Remote S: Tesla app for Apple Watch, iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch

[araxara]

Hi Allen,

Thanks for the updated and added features.

It would be nice on the next update to include 3D-Touch features for the iPhone 6s. Although I have an Apple Watch, I think it would be quicker to activate some of the Apple Watch force-touch features using 3D-Touch on the iPhone, since it would not require activating the app on the watch and scrolling to the appropriate screen.

 

[AllenWong]

Alright, I submitted the new update to Apple - should be available in a week. I fixed the rounding bug for charging rate, fixed a bug with the Summon, and added a confirmation dialog to HomeLink. If someone figures out and tells me the Tesla API command to choose which HomeLink to trigger, I'll add it to my app. I wish I had my Tesla with me right now so I could figure it out on my own, but I don't.

Hi Allen,

Thanks for the updated and added features.

It would be nice on the next update to include 3D-Touch features for the iPhone 6s. Although I have an Apple Watch, I think it would be quicker to activate some of the Apple Watch force-touch features using 3D-Touch on the iPhone, since it would not require activating the app on the watch and scrolling to the appropriate screen.

This is on my TODO list, along with a lot of other stuff.

- - - Updated - - -

All,

Here's a video demo of the latest Remote S on the Apple Watch initiating Summon:

Tesla Model S Summon from Apple Watch (Remote S - Rego Apps) - YouTube

Congrats on being the first person in the world to summon a car through a watch (or at least the first person to videotape it and show it to public). As I said before, I wasn't the first person to do this because I did not have my Apple Watch with me when I was coding this update.

Your video is going around the blogs now:
Summon your Tesla Model S using only your Apple Watch [Video] | 9to5Mac
You Can Now Summon Your Tesla Using the Apple Watch [Video] - iClarified
The s Model S
Apple Watch iti poate scoate Tesla Model S din parcare | iDevice.ro

One thing I want you to try out. Unlock and remote start your car via the app (iPhone or Apple Watch). This might allow you to bypass the requirement for the keyfob being nearby. Give it a try and let us know if it works. I don't have my Tesla with me to test it out. Otherwise, I'd do it myself.

 

[BertL]

Does the official Tesla app give you options on which garage door to open? I don't have my car with me any longer, and I didn't have multiple HomeLink garages at where I was when I was testing this app update. So I actually don't know what the API commands are in the case of multiple HomeLink garages nearby. If someone knows and tells me, I'll add it to the app...

Remote S is consistent with the Tesla App. Neither offer an option as to which garage door is controlled via the App. I unfortunately can't help with the API specifics or if a specific opener can be specified or not -- I've never gone into that level of detail, nor do I have the tools to do so.

Thx again for your continued support.

 

[AllenWong]

I got confirmation that it is possible to activate Summon controls without a keyfob nearby by simply activating Keyless Start. No need to unlock the car as well.

Remote S is consistent with the Tesla App. Neither offer an option as to which garage door is controlled via the App. I unfortunately can't help with the API specifics or if a specific opener can be specified or not -- I've never gone into that level of detail, nor do I have the tools to do so.

Thx again for your continued support.

Ah... there's the problem. I can't control which HomeLink to trigger if the API doesn't support it. If the Tesla app doesn't support it, it most likely isn't supported in the API as well. But when they add it, I'll be sure to add it to my app as well.

 

[MarkS22]

Congrats on being the first person in the world to summon a car through a watch (or at least the first person to videotape it and show it to public). As I said before, I wasn't the first person to do this because I did not have my Apple Watch with me when I was coding this update.

Your video is going around the blogs now:
Summon your Tesla Model S using only your Apple Watch [Video] | 9to5Mac
You Can Now Summon Your Tesla Using the Apple Watch [Video] - iClarified
The s Model S
Apple Watch iti poate scoate Tesla Model S din parcare | iDevice.ro

I hope I'm not violating some kind of patent here.

BGR.com just picked up the story, as well. I hope it translates into some additional app sales for you.

 

[Andyw2100]

It might be possible to bypass the keyfob requirement if you unlock and remotely start your car through the app. I don't have my Tesla with me right now to test this, but if someone does, please do so and report back to us. I removed the requirement to be near the car itself. On the official app, you must turn on your device's GPS, and the Summon features only work if your device's GPS coordinates are near the car's GPS coordinates. But on Remote S, there's no need to be near your car to use the Summon features nor turn on your device's GPS.

Edit: I received confirmation from a user that you only need to turn on Keyless Start through the app to bypass the keyfob requirement. No need to unlock the car.

It's not my place to tell you how to run your business, Allen, but I'm going to make the following suggestion anyway: I think you should give some serious consideration to disabling the ability to summon the car without the fob present. Here's why.

I know you are very much interested in providing your users all possible functionality. That's admirable. But I also know you were bogged down by the patent troll, and that that took quite a toll on you. I see a few issues with this. For one, you are allowing users of your app to do something that Tesla clearly does not want people to be able to do. You had an early run-in with Tesla over the graphics or name or something, as I recall, and that was settled amicably, but if you really upset the people at Tesla I imagine they could make things difficult for you. Is it really worth stirring the pot just to provide your users this one feature?

Perhaps more importantly, this is potentially a dangerous and costly feature. The reason Tesla requires the fob to be present is as an assurance that the driver is actually in the vicinity of the car, supervising what is going on, presumably so that anything going wrong can quickly be stopped. Circumventing that safety feature is risky for your users and their cars. The last thing any of us here want to see is you being sued by some fool who downloaded your app, didn't understand what was what, and damaged his car because your app gave him the ability to do that.

Again, I know your heart is in the right place in providing this feature. I just think from a business stand-point the safer thing to do is not to.

(I originally posted this in response to Allen's post in the thread in which he made that post, but realized this message made more sense here, in the RemoteS thread.)

 

[AllenWong]

It's not my place to tell you how to run your business, Allen, but I'm going to make the following suggestion anyway: I think you should give some serious consideration to disabling the ability to summon the car without the fob present. Here's why.

I know you are very much interested in providing your users all possible functionality. That's admirable. But I also know you were bogged down by the patent troll, and that that took quite a toll on you. I see a few issues with this. For one, you are allowing users of your app to do something that Tesla clearly does not want people to be able to do. You had an early run-in with Tesla over the graphics or name or something, as I recall, and that was settled amicably, but if you really upset the people at Tesla I imagine they could make things difficult for you. Is it really worth stirring the pot just to provide your users this one feature?

Perhaps more importantly, this is potentially a dangerous and costly feature. The reason Tesla requires the fob to be present is as an assurance that the driver is actually in the vicinity of the car, supervising what is going on, presumably so that anything going wrong can quickly be stopped. Circumventing that safety feature is risky for your users and their cars. The last thing any of us here want to see is you being sued by some fool who downloaded your app, didn't understand what was what, and damaged his car because your app gave him the ability to do that.

Again, I know your heart is in the right place in providing this feature. I just think from a business stand-point the safer thing to do is not to.

(I originally posted this in response to Allen's post in the thread in which he made that post, but realized this message made more sense here, in the RemoteS thread.)

I appreciate you looking out for me. Tesla's own app allows you to Summon the car without the key fob. You can do the same thing on the official app by using Keyless Start first and then using Summon. The idea is that if you left your key at home or your key is lost or out of batteries or broken, then you can still control the car without the key. By first requiring you to do a Keyless Start to disable the requirement to have the fob present means that you are intentionally doing this without the fob present. If Tesla didn't want this ability, then they can disable it on their own firmware/API server.

 

[andrewket]

I appreciate you looking out for me. Tesla's own app allows you to Summon the car without the key fob. You can do the same thing on the official app by using Keyless Start first and then using Summon. The idea is that if you left your key at home or your key is lost or out of batteries or broken, then you can still control the car without the key. By first requiring you to do a Keyless Start to disable the requirement to have the fob present means that you are intentionally doing this without the fob present. If Tesla didn't want this ability, then they can disable it on their own firmware/API server.

^^ my interpretation as well. The feature is exposed in Tesla's API.

 

[tezzla]

I've used Tesla's app to summon my car out of the garage from my computer (some 100 feet away).
btw: I have security cameras in the driveway & garage so I made sure it was clear before starting.

 

[MarcG]

I appreciate you looking out for me. Tesla's own app allows you to Summon the car without the key fob. You can do the same thing on the official app by using Keyless Start first and then using Summon. The idea is that if you left your key at home or your key is lost or out of batteries or broken, then you can still control the car without the key. By first requiring you to do a Keyless Start to disable the requirement to have the fob present means that you are intentionally doing this without the fob present. If Tesla didn't want this ability, then they can disable it on their own firmware/API server.

I actually tried this last night with the official app while having visual contact with the car but too far for the car to sense the keyfob.
Although the Summon button was present, I got an error message stating the keyfob could not be detected.

So even though the API allows the Summon initiation, I don't believe the car would move unless it sensed a keyfob closeby.

EDIT: just tried it again, and here's a screenshot of the error message.

 

[Andyw2100]

I appreciate you looking out for me. Tesla's own app allows you to Summon the car without the key fob. You can do the same thing on the official app by using Keyless Start first and then using Summon. The idea is that if you left your key at home or your key is lost or out of batteries or broken, then you can still control the car without the key. By first requiring you to do a Keyless Start to disable the requirement to have the fob present means that you are intentionally doing this without the fob present. If Tesla didn't want this ability, then they can disable it on their own firmware/API server.

I misinterpreted the part of your message that I quoted. It sounded like this was only possible in RemoteS because of the difference in GPS location authorization. As long as the same functionality can be achieved with the Tesla app it would seem you're not doing anything with RemoteS that people can't do another way.

I apologize for my misinterpretation.

 

[AllenWong]

I actually tried this last night with the official app while having visual contact with the car but too far for the car to sense the keyfob.
Although the Summon button was present, I got an error message stating the keyfob could not be detected.

So even though the API allows the Summon initiation, I don't believe the car would move unless it sensed a keyfob closeby.

EDIT: just tried it again, and here's a screenshot of the error message.

I wasn't expecting that at all. My API commands for Summon should be identical to Tesla's, except for the fact you don't have to physically stand next to the car. Perhaps the error message is wrong, and what it really meant to say was that your device wasn't near the car? Or perhaps the Keyless Start 2-minute activation time ran out? I wish I had my Tesla to test this out myself. Sorry that I have to rely on you guys to test out the Summon conditions for me.

 

[1NJ85D]

URL Scheme

Allen,

So glad to see you back in action!

Where do you stand on supporting a URL scheme for Remote S?

I believe I can use "remotes://" to open Remote S. Can we pass parameters (e.g., turn on HVAC) yet?

Thanks much

 

[Andyw2100]

I wasn't expecting that at all. My API commands for Summon should be identical to Tesla's, except for the fact you don't have to physically stand next to the car.

So that is a distinction between your app and the Tesla app that allows for "riskier" behavior with your app.

Even if the above is not correct, and even if your app, Allen, and the Tesla app do offer identical functionality, the more I think about this, the more I think you should give some serious thought to just not including any summon option at all in Remote S. I know that is an even more drastic position than the one I took earlier, but hear me out.

People can sue for any damn reason they want to, and the person or company being sued has to spend time and money defending the suit. Unfortunately you've experienced that first-hand with the patent troll. Someone somewhere is going to damage their car or their garage or both using summon. Actually I expect many people will. Some percentage of those people will look to sue someone. Let that someone be Tesla! Why would you want to open yourself up to that possible exposure if it happened to be Remote S that they used instead of the Tesla app?

Again, I recognize your desire to provide the most functionality to your customers. But taking on this poitential risk is, I think, above and beyond. I don't think you'd lose any potential customers by not offering summon. I would hope that your existing customers, and certainly your friends here would understand your need to limit your potential exposure. Yes, that exposure may not be any greater than Tesla's, but Tesla's pockets are deeper than yours, and they have a lot more to gain than you do. You just don't need to give us this functionality. Look out for yourself on this one, which, by the way, is also looking out for us--your customers. Because if a lawsuit down the road makes you pull Remote S from the market entirely, that would be a heck of a lot worse for everyone than simply not being able to use the summon feature from within it.

Please give this some serious thought!

 

[Ulmo]

Or he can just require being close by GPS, and/or certification of a remote camera setup sufficient to see all dangers for GPS-registered cameras with audio capability (for sirens), and then buy insurance for this in case someone sues him. That would make it a selling point for the app.

 

[msnow]

So that is a distinction between your app and the Tesla app that allows for "riskier" behavior with your app.

Even if the above is not correct, and even if your app, Allen, and the Tesla app do offer identical functionality, the more I think about this, the more I think you should give some serious thought to just not including any summon option at all in Remote S. I know that is an even more drastic position than the one I took earlier, but hear me out.

People can sue for any damn reason they want to, and the person or company being sued has to spend time and money defending the suit. Unfortunately you've experienced that first-hand with the patent troll. Someone somewhere is going to damage their car or their garage or both using summon. Actually I expect many people will. Some percentage of those people will look to sue someone. Let that someone be Tesla! Why would you want to open yourself up to that possible exposure if it happened to be Remote S that they used instead of the Tesla app?

Again, I recognize your desire to provide the most functionality to your customers. But taking on this poitential risk is, I think, above and beyond. I don't think you'd lose any potential customers by not offering summon. I would hope that your existing customers, and certainly your friends here would understand your need to limit your potential exposure. Yes, that exposure may not be any greater than Tesla's, but Tesla's pockets are deeper than yours, and they have a lot more to gain than you do. You just don't need to give us this functionality. Look out for yourself on this one, which, by the way, is also looking out for us--your customers. Because if a lawsuit down the road makes you pull Remote S from the market entirely, that would be a heck of a lot worse for everyone than simply not being able to use the summon feature from within it.

Please give this some serious thought!

There's a lot of flip flopping on this topic with VERY LITTLE facts just anecdotal snippets from a couple of sources. There's a video on this forum of someone using Summon from his eighth floor office building and 177' away with no fob, just his iPhone.


You Can Summon Your Tesla Out of a Parking Spot - Page 4

I suggest more testing is needed with both the Tesla app and Remote S before people come to conclusions.

 

[Andyw2100]

I suggest more testing is needed with both the Tesla app and Remote S before people come to conclusions.

Did you fail to understand the main point I was making? That point is that Allen just doesn't need the exposure, even if his app offers nothing that the Tesla app doesn't offer. People may sue over this. If there is just a 1% chance that someone sues the maker of the app that allows his or her car to be summoned I think that is too much risk for Allen to take for the "return" he is going to get from offering this feature.

Let Tesla take the risk. Allen doesn't need to.

 

[msnow]

Did you fail to understand the main point I was making? That point is that Allen just doesn't need the exposure, even if his app offers nothing that the Tesla app doesn't offer. People may sue over this. If there is just a 1% chance that someone sues the maker of the app that allows his or her car to be summoned I think that is too much risk for Allen to take for the "return" he is going to get from offering this feature.

Let Tesla take the risk. Allen doesn't need to.

I understood your point but it is based on conflicting evidence. No need to have a knee jerk reaction when this is easy to verify over the next couple of days. Also, I'm not sure Allen assumes any risk in this situation as he's only using Tesla's existing API.

 

[AllenWong]

Allen,

So glad to see you back in action!

Where do you stand on supporting a URL scheme for Remote S?

I believe I can use "remotes://" to open Remote S. Can we pass parameters (e.g., turn on HVAC) yet?

Thanks much

It's on my TODO list. Version 3.0 (and soon 3.1) were churned out quickly to add Summon/Homelink/Valet Mode and fix those token bugs that people kept having. I have quite a few TODO items that I'd like to code when I'm not pressed for time to get something out quickly.

So that is a distinction between your app and the Tesla app that allows for "riskier" behavior with your app.

Even if the above is not correct, and even if your app, Allen, and the Tesla app do offer identical functionality, the more I think about this, the more I think you should give some serious thought to just not including any summon option at all in Remote S. I know that is an even more drastic position than the one I took earlier, but hear me out.

I have confirmation and video proof from a user that Keyless Start does disable the requirement for a keyfob on the official app. This feature is not unique to my app and does work on the official Tesla app.

Did you fail to understand the main point I was making? That point is that Allen just doesn't need the exposure, even if his app offers nothing that the Tesla app doesn't offer. People may sue over this. If there is just a 1% chance that someone sues the maker of the app that allows his or her car to be summoned I think that is too much risk for Allen to take for the "return" he is going to get from offering this feature.

Let Tesla take the risk. Allen doesn't need to.

I understand your point, and have given it thought before. More litigation is not something I desire, and I knew the risks of that when I added Summon to my app. Any lawyers want to chime in on whether it would possible to sue and win in a case like this?

 

[Troy]

Recently I read this comment on 9to5mac website:

Allen Wong: The keyfob doesn’t need to be within range of the vehicle. If you press the Keyless Start button before using the Summon features, it will remove the need for the keyfob to be near the car. You can truly summon the car from anywhere in the world, because I’ve removed the requirement by Tesla to turn on your iPhone’s GPS and be near the car to activate Summon features. (Source)

To me it looks like the GPS requirement is a safety feature Tesla added intentionally. In the Tesla app how does one circumvent the GPS requirement? Does this require entering a password to activate keyless start? Does the same password requirement exist in Remote S? If not, kids playing with Remote S could summon the car. Another risk is somebody unknowingly summoning the wrong Tesla if there is more one in the family.