So you purchase ordinary suspension but get active suspension that works exactly like ordinary suspension and cost like active suspension to service…
It’s time we get legislation that gives the consumer access to all encryption key pairs used in the product they purchased.
(For you who don’t know what encryption key pairs are used for: they are used for the software to know that a change order, like “activate suspension”, is legit and therefore will be executed.)
No, we need to legislate that you should be able to use the hardware features that come with your vehicle without a subscription. What will the average consumer do with encryption keys? Even then, you’d need to decrypt and rewrite the ECU or other system that controls this hardware to run your own version, and if that doesn’t work, you’d need to have hardware to manually intercept communications between the suspension and the system verifying your subscription, and intercept the signal to always send an ok signal.
The hardware has full functionality from day one. The limitation is in what software you are using.
Active suspension is not a hardware feature, it’s software collecting data from sensors and by analysing the data being able adjusting the suspension to “optimal performance”. Just because certain hardware can be controlled by software doesn’t mean that you will get whatever software features you like to have.
BMW would claim that “BMW Smooth Comfortable Cloud Ride Software” is included free of charge with the purchase of a BMW.
BMW would also claim that they offer “BMW Hyper Advanced AI Premium Sensation Masculine Active Road Experience Pro Suspension” as an optional subscription for alpha males and people with too much money in their pockets.
The outcome of what you are suggesting will be a slight change in the phrasing of the product offering at the most.
With access to the keys, the owner can subscribe to the BMW solution, unlock the features in breach of the agreement with BMW by not subscribing or get a software solution for the car from another provider.
I never disagreed with that, I asked what the purpose of having an encryption key will be, you are creating some magical step between “subscribe to the software” and “don’t pay the bill” that doesn’t require modification of anything but somehow just requires encryption keys
In my experience there always someone willing to create everything from homebrew software to software activation. Especially if there’s some money to make on it.
lol thanks for the downvote. So you’re asking the average consumer to pay the grey market to write aftermarket untested software for their vehicle that will replace the car manufacturers active suspension software on their vehicle, and can be activated as such because they now have access to the encryption keys. That was what I was trying to ask in the first place. Glad we cleared that up
People act like subscriptions are a new thing for cars, and somehow mentally gloss over the fact that they have to physically go in to renew their energy subscription weekly, not to mention the quarterly, and bi-annual subscriptions for oil and various maintenance respectively.
Everything has always been a subscription, you’re just a frog that’s well done.
The key differences is utilities you’re paying for the generation & maintenance of key resources - without gas, water and electricity we wouldn’t be able to survive. Road tax you’re helping to pay for the renewal and upkeep of the road surface (among other local services)… Left alone the road will degrade & will become unusable.
Suspension as a Service is milking what should be a perpetual cost when purchasing the vehicle. If the hardware is already installed, it should be available for the owner to use. They’re not paying for the upkeep of the vehicle, or even ensuring the suspension remains functional… All they’ve done is placed the function behind a pay wall. They can argue they’re maintaining the software, but it’s utter bullshit and I hate the fact this has become a norm within B2B (for example network appliances)
At least with luxury subscriptions such as Spotify, Netflix, NYT, etc you’re getting access to their content, which they renew. Here you get access to something you should have had access to from day 1.
Gas oil need money to drill and refind from sources and car suspension does not, it maybe need to get a check up or replace once in a long while and not every months
Haha… connection to server cannot be established. Suspension resetting to default.
This is extra hilarious in the face of the crib manufacturer that just decided to subscription paywall basic functions of their crib… or the slow cooker… And that’s just this week.
Game manufacturers pulling the plug on games they sold removing the servers yanking the games.
And now people think that you can buy a product that is going to last longer and costs several orders of magnitude more… and you can only hope that the manufacturer can be bothered to:
Keep the service safe and secure.
Have it be reliable.
Maintain it operational for the actual lifespan of the car (not some MBA’s definition of economic lifespan or something).
Not fuck with you on the price. (We’re not shutting down the servers, but the price will be 50 a month and 5 euros per adjustment).
But the sale case is easy… lease car drivers. This way they can enjoy premium functions not incorporated into the sale price of the car. I hope the IRS that taxes these things sees through this ploy and taxes the vehicles for installed functions wether you pay for them or not. Saw this happen with Tesla’s… taxed based on their initial price… and then the user added 15k of functions after a day… and the tax was still based on the original sticker price.
At least in the case of games, the servers are an ongoing expense that adds value to the game. I want to play against other people online and provide by that costs ongoing expenses.
Oh you think this feature will function locally… I’ll bet this goes from their app to their servers first to verify subscription and then to your car. Someone needs to pay for the subscription verification platform.
Now, I can "kinda" see the rationale behind optional features on a car being either enabled via software or subscription. I believe the permanent enable price should be the same as if you added the hardware to the car as an option.
As to why this might make sense for a carmaker. In my work I've visited car manufacturers before, and from what I could see it's quite expensive and adds time to support the various options when building a car. You see they have the main production line, and units are pulled off the main line to fit the options at various points and then reinserted and this causes problems for efficiency and price per unit I think.
So, there's probably a cost saving to making the base car have all the options fitted and having a completely standardized production line. However, the expense is likely going to mean if they sold the base car at the usual base car price they would either lose money, or at the very least, the profit margin wouldn't be worthwhile.
However, if you know a certain percentage of people will want the options, and you can enable it with software later, it's possible building the hardware into every car as standard would work out overall cheaper. They might also be able to upsell to more people by making a subscription option, perhaps with maybe a free trial for the first say 3 months of ownership. That is, they turn everything on for 6 months for free, then revert you to the package you paid for. Hoping that you liked some of the features and will pay or subscribe to keep them.
What I don't like is when this stuff might become ONLY available as a subscription, the overall move toward subscription models for everything irks me a lot. I'd much prefer we still get to choose a package, and have the ability to upgrade later.
So I think my point is, the argument "the hardware is there anyway" doesn't really work, because they are likely going to install the hardware at a loss, on the assumption (backed up by their own numbers) they will sell enough to make a bigger profit overall.
They also likely bake into the numbers that a very small number of people will hack the car and enable the features anyway. The vast majority will not do this, though.
Well, I would say it SHOULD bring overall prices down. If the cost to build the top of the line model comes down to say the same as the mid-range model AND more people are say buying up. It means that competition would push overall prices down.
But of course not, it benefits the companies most, and given the choice of lower prices or more profit, they'll choose the profit every time.
If they go subscription only (because recurring revenue is the current business buzzword, so of course they will go subscription only) then overall cost for the life of the car will definitely be higher yet "feel" more affordable.
You’re right that the idea has come from the mind boggling number of options in vehicles these days. The company I worked for recently had over a million different combinations, and making more physical parts standard fit saves them money.
However that saving is not passed on to the customer. The company pockets it all, and makes more money on top with the subscriptions.
eh, rich people car shop as well, and there is plenty of competition in that market. of course some people will still opt for BMW, we just have to hope enough go elsewhere to make them lose marketshare. but… it’s not looking good so far.
Ngl, i don’t see how bmw gets any sales when Mercedes exists. If you are actually rich a Mercedes is almost objectively the better vehicle, if you are just trying to show off the Mercedes is a better status symbol too.
Because the people who buy them have it and BMW can get more out of them. The real problem is that they’ll buy it, and other manufacturers will see “hey, it’s a successful model and additional revenue generation!”
So, you buy a car with all these features, but you don’t pay for them. They are disabled by default. You jailbreak your car, everything works without paying extra, but then you realize, you broke your warranty.
If once you do not succeed, just try again next year. They tried and backtracked putting heated seats behind a paywall not even a year ago see here.
Unless laws are made to make this fundamentally illegal, they’ll just keep pushing until it sticks. And once one manufacturer succeeds, they’ll all follow.
I wish that someone sues when something breaks in the car that you didn’t opt in for.
And… yet better, they get sued when something breaks that is in connection with a paid service and someone suspects that it’s because they paid part caused it.
bmwblog.com
Active