111–120 of 296 posts
How long until Tesla (or any manufacturer) remotely disables the ignition on all used cars until the new owner pays them to turn it back on. Its only fair. After all, the new owner just bought a hunk of metal from the previous owner. They still need to purchase a license for features like starting the car.
this is already a thing in the used car market for people with really bad credit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember when Tesla issued that paid software update to make your car accelerate 0-100 a 0.1 seconds faster. If the hardware is there unchanged, why should the software update be a paid upgrade? It means the software was not good to begin with. Seems to me Tesla is trying to model a software development business, but they forget they're in the hardware business
Owners of photoshop don't get free updates even though they own their computer. Software costs money to develop so saying all updates should be free simply because they already own the hardware doesn't makes any sense.
A more fitting analogy would be Apple charging you to upgrade your BIOS.
How long until Tesla (or any manufacturer) remotely disables the ignition on all used cars until the new owner pays them to turn it back on. Its only fair. After all, the new owner just bought a hunk of metal from the previous owner. They still need to purchase a license for features like starting the car.
The way out of it is through competition. My 2c
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember when Tesla issued that paid software update to make your car accelerate 0-100 a 0.1 seconds faster. If the hardware is there unchanged, why should the software update be a paid upgrade? It means the software was not good to begin with. Seems to me Tesla is trying to model a software development business, but they forget they're in the hardware business
Maybe it required new algorithms to control the torque to not cause stress on the frame. Better algorithms and fine tuning are real work that deserve compensation. Maybe the intial algorithm was just simplistic and conservative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember when Tesla issued that paid software update to make your car accelerate 0-100 a 0.1 seconds faster. If the hardware is there unchanged, why should the software update be a paid upgrade? It means the software was not good to begin with. Seems to me Tesla is trying to model a software development business, but they forget they're in the hardware business
Owners of photoshop don't get free updates even though they own their computer. Software costs money to develop so saying all updates should be free simply because they already own the hardware doesn't makes any sense.
If you buy a camera, you get free firmware updates; your phone gets free updates,...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You pay for software updates/upgrades on your PC, right? Like it or not you don't own rhings anymore. Neither software or hardware. Everything is going towards subscription models.
I have never paid for updates of the drivers in my PC. The software to control the motors of a Tesla is akin to that, and should therefore not be compared to software sold purely.
Surely you did. You just didn't pay attention. You paid for a bigger package (i.e new UI)that included driver updates as well.
How long until Tesla (or any manufacturer) remotely disables the ignition on all used cars until the new owner pays them to turn it back on. Its only fair. After all, the new owner just bought a hunk of metal from the previous owner. They still need to purchase a license for features like starting the car.
You forgot the /s tag.
Actually for a number of years there have been companies that disable car ignitions based on car payment status.
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/gadgets/remote-kill-switches-di...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You pay for software updates/upgrades on your PC, right? Like it or not you don't own rhings anymore. Neither software or hardware. Everything is going towards subscription models.
Or... We could change the law to make it clear that when you buy some hardware you do own it, and to punish businesses that attempt to abuse their customers with owner-hostile retrospective software changes (to hardware products or otherwise). Consumer rights laws exist, and they can be strengthened if necessary to ensure fairness in the market.
I think the law will only change for worse. It all starts with the DRM/DMCA.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You just described basically every consumer motherboard with raid. It's there in the chipset, but requires a key to unlock.
Every consumer motherboard that I've bought in the last decade or more has supported RAID, and none of them have required any additional purchase to "unlock" it.