[lisk1]

I'm perplexed by this article what so special about tesla hardware except some custom ASICs , few days ago there was article disusing the software side of Tesla cars didnt took traction on HN , its just Ubuntu based linux with fail save boot feature, a bunch of shell scripts and QT based user interface. The interesting questions is, is it viable someone to make fully open source linux distro for tesla cars and how legal is it to install alternative software for Tesla cars , just like a PC, customer buys the hardware but have a choice to install what ever software he wants.

[Shivetya]

What stands out from this article for me; I own a model 3; is that they are suggesting that suppliers may hold back some manufacturers who do not wish to damage their relationship with those suppliers by wholesale changing up how cars are done.

one area they suffer not highlighted is that each supplier maintains its own code base and while I bet they are obligated to share that with the automobile manufacturer it is still a separate team that does not integrate with other suppliers, all this meaning that since Tesla codes all their own ECU and everything feeds up they have a much easier time adapting to new tech and also fixing issues as they come along

OTA alone is a major headache for any traditional manufacturer to implement because they don't make all the electronics so they have to rely on the suppliers coming on board. Worse they also have to convince the dealer network this is a good change because it will take work from them. BMW just recently demonstrated their ability to OTA with some improvements sent up which allow customization of non driving related functions. We know that Audi supports limited OTA for eTron and the Chevrolet Bolt while it has the ability no one seems to report it being use.

for the most part the article is a bit too fanboi for me, after all Tesla riding this edge is just as likely to have issues with hardware that does not stand up to the abuse an automobile can give it