date & time!), and getting more owners to help in testing (hopefully finding more of the problems)
3. Give owners more control over when software releases are distributed to their cars. Microsoft has implemented a "ring" system, allowing users to indicate how quickly they want to see the latest changes. Tesla owners could do something similar - indicating if they always want the latest & greatest, or if they'd prefer to wait a few weeks to get the latest software (and give it more time to be stable)
4. And, provide owners an opportunity to comment on planned software changes - before most of the implementation has started. If that had happened, that surely would have avoided some of the complaints owners have had about basic things like the speedometer, useless "toy car" on the dashboard or eliminating the source select button on the console. Plus, with UI changes - getting more owner input would surely benefit everyone.
It's surprising how tolerant Tesla owners continue to be about some of the software issues we're seeing. Will the much larger number of Model 3 owners be this forgiving?
The easiest way to satisfy us "classical owners" would be to give us a config choice between "New" and "classical" instrument cluster. They have the code for both and the parameters show are mostly the same.
This is a simple and manageable demand for an overworked SW-team. The;17" is acceptable in the new version. And since it is an input device its more complex to make a "classic" version of.
This is a simple and manageable demand for an overworked SW-team. The;17" is acceptable in the new version. And since it is an input device its more complex to make a "classic" version of.
The only two things wrong with the 17" screen (not counting Nav) are the climate controls (too dark and information removed)0 and the lack of the outside temperature.
- - - Updated - - -
If you've never used the old version, the new version probably looks okay, as it's no worse than an ICE display. It's when you've had seen how good the display can be that the problem arises.
It's not that I want to go back, it's that I want the safety and usability aspects to be fixed.
DrGuest
Member
Yesterday, Leap Day, I pushed the "confirm" button on my purchase of a new Model S90D, So I only have 4-6 weeks before I will not be a "classic" anymore. I promise that while I have the Delivery Specialists, Financing Team Representative and then Customer Satisfaction Representatives undivided attention, I will tell them to not forget about the 20k-30k of Classic owners and the various points noted on this thread. I will tell them why my Model S 85 still has 6.2 and why I never upgraded to 7.0 or 7.1. I did learn a big lesson about updates and how prudent it can be to check these forums about problems with new updates in order to have the choice to accept what is being offered, or not! I decided if I was happy with what I have, I will hold off. I will post anything I find out from my inquiries.
santana338
Member
Gotta take that back. Still having the RM radio mute/select problem. I swear it worked correctly a few times though.
Oh, and add me to the list of signatories for the letter!
Ebony Star
Member
When did the door unlocked change. You had to touch the drivers door to unlock the door you could not touch any of the door to unlock the car . The door will only unlock on a drivers door and you could not touch any other door to unlock it. now all doors are open if you touch the passenger door.
Exactly as Jerry stated. I just want to add that in other firmware versions, we've seen some settings revert before. Make sure your setting still says driver only mode, and if it does, try switching to all doors and then back to driver only.
Anyone here with 2.13.77 or newer that could see if we lost double-yap park to extend and unlock the doors? My guess would be this was lost to all cars, even though we do not get summon, but I hope I'm wrong.
Similar threads
