I hate these proprietary systems because companies have very bad track records in terms of maintenance, since they’d rather you buy a newer product.
In 2022, the automaker told drivers of the affected cars, some only three years old, that a technical solution was delayed by the pandemic. Now, more than two years later, those drivers still don’t have access to telematics services. […] Vehicles from Hyundai and Nissan, some as late as model year 2019, also lost some features after 2022’s 3G sunset.
In a country with good consumer rights, this would be a valid reason to return it and get a replacement or refund: It’s no longer offering functionality that was advertised and that you paid for as part of the purchase price.
In a country with good consumer rights, this would be a valid reason to return it and get a replacement or refund: It’s no longer offering functionality that was advertised and that you paid for as part of the purchase price.
In the EU this would probably be a no-brainer.
The mandatory warranty for any product in the EU is 2 years. It doesn’t take into account products like cars that you would expect to be usable for 10+ years.
I doubt you could claim anything in the EU either after more than 2 years.
I’m not an expert on this, if there are some regulations I didnt take into account, please correct me.
The mandatory warranty for any product in the EU is 2 years
I don’t know a lot about EU policies. In Australia, products must last for as long as a reasonable consumer would expect them to last (for example, 10 years for a large appliance like a fridge), including advertised features or features a sales rep told you about, regardless of the warranty period. A company removing features only three years after purchase would absolutely qualify for a refund or replacement.
I think Australia’s policies are stricter than the EU though. As far as I know, Australia is the only country where you can return games on Steam if there’s a major bug, even if you’ve had it for months and have hundreds of hours of game time. Valve got sued by the government and fined AU$3 million because they tried their “no refunds after 2 hours of game play” approach in Australia, which is illegal there (you can’t have conditions like that on refunds if the refund is for a major issue). https://www.pcgamer.com/valve-posts-a-notice-about-australian-consumer-rights-on-steam/
Without right to repair, there will be planned obsolescence.
My Citroen EV developed an on board charger fault. It wouldn’t charge. The part was a “coded part” which meant it had to specifically programmed with my EV’s ID by Citroen at manufacture. It took months to finally be fitted and ready. So basically, not only does the coded parts system make service shit, but also means when the manufacturer is done making the part, the car is dead. You can’t swap parts between cars and there is no third party parts. It’s meant to be about car theft, but it’s very convenient it blocks competition and long product life…
If it was a carburetor (which EVs do not have), I’d be okay with a DRM. But boards? Is there an organized crime group that steals EV boards? Next time it will be funking wipers with DRM.
Cars should just come with a big open socket up front, where I can buy (or build) my own infotainment system to install there. That way I can replace it over the course of the car’s lifetime. Or, give me the option to just plug it up or install a traditional car radio or something. I should be able to cram an 8-track player in if I want.
Keep all automobile controls as physical buttons, knobs, and levers.
I haven’t owned a car in over 10 years, but whenever I look at what’s available, I can’t get past how much planned obsolescence is baked into newer cars. I would never buy one…
If automakers focused on cars, and let tech companies and focus on building the infotainment systems, we’d have better choices and less vendor lock-in.
Cars should just come with a big open socket up front, where I can buy (or build) my own infotainment system to install there.
…which is precisely what we used to have, before auto makers decided to insist that they should be enclosed in a swooping dash.
I’d be fine with a reinvention of the modular system with more digital I/O and connections to other features of the car. Let me buy something like a “Samsung Galaxy Drive” infotainment dash that embodies the “swooping dash” concept, or let me buy a pre-built shell that I can build out like a custom PC.
I can cram my car full of corporate apps, or I can run it on Linux. I would love to have the choice.
Any future self-driving capabilities need to be inside of their own dedicated system like an aircraft autopilot.
I may be weird but why would you need an infotainment system at all? I have all the infotainment I could possibly want in my phone, the car is only needed as a Bluetooth speaker and for standard playback controls.
The car screen is significantly bigger than the phone screen, making it quicker to glance at it for driving instructions.
But now we’re just coming back to Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. I just want a big screen with physically touchable controls for those. My previous car did exactly that, but now I’ve gone near two decades older so I now get a fancy screen with no functionality beyond FM radio and DVD video lol
That was also the point of Apple CarPlay/Android auto. Let the manufacturer provide the hardware but your phone can run the infotainment. Let actual software companies do that, instead of the horrible mess that car manufacturers make out of software
I’m disappointed to find this article is mainly about losing premium subscription features that use mobile internet, which I see as little more than expensive spyware. I don’t want them in the first place, and although I believe that some people might, it doesn’t seem like one of the important issues around car technology or transportation in general.
The promise is a “smartphone on wheels”: a car that automakers can continue to improve well after an owner drives away from a showroom.
I feel a more worthwhile discussion would be about how a long a “smartphone on wheels” will remain useful compared to one that doesn’t depend on continually updated software. How much more often will they need to be replaced? How much more will that cost people? How much more waste and pollution will be generated because of shorter car lifetimes? What sort of right-to-repair laws do we need here?
Seems like a missed opportunity.
It’s not just cars. Anything with electronics (appliances, smarthome devices, healthcare, transportation) that is designed to last more than three years will hit a wall.
The host devices are designed to last 10-15 years, but the electronics will be out-of-date in 3-5 years.
The processor manufacturer will have moved on to new tech and will stop making spare parts. The firmware will only get updated if something really bad happens. Most likely, it’ll get abandoned. And some time soon, the software toolchain and libraries will not be available anymore. Let’s not think of the devs who will have moved on. Anyone want to make a career fixing up 10-yo software stack? Where’s the profit in that for the manufacturer?
So as an end-user, you’re stuck with devices that can not be updated and there’s still at least 10-20 years of life left on them. Best of luck.
Solution: go analog. Pay extra if you have to. They’ll last longer and the ROI and privacy can’t be beat.
The problem isn’t analogue Vs digital, or even software controlled or not. It’s about the design assuming:
- The manufacturer will always exist
- The manufacturer should be the only one to maintain the device.
- The manufacture will define what the owner will do with the device.
An analogue device can be at fault too. Proprietary parts. Construction techniques which don’t allow for dissambly without destroying things. All that stuff.
…but you’re right. Buy the items that let you service them, that don’t rely on cloud servers and software updates, that use standard parts, etc, etc. Right to repair legislation is good too, but the companies understand purchasing power more. So educate those around you too.
A lot of what’s driving these decisions is the mass switch to subscription models. Everything’s designed so you have to keep coming back to the manufacturer.
It used to be making a high quality, standalone product meant you could spend less on customer service and RMA’s. Now they’ve figured out they can sell you service contracts and make money off you being locked in.
While I’m not in love with proprietary software nor APIs from the start, I would accept some policy/regulation that would require smart device manufacturers to open-source the drivers after some given time.
Too many devices become obsolete software-wise then become e-waste not too long after. At least by open-sourcing you allow others to at least use the hardware, and the manufacturer benefits by saying “we didn’t just brick everything” while people who actually care to support it can do so.
