21–30 of 197 posts
A little sad that this is being pulled back - I was looking forward to after market hacks
That is some real stockholm syndrome mentality there my friend. It is now 100% free, as it always should have been.
The right way to sell subscriptions is for services that actually incur ongoing costs for the company. Charging a subscription for hardware and software already built into the car, and not dependent on any external servers or anything is just plain anti-consumer. There are plenty of services BMW can charge for that people will happily pay, like remote start, remote monitoring etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One wonders why the automaker's can't just charge a reasonable monthly fee for 1. tracking where you left your car parked, and 2. remote-locking your car. I would vastly prefer that to playing games with our data, or trying all these gimmicks like charging for extra acceleration.
When my iPhone disconnects from my car (even one without CarPlay), it remembers the car's location.
The right way to sell subscriptions is for services that actually incur ongoing costs for the company. Charging a subscription for hardware and software already built into the car, and not dependent on any external servers or anything is just plain anti-consumer. There are plenty of services BMW can charge for that people will happily pay, like remote start, remote monitoring etc.
>Charging a subscription for hardware and software already built into the car, and not dependent on any external servers or anything is just plain anti-consumer. What's the principle here? That because it already exists, consumers don't have to pay for it? How far can we stretch this? Suppose there's a streaming service (eg. netflix or spotify) that supports downloads, does that it's "anti-consumer" to deny them acce…
Compare to a "land grab" or "rent-seeking" behavior. Also compare to "financing". It may be economically efficient to establish bargaining over the value but it matters asymmetrically to the parties to the transaction who is assigned property rights and who is renting.
It's not controversial, everyone thinks it's ridiculous
One wonders why the automaker's can't just charge a reasonable monthly fee for 1. tracking where you left your car parked, and 2. remote-locking your car. I would vastly prefer that to playing games with our data, or trying all these gimmicks like charging for extra acceleration.
The right way to sell subscriptions is for services that actually incur ongoing costs for the company. Charging a subscription for hardware and software already built into the car, and not dependent on any external servers or anything is just plain anti-consumer. There are plenty of services BMW can charge for that people will happily pay, like remote start, remote monitoring etc.
Even a case can be made for not charging for software maintenance and upgrades since the customer has already paid for that cost while buying the device (or just include it in the device cost). Take Apple as an example. Software upgrades are free. It actually works in their benefit to give free software since they don't need to be backwards compatible for decade(s). Charging for actual recurring fee services like dat…
I was surprised, though, that it would "upgrade" my phone to apps that wouldn't work anymore and didn't bother to say it wouldn't work.
Bought a new phone, transferred my setup over, and they started working again.
It's not controversial, everyone thinks it's ridiculous
It was actually a little more nuanced — they offered a one-time purchase (at a normal-ish price), or the option to purchase via subscription. I have no problem with this arrangement, which literally offers consumers more choices. The concerns I would have are (1) that the one-time pricing would gradually creep up, so that in a few years it becomes untenable, or (2) that when you sell the car, the heated seats would b…
To me this isn't nuanced at all. It's my fucking car, get out of here with this rent-seeking DLC shit.
It was true. The heating wires in the seats were already installed and the consumer paid for them and owned them.
I remember in the olden days some compiler vendors added a fee to "unlock" floating point code support. That was never popular (I never did such with my compilers.)