http://www.teslarati.com/tesla-issu es-software-update-help-

>being so cucked even your car is locked down by botnet

>>62337791
You got what you paid for.

>>62337560
DRM ON YOUR FUCKING CAR
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>62337791
Its almost like batteries don't normally like being drained flat

>>62337560
Wait up, downloading the Dark As My Highway DLC for my car

>>62337849
>Its almost like batteries don't normally like being drained flat

This. I've had to deal with batteries in the past that were so drained, that normal chargers would not work on the phone they were put in. I had to disassemble the phones, get the batteries out, and hook them up directly to a power source, to "jump start" them.

>>62337849
That's not what's happening. Tesla has both 60 and 75 kWh models, to save on manufacturing they only produce 75 kWh batteries and just restrict them to 60 in software if you buy the lower tier of car.

>>62337791
Most likely has to do with ensuring battery health, rather than a completely arbitrary lockdown because "botnet".
It would make no business sense for a manufacturer to put a battery into a car and then limit it to 60% or whatever of it's full capacity, simply because it's a cheaper model, instead of just putting in a cheaper battery that has a full charge which equals to the lower capacity.

>>62338085
What? That makes no sense. Why would they make one cheaper if it uses the same battery and cost the same to manufacture?

>>62338094
You can pay to unlock the extra battery capacity.
http://www.teslarati.com/tesla-cuts-price-model-s-60-75-kwh-battery-upgrade-2000/

>>62338094
No, that's exactly what they do.

>>62338085
You can buy the upgrade later, but until then it keeps it healthier because you're effectively limited to 0-80% charge.

so this is the future of cars...
whoa.......

>>62338176
>you're effectively limited to 0-80% charge
No, it's 20-100%.

Fully discharging a battery pack is more harmful than fully charging one. Fully charging one doesn't harm it at all.

File: 56b154ca4bae9fc0b2dcd4819e2f4f3c93e2b80a97607a701922b9358d40b2fe.jpg (109KB, 668x691px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 668x691px

>>62338171
Well there goes my interest in ever owning a Tesla car. That's Apple/Intel-level bullshittery right there.
And people are actually praising these fuckers as "humanitarian" because they lift this arbitrary restriction during "crisis times"?

Nope I'm just going to wait until Toyota or some other decent manufacturer releases a competing EV. Fuck Tesla.

>tfw you forgot to buy the range extender DLC

>>62338168
because the 75 kWh battery only costs as much as the 60 kWh battery, so they make extra profit from people buying the non restricted batteries.

Same thing is happening in CPUs, I remember when Jewtel used to sell the exact same processor with 2 or 4 cores enabled.

>>62338816
I'm surprised this business model hasn't been explored further.
>Your phone is dead and you need to make an important call? NO PROBLEM!

File: 4sfhhl.gif (1MB, 380x272px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 380x272px

>>62339063
Don't give them ideas

> Battery holds charge for exactly 35 phone calls
> Or exactly 2h of facebook
> Purchase our scratch upgrade cards for only $60 to upgrade to 55 phone calls or 3:30 hours of facebook!

>>62337560
>cars with features locked behind software with a Kia tier interior and an iPad for a center console
I'm not opposed to electric cars on principle (the Leaf is a pretty good electric shitbox) but you have to be an idiot to buy a Tesla.

File: 1504235527038.jpg (67KB, 711x711px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 711x711px

Has anyone tried to pirate Tesla DLCs yet?

Do they make it easy to swap out these batteries?

File: proprietary.jpg (28KB, 480x451px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 480x451px

i would never buy a car that has proprietary software in it.

In other words they artificially limited the battery's range to force people to swap batteries more often.

Petrol powered cars don't have this problem.

>>62341528
no, they probably do it to keep the battery from becoming overdischarged which would damage it.

what you said doesnt even make sense

File: 2016-Mazda-MX-5-01.jpg (219KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 1600x1067px

>liking Tesla

Spotted the Redditard, Mazda is officially /ourguys/

>>62341528
All the auto manufacturers conspire with gas stations to limit the range of cars so people would have to stop at gas stations more often. It makes sense that Tesla is bucking this trend.

>>62339054
Isn't AMD doing the same with the 1900X?

>>62341831
No, some CPUs will have disabled cores and sold as a lower priced SKU because the cores are unstable and not fit for use.
That guy was referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Upgrade_Service which is quite a bit different.

>>62341831
Not so long ago there was the case of the RX480, they sold both 4gb and 8gb versions, but they both had 8gb.

>>62341627
Mazda actually making ICE advances while Tesla memes 100 year old tech with a new battery

>>62338094
>It would make no business sense for a manufacturer to put a battery into a car and then limit it to 60%
C U C K
U-------E
C-------L
K E L O N
N

>>62338094
>It would make no business sense for a manufacturer to put a battery into a car and then limit it to 60% or whatever of it's full capacity, simply because it's a cheaper model, instead of just putting in a cheaper battery that has a full charge which equals to the lower capacity.

Part commonization is big in automotive. Simplifying your assembly line by using the same exact part that other vehicles on that same assembly line use has plenty of business merit because it simplifies final installation and logistics.

They might save enough to be worth it, especially with their forecast of how many people might upgrade later. I would be curious to know what that post-purchase conversion rate is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU7FuAswPW0
>this thread

>>62337560

Someone who read this was screeching over "WHY DO PEOPLE BUY THINGS THAT HAVE DRM LOCKED FEATURES OR CAPABILITIES?! I BOUGHT IT, I HAVE A RIGHT TO THE FULL FEATURES!" like an autist. I knew the guy in real life, went to college with him. Asked him "Hey, do you still drive that (2010) Camry?" "oh, yeah. Why?" "Did you know the exact same engine in your camry made 12 more HP in the 1-step-up Avalon?" "WTF, that's weird. Why?" "Because some settings in the engine's computer were changed to allow it to make more power. You're not getting the most of your car's engine, and you're accepting that." He then called me a liar, apparently looked it up, came back an hour later, deleted his post, and said "Well, they had to do that because the Avalon was heavier. " and just left it at that.

He's one of those would-be-a-NEET-if-he-could dudes who works a minimum wage job, lives with 3 other people in a 3 bedroom apartment, splitting the rent, getting all upset about the same dumb shit autists on /g/ do, but says Reddit is superior.

If someone wants to pay less, for less features, why is it a problem? Thriftier people will pay for the less features, and re-add the features of the costlier one if they want to. Others will accept that they're paying less for less.

>>62338497
For a few years there was a RAV4 available in commiefornia that had a Tesla powertrain and batteries. They're hard to find though.
Also
>toyota producing a decent ev ever
>can't even produce a phev that will last more than 30 miles per charge

>>62342352
>tesla not improving old tech
>ice not old tech

>>62338168
Maybe the motive is that if you put less strain on the battery you will hassle the company less with your troubles. So those who elect to put more strain on the batteries by more fully cycling them pay more for the inevitable trouble and calls and complaints etc. I suspect where the real money is, is limited edition models. Like a model collaboration with a designer or celibrity etc.