Naw if I remember correctly it was actually access to screen real estate in that CarPlay in particular required taking over pretty much the entire screen which obviously wouldn't work with the model 3 but that requirement has since relaxed so could be possible now and unfortunately I can't find it so take it with a grain of salt but I recall seeing him respond with a "maybe" or "working on it" to someones tweet asking for CarPlay in the last year
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
What’s coming next in V11?
- Thread starter Jeffordst09
- Start date
Naw if I remember correctly it was actually access to screen real estate in that CarPlay in particular required taking over pretty much the entire screen which obviously wouldn't work with the model 3 but that requirement has since relaxed so could be possible now and unfortunately I can't find it so take it with a grain of salt but I recall seeing him respond with a "maybe" or "working on it" to someones tweet asking for CarPlay in the last year
Dan203
Active Member
ehh, it's fine. I kind keep to my two villages and do my war attacks when needed.
Car Play needs to take over the screen, probably not gonna happen. What would be nice though, is an Apple Music client, similar to the way Spotify is set up.
Agreed on the CarPlay, but Siri reads my texts and dictates my responses just fine.
yerEVan
Active Member
Wow i hope i don’t have to wait that long for that. Although I’ve learned to ignore it.
boriszima
Member
this thread turned into complains more than wanting new features. I would like more progress towards FSD since i paid for it.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
FWIW that's no longer true- there's smaller window implementations available now, but that's fairly recentish as developments go.
hocr
Member
Not much of a software update but I’d like to see tires that don’t get flat or need to be replaced, ever. With all this high tech, we still need to rely on rubber tires that need to be inflated.
With my previous car we got a couple of nails since there is some construction by our house. Freaks me out to think I’d have a flat and can’t do anything about it(?) besides calling roadside assistance.
Is it just me?
With my previous car we got a couple of nails since there is some construction by our house. Freaks me out to think I’d have a flat and can’t do anything about it(?) besides calling roadside assistance.
Is it just me?
notAnExpert
Member
Actually, that's not recent. Volvos have been doing CarPlay in part of their large screen for four years. What is recent is the ability to have different aspect ratios for the CarPlay display area.
Dan203
Active Member
Actually this isn’t true anymore. The newest API not only allows multiple viewports but it allows you to designate safe areas so you can ensure nothing important gets cut off with irregularly shaped displays. It's actually pretty slick.
But I still don’t think Tesla will do it. They're a tech company and I think they like having full control over their own UI.
Incorrect. All Android Auto needs is a screen to display data, touch events and access to Bluetooth. That's it.
A car can also optionally provide speed, GPS position, engine RPM and some other stuff.
Source: I implemented Android Auto display part for my Model S.
TACC that maintains the current speed travelled when engaged and not some derived-off-the-map speed limit that hardly ever makes sense. Please......
I live in Georgia, and many of the speed limits are wrong. Either the car needs to see the signs or there needs to be a way for the driver to correct the limits or submit to Tesla to correct the limits. Otherwise speed limit warnings are useless.
just set your relative speed offset to -20. as long as you aren't going more than 20mph below the speed limit, engaging AP will match yor current speed.
This would be a perfect workaround, but unfortunately it is insufficient. In NL the max deviation when "relative" is selected is 10 km/h (~6mph). As a large number of our highways have (mapped) limits of 130km/h, while during rush hour, accidents or roadwork this goes back to 100km/h, or even 70 km/h the +-10km/h does not prevent me from having to lower the TACC speed time and time again.
Using the "absolute" speed does nothing for the TACC speed setting. Contact with Tesla about this taught me that both "relative" and "absolute" settings are not even meant for TACC; they are meant for the speed limit warning. And indeed, if you disable this warning both settings are greyed-out and no longer settable. All the more strange that in that (disabled) situation still the earlier used deviation is used as the TACC speed limit.
IMO it really is a silly oversight that TACC does not use the traveled speed as its input.
Paul
How about a feature called "Backseat Driver". Throughout your ride an annoying voice chimes in with suggestions like "watch out for that car" or "you're going too fast"
Right after that feature we can add the "Nagging Wife"
That's about it .
Right after that feature we can add the "Nagging Wife"
That's about it .
We'll probably get a new game.
What I'd like to see is smarter navigation and climate control features.
Navigation options to optimize routes for autopilot use or minimizing energy use or at least offer route options.
Actually calculating energy use based on the topography would be helpful (I mean its not that hard).
As an example, going to the mountains for a weekend, energy use on the way there way higher than the way back. So on the way there the projected range is too optimistic and the way back is too pessimistic.
Its not very helpful to know that something is the fastest route when it may only be 3 min faster and requires hands-on driving vs a route that is almost as fast and 95% autopilot.
I shouldn't have to check google maps..
What I'd like to see is smarter navigation and climate control features.
Navigation options to optimize routes for autopilot use or minimizing energy use or at least offer route options.
Actually calculating energy use based on the topography would be helpful (I mean its not that hard).
As an example, going to the mountains for a weekend, energy use on the way there way higher than the way back. So on the way there the projected range is too optimistic and the way back is too pessimistic.
Its not very helpful to know that something is the fastest route when it may only be 3 min faster and requires hands-on driving vs a route that is almost as fast and 95% autopilot.
I shouldn't have to check google maps..
Similar threads
