[BAZINGA]

http://money.cnn.com/2017/08/05/news/companies/gm-recall-chevy-trucks/index.html

"GM (GM) is telling owners of the trucks involved in the recall to take their vehicles into a dealer, where they can receive free of charge a software update to fix the issue."

700K vehicles all being forced to visit their local Chevy/GMC dealer for a SW update. Consider the lost revenue, by the owner's.

 

[llninja]

Of course, if they had OTA updates, we'll have 700K owners complaining that their software was updated overnight and they want the old software back (a la the Volt triple honk update). It would be even worse of any small percentage of that 700k ended up getting bricked during the upgrade process.

 

[Barry]

OTA updates also increase the potential for hacking and computer viruses.

 

[obermd]

I can see both sides of this. Tesla, with its relatively small "dealer" network needs OTA for fixing problems in their cars. GM, with a huge dealer network needs to somehow keep those dealership service departments busy. This has to balanced against convenience for the vehicle owners. GM and other traditional car manufacturers do this by only issuing recalls on those software updates that are safety critical. All other updates can wait for a routine service or repair visit.

Also, how do you charge for OTA updates after the warranty expires?

 

[Dutch]

I'm all for OTA updates with one rider. I want a key or dongle or something that you have to manually plug in for the update to run. So if you don't plug that in, no updates or changes can be made.

I really dislike the idea of any of my "appliance computing" type devices suddenly changing behavior without my specific approval.

 

[Barry]

This is also a difference in mindset. Tesla has a silicon valley culture where products are put out with the assumption that bug fixes, updates and enhancements will follow, and they will be pushed digitally. Detroit has always had a very different way of releasing products. The day it leaves the factory, it is final. Only repairs and (hopefully no) recalls after that.

 

[bjrosen]

I'm all for OTA updates with one rider. I want a key or dongle or something that you have to manually plug in for the update to run. So if you don't plug that in, no updates or changes can be made.

I really dislike the idea of any of my "appliance computing" type devices suddenly changing behavior without my specific approval.

I don't think a hardware device like a key is necessary but I agree that there should be a procedure to accept the update, there also needs to be a simple way to return to the previous state.

OTAs are a significant advantage for Tesla because they not only can fix bugs remotely they can also continually improve their cars and even offer entirely new features that you can purchase later. I read somewhere, maybe here, that GM can't do this because of the contracts with their dealers. GM wants to be able to do OTAs so my guess is that they will offer a deal so that the dealers get a piece of any upgrade fee.

 

[Upper5Percent]

Just think if VW had had OTA ability to fiddle those diesel cars' systems...

 

[jbakerjonathan]

Did everyone miss this news release? GM will be doing OTA in the near(?) future.
http://www.businessinsider.com/gm-new-tech-framework-for-over-the-air-updates-challenge-tesla-2017-7

 

[Loboc]

OTA is a disaster in progress. Our entire PC infrastructure was decimated by a McAfee update several years ago. Worse than a virus.

No thanks.

Now we test updates before releasing to the field.

 

[Jmaj]

So when I've been told that an update (recall or bug fix) will take 30 minutes via hardwire I wonder if they are reloading the complete firmware package for the car.

My last Silverado had a seat belt tensioner recall done that was just a software issue. 30 minutes. Same with every Volt patch I had, 30 or 40 minutes.

 

[hellsop]

So when I've been told that an update (recall or bug fix) will take 30 minutes via hardwire I wonder if they are reloading the complete firmware package for the car.

My last Silverado had a seat belt tensioner recall done that was just a software issue. 30 minutes. Same with every Volt patch I had, 30 or 40 minutes.

That's how sensible embedded systems update. It's not an "update" like Windows has, where only the bits someone thought were the changed ones get placed. It's a whole new system image for that module to ensure that all the "old" code is exactly as expected as well.

 

[scottf200]

I'm all for OTA updates with one rider. I want a key or dongle or something that you have to manually plug in for the update to run. So if you don't plug that in, no updates or changes can be made.

I really dislike the idea of any of my "appliance computing" type devices suddenly changing behavior without my specific approval.

The Tesla updates are NOT automatically installed. They are downloaded, then verified to be valid, then the user gets a phone notification or an icon in their car that they have to approve the install take place. It can be immediate or at a scheduled time (ie. 1 am).

 

[Qinsp]

There is a false assumption held by many that GM is an old school, low tech company. While that is false, it is totally wacko when you think about automotive computerized controls.

GM has some of the best automotive electronics engineers, computer engineers, and software engineers in the world working there. The company's CEO is an automotive electronics engineer from Kettering (nee GMI), which is a hand's-on automobile engineering college, arguably the world's best.

The reason GM focused on dominating ECM design starting in the late 90's was driven by CAFE and emissions restrictions, but it netted big gains in MPG, HP, and emissions controls and took everybody else over a decade to catch up, and not all are there yet.

This was the result of GM's intense focus on computerized controls:
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=39250&id=39317&id=38981&id=39005

The Toyota V8 is DOHC 4V design, the Chevrolet V8 is pushrod 2V design. Even the bigger 6.2L 420HP engine option (not available in the Suburban) beats the MPG of the Toyotas by a wide margin.

How? GM is better at engine controls than Toyota and most companies. The 32v DOHC V8 is more efficient in design, but without the best software, it was wasted money and weight.

So the idea that GM isn't doing OTA because they are inexperienced would be incorrect. GM did a safety related OTA update to the 2013 Cadillac ATS as a real world test, as well as continual OnStar system updates since 2006. Like with GM's Hydrogen Fuel Cell car technology, General Motors is probably also the world's technical leader in OTA updates with more remote reflashes than anyone else due to OnStar.

There will be a day of reckoning. Google Microsoft Windows update crashes millions of computers to see where the future of cars is going. Over a million hits. If you can always patch it later, why test it thoroughly?

And heaven help any company other than Tesla who deliberately 'gimps' a car with an update. Folk might forgive Tesla, but they will not forgive GM, Honda, Ford, VW, Toyota, Mazda, BMW, MB, Fiat/Chrysler, etc, if they are caught doing that to a performance car. I'm not sure Ford ever fully recovered from the 1999 Cobra fiasco. Mazda probably will never be trusted again either. All they did was exaggerate their HP in advertising. I know I left Ford for good. Can you imagine if they reduced your horsepower of your performance car deliberately and silently?