They said "you can't stay on 7.0 forever. .."

[3s-a-charm]

You are not tinkering with your vehicle, your whining about the inconvenience of getting nagged to keep your hands on the steering wheel, which has always been a requirement for using autopilot, and if you are really that upset about the inaccuracies in their maps, ask for your money back and get rid of autopilot.

Pretty sure he bought it used so asking for money back won't be an option...

 

[Odebek]

Pretty sure he bought it used so asking for money back won't be an option...

@green1 said he upgraded to AP and paid for that at some point...

 

[beeeerock]

I have to say I'm with Tesla on this one. The car contains many advanced features and is essentially a work in progress. Firmware isn't just about AutoPilot! There will undoubtedly be other changes we would never see or appreciate, ranging from improvements to automatic braking, battery management, motor optimization... etc.

Just considering the BMS possibilities... we have a pretty good warranty on the batteries and drive units. If Tesla finds a flaw in the BMS or a way to extend battery life, pushing the upgrade is going to be good for us AND for them. Taken to extremes, it could mean the difference between replacing a battery pack at Tesla's cost, or no problem at all. That's a significant cost to them.

You could also extend this to safety features that should have been upgraded but weren't... someone dies and the lawyers swoop in.

At what point does this discussion begin to feel like it's a rant about the old guy on the porch yelling at the kids to keep off of his grass?

 

[thegruf]

imho Tesla should
1) reduce the number of general availability software releases to those that are deemed stable, restricting interim releases to a select group of beta users contracted to provide detailed feedback and be clearly advised of the beta nature and associated risks of the software.
2) enforce upgrading to the current build when a general realease is made available
3) this must be part of the agreement with the owner on purchase of a vehicle, new or used.

It is quite extraordinary that Tesla quite possibly have 10 or possibly even 20+ releases in customer vehicles and presents a significant possibly of a legal nightmare for the company and even owners of Tesla vehicles. Users that refuse updates espeically in respect of AP have no idea of the detail changes "under the hood" and are jeopardising not only their safety but that of others.

Speculate this, Tesla involved in AP related accident. Tesla states driver refused latest updates which would have prevented/mitigated accident. Who is at fault?
Is it the driver for refusing an update?
Or Tesla?

Tesla really need to smarten up on this, it is a legal catastrophe awaiting, and even an unecessary injury accident, which I for one would hate to see potentially derail so much good work.

 

[gpetti]

I'm sorry @green1, I have to pile-on here. To my knowledge, no body else in Calgary or the surrounding area that I have talked to, is avoiding this update and none of us have found 7.1 to be anything other than an improvement. The miscalculation of speed limits has not been a major issue for me and normally it happens on streets that are not really ideal for autopilot in the first place. Speeding up by applying the accelerator in these occasional situations has not been onerous and in a couple of cases, the autopilot restriction has led to the car slowing down for real speed reductions that I missed, even saving me from a potential ticket in one instance. There are occasional situations on the highway where the autopilot has not "seen" that the speed limit has increased (or doesn't increase speed after an on ramp) but these are always short inconveniences and represent less than 1% of my driving. I am mildly concerned that variable speed signs will become a problem (autopilot is unlikely to be able to read overhead dynamic signs anytime soon) but overall and on balance, I personally find that autopilot is a hugely useful feature that appears (see Car and Driver's review) to work better (and with less restrictions) than other cars with the same functionality set. I also have no concerns with being prompted to hold the wheel, as I believe that nobody should be using these features without maintaining their hand ready on the steering wheel. If this helps avoid injury or death and the attendant negative publicity (that could result in total loss of these features), then we should be all for it.
Tesla as is their MO release new features (pretty cutting edge in this case) with as few restrictions as they can but in this case they have had to tighten up the safety restrictions due to a fairly widespread misuse of the feature set. Anyone who thinks they overreacted has not been watching the avalanche of media and demands for feature removal even though autopilot did not directly cause the recent accident.
I personally hate when people on this forum say to complainers "get a different car if you don't like it" but in this case I feel that given how angry this seems to make you (there are literally hundreds of posts from you on this) and given the ongoing dynamic nature of Tesla software updates, you will likely remain angry and frustrated for the duration of your ownership experience. There are plenty of cars where you can get a feature set on the day you buy it that will never change (including bugs), though even for these cars, if there was a sufficient outcry about feature safety they might be recalled to implement restrictions.

 

[Gizmotoy]

A divisive issue, to be sure. Essentially we're seeing the strain of "automobile as software" come into focus here. We've seen and promoted the good aspects (OTA updates improve the car and add features!), and for some, this illustrates the bad.

Software updates that break old APIs happen all the time, and the expected solution is that the user upgrades. This is not surprising or unexpected to anyone that's used software. It is one of the first times someone may encounter it on a car, though, so the reality that Internet-connected software requires constant, ongoing maintenance to continue to function is present in a vehicle is new to just about everyone.

Honestly, I sympathize, but I'm not sure what Tesla can do to make OP happy here. Obviously they can't maintain a separate build for one user, or even dozens of users. They can't completely open up the firmware without creating a huge liability issue. OP doesn't want to upgrade because the software actually closed a liability issue for Tesla and he wants to continue using the higher-liability version, so they have no incentive whatsoever to support the OP remaining on this old version. It's an intractable problem.

 

[EVie'sDad]

Then OP, this is the guy you should be talking to....http://jalopnik.com/electric-hot-rodders-combine-tesla-and-chevy-parts-into-1784988208

 

[Doug_G]

One post moved to snippiness

 

[green1]

@green1 said he upgraded to AP and paid for that at some point...

That is incorrect. The car was an inventory model from Tesla, I bought it after 7.0 was released and it came with AP enabled.

I fully agree that Tesla should make updates to the car.

What I don't agree with is that they have any right to remove or limit any feature that the vehicle came with after purchase without the express consent of the owner. Where does that slippery slope end?

 

[msnow]

That is incorrect. The car was an inventory model from Tesla, I bought it after 7.0 was released and it came with AP enabled.

I fully agree that Tesla should make updates to the car.

What I don't agree with is that they have any right to remove or limit any feature that the vehicle came with after purchase without the express consent of the owner. Where does that slippery slope end?

Maybe that's where the majority of us see it differently than you do. What you see as a downward trajectory (or slippery slope) we see as improvement and feature enhancements. I can't begin to tell you all of the things that have gotten better and yes a few new bugs were introduced but, you know, that's part of the process. On balance this is a far superior OS than 7.0 was and you're the only one saying it isn't as far as I can tell. For me the only feature that was changed is the nags but keeping my hand touching the wheel made sense.

 

[stopcrazypp]

That is incorrect. The car was an inventory model from Tesla, I bought it after 7.0 was released and it came with AP enabled.

I fully agree that Tesla should make updates to the car.

What I don't agree with is that they have any right to remove or limit any feature that the vehicle came with after purchase without the express consent of the owner. Where does that slippery slope end?

I highly doubt Tesla did this just to screw you (or other people who have refused to update to latest version) specifically. It likely was a change to API that they didn't do regression testing back to the older version (or the testing missed it). It's not even clear this is an issue on Tesla's end. If I remember correctly, both the large screen map and voice recognition uses Google APIs (wk057 can confirm). It could be those APIs were updated and Tesla has to update things on their end to keep it still working.

And this example is a little more nuanced than the standard "end of support" scenarios in software (which involves no more updates to a given software). This is more of a backwards compatibility issue.

 

[fallen888]

imho Tesla should
1) reduce the number of general availability software releases to those that are deemed stable, restricting interim releases to a select group of beta users contracted to provide detailed feedback and be clearly advised of the beta nature and associated risks of the software.

And what do you think they've been doing up to this point.. pushing out nightly builds to the public?

I'm sorry, but this is laughable.

 

[ecarfan]

What I don't agree with is that they have any right to remove or limit any feature that the vehicle came with after purchase without the express consent of the owner. Where does that slippery slope end?

Good point. Tesla could easily disable the HVAC in your car just because, well, uhh...they have decided to single you out.

In this specific instance, Tesla is trying to push forward semi-autonomous driving with the goal of, as soon as possible, offering cars for sale with fully autonomous driving. AP is currently a work in progress, and will continue to be so for years, I think.

In my opinion, you are failing to understand that Tesla AP is a work in progress and it is going to require frequent firmware updates that may in some instances modify AP features in a way that you think causes a feature to be "removed" or "limited". Other people may not feel the same way. Given how new AP is in the automotive world, there is no way that Tesla is going to be able to satisfy every AP user all the time, and Tesla is not under any obligation to try to develop multiple different versions of AP released simultaneously just because some people are unhappy about a particular change.

I say again, with all seriousness, that a Tesla may not be the right car for you because you have, in my opinion, an outmoded perspective on how a modern firmware-drive internet-connected car should operate.

Or just turn AP off and wait a year and try it again.

 

[msnow]

And what do you think they've been doing up to this point.. pushing out nightly builds to the public?

I'm sorry, but this is laughable.

I can see you're a new owner, welcome! Most of us get updated every couple of weeks and while many don't mind the occasional bugs that are introduced we are de facto beta testers. What @thegruf is saying is to reduce the number of updates to us and let the real beta testers do more regression testing. I like the frequent updates so that doesn't appeal to me but I understand what he's saying. It's not laughable.

 

[AZ Desert Driver]

As I understand the AP system, every mile driven by a Tesla that has AP (activated or not) is collecting miles of data to be shared with the collective. Could a Tinkerer remove his miles, keep his miles from being added, or if very creative and evil, contaminate his miles such that the collective is now unreliable, and perhaps driving folks off cliffs?
I think local repair shops might be happy to change tires and fix gaskets and bent metal. Would I be happy with scores of angry evil-doers having access to the guts of this software?There are a lot of very good folks out there, but not all folks are good.

 

[wilheldp]

I won't be a hazard driving 30km/hr under the speed limit just because the car thinks I should.

The speed limit recognition in this car is atrocious at best, it is not anywhere near reliable enough to be used to add limits to the speed you can use autopilot at.

Really? I wonder if the hardware on the 2014 models (i.e., camera resolution) was that much worse than current production or if Canadian speed limit signs are harder to read/interpret by the system. I did my first real road test of AP this weekend, and I don't think the car missed a single speed limit sign (including all of the construction zone signs). I don't think that the car was using Google Maps info for speed limits because on many roads, the speed limit didn't show up on the dash until I passed a sign. Do the roads that you concerned about not have speed limit signs? If the do have signs, I would be very surprised if the car missed them...especially by 30 kmh. Perhaps better recognition of speed limit signs was included in one of the firmware upgrades after people complained about 7.1 limiting the speed to an incorrect limit.

As for the nags, I think I only had 1 or 2 nags over the course of 300 miles of driving that weren't immediately after a turn in the road or some sort of unusual lane line divergence. It sounds like the 7.0 AP still had nags after complex road geometry, but they just added a few on long straight sections to make sure that you are awake and alert. Just seems reasonable to me given the Josh Brown wreck.

 

[fallen888]

@msnow Point taken. Perhaps I was overly dramatic with that last sentence.

 

[ged]

I'm also an "update-refuser" or whatever you want to call it... I'm on 6.2.x and it's now broken in the way that Green1 describes in the OP.

I have a non-AP car, and the changes they made to the dash for 7.x are rubbish... couldn't give two shits about the odometer (thanks for moving that to the center Tesla), and I'm not looking forward to having to scan around to find out what my remaining range is (moved from center to bottom left) or what gear (moved from center to bottom right) when I'm trying to keep my eyes up and forward, I'm sure it's a great UI if the car is driving itself on AP and you have nothing better to do then look around for that stuff. (Obviously it was done this way so they could be lazy and just slap the speedo UI overlay in the middle of the screen layout that they made for AP cars)

Aside from the shitty new UI, there is no new functionality or improvement for non-AP cars, so why would I want the upgrade?

A higher version number does not automatically equate to a better user experience (the majority of owners probably hit the upgrade button hoping it will improve (cause no change long before), or are indifferent and just upgrade so the nag screen goes away). There are tonnes of examples of this, new things are fixed and new things are broken with every release of the Linux kernel, Ubuntu, MacOS and Tesla's firmware... There's no reason to upgrade if there's no value to the user in upgrading; I say this as someone who develops software.

Edit: Also, I own the car, tesla has bundled a copy software on it, however there's no EULA or contract anywhere that says Tesla retained any right to do anything to my property without my permission.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Edit: Also, I own the car, tesla has bundled a copy software on it, however there's no EULA or contract anywhere that says Tesla retained any right to do anything to my property without my permission.

I don't think in this case doing anything to your property applies. Both voice recognition and maps (the one on the big screen) uses Google servers to function. So likely nothing changed in your car, but what may have changed is on the server side. A change to your property would be breaking something that works completely offline.

 

[green1]

Really? I wonder if the hardware on the 2014 models (i.e., camera resolution) was that much worse than current production or if Canadian speed limit signs are harder to read/interpret by the system. I did my first real road test of AP this weekend, and I don't think the car missed a single speed limit sign (including all of the construction zone signs). I don't think that the car was using Google Maps info for speed limits because on many roads, the speed limit didn't show up on the dash until I passed a sign. Do the roads that you concerned about not have speed limit signs? If the do have signs, I would be very surprised if the car missed them...especially by 30 kmh. Perhaps better recognition of speed limit signs was included in one of the firmware upgrades after people complained about 7.1 limiting the speed to an incorrect limit.

As for the nags, I think I only had 1 or 2 nags over the course of 300 miles of driving that weren't immediately after a turn in the road or some sort of unusual lane line divergence. It sounds like the 7.0 AP still had nags after complex road geometry, but they just added a few on long straight sections to make sure that you are awake and alert. Just seems reasonable to me given the Josh Brown wreck.

When I drove in the USA briefly the car never missed a single speed limit sign.
In Canada it gets it right less than 50% of the time.
visually they look mostly the same, the only real difference is ours say "Maximum" and a number whereas the US ones say "Speed Limit" and a number.
Based on the fact that it was 100% in the USA, and that I have zero issues with lane markings (it sees those at least as well as I do) I have no reason to suspect a camera issue, instead I suspect it's software.

As for nags, that's a minor concern really (though it is of course the one all the haters latch on to), I have however had several occasions of nags appearing despite my hands on the wheel, and continuing until I make a more noticeable tug on the wheel than I believe I should have to. But my main concern is, and always has been, the speed limits. I spend a ton of time on roads where it doesn't know the speed limit, and I use AP extensively on those roads for the safety advantages. Making me less safe by forcing me to turn AP off in those situations (or force me to manually push the accelerator pedal) is not what I signed up for.

As for selling my car, sure, show me a replacement car that has the same functionality as the Tesla and I'll swap in a heartbeat. It's the best car on the planet, it's unfortunate that the company behind it is so consumer hostile.