Just a Place Keeper to See if I Am Right About the Future of AP1

[Andyw2100]

@roblab --Please be careful to quote and respond properly. Your response appears within the quote of mine that you tried to respond to, making it look to others as if your words are mine. Since you were taking an opposing position to mine, your carelessness makes it look as if I have viewpoints that are 180 degrees from where they really are.

You've been around long enough to know better. If you can still edit that post, I would appreciate it.

Below are your words that appear as mine:

--
OK, they may have modified the ability, but it can read signs and adjust the AP speed. Mine does. Some folk get so wrought up because they interpreted something said as "You Promised", and I just don't get it. Life's not that way. Tesla is able to say things and then change their minds. If people don't like it, please, please, buy a Hyundai and be satisfied and quit grouching about how Tesla does business.

Some of us are very happy with what Tesla has done, and continues to do, which is more than any other company.
---

And to respond to that...

Tesla is not legally allowed to sell one set of features and then deliver less than that. And forget the legal aspects of it, it is just wrong! Morally wrong. You may be happy that they are "doing their best", but many of us want the cars and features we paid for. I don't think that is asking too much.

I have come to realize that I am never going to get the 691 HP I paid for. That doesn't mean I'm going to be happy about it.

Someone asked, in another thread, if Tesla had fully delivered on their AP1 promises. They have not. People should realize that.

 

[Canuck]

That's not quite right, either. Both sides chose to settle and the owners received $7,700 in cash or upgrades. That means the owners won.

The settlement did not include an admission of wrongdoing or liability on the part of Tesla. It was also for half of what the owners involved in the lawsuit demanded as compensation. This is not a "win" by any means. The settlement amount was also before legal fees. Most lawyers and experienced mediators will tell you that a reasonable resolution to a lawsuit in mediation is where both parties compromise and do not get everything they want. In this case, Tesla wanted to pay nothing, and the owners wanted double, and the settlement was right down the middle without any admission of wrongdoing.

If you call that a win for the owners, then Tesla can just as easily call it a win for them.

But in reality it's called a compromised settlement without any admission of wrongdoing or liability, to avoid the risks, costs and uncertainly of proceeding to trial. It sets no legal precedent and it can't even be referenced in court actions.

 

[scottf200]

<snip>
At the D launch, Tesla demo'd cars that were automatically adjusting their speed based on speed limit signs. That functionality does not yet exist, as demonstrated. (It exists now as speed reduction when autosteer is engaged on undivided highways, but that is not at all what was demonstrated.)
<snip>

My car does pretty regularly at lower speeds (i.e. < 65). It did it before sporadically (or I didn't see the pattern) but it is more consistent now after the +0 OTA version update.

 

[Andyw2100]

My car does pretty regularly at lower speeds (i.e. < 65). It did it before sporadically (or I didn't see the pattern) but it is more consistent now after the +0 OTA version update.

Your car is probably only doing this with TACC and autosteer set on undivided highways, as a safety measure. That's not at all what was demo'd.

 

[eye.surgeon]

I bought my MS with AP but before AP was enabled. It started out working well, and each successive "update" made it worse. More restrictions, more nags. I'm not optimistic about any future "updates" to it. I use it half as much as I used to as a result.

 

[Canuck]

My own personal view is that Tesla oversold AP1.0 and pushed it beyond its capabilities with its minimal hardware and slow processing. After the fatality, which lead to the NHTSA investigation, Tesla now has no choice but to dial it back or risk the NHTSA ordering that it be disabled completely. But Tesla only has itself to blame because it should have made the BETA part known to every owner, with an "ACCEPT" button to press when buying AP1.0 and a clear explanation that it is beta and features may be lost.

I hope they are not making the same mistake with AP2.0. Perhaps with much more hardware, and significantly faster processing, AP2.0 will prove much more useful and safe but given Tesla's track record I will need to see it to believe it.

 

[Dave85D]

My own personal view is that Tesla oversold AP1.0 ...

I hope they are not making the same mistake with AP2.0 ...

I believe they are making the exact same mistake. FWIW, I predict that AP2.0 hardware will never be approved for full autonomy.

Just as AP1.0 will never perform as advertised. The question is, what compensation can be expected.

It was only a $2500 dollar option and some parts perform as advertised so as little as $1000 could be expected?

On the other hand, some would argue they wouldn't have bought the car if they knew it wouldn't get all the features. They might feel entitled to as much as $10,000 or even insist Tesla buy back their car so they can afford to buy what they were looking for.

Just my opinion, but I believe it's time for SOME kind of compensation.

 

[Sir Guacamolaf]

There are a lot of amazeballs extremes being thrown around in this thread, but reality is always tempered in the middle. So, with that in mind, I'd like to make 2 points here here followed by a summary.

Point #1 - My purchase agreement, says "Autopilot - $2500". This is a signed document, and it supersedes all opinions on this thread . So, I really doubt Tesla will remove AP1 completely. However, will Tesla make AP1 suck? Leads me point #2 -

Point #2 - AP1 is a cost center for Tesla, also if AP1 was so damned good, nobody would buy AP2. There are two ways out of this,
a) Tesla can make AP1 suck
b) Tesla can make AP2 rock

Now, I know most Tesla buyers are not stupid . They know how to differentiate between #a and #b. And they know there will be AP3 eventually. So if Tesla took the route of #a, Tesla will be severely hurting their own sales - people are not stupid.

Reality however is, in my 2ish years of owning an AP1 car, AP has gotten better, and I feel AP1 will actually improve over time. Yeah there may be more nags, but frankly I see the quality of AP improving with every release. It stays better in lanes now, and doesn't make sudden left turns. I'm not too happy about the speed limit restriction, but Elon tweeted that this will be removed.

Summary: Reality will be in the middle,

AP1 will improve with time, but AP2 will surpass. .. but on Tesla time.
The noise was end of 2016 we will have parity, and then AP2 will surpass. Experienced Tesla owners could have told you right then that this meant parity by April 2017, and surpass further on.

Speaking of surpass, all those hype videos showing a Tesla driving door to door with zero human input ........ that's the amazeballs extreme that is probably 2-4 years away, more if governments get involved .. which .. they probably will :-/. In fact, that amazeballs extreme may never happen in a reasonable timeframe.

 

[Drone Flyer]

And just think that AP 2 full self driving Tesla Model S's will only be able to drive the speed limit on roads other than freeways!
Who will want this?
Perhaps Model X owners will be ok with it as they will be using the car for transporting family mostly whereas the Model S owner will mostly drive solo and will more often than not, want to drive a little faster.
I see AP 2 as a total bust!
Besides, we bought our sexy looking Model S's to drive it and not sit in it like you would in a taxi.
If you really want self driving, just hail a cab!

 

[calisnow]

...I hope they are not making the same mistake with AP2.0.

I believe they are making the exact same mistake.

The word "mistake" implies that an action counter the goal was accidentally made. How do you know this actually happened? There is one thing and one thing only that matters - profit. If AP 1.0's overpromising resulted in sales that are/were higher than they would have been had Tesla made "less wild" promises then AP 1.0's execution was no mistake. Since we do not have an alternate universe lab to run the test case in which Tesla did things they way you two suggest we actually don't know if Tesla's marketing and bleeding-edge-pushing is/was a mistake or not.

 

[Bishop]

Considering they charged people for ap1 and there is no upgrade path to ap2 short of buying a new car I think it's going to stay

 

[lolachampcar]

I bought my MS with AP but before AP was enabled. It started out working well, and each successive "update" made it worse. More restrictions, more nags. I'm not optimistic about any future "updates" to it. I use it half as much as I used to as a result.

Eye,
This is pretty much my experience and so I have started to refuse "improvements". I stopped by my service center and asked if I could remove the daily nag message. I was told no. I'm now looking into other alternatives. This idea of removing functionality in the form of undocumented elements of updates is chick s pure and simple. Those that think it is ok will come to understand that Tesla is becoming more brazen in this activity and will eventually do something they do not appreciate. When they do, please do not come back to this thread and complain. If you do, I will remind you of your previous position.

High marks to the poster above that basically said forget suing, the behavior is simply wrong and should not be happening.

Sir,
The only reason to spend another moment on AP1 is so Tesla can reduce risk. Making it do less dumb stuff (like those turns you mentioned) reduces risk. Removing utility thus reducing on time reduces risk. I believe they have and will continue to do both.

These are smart people making well reasoned decisions. Regretfully, their calculus does not provide much consideration for the customer. They care more about the available megaphone for any pushback then developing that push back in the first place. (of course, IMO)

 

[St Charles]

IMO, this change to AP1 smacks of regulatory approval. I don't think that this is a move by Tesla to drive consumers to upgrade cars as much as it is getting the NHTSB to approve AP2 functionality. The TACC cat is already out of the bag and the NHTSB can't really force Tesla to restrict functionality since every other Cruise control system has no restriction on use.

Cruise while the car is steering itself? Yeah, that's gonna cause the NHTSB to have kittens. IMO, Tesla has a much bigger risk in that they have already deployed and discussed, in detail, the capability of AP2. If the NHTSB ultimately does not approve or significantly delays the approval of this functionality that will be a huge hit to the stock price of the company. I see this as the real liability. AP1 functionality suffering is simply collateral damage.

As @lolachampcar points out, the real solution is to stop accepting updates to your car. I am working with my own SC to get routine maintenance completed without SW updates. Time will tell if this is possible in the long term

 

[NOLA_Mike]

As @lolachampcar points out, the real solution is to stop accepting updates to your car. I am working with my own SC to get routine maintenance completed without SW updates. Time will tell if this is possible in the long term

My understanding is that many replacement parts require the firmware be reflashed and the Service Centers are not able to flash anything but the latest they have. Is that your understanding too?

Let us know what you find out working with your SC.

Mike

 

[spooky981]

My problem is that in September I spent $3,000 on something and within 90 days its become something totally different. That's not fair to the buyer.

 

[Cyclone]

I would like to be more positive and say that the mapping data and learned experiences collected by AP2 hardware may be useful to AP1 and shared down the line making AP1 more functional as time goes by.

Yes less direct money to be made by Tesla but it would be protecting the future uptake and upgrade by happier customers which will help their bottom line.

I am looking for the convenient time to upgrade to an AP2 car but the time is not right yet.

The AP1 cars (and presumably AP2 cars) have a speed database to have an educated guess of the speed until the camera gets a good read off a sign. This database is relatively static and available on the car even when there is no active cellular connection. Yet, Tesla hasn't shared this data with the pre-Autopilot cars which could display this educated guess at the speed limit like a 10 year-old standalone GPS can.

So I'm not saying Tesla won't or can't do what you stated, but there is precedent for Tesla to let "older tech" languish without the data they have for the "newer tech" cars.

 

[sandpiper]

@roblab
.....
Someone asked, in another thread, if Tesla had fully delivered on their AP1 promises. They have not. People should realize that.

At the risk of handing over a bat and pointing to a dead horse, what didn't they deliver on AP1 Andy?

 

[sandpiper]

....Tesla has a much bigger risk in that they have already deployed and discussed, in detail, the capability of AP2. If the NHTSB ultimately does not approve or significantly delays the approval of this functionality that will be a huge hit to the stock price of the company. I see this as the real liability. AP1 functionality suffering is simply collateral damage...

On the website, they're pretty careful about saying "FSD capable". And even what they've committed to for enhanced AP, seems to be relatively limited. And I'm sure that, somewhere in the sales paperwork, there is some detailed verbiage around regulatory approvals.

Even on the public perception side, there's going to be a lot of noise in the media around approvals for this sort of technology. I rather suspect that the various governments will provide a large and obvious bogeyman to take the blame for lesser capabilities.

 

[number12]

At the risk of handing over a bat and pointing to a dead horse, what didn't they deliver on AP1 Andy?

Not only what did they not deliver. It's what they took away.

Private property summon. Exiting hwys. Speed restrictions. Nags.

 

[sandpiper]

My problem is that in September I spent $3,000 on something and within 90 days its become something totally different. That's not fair to the buyer.

Not only what did they not deliver. It's what they took away.

Private property summon. Exiting hwys. Speed restrictions. Nags.

I'm not sure that I agree.

1. Summon does work. If you were expecting that the car would drive 2000 feet across a large, occupied parking lot, then that's your extrapolation - not Tesla's.

2. My car exits highways. I signal to put it in the exit lane, and away it goes. It doesn't work on all highway configurations, but that should be expected.

3. Speed restrictions. Yes - I don't like this either. But Tesla didn't say that the car would would auto-drive above the legal limit. Possibly regulators had some influence here.

4. Nags. I also don't like this. But don't blame Tesla. Blame the idiots who decided to do blatantly idiotic things, that Tesla explicitly warned against, and then post their idiocy on youtube, or worse, to crash and then sue Tesla. I rather suspect that regulators had a large part in requiring Tesla to implement the nags.