[rickdeckard]

> Why shouldn’t software be treated with the same rigor at Volkswagen scale?

No one said that it shouldn't.

What I wrote is, that the approach of minimizing any SURFACE of risk in software creates the (subjectively good and solid) software of previous car-generations (in Volkswagen terms: MIB2 ~ a bit downhill already in MIB3): A solid, predictable and closed product fulfilling its core use-case.

But it DOESN'T create a user experience with those "fun" niche features, competitive remote-access Smartphone features, exposed API's, sudden new features during lifecycle, funny "ludicrous modes" etc.

And today's customers are demanding those features, it's now a hygiene factor for a premium experience on Smartphones as well as on cars.

A Tesla is not considered a "Premium" car because of its premium hardware or manufacturing quality. They disrupted the car-industry by being the first to apply a software-dev mindset to it, and the consumer perceives this as premium.

[LtWorf]

It's considered premium until you see the amount of recalls they do for important things like brakes braking and wheels staying attached to the car.

https://www.go-parts.com/garage/brake-pedal-tesla-cybertruck...

https://www.tparts.com/blogs/tesla-latest-news/tesla-issues-...

https://tesorb.com/cybertruck-rwd-recall-173-wheel-stud/

[rickdeckard]

Apparently I need to clarify, as it's not obvious from my previous comments: _I_ don't consider Tesla premium at all, it is NOT a premium hardware company.

It's bad quality hardware hiding behind an cleaner engine and some software features.

It is EXACTLY the product of a hardware company which keeps treating hardware-production like it's software, as described above.