I don’t like touch screens in cars. But I have them in my '16 Odyssey and '18 Accord. Apple CarPlay (and Android Auto) require them after all. But I do like knobs better.
However. For the manufacturer the touch screen is a clear win. No more multiple mechanical buttons and switches. Each has multiple parts and are therefore assembled. Separately wired. Separately installed. Each a potential break-point, being mechanical. More, the touchscreen is easily re-configured for different chores. One look when its the radio, another when its the mapping, a third when its the HVAC system, etc.
Sure they did. There were a couple of front facing cameras used only by the original autopilot.
About 6 months after I got the car they added software that allowed you to put a special folder on a USB flash drive. When this folder was detected they began keeping a circular buffer of one minute videos on the flash drive that you could remove and watch on a PC. When this folder was detected a small camera icon showed up on the display and you could tap it to save the recent history – else it would get overwritten
A year(?) or so later they added the rear camera and the two side cameras.
A while later they added the ability to view the footage in the car and to save (move it out of the circular buffer) the footage via a horn honk.
So, yes, they did add a dashcam via OTA update by combining the existing cameras with the existing USB port for storage and the existing display for control and later for viewing videos.
The camera was there and used only by Autopilot.
See my previous post
They also added a security system by turning on the cameras all around, when parked. When motion is detected the system triggers and records on the flash drive and a message is sent to your phone.
Later they began allowing you to see the video on your phone.
Feel free to comment all you want; I wouldn’t want it any other way. But don’t overstep the boundary of telling other people they are wrong for having the opinion they have.
Unfortunately, most cult members don’t see themselves in a cult. Not all tomatoes are potatoes!
If there’s one thing I’ve learned from updating computer software over the last 3 decades, it’s that not every update is an improvement.
But your point finally addresses the question, and for that I thank you.
Yeah. About that. Does my productivity increase with every update? No. I benefit from almost none of the updates since around 2005 or so. But some people do, and that’s OK. I just wish I could keep using my older software because it still does the job.
But let’s get back to a car. Cars with the current leading edge of software are fairly new. (Kind of obvious, isn’t it, Peter?) 20 years ago, cars had plenty of software, but most of it couldn’t be updated. It had no need to be updated regularly because it was thoroughly tested and did the very limited job it was assigned. Today, cars are getting asked to do more and more, and some (certainly not all) people are happy about this. But it also means that this more general purpose software is being asked to interface with systems outside the car, or to do jobs that require significant processing of inputs from various sensors. Those interfaces and that processing are the things that need relatively frequent updates. Not the relatively simple stuff that is pretty much unchanged from 20 years ago - like engine management. That’s still pretty static once the car is built - barring some kind of recall.
I guess the real question I have is this. Are cars really better for all of the things we’re asking them to do today? In some cases, that’s probably a yes. Adaptive cruise control certainly reduces the driver’s work load and reduces fatigue. Emergency actions (braking, steering) are probably good as well. Avoiding accidents or reducing their severity is good. We are all human and are going to make mistakes. A car that can identify mistakes that can be life threatening is a good thing.
But do we really need more advanced entertainment systems in a car? It’s a car, not a home theater or sound studio. Do we need every creature comfort to be controlled via a touch screen instead of a knob or button? Do we need seats that massage you while you drive? Where do useful improvements end and potential distractions from the driving task begin? There’s a line somewhere. It’s going to be in different places for different people. But it exists. And we need to decide if there is some point where it needs to be drawn legislatively.
That’s the point I was making. You had the camera already. Tesla didn’t add a dash cam. They added dash cam abilities to an existing camera.
Why didn’t they include that functionality in the first place? It’s not like digitally recording a camera feed is all that cutting edge. We’ve been doing it for literally decades.
Did Tesla simply forget? Did they rush an incomplete car out the door just to get paid?
Why should you get a dash cam added to your car? Some other guy bought his car later and paid more in some small part because he DID get the dash cam. Why is yours free?
Good questions! I think only Tesla can answer these. Maybe in the future they will start charging for new features that they can provide via just software. There are numerous such features they have added, but most are just improvements to some existing feature or games to play while sitting in the car. They did add the sentry mode (security system) right after lots of model 3 break ins in the Bay area and you couldn’t get replacement small rear window glass. They also added “dog mode” to keep your pet cool when left in the car so people wouldn’t smash windows. There is an entire 3rd party web site with hundreds of suggestions (some whacky, some good) and Tesla has implemented dozens of them.
I’ve never had a car where new features are provided for free before. Ever.
It really doesn’t cost them much to add new stuff when they send out an update with bug fixes so they just do it. Might be cheaper to have fewer variations of software to test.
Might be why some customers like their cars.
I think some features evolved over time and would not have ever been thought of before they started shipping. For example, the car wash mode. Seems silly, but it does several things for you that, as a driver you might not think of as you enter a commercial car wash. It stops the automatic wipers from coming on, but also locks the charging port so that high water pressure doesn’t open it. It makes sure all windows are fully closed and disables the sentry mode. It also turns off the automatic door lock if you get out and walk away with the key (your phone or fob)
Was the car rushed to market by not having this? I can’t say.
Of course they are, or at least soon will be. By turning cars into computers they become cleaner in emissions, more energy efficient, and much safer. Those are critical improvements in a world with billions of people and mega-urban areas with populations in the multi-millions. In-car navigation systems mean one can get from a to b without knowing exactly where b is. EVs can serve as an emergency electricity source for your house during outages. And then of course there is the potential of autonomous driving.
Do we really need telephones that can take pictures? As always the market will decide. But as car get smarter and do increasingly more of the driving, finding ways to make that daily two hour commute in LA traffic more bearable is not a bad thing.
But the importance of over-the-air updates is greater than just the frills you mentioned. It may mean that people will hang on to their cars significantly longer. That would have a lot of environmental benefits.
Can you get a bit more specific? How does turning a car into a computer make it cleaner? Or more energy efficient?
Keep in mind that we’ve had computerized controls for ICE cars for a couple of decades or more. I agree that those computers make cars cleaner and more efficient than they would be without computerized controls. I don’t think anyone would mistake my 1998 Chevy truck for a rolling computer. Yet it does have computer controls for it’s engine and transmission, which make it cleaner than it would be without that computerization.
Why would in-car navigation be better than navigation on your smart phone? Why stuff something like that onto the car when most folks already have a very good navigation device in their pocket?
How big a problem is that, really? I have lived for most of my 60+ years and never been in an outage that lasted more than a couple of hours. Of course, there are areas where outages are more common. But I’d still ask if using your EV’s power is better than having a backup generator. For a short outage of just a few hours, perhaps. But get too long and your EV power would be better used for a trip to the gas station to get more gasoline for the generator.
Yeah. About that. Lots of talk. Very slow progress. Most people I’ve seen talk about this who aren’t rabid Tesla fans think that we’re still a decade away from that. Definitely closer for some driving in limited areas. (Currently doing some serious driving in the SF area and one or two other areas, IIRC.)
Maybe. But at the moment and for the near future, a worn out battery pack is going to financially condemn higher mileage EV cars long before the rest of the car is worn out. With proper care, pretty much every ICE built today will last 200k miles or more, and 20+ years. It’s poor care that sends most cars to the junkyard early, not the major components wearing out. EV batteries have a limited number of charge/discharge cycles. Those stats are getting better each year, but their life span is dictated mostly by the battery chemistry, not by the software that controls the battery charging and use. Newer chemistry holds the promise of more power in smaller packaging, but none that I’m aware of have unlimited cycles. They all wear out at some rate as they are used. And once built, software updates can’t significantly change that. Maybe tweaks to the charge or discharge profiles can provide some small benefits, but they’re not going to add 20% or 30% to the battery’s life.
In an EV the car knows the state of charge of the battery so it knows how far you can go till you need a charge and map out all your charging stops for the day. It also knows the outside temp and the battery temp so it can efficiently pre condition the battery as you approach the fast charger so you charge faster. Probably other benefits of knowing car parameters.
It’s (mapping optimal charging stops) a universal thing among good quality EVs. Just like battery management systems are a universal thing among good quality EVs. I own two EVs right now, one with a battery management system (BMS) and one without, and the one with is far better in all respects than the one without. Vehicles with a good BMS will tend to have batteries that last longer, and keep more of their range over time.
I can’t wait until Toyota and Honda enter the EV market in earnest. Their obsession with quality will probably eventually result in them having the best, or one of the best, BMSs out there.
(Battery Management Systems mostly monitor the battery for temperature/voltage/current and create the optimum conditions for charging and discharging. Optimum is a combination of charging speed, battery health protection, and a few other things.)
You answered your own question with “I agree that those computers make cars cleaner and more efficient than they would be without computerized controls.I don’t think anyone would mistake my 1998 Chevy truck for a rolling computer. Yet it does have computer controls for its engine and transmission, which make it cleaner than it would be without that computerization.”
As for the italicized bit, your 1998 Chevy is a step along the pathway to the computerized vehicle. It represents a combination of mechanical with electronic, with mostly the former. EVs will be almost completely electronic and mostly computer controlled. Car-as-computer is the automotive future and we are a good part of the way there.
Because people will want the car to do most of the driving. Tesla’s FSD can already do this, though one still has to be attentive at the wheel.
And speaking of autonomous driving, we may still be a decade away or more but the benefits of the development are already having a significant impact. Cars are safer now with automatic emergency braking and proximity warnings. Advanced cruise control is much better at keeping cars properly distanced. All these will continue to be improved and enhanced with software updates.
ICEs can last 20 years, but the repair costs rise with the age/mileage of the car. EVs are mechanically much simpler with few moving parts so fewer things can wear down while software updates will ensure that the car will not become dated in its performance over time. You have a Chevy truck that performed best when first bought and steadily declines in performance as it ages. Teslas because of software updates perform better as they age.
FSD, or Enhanced Auto Pilot? I’ll admit I’m confused as to how significant the difference is between the two. And how either compares with Blue Cruise or GM’s Super Cruise.
I guess the big question is, would the cheaper EAP be a significant help to long-distance highway cruising? (I’m guessing, yes).
Not sure if it is universal, but certainly any EV that is going to do more than drive around town is going to want this. My Chevy Bolt does show you chargers on your route and knows your battery range and warns you if you can’t make it there.
And, in your opinion, how many “good quality EVs” are out there? Or more bluntly, does anyone beside Tesla have this feature?
Is there really an EV out there without a BMS? It’s such a basic need for lithium ion batteries, it surprises me that anyone would skip it. Would you mind naming names here?
Most manufacturers have this feature to one extent or another. It’s almost a must in an EV. Even my lowly Nissan Leaf has it!
Yes. For some reason, Nissan declined to add a BMS (the kind that adjusts the temperature of the battery for health and efficiency) to their vehicles. It might be understandable on the Leaf, which has been around for a long long time. But it isn’t understandable in their newest model, the Ariya (?).
Try this next time you are in a Tesla. Just push the voice command button and say something like “navigate to Seattle” or anywhere far enough away to require a few charges. You’ll see your whole trip mapped out with each supercharger stop and how many open charger stalls (currently) at each location.
Now think back a little and ask yourself if Ford, GM and all the others want this in their cars too.
Now try the same thing using Google Maps and ask it to show nearby EV chargers.
Pre-conditioning the battery, knowing the state of charge of the battery, and suggesting the number of minutes you need to charge at each stop, popping up a message when you can unplug and showing your your estimated battery level at each stop are all things you’d see if actually following the route.
Why would a CEO of a car company NOT want all this in their cars when they are switching to the Tesla chargers?
Be sure and press “end trip” so you don’t actually go to Seattle.
Mike
