GM Volt Forum banner

Marketing Backfire- promotional Facebook post about MyLink becomes dogpile

4K views 21 replies 15 participants last post by  Mathew Hennessy 
#1 ·
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...&set=a.110714446008.90278.106095626008&type=1

I bet the marketing team didn't expect that all the highest "liked" comments would be from owners calling out GM for offering zero retroactive enhancements to existing owners.

"But it's hardware differences," the apologists respond. Yes, when simple software changes require hardware changes, we call that "short sighted engineering," a problem Tesla offers a nice solution for, and something many people will remember when it's time to re-buy.
 
#4 ·
I'll bet the reason they quote hardware differences has nothing to do with the feature, but rather they haven't made a firmware set that matches the 2011 hardware. It probably has nothing to do with the feature, it's just that unrelated parts of the firmware have hardware dependencies. They just don't want to support extra software sets (and the obvious desire to make the customer buy a new car).
 
#6 ·
people people people..

I wish people would LEARN.. its NORMAL for car companies to enhance features year over year.. and wahhh cry to the ones that think they should get upgrades to their car.. (and most would say they want them FREE!!) but I digress here...

if you could upgrade your current car to the latest features there would be little reason to buy a new one... and that causes a couple issues.. not upgrading makes business sense..

1] Early adopters willing to buy new cars gets the nameplate out on the road quickly as well as makes the manufcaturer money
2] early traders (1-3 years) puts nice late model used cars on the lots.. (which often buyers come to look at and are easy to finance for less-than-stellar credit customers...resulting in decent resale prices.. same dealer may make money on the same car twice)
3] it would be a SERVICE NIGHTMARE to service cars that are both upgraded and ones that arent... as many people as want the new software will also want to keep the old... (Hey dont upgrade me i like the old better!)..

from a programmer standpoint having to test new loads against new and old features would be true PAIN.. as it is now some new loads require complete reflashes of the car and dont majorly affect operating features..

4] used car buyers expecting a 2011 software feature end up with a 2013 feature that they didnt want...

egads that means we need to create DOWNGRADE capabilities.. even more software distribution nightmares...

want a new feature?? go buy a new car.. pure and simple..
-Christopher
 
#7 ·
I don't see the big deal. Now if my Volt lost 6.5 kWh of battery power every night, which is the case with the Model S, then I'd be vocal about an upgrade. Would I like a Hold Mode? Sure. But it and the other stuff we're talking about here is minor.
 
#10 ·
Umm, yes, iPhones do get retroactive upgrades. iOS upgrades are always available for older iPhones. Not all of the new features work on older phones (like Siri), but those are understandably limited by hardware processing power. In the 90s, there weren't a lot of features on cars that could be upgraded by software so people didn't expect it. Things are different today. Imagine buying a cell phone that you couldn't add Apps to! In the 90s, that was normal.

As a previous post noted, consumers can usually tell the different between something that probably could be offered by a software update (i.e. Hold mode), and those that can't (like a bigger battery that doubles range).

People buy new cars and phones for all kinds of reasons. There will always be new hardware changes coming that people will want. Companies would be wise to consider that consumers will be less likely to buy a new product if they don't think a company will keep it up to date.
 
#12 ·
In my 2012 there have been a grand total of 0 updates available. I understand certain features do require hard ware changes like MyLink.

However, the ERDTLT at 25F can certainly be changed to 15F. It would be great if there was a menu option added like in late 2012 and 2013 models. I cannot buy the answer that that is hardware related when there must be a software setting that determines the outside temperature and fires up the ICE.
 
#15 ·
Tesla's approach is different because
1) they aren't hamstrung by trying to appease dealers
2) they needed to get their car out early

Tesla Model S lacks some features and had issues like the high vampire load (mostly fixed in 5.0) so upgradability stopped owners from deferring purchase. Similarly they recognized the value of allowing deferred purchase of the Supercharger access since many buyers might not see one for 3 years or they might not need it, but future owners might.

Not only does it not hold up sales for the sake of perfecting a software feature, it also helps protect resale value. Plus, being low volume, offering upgrade over cell or wifi helps cut down trips to the service center or by a rover. GM doing anything to keep owners away from dealerships would upset dealers.
 
#16 ·
Now my curiosity is aroused. I'd like to be educated.

What genuine discretionary feature enhancements, versus more-or-less mandatory bug-fixes, has Tesla actually delivered via software update? Or is this mostly all about a Tesla promise for the future?

(BTW, I admire Tesla a great deal.)
 
#17 ·
Yup looks like that FB post sure didn't go the way they wanted.

What the Volt interior and touch screen needs violently is a good User Experience team to watch how people use the car and suggest new method of on-screen menus and the buttons that surround it as I've used the car for a couple of years now and I still don't understand the layout of all the buttons...seems incredibly random with a few useless buttons (AS1-2 who the heck thought was a good idea).
 
#20 ·
Thank you. That's a great link.

As best I can tell, the coolest new feature is WiFi, although I think WiFi had been promised by Tesla from the outset. Other new features seem minor, almost like bug-fixes. From my read of the Tesla Forum, Model S owners are getting restless for something tangible (Valet Mode??), and Elon now is promising to deliver. It will be interesting to watch this going forward. As many of us know, software "upgrades" often come as a double-edge sword, even for some users, but especially for the manufacturer.
 
#19 ·
I'm unhappy with GM's refusal to provide simple software useability upgrades, but I'm more unhappy with the constant excuse that hold mode, etc., requires hardware. WHAT HARDWARE? GM never says.

There was a time when the internals of a Volt might have been a trade secret, but by now the Chinese have probably built a working duplicate.

There's been lots of speculation on this board, but nothing official.

GM - Either tell us more or admit you just don't want to do it.

EVs are not the only cars that are software-centric. Some car company besides Tesla will release a Service Pack and make a big splash. GM will ultimately give in. I hope that these upgrades are sold with dealer profit built in so that there is a revenue stream to support the upgrades. The GPS once per year model sounds about right.
 
#21 ·
from a technical standpoint this is tougher than it seems.. never mind my completely-ignored post above about why marketing doesnt just upgrade everyone.. lets go technical..

apple pretty much lines up its suppliers for iphone and they pretty much stay the same for the complete iteration of the iphone.. (ie iphone 4,5, etc)..

so when new software updates are developed, their test-set of hardware is pretty easy.. test on a variant of each iphone model they want to support.. (test on all sizes and models).. and make sure it works... if a supplier changed mid-cycle it likely happened once.. so again grab a few more phones with that hardware and test away...

TESLA is also likely pretty-static in the suppliers for their cars.. they make so few cars per year that upgrades are still fairly easy to maintain and test accross all hardware variants...

lets look at MyLink.. MyLink isnt JUST in the volt its in many cars... GM sees MANY parts changes from suppliers quitting, new bids for new suppliers, etc.. they create a working software image for each hardware profile they have.... once software is "frozen" (no more new features", only bugfixes are produced.. the next "version" of software developed will be tested on the set of hardware it is targeted for.. when they released the 2013 MyLink the 2014 was already likely in POC (proof of concept), maybe even Alpha status...

the Devs knew that "dont worry about the late 2012 cars that came out having MyLink as the cars we are "desigining" for our 2014 targets..".. a hardware set that sure can and will change, however the DEVs only need worry about the oroginal DEV hardware and its variants for that Model year...

hardware suppliers do change as I mentioned.. and alas why your Volt's software updates are controlled by VIN.. because your volt may have a different hardware set than your neighbor's both 2013's...

make those DEVs have to write the new version to work on ALL that hardware 3 years from now having to cover 2012-2016 (2017) models.. wow we will never see anything work right or new features developed then!!...

ever change your video card in your PC only to have it blue-screen on you periodically afterwords? you try everything.. new drivers.. go to windows update, only to find that if you downgraded your sound driver one version and upgraded your video driver one version that works well... good luck if your Volt "blue-screened" and stranded you periodically.. trips back to the dealer over and over... because you had some hardware / software set that missed being tested...

want new features??? Go buy a new car... pure and simple...
-Christopher
 
#22 ·
lets look at MyLink.. MyLink isnt JUST in the volt its in many cars... GM sees MANY parts changes from suppliers quitting, new bids for new suppliers, etc.. they create a working software image for each hardware profile they have.... once software is "frozen" (no more new features", only bugfixes are produced.. the next "version" of software developed will be tested on the set of hardware it is targeted for.. when they released the 2013 MyLink the 2014 was already likely in POC (proof of concept), maybe even Alpha status...
Seems to me like Apple and Tesla know how to do technology, and GM's methodology is pretty lacking. US automakers also have a pretty poor track record with suppliers, presumably Tesla's smart enough to pay fairly and on-time, and not try to screw their suppliers over at every opportunity. Standard operating procedure is to code drivers to deal with changing hardware, and keep as much code as possible as common as possible, since doing so reduces support costs and increases reliability.

ever change your video card in your PC only to have it blue-screen on you periodically afterwords? you try everything.. new drivers.. go to windows update, only to find that if you downgraded your sound driver one version and upgraded your video driver one version that works well... good luck if your Volt "blue-screened" and stranded you periodically.. trips back to the dealer over and over... because you had some hardware / software set that missed being tested...
Beyond the fact that Microsoft software is largely bloated legacy junk, an automaker is far more vertically integrated and has better control over its hardware than the spectrum of 'compatible' hardware and standards that MS is expected to support. And if GM can't test its limited, tightly-controlled stack, then they fail at technology.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top