re: Tesla flips a switch to increase the range of some cars in Florida to help people evacuate

quote:

---

Or maybe they did and realized it is totally different?

---

Well it's not, so that's the thing.

And LOL at you thinking the OT gives this a lot of thought and thinks of all other companies/examples before giving an opinion. You REALLY think everyone in this thread did that?

How's it any different than internet or cable? You have what you need to run at full capacity in all 3, the company can flip a switch in all 3. The company offers you a scaled down version of what your hardware can do for cheaper package...for all 3.

Saying it's totally different is just grasping for straws to make one seem like they're not wrong, but it's illogical to think that, and I'd like to see how you think they're so different.

quote:

---

So some perceive to be charging their 60kWh cars to 100%, when in reality they are charging their car to 80% (60/75).

---

Also, depending on how it's set up, it means that they can go longer before they notice the car's range to degrade. It has a built in loss buffer.

quote:

---

The cable company has to pay to distribute these channels and then they have to set pricing to recoup the money. No one thinks they are hardware limited by a cable box.

---

Ok fair enough. Strike it from the list and use all of the other examples at our disposal.

The main point is posters are acting like Tesla is the first to do this when there are examples in multiple walks of technology that those posters never thought of.

Before going 1 by 1, I think the simplest thing to do is to ask you point blank, you honestly think Tesla is the only one doing something along these lines?

They're not, so I don't know if you're trying to set the examples straight(which is fair) or denying the main premise here that other companies do this as well.

Simplifying it to its core, by arguing against it aren't you just arguing that less options are better than more options?

There are 2 options:

- Offer 1 car at 1 price with 1 battery life
- Offer 1 car at 2 different prices with 2 different battery lives

Just thinking logically, why in the world would the 1st option be better than the 2nd one?

I don't really see the relevance of whether it's an entirely different battery or the same battery with software restrictions.

quote:

---

aren't you just arguing that less options are better than more options?

---

Not sure how you think that is what I am arguing. I don't care how many options they offer. There should be a clear delineation between options and it should have a reasonable cost associated with it.

You failed to offer a 3rd option.

-Offer 1 car at 2 different prices with 2 different batteries.

Edit: Clearly we disagree. That doesn't make either of us wrong. This isn't a matter of fact, so I won't be making any more posts on the topic.

quote:

---

How us the 60kWh more affordable then if they use the same things in them? This sounds pretty shitty on Tesla's part. Glad they sent the update but frick them for limiting it in the first place (unless there's some good reason that I'm missing).

---

They offered the option to only use 60kWh for a discount. And, there were apparently consumers who wanted that option. What assholes.

Who fricking drives a battery operated car from Miami to Atlanta in traffic that'll take 12 to 15 hours in stop and go traffic? I mean, you'd think that the initial surge from starting over and over and over that car would die only 2/3 of the way there, plus, can you imagine the lines to charge at charge stations?

quote:

---

Well it's not, so that's the thing.

---

It's different because you ISP is charging you based on how you will utilize their hardware. Higher utilization may require more robust hardware and will likely tax their system requiring additional expenses in hardware, maintenance, monitoring and management of resources.

Telsa is charging you to enable hardware that you already paid for for an additional fee. I do not necessarily think it the horror some think it is, I would need more info into the reasoning behind it other than a desire to maximize profits (not that I have an issue with that in many, if not most, case).

quote:

---

And LOL at you thinking the OT gives this a lot of thought and thinks of all other companies/examples before giving an opinion. You REALLY think everyone in this thread did that?

---

I assume some had since a previous poster had mention this and other had responded similar to what I have said. But I gotta agree that most give it no second thought and are looking for something to be outraged about.

And I suspect the change is not really what it is made out to be. It will not change the batteries properties (the article says it goes from a battery with one capacity to a battery with higher in terms of kWhrs. Since the battery characteristic do not change, I assume what it really does is change the level the battery can drain down to. All batteries that I know of suffer permanent degradation if they are discharged below a certain charge level or if they are more than marginally overcharged (in many cases, if they are overcharged at all).

It's usually just a few #define's to switch from "basic" to "enhanced"

#define ENHANCED_MODE 0

#ifdef ENHANCED_MODE
// Do stuff here
#endif

Flip that #define to 1 and now you have the upgraded package.