True...but just as with other typical chip procedures, the 'binned' units carry a different prt number and different performance characteristics. All this debate seems t have forgotten the original description of P3D and P3D+.
Just in case many of us do not remember:
P3D+ and P3D- have identical motors, control units (including inverters and all associated hardware and software)
P3D+ does have larger brakes and wheels plus the sometiem to be delivered cosmetic ID.
3D has the same motors and control units and P but they are NOT binned, so are not software upgradable.
These differences appear to be minor but anybody who has ever bough chips wholesale knows about bin-sorting extra testing and dramatically differnet price points and performance based on those differences. Outside this world one rarely finds vastly different performance based on components that look the same and are plug-compatible.
IMHO, based only on logic, not inside information, is that software loading errors are more likely when the differences are not overtly distinct beyond part numbers. Thus, even though in the computer world such errors are uncommon, the the auto world is quite different, making such errors less unlikely. That is my guess, even though I think these mistakes should not happen, they do. (FWIW, many years ago I owned a turbocharged car that had two models, one with higher pressures, one lower. All the hardware was the same, but the higher pressure one required premium fuel, the lower one did not. There were mistakes. I was the recipient on one such mistake per performance, but Monroney and VIN did not show that. Maybe I am less surprised by these Tesla errors because of that experience.)
