Separate names with a comma.
TMC Connect 2016, the Official Conference of Tesla Motors Club will take place on July 28-30 in Reno, Nevada. Register now.
Discussion in 'Model S: User Interface' started by brianman, Dec 1, 2012.
That's a pretty broad and, IMO, overly harsh characterization.
Are you disappointed in George's post? Or those that have respected his request and acted accordingly?
Sorry, but you come across too strong for my taste painting with such a broad brush.
You are entitled to your opinion.
I'm disappointed that he had to respond.
You're just being pendantic.
I don't know what pendantic means, but I'm just taking what you said at face value. Should I not?
I feel that George should have said at "midnight to night this bug in the software will be removed" or something to that extent. I know that updates aren't that quick, but in my opinion this is a software bug when it's in the wrong hands, and a tool in the rightful hands. We aren't taking about extra gauges, performance enhancements or features here. We are taking about vehicle safety's systems that are regulated by legal systems, People's lives, Property ect. As cars get smarter the avg joe gets dumber so to say, you use to change rear end gear ratios to modify your car. It's not that easy today, people will get killed when one wrong number in a line of code is changed.
I work in aviation, I can tell you, you don't want pilots adjusting systems in aircraft. And believe me when I say the vast majority of engines in aircraft are still to is day controlled by nothing but air pressures, and fly wheel based governors.
There you go again - that was a typo. Pedantic
- - - Updated - - -
There's a quote... "Beware programmer who caries screwdriver". But I digress...
Apparently my humor here was too dry.
I think we all need to just chill. The screen is there. George has made his request, and you can choose to follow it, or not. We've heard every reason why you shouldn't (mess up your car, ruin Tesla's chances for success [huh?]), but at the end of the day it IS there and curious folks will be curious. I just hope that anyone who messes anything up fesses up to it and doesn't try to act like it just happened.
It means being fussy about writing implements.
Or that Tesla outs them like they did Top Gear and Mr Brick.
hmm, well we have bought the car, and in some states / countries they are required to provide information on how to service the car, in such a way that you won't void your warranty
but I also understand that "George" would prefer that this information isen't easy available on the Internet
as I see it they have at least 2 options
1. change the system so you need to connect a USB key that will bump a file that they can read with a Tesla Service Program
2. change the GUI so it reveal less sensitive information
my guess that they will do both
but in the end, no-matter what they do, we will find a way to read the file
so unless they encrypt it with a public tesla encryption key, we will guess it
the same apply to the information that is transferred via wireless or 3g
sooner or later some of us will sniff it
the best solution for tesla is to give us nerds access to some of the data so we can play with it
and thereby be in controle of what is being released
on a different note, wonder what information is available in the system
my guess is individual cell history and log for each censor in the system
One other thing for folks who *did* read the specifics is that IIRC Tesla uses 3rd party car management software, and it's quite possible/likely that those screens are generic for the platform, and have nothing to do with every feature installed in the Model S. Bottom line, don't get too excited
Source on this? I'd imagine Tesla would want to control as much as possible? And isn't it likely, that even if they don't control the underlying stuff, the interface is theirs? So why write an interface for functionality you have no plans on using?
I'll see if I can find the source, as I recall there was a press release from a company shortly after S started shipping that they were the provider for this software. On the 'why write an interface for functionality ...' question. If it *is* a 3rd party provider, it's quite likely that it's harder to customize the software than to deliver it with all the features where only a subset of those features are used. Of course, in the customer facing interface, you would only expose the features that are used, but that's not what we're talking about here.
- - - Updated - - -
Now... this could be all wrong.. who knows. I'm just theorizing here.
This is just the lowest layer software for turning the outputs of the touch sense hardware into useful key-press/gesture events, nothing to do with the main user interface or vehicle systems. Note that the key feature of their software that they call out in the release is "the ability to track 10 fingers at once".
Yes, that's what the press release babble says, but if you read their web site, they offer software that integrates automotive sensors and the OS.
But whatever, my real point was this: just because it's in a screen somewhere in the admin UI doesn't mean it's a coming feature. So people shouldn't get their panties in a bunch if their Model S doesn't have feature X because some admin screen had that option on it. That's all I'm really saying.
I think that was understood from the beginning and was never in question. What I personally disagree with though, is why make an ADMIN interface for something you won't use? Admin tools are usually rawer and more spartan than any user facing thing (given how the menu operates, it's pretty clear they didn't bother with too much polish). As a developer, if I have access to an API and I build admin tools to access that API, I'm NOT going to build admin tools to interface with pieces of the API I have no desire to use.
Again, it doesn't mean we'll ever see the features there, but I highly doubt they ARE there because some software exposed a hook to it so they figured "let's write a UI for it!".
I agree with that 100%. Which is why I was theorizing it was a 3rd party app. That would explain why there are things in there that might not be part of the car. Otherwise, I think it's just wishful thinking that Tesla has already written admin screens for features that are just lying in wait to be deployed in the car. Either way, I think we're closer to saying the same thing that not.
Economy of scale is one reason. Perhaps they took the S, X, III, and Roadster (tentative) feature sets and wrote the UI once for all 4?
Doubtful bman, its software. Ignore it for now and touch it when you HAVE to. One thing to note, is that power folding mirrors was missing off the lists, and from rumors, it sounds like its not in the works