Buggy software is dogging the switch to electric cars | Hacker News Reader

Buggy software is dogging the switch to electric cars

axios.com

27 pointsrurp71 comments

This is all tremendously frustrating to me because electric cars don't have to be this complicated. I've enjoyed the restoration work on my electric-converted minitruck because it's all very simple. Sure, there is software, running in the motor controller and the instrument cluster. Both are fairly straightforward to work with, though, and have small functionality scopes that makes it unlikely you'd want to change anything besides configuration. The user interface is mostly just 12v through switches to GPIOs on the motor controller, though the instrument cluster receives data via CANOpen which of course greatly simplifies the wiring.

What I'm saying is that I don't think there's really any connection between these software problems and electric vehicles... the problem is that electric vehicles are being introduced at the same time that the auto industry has bet on advanced software features, touchscreen interfaces, and sophisticated infotainment as the way to win customers. Since the EVs are broadly new designs, they're often getting all these new features first. Major examples like Tesla have caused consumers to conflate "electric drivetrain" and "huge touchscreen, no buttons," when one does not need to imply the other.

Look at the hobby EV community, they can be built in very straightforward ways that are easier to diagnose than combustion engines. The industry just doesn't want to.

you can blame tesla for that. the whole premise was EV + autopilot, lumping software in the electrical hardware bucket

Hobby EV community sounds fascinating, are there any links to active community?

Now do it a million times and see if a failure mode crops up.

Yep, the best example is our little EV - the Volkswagen e-Up, I love that little car, it still has normal analog gauges, basic bluetooth radio, physical controls for AC(!!!!), no touchscreen anything.....it just works day in and day out. 150 mile range in summer, 120 in winter, it's enough for us, fits a baby seat, stroller, shopping from costco...and it was "relatively" cheap to buy too.

I wish we had more of this, rather than modern EVs which apart from pushing the electric drivetrain have to push some crazy complex infotainment system on you.

I totally agree and can't wait for the trend of conflating awful touchscreen interfaces with EV drivetrains to die off. I'm interested in getting an EV for my next car but I find the UX on all of the current options atrocious.

I would add that product decisions in general are extremely fad and trend driven. Tesla took a huge lead in EVs and then most manufacturers have fallen over themselves trying to copy aspects of that style regardless of whether they are a good idea or not. Sooner or later they will start chasing some new shiny ideal, hopefully before I need a new car.

I routinely get downvoted on various platforms including here when I attempt to remind people of this simple and obvious fact.

EV's do not have to be spaceships.

But carmakers have a lot of difficulty envisioning a future where their BOM costs go down. They want to sell the customer a vehicle at the very limit of their purchasing ability. In fact, with the EV credit the strategy is even worse: they can now sell a customer a car that is $7500 more expensive than the customer could originally borrow/afford. Its fucked up in the extreme.

Here we are in the US quibbling over the minutiae of a $7500 tax credit; meanwhile China is getting busy building $7500 A-segment EVs. Guess how that is gonna work out

It's not really buggy software. The real part is cost.

The reason EVs are loaded with features is to increase the price they can charge and diffuse the cost of the battery. I do not want most of the features in the current EVs, even if they aren't buggy. I want an EV that's the equivalent of a work truck.

That doesn't mean it has to be a truck, but basic radio/usb, power locks/windows, basic seats and rubber floor, etc. Typically only work trucks are stripped down like this, but similar options for cars or SUVs would be nice. Not everything should sync with my phone and blow hot (or cold) air up my ass.

The now-sadly-cancelled Bollinger project was the electric vehicle I really wanted.

Related to high-cost and EVs, I've noticed this phenomenon of automakers hyping EVs with low announced starting prices, but initially only selling the expensive, high-end versions of the car, then eventually (maybe) releasing the cheaper version much later. I first noticed this with Tesla, then Rivian and Lucid followed suit, which isn't terribly surprising. But now Chevy is doing that with the Blazer EV: https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a44723787/2024-chevy-blaze...

I don't know if they really just can't conceive of how much these things are going to cost to make ahead of time, or if they're just trying to grab headlines with attractive pricing or whatever, but it's annoying.

I mean, cars have always been expensive to build, but I don't really remember say, the new Civic coming out and Honda being like "yeah, we're only going to build Touring trims at first, then EXs when the demand drops, and finally maybe a couple of years from now we'll build you an LX model".

Honda puts features on the Acura line. Toyota has Lexus. They bring features to the basic line if they become popular.

And GM has Cadillac. It’s one thing for some features to debut on the luxury line and trickle down to the mainstream. It’s another to be like “here’s our new $40k mainstream electric SUV” and then only sell the $60k version for an entire model year. Just be honest about what you’re putting on sale.

You say that, but then you look a bit and realize you can buy a few year old luxury car with all those options for similar money so you don't buy the new basic car.

Personally, as someone who buys used cars, I always look for the simpler ones. I never consider anything luxury. From a practical standpoint, that just seems like many more features to go wrong on the used car.

That's the opposite. I was able to buy a basic vehicle for about the same price as one with all the options. I bought the new one for the better warranty and the fact that it didn't have 50k miles on it already.

How about this: Instead of buying overpriced buggy new cars with SW developed by "moove fast, break things" bootcamp web-devs, I keep my 2000's car which has buttons and knobs and much less software on it, and who's only software on it has been developed by grumpy old EEs with grey beards, and is only there just for controlling the engine and safety ECUs instead of fucking with touchscreens to open the bloody windows.

How about that?

Unsustainable. Cars don't hold up for very long. The future is electric hot rods. If cars are computers now then I'll build my own thanks.

I dread the day I have to give up my 04 Outback. Love the layout of the controls and the easy adjustments. More and more I’ve been doing my own repairs which gives me great satisfaction. This last Monday I changed out the alternator. The vehicle still gives me great pleasure to drive.

Would you consider yourself an early adopter? Based on this comment, I'm going to assume not.

Cars have been around for over a century, so you'd be forgiven for not seeing them through a lens of innovation.

But modern EVs have played "catch up" in a lot of ways, bringing UX heuristics that are two plus decades old into the dashboard.

Like anything new, this necessitates a more forgiving mindset.

The issue here is the folks with your mentality are also the ones charged with incorporating these heuristics into cars. Thats a fundamental issue, because they are fundamentally different ways of looking at the world.

The world is asking car companies to become tech companies, without any staff changes. Not a recipe for success.

>The world is asking car companies to become tech companies

No, the world isn't. Musk started a fad of replacing the hardware that worked in cars with software to save costs and look "futuristic" on Twitter, and now everyone is racing to emulate the shitty parts of Tesla's approach, but EVs don't need to be this annoying and user hostile.

Just give me something with a battery and a motor who's only controlled by switches and knobs and the meatbag between the seat and steering wheel, no fancy software, no autopilot, no touchscreens. Basically give me a 2000's car that's an EV and not a smartphone trying to be a car.

I'd accept software that helped with efficiency and battery longevity. It's not all bad. But those pieces of software are much more limited that what is packed in today.

They reason they won't build vehicles that you or I want is because people aren't willing to pay the $50k+ prices for an EV that has the equivalent options as a basic $35k work truck.

>I'd accept software that helped with efficiency and battery longevity.

The embedded software doing that quietly in the background is not the problem. It's the user facing software that thinks it can replace the hardware UX that has already worked for decades that's the problem.

I mean, some of the embedded stuff is iffy too. I mostly agree though. For example, the Active Fuel Management in GM V8s requires the TCC to slip around 10-15 RPM all the time, so that if it goes into 4 cylinder mode the vibrations won't transfer through the drive train. Not a recipe for a long transmission life.

The car we all want comes from a school of product design that respects both the machine it's building and the user of that machine. Specifically, it respects that user's time, money, taste, judgment, autonomy, and capability. I can't think of any mainstream consumer brands that practice this school of product design - and I hope there isn't something irreparably structural at play right now that would prevent such a brand from emerging.

So you're saying Musk, all by himself, tricked the world into making Tesla the best selling car of 2023, and tricked all the other auto manufacturers into copying him?

Damn, he's smarter than I thought.

Even the people who have been around a long time and seen innovation can be pessimistic about something new.

Plenty of car guys were pessimistic about reduced compression, 80mph speedometers, restricted intakes, and air injection tech in the late 70s-80s. They were right - it did little to nothing on economy, safety, and smog (cats were more effective).

It's not a leap to say that touchscreens are garage in a vehicle for most functions. Out of sll my comments ever made on here, that one is likely to age the best.

"The world is asking car companies to become tech companies, without any staff changes."

There have been huge shifts in staff over the years.

> The world is asking car companies to become tech companies,

Uh, we are? I must have missed a memo. This is absolutely not anything I want, nor need. This sounds like a pundit trying to make excuses while evangelizing looking for new converts

That’s a lot of words to say that you either own a Tesla or really really want to.

Your whole comment is absolutely drenched with elitism. “The only reason you don’t agree with me is because you can’t see the future, old man! Did you know that cars have actually been around for a while?” Give me a break.

Modern EVs have blindly copy and pasted UX mechanics from smartphones without first looking at things from a first-principles perspective to determine what a good car user experience even is. It plainly, without argument, is not a Tesla, or anything like it. Having a touch screen interface that frequently changes with software updates intended to be used by someone ACTIVELY DRIVING A CAR is not the way to go. If anything, the opposite, as it’s actively unsafe.

If you think that the world is asking for this, you are very obviously living in a bubble. As someone that doesn’t have many computer nerds in my social circle, people at best see this stuff as a flashy passing interest. Give people CarPlay / Android Auto so they can “use their GPS” and be done with it.

I say all of this as someone in their late 20s who owns an EV and who is generally an early adopter. So the answer isn’t another lecture about how my feeble mind can’t understand the innovative concept of “what if we put a crappier iPad in your car?”

Ironically, my old 2016 Honda Pilot had no knobs to speak of. It was infuriating to lower the volume when it randomly decided to crank it to full blast.

All Teslas have a dedicated volume/mute knob.

Who's following who?

> UX heuristics that are two plus decades old

All the UX rules I know of would encourage keeping the physical knobs and switches instead of replacing them with touchscreens.

Maybe I missed a memo in the 2000s?

Computers have been running cars since the mid 1980s. Car companies have been computer companies for decades by now.

the Silicon Valley "move fast and break things" is newer though.

Happy owner of a 1973 chevy pickup checking in. My brother cannot figure out why I like driving an old truck, but if something goes wrong with it, after a search on youtube and a trip to the parts store, I can fix almost anything for under $500. He says if you drive a newer car, you don't have to fix things. However, his BMW X5 then needed a new transmission. Six months and $18,000 later, he doesn't ask me why I drive an old truck anymore.

>However, his BMW X5 then needed a new transmission.

New-age German cars are very accurate and precise, as in only designed to last as long as the lease. Any day longer than that means lost revenue for services and dealerships. A far cray from the German cars of the 80's.

Buying a new German car today means you're either minted or masochistic with your finances.

There was a stat on this released by BMW recently - something stupid like 90%(!!!!) of all owners of new BMWs don't keep them longer than 3 years. So in a way, if you were running BMW engineering division.....yeah, why make them last any longer than that. Clearly the people who actually make you money by buying new cars don't give a crap about longevity - Plastic oil pans it is.

As anyone in automotive should know: you make them last longer because the people who buy a new car every 3 years can only afford to do this because there is a lot of trade in value left in the car. If the car was dead and worthless in 3 years they would be forced to buy much cheaper cars.

That’s because BMW (and their dealers) want to sell every car twice. Once new and then again in a few years as a certified pre-owned car that has retained quite a bit of value. Makes them more money than just selling new cars.

CR has a different opinion, in their recent rating Mini is #3 and BMW itself is #9 in the predicted reliability out of 30 brands (I don't give a link because it requires subscription).

It's not necessarily the reliability that's the issue to me. The issue is that if something does go wrong, it's very expensive and it takes forever because the parts have to come from Germany, and everything is backordered.

One of my buddies bought himself a BMW and it was the best favor he's done for me. Listening to his tales woes makes me not mind when my Honda needs an expensive repair because it's still way cheaper and less hassle than anything he needs done. And worse, the parts can only be gotten by a dealership, which he isn't, so he can't wrench on the thing himself, even after finding a copy of the manuals online. I guess there's ebay but all of that is just so much extra work that none of us have time for. I wanna cool car, but the upkeep is too painful.

I'd love instead a car that has software I can fully customize. Not the life threatening stuff I can shoot myself in the foot with, but all the dashboards, button placement, sensor logic,entertainment system, live APIs, downloadable logs etc. That's where most of the annoying bugs are anyway. An "open source" car would be a dream come true.

The Rally Fighter by Local Motors would be right up your alley!

At least in Europe the state won't let you do that because of ULEZ regulations

Sort of as the Japanese completely ROFL-stomped latge portions of the USA's automakers' offerings by simply building better quality cars in the 70s and 80s, I would be delighted to see China offer an open-source platform their respective EV manufacturers could adopt. No data collection, no subscriptions, just simple and robust apps. It'll never happen for a long list of reasons but it's nice to dream.

You’re conflating very real usability concerns with a very nerdy wish list that has little to no broad appeal. Realistically people aren’t fussed about tracking and they certainly aren’t fussed about open source.

But this is the Internet age. It doesn't need mass market appeal. If enough people throw into the Kickstarter, it can happen.

Sure, you can buy cars with those things easy to adjust already. For more than $million each. Such companies can't handle selling 10 of them in a year. (even then most of the parts are from a standard car, they just expose a few minor changes)

The success of routers that can run OpenWRT would beg to differ.

I'm not sure what your point is. Has there been a prosumer mesh AP product that runs OpenWRT on Kickstarter that I didn't see that failed? Quite possible as I don't trawl through Kickstarter for my wallet's sake. Ubiquity is in the middle of destroying themselves, so something in the prosumer space seems like it would do well.

Serious question: what software is truly needed on an electric car that's not in a "normal" car beyond the charge controller and the linkage between the accelerator and the inputs to the motors? Sometimes I wonder if Tesla has done a disservice to electric cars by making them so computerized and throwing in features nobody really asked for, like like self-driving and drive-by-wire controls.

The base cost of an electric car is very high, so customers (at least, according to manufacturers), demand features aligned with the price. A $25-$30,000 ICE work truck or $20,000 basic economy car looks good compared to the feature laden $40,000 upgrade model. A $40,000 electric car with zero features, on the other hand, looks bad compared to the $40,000 fully loaded gas car.

This theory has mostly panned out I think - the Leaf was probably the most barebones electric car you could get and wasn’t a very strong seller.

> Sometimes I wonder if Tesla has done a disservice to electric cars by making them so computerized and throwing in features nobody really asked for, like like self-driving and drive-by-wire controls.

Teslas aren't drive-by-wire. The steering column and brakes are 100% conventional controls. Only the accelerator pedal is electronic, but that's true of basically all hybrids too.

As far as "too many features"... That's the kind of argument that only works in the abstract. Name any one weird feature that "no one" uses and you'll discover that a bunch of people love it. Tesla's features work. I mean, sure, there are bugs here and there, but it's in general an extremely smooth software experience. It's not Tesla's fault that GM and VW can't ship bug-free equivalents.

Cybertruck is drive by wire.

My 1999 truck has accelerator by wire. (diesel never had a throttle, and the injectors have long been computer controlled)

The normal cars also have too much code in them.

> The typical new-model vehicle comes with 100 million lines of code, says Newcomb [2012]

https://www.technologyreview.com/2012/12/03/181350/many-cars...

Seriously?

First of all, Teslas aren’t drive by wire, other than the accelerator, which is the case for almost every car built in the past 20 years.

Secondly…okay, you have an EV. Where do you charge it? What will your range be when you arrive at a destination? Do you have enough charge to make it back, or should you stop by a charging station? Is it cold; does the battery need preheating?

I don’t know what your issue is with Tesla, but nobody outside of a few “purists” would want to drive an EV without the trip planning features. As for Autopilot…just don’t use it. Nobody is forcing you to use cruise control.

I can't believe it's shocking that legacy auto can't write software.

Legacy? I thought we were mainly talking about Tesla here in the comments.

Not sure if you've ever used a Tesla interface, but they're so much better than the garbage we've gotten used to in cars.

I was also the first comment, so...

Well, it's a good thing the software in an EV is restricted to the UI. /s

Tesla's software for FSD (whatever that name means) doesn't work, and is one of the worst places for buggy beta software that I can think of

I paid for a month out of curiosity, and it was actually great. Really enjoyed it on long trips. Obviously I used it as intended.

Autopilot works stupid good the rest of the time, though. Great feature.

Important Note: This is a terrible written "article"

- it's so disjointed and weirdly formatted that it barely even counts as an article

- who the hell came up with this format

Additional note: it's just clips of text mashed together in a mixed bullet point format

- I'm not willing to take the time to read it in this format

Summary: The bits and pieces I did read through didn't mention anything that I hadn't read in other sources years ago and the website didn't suggest any alternatives

- I didn't learn anything from this

This is pretty standard for Axios. I hate it, but it's really popular in tech circles. I don't understand why.

Tesla has the valuation of a tech company. Traditional automakers have the valuation of heavy industries.

Traditional automaker execs want Big Tech valuations. So they've loaded up their products with tech, in areas they have no track record of delivering, and often without any customer demand. Starting with EVs.

Result: overpriced cars that are substantially less reliable.

This sloppy delivery will further separate the wheat from the chaff in this space. We already see a narrative from certain automakers that EVs aren't competitive. They should be more specific: their EVs aren't competitive.

ICE cars are becoming more software reliant too.

I have been wondering whether EVs will get more of a bad name from their coming along at the same time as cars in general are enshittified than from any problems that are directly related to being electic.

I agree, I suspect this is more of a "new car" problem than an EV problem.

It looks like you're driving a car without a touchscreen or black-box computer that the manufacturer can mine for "data", let's fix that!

They should just get AI to write the code.

An AI would hallucinate a deer in the headlights.

But it's AI.

Is it just me or does Axios have a bit of a pro-Musk bent lately?

First the pro billionaire link the other day, now an ostensibly straight-news item that throws shade at EV makers not named Tesla.

Have I entered bizarro world here?

Did we even read the same article?

Far from being pro-Musk (Musk wasn't even mentioned), the only mention of Tesla in the article is a highly misleading mischaracterization of events.

And the non-Tesla EV makers absolutely deserve shade.

Your definition of a pro-Musk article is one that doesn't try to eviscerate or even mention him, and even slights his company? Super odd.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com