Live data from Hacker News

Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

autoexpress.co.uk

181–190 of 325 posts

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#181

If it’s behind a software lock, then a resourceful cracker can find a way to get around it Welcome to the era of jailbreaking cars

After which VW will deny any warranty claims or won't do any repairs. Or even worse, brick the car remotely. It will be akin to unlocking bootloaders on phones or Nintendo bricking consoles.

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#182

The really offensive part of this kind of thing is that you already paid for it. Like if you wanted to buy a regular car and you could get the engine with turbo then those are two different cars. The latter costing more because it has more/better stuff in it. This is all fine and good. In this case, all the cars have turbo and you pay to have it turned on or not. The cost of the turbo is in the cost of the normal car…

How about in-app purchases and subscriptions? The code is already there. Is it abusive? Is it abusive because it is tied to hardware? No, I see it as the opposite. I see it as Volkswagen simplifying production by limiting variability and giving you the option to get a less capable product at at a cheaper price. A 6 and a 8 core processor is probably the same die also and produced at the same cost. Maybe 2 cord were t…

> How about in-app purchases and subscriptions? The code is already there. Is it abusive?

Sometimes yes and sometimes no. Pure software is a bit different than hardware as copies are effectively zero cost. Same would go for e-books, music, etc. Not that they get a full free pass, these media can also engage in abusive practices.

> Is it abusive because it is tied to hardware?

Yes. Another example of the absurdity is if you want to buy half an apple and the store charges you enough to cover the costs of a full apple, then pull out a full apple and destroy half of it before handing it to you. Does that seem ok? Putting in extra effort to make something worse is bad.

> A 6 and a 8 core processor is probably the same die also and produced at the same cost. Maybe 2 cord were turned off because they were faulty or maybe they were turned off because some people don’t have the need and money for 8 cores.

Big difference between these two cases. If the two extra cores were faulty, then charging a lower price makes sense. Like paying less for used tires that have some wear on them. But taking a perfectly good chip and purposefully disabling two cores is like taking a belt sander to a new tire and then charging less.

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#183
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said in other comments, this is already happening since years (and I mentioned Ford, but literally everyone else does it). Car manufacturers already give you the same powerful engine that you can't afford/don't want to buy and "shrink" it with SW. If you jailbreak it, you lose the warranty and bye bye insurance. You should not think that you're paying more for getting less. You should think that finally you can…

How can companies get away with doing extra work to make their products worse in a market with healthy competition? What does it mean when things that happen in a competitive market aren't happening?

They are doing less work. Designing a lower performance engine is harder and more expensive than producing more of the higher performance engine and limiting it.

It works in the market because sellers sellers want to charge as much as buyers are ready to pay. People who want a powerful engine are ready to pay more, so make them pay more. The limited power option is sold at a lower but still profitable margin to those who don't want to pay for the extra.

Market segmentation like this is seen everywhere. It is just that the subscription thing makes it particularly obvious.

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#184
post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not true, and even TFA points at why that can't be true: to your insurance, to vehicle taxes, etc. you declare the power _of the installed engine_, not of whatever software interlocks you, your tax advisor, or the manufacturer have decided to install on it. TFA already says the car is registered at the maximum power level regardless of the actual software cap. So you are _quite literally_ paying for it, at le…

Is this the same with EV though? The power of the installed engine is more nuanced, for example the full power is limited by software already to prevent wheel spin and improve range. Also, in the UK EVs are listed as a 0cc engine on the vehicle ownership records so effectively have no engine.

Effectively and technically. A motor is not an engine.

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#185
post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"lifetime"

What do you want to imply with this pithy reply? It's for the life of the car and is not bound to an owner.

There’s no single universal legal definition of “lifetime” for products — it’s vague and often depends on the warranty’s own wording. It can mean the buyer’s lifetime, the product’s “useful life,” or as long as the manufacturer supports it. Courts usually interpret it based on context and disclosures.

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#186
I'm curious how this car would react to being offline? Like what if I pay for a month, then disconnect the cellular antenna. Will it just drop its max power after a certain date? What if I'm driving during that cutoff time?

The solution this issue is - of course - to not buy a car with a power subscription.

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#187
post #106

There’s already a growing market for companies that just sell you a quality good without ongoing service fees or data harvesting/surveillance; cars only recently really joined that list, which frustrates me. On the one hand, I appreciate the potential such data collection allows: proactive maintenance reminders, repair scheduling, TCO reductions, and even factory-line improvements by identifying flaws before they tur…

> I’d like to believe there’s a market for smaller, simpler, EV-based “retro-inspired” cars that aren’t jam-packed with modems and sensors to phone home. Maybe someday I’ll be proven right. This might come close: https://www.slate.auto/en

Refreshingly small.

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#188
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In most countries I know of (almost all of western EU), for electrical vehicles, you have to register the real maximum power output by the engine. If a software update allows you to increase that over the registered power, then you are in violation of motor vehicle codes and would need to a) pay a fine b) then update the registration, which is usually a $$$ process. If, like TFA, they register the power output as lar…

You know that you can tune your engine right? And this is done with software that does ECU tuning. So in theory all cars are illegal? The issue is not that you can do it, the issue (as stated in the VW article) is how to update your car papers to reflect the changes. You do it illegally with your friends? You can't. VW does it through the subscription? (I guess) allowed. Don't ask me how, but when you buy such cars (…

> You know that you can tune your engine right? And this is done with software that does ECU tuning. So in theory all cars are illegal?

You know that you CANNOT tune your engine, without going through your state's motor vehicle department, right ??

If the manufacturer tunes the ECU via whatever method and as consequence lowers/raises the power, good for him, but the final maximum power number is what will appear on the registration, and only in case of huge negligence can he change it afterwards on sold cars.

> The issue is not that you can do it, the issue (as stated in the VW article) is how to update your car papers to reflect the changes. You do it illegally with your friends? You can't. VW does it through the subscription? (I guess) allowed.

As I have repeated in literally each one of the 3 messages I have written in this thread: TFA clearly says the register the car for the maximum unlocked power level. Which means you _are literally paying for the maximum power even if you don't unlock it_, in terms of insurance and tax.

> you buy the ford ecoboost 1.0 100HPs. It won't be registered as the 150HPs model, although it's 100% the same hardware.

That's unsourced bullshit. I'm not familiar with Ford US cars, but Wikipedia clearly lists that the different models _are differently sized_.

But, even if it was true, and software was used as in the interlock mechanism, Ford would have to register these engines as with their maximum, unlocked power, and that's something people tend to notice.

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#189

Seriously people selling a product at a fair price and that being that is a centuries old thing, why does everything need to be a subscription now just because it's possible?

This isn't exactly centuries ago, but my dad started a company selling a widget in the 90s; their business plan was to charge not just for the widget, but a yearly cost for having the widget installed at all. I remember thinking this was weird even back then, but apparently that was the only way the company could have been profitable - if they sold the widgets for a flat fee, eventually everyplace the widget could be used would be used, and they'd run out of money, except occasionally replacing broken widgets.

The company ended up folding either way.

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#190
post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You should not think that you're paying more for getting less. You should think that finally you can now enable more in your engine if you want to. Until today, you couldn't. I can think the way I want to think. I'm not going to pretend that I'm not paying more and getting less when that is what's happening! > You just had to know that your car is more powerful than the papers say and live with that. Or I voice my…

From a manufacturer perspective it costs less to produce and test 1 engine type than 5. So it's questionable to me that you believe you're paying more. You're just getting better hardware, but it doesn't mean it would be cheaper it it was specifically crafted for your needs. (= I buy 100HP and my engine supports only 100HPs).

If the manufacturer doesn't want to go through the trouble of creating a less powerful engine because it's not economically advantageous then the consumer should just get the better engine by default.

It's ridiculous and insulting to buy a new car (a big purchase for many) to be presented with options where the manufacturer went through considerable effort to _make the car worse_. Manufacturers should be in fierce competition to offer the best cars at the lowest price point.

Chinese competitors will absolutely crush Volkswagen and Volkswagen will have nobody to blame but themselves.

Post reply on HN