If I own the car then either those are all my batteries or someone else has abandoned their property in my car.
Comment on Elon Musk reveals Tesla software-locked cheapest Model Y, offers 40-60 more miles of range
ch00f@lemmy.world 1 month agoIt’s tricky. It’s not like BMW locking heated seats, a trivial feature, to nickel and dime the owner out of $300.
Reducing the battery capacity severely alters the value of the car possibly dropping it into the range of more budget conscious buyers.
There are benefits too. Less wear on the battery by not using its whole range, faster charging to “100%,” and more potential value when it comes time to sell should the buyer want to unlock the extra range.
Leave it to Tesla though to bungle the PR and completely lose the narrative.
tabular@lemmy.world 1 month ago
ch00f@lemmy.world 1 month ago
You don’t have to buy the car. People aren’t getting conned here… They would buy a more expensive version of the car with a higher range if they thought that would suit their needs.
tabular@lemmy.world 1 month ago
You don’t have to buy the car.
If it’s a profitable decision then it has the potential to become the de facto standard standard and so simply not buying it isn’t enough.
The manufacturer using software to lock use of hardware in people’s own cars is an attack on ownership rights.
ch00f@lemmy.world 1 month ago
When it comes to things that are trivial to include but locked behind exorbitant paywalls (i.e. heated seats), I agree.
However, range/battery capacity is the primary price differentiator for EVs and also the primary cost for manufacturing. Finding a way to offer options that suit the needs of different people at varying prices just allows more people to enter the market.
to become the de facto standard
I feel like it might be nice to have a sliding scale of ranges available for people who have a sliding scale of needs. If I need a second car strictly for my 20 mile commute, it might be nice to have an option to pay less for 100 miles of range over 200. And I assume if a market is established for low-range EVs, manufacturers will compete with each other on how to deliver that for the best price. Perhaps if the market is large enough, Tesla will find it better to actually remove the extra batteries and put them in other cars.
Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 month ago
You are 100% right it improves the lifespan, and when selling it, a battery in better condition makes the car worth more.
I think somehow some people misunderstand your post? Or they don’t get how it can be an advantage to have a bigger battery than you pay for?ch00f@lemmy.world 1 month ago
It’s funny how frequently this business model is used in the digital space, but when it comes to physical hardware, people freak.
Like look at movies. Does anybody really think it costs substantially more to deliver the 4K version of a product over the HD version? Everything, Everywhere, All At Once is $12 on Blu-ray on Amazon. It’s $20 on 4k UHD.
The movie was mastered at 4k or higher, so why not just give you the UHD version with the Blu-ray version? The physical disc can’t cost more than a few cents to manufacture.
It’s because some people have decided they don’t need 4k and are happy to take a shittier version of the product for a lower price.
Don’t get me started how much people hate when content is included on the game disc locked behind a paywall yet somehow have less of an issue when there’s day 1 downloadable content also locked behind a paywall.
tabular@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Perhaps typical people can more easily understand how a physical device might work. People probably understand gears and electricity more so than “software” (never even heard of source code or binaries).
deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
None of those other behaviors you describe are any less shitty. “Look, Tesla is doing the same shitty things as other corporations, they’re not so bad!” What a terrible argument.
For the record I pirate my content for the reasons you describe; I also don’t fuck with AAA games with day 1 DLC or paywalled content. Those get pirated or purchased on a heavy discount later.
Got any compelling argument as to why this software nerf should exist?
ch00f@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Sure:
It’s cheaper to manufacture and maintain a single version of a product. It’s cheaper to ship and store a single version of a product. It’s also easier to adapt to quickly changing market needs if you don’t need to spend six months spinning up a production line for a different version of a product.
Also, the existing market for low-range EVs might not be large enough to justify the expense of maintaining a separate line.
If there is competition in the space, it’s safe to assume that some portion of these savings are passed on to the customer to better edge out competitors over price.
If you want to be very charitable: wealthier people who can afford the full-range version are partially subsidizing the lower range (tighter margin) version for more budget-conscious consumers.
lightnsfw@reddthat.com 1 month ago
That just means they could be selling the full range version cheaper. You’re getting the same hardware. It’s insane. Not “tricky”.
ch00f@lemmy.world 1 month ago
That just means they could be selling the full range version cheaper.
No. The additional price of the full-range version is partially subsidizing the lower priced version. People are willing to pay the current price for the longer range version, why would they lower the price?
lightnsfw@reddthat.com 1 month ago
The additional price of the full-range version is partially subsidizing the lower priced version.
That makes it even worse!
deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Yes it is; it’s exactly that.
Or they could not reduce it for the same production cost…
There are no benefits. You could simply unplug at 80%.
This is such a cope ass response.
SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Let’s just say it’s 50% battery capacity and range for simplicity.
As each cell dies, it can use another cell to replace that one, it would effectively double the life span of the battery.
ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
That’s… not how battery packs work
SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 1 month ago
That’s actually how the majority of batter packs operate, they have a margin of cells to replace when they start undercurrenting.
Steve@startrek.website 1 month ago
It kinda sorta is, but not exactly.
ch00f@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Yes, but perhaps some money is saved by not having to manage multiple production lines for multiple battery capacities and also having to predict how many of each capacity is going to sell so you’re not stuck with cars nobody wants?
Right, after you just paid more for battery that you’ve decided not to use. The benefit is that it’s cheaper for the customer.
deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
It’s only cheaper because they inflated the price from a limitation they created. There is absolutely no reason to limit the battery capacity in software in this manner other than to create an artificial divide to upsell people on the “”higher”” capacity.
ch00f@lemmy.world 1 month ago
TIL Tesla has a 100% monopoly over the electric vehicle market space.
Tesla is offering a wider variety of products at more diverse prices to try to better fit the needs of a larger portion of customers. They must have determined that it was cheaper overall to do it this way rather than physically rip the batteries out of the vehicles or they wouldn’t do it.
I mean, isn’t not offering a cheaper version at all already upselling? When the F-150 Lightning came out, people had a really hard time finding the standard range version because dealers didn’t want to sell a lower trim version of the car with lower commission.
Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 month ago
You misunderstand, having a larger battery that is not used to full capacity makes it last longer. If you unplug at 80%, you need to have paid the extra price for the bigger battery.
deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
There is no “larger battery”. It’s an identical battery with different software limitations on the charge level.
Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 month ago
No we agree on that, but when the market is so they can charge more, you still benefit getting the car cheaper with 80 Watt than an extra production line with a 70 watt battery. I agree it feels like cheating, and I’m not defending the practice, but if the choice is between making a model with an actual smaller battery that cost the same to make, the customer is actually better off getting the bigger battery without being able to use it 100%
There is no such advantage in the BMW example. Which was kind of the point.