It’s the cars they are making. The evs are all quite expensive and then all new cars seem to be taking the opportunity to tack on all these extra subscriptions and such.
I’m never buying a car where heated seats are bound to my car app account on a subscription like seriously…
Most of the car subscription items don’t bother me. Many are like cosmetic skins in game. The car still works well without them. Lets look at Tesla just because they are popular:
Full Self Drive, one-time $20k - No way is this required. Skipped it.
Enhanced Autopilot, one-time $6k - Auto lane change and vehicle summon in a parking lot. Car drives fine without it. Skipped
Acceleration boost, one-time $2k - Without this the car 0-60MPH is 4.2 seconds. That’s PLENTY fast for me. Skipped
Premium connectivity, recurring $10/month or $99/year - Gives you a web browser on the dash, photoview satellite images in navigation instead of line drawing, and lets you stream music from Slacker or stream your Netflix movies from the car cell radio. I don’t need any of that and have better choices for music. I can stream video from my phone when I’m stopped if I need to.
None of that stuff is required and the usability and features of the car are still really good.
Further, for many of those factory hardware locked features there are one-time aftermarket solutions to enable them from third parties, though I have never had the need or desire for those things.
I’m not a troll. Are you interested in discussing your opposing position or just crapping on mine and walking away?
If my first post was too wordy my thesis boils down to this: At least in Tesla, which is the only one I have first hand knowledge of, the paid addons are not required. If others want to buy them, they’re welcome to, but I’m not and the resulting experience of the car I’m quite satisfied with. If you read a number of the replies from others, they’re trying to make my position something it isn’t and then knocking down that strawman.
Most of the car subscription items don’t bother me. Many are like cosmetic skins in game.
I am not wasting my time other than to argue over this position. Anything else take up with anyone else, not me specifically. What I’ve quoted is a stupid position that relys for us consumers to overly rely on the car manufacturers. If tesla wants to strictly lease cars that is their right but if you are selling me a car as a service be explict. If you are selling me a car you are selling me a car with complete functioning features. I cannot depend on a company to last forever. When it tanks and my car bricks, that is unacceptable risk for buyers. Do not capitulate to the auto manufacturers. Its a brain dead mistake and no amount of corporate cup and ball games will make me change my mind.
I cannot depend on your company to last forever and when it tanks my car bricks and that is unacceptable risk on a buyers behalf.
I’m not aware of any core features for functionality that would stop working if the company tanks. The only re-occurring subscription with Tesla is the premium connectivity which the web browser and internet streaming music services.
Do you have the expectation that automobile manufacturers should be required to provide a free internet service in perpetuity for purchasing a car?
What part of the car do you believe stops working if the company tanks?
This is the end game of add-on services. This is the end game of subscription based service. Transfer all the liability to the customer and put them on subscription based services. Buy our cars, now featuring enshitificstion.
This is the end game of add-on services. This is the end game of subscription based service.
It sounds like you’re speaking about a possible future of where this could go, and not what is today with Tesla at least. Since the only subscription on Tesla is the optional premium connectivity, Tesla isn’t the start of that. Your complaint is with General Motors with its Onstar service started 28 years ago. source. Just like GM Onstar, the Tesla car still works fine without that subscription.
Transfer the liability to the customer and put them on subscription based services.
Which liability are you talking about?
You didn’t answer my clarifying question about your statement of how the car would be bricked if the company goes under.
Like the car has it, it’s already cost the manufacturer to install it sure there are ongoing dev costs for some things, but not all.
On top of that many manufacturers are locking the features to the one person.
So for example I pay for heated seats. Then I sell the car, and the new owner has to “buy” heated seats again.
I’m sorry I’m not supporting that bullshit or the manufacturers who are doing this one bit even if I don’t pay for a feature.
On top of that there are issues with servicing and also forced firmware updates.
A friend was late to work the other day because his Tesla was doing an update when he tried to leave, like what happens if someone was trying to rush a partner to a hospital or something and you happen to jump in the car as it’s mid way through an update.
I want to be in control of the things I own and pay for, that’s the whole point of owning something. Car manufacturers these days seem to be under the delusion that they still own our vehicles and we are just the money sacks they are renting them to.
This has been going on for a while, but seem much much worse on the electric cars.
Also frankly the infrastructure isn’t there in many places around the world.
It’s not just waiting to charge the car that’s the issue, it’s waiting for the charger… when each vehicle takes up to 30min-an hour to get a meaningful amount of range back suddenly you need like 10x as many charging stations as you had petrol/diesel pumps.
And while this may be in place in some places in the world it’s not in most. Add this to the fact that charging points are often out of order well you start to see the issue.
Honestly it’s sort of the principle of it. Like the car has it, it’s already cost the manufacturer to install it sure there are ongoing dev costs for some things, but not all.
I know this isn’t an obvious point, but if you got the car how you wanted it, it would actually cost more for things you may not care about. The complaint then would be “why is the car so expensive? Why don’t they sell a more basic version?”
When a manufacture has to actually build different cars with different features at time of manufacture it drives up the costs for ALL models. They can’t easy substitution when market conditions change and could be stuck with only the premium versions which cost more. A great example of this is the Ford Lightning. There were as many as 12 different model/trim levels. One of the primary complaints of prospective buyers is only the premium priced versions were on dealership lots. This is what you get.
The car is cheaper with the addons disabled. If forced to sell with all addons enabled, the car would be much more expensive for things may people don’t care about.
So for example I pay for heated seats. Then I sell the car, and the new owner has to “buy” heated seats again.
I’m not understanding your argument here. If we’re talking Tesla, and you bought the $2k Acceleration Boost, if you sold the car to someone, that $2k feature would still be there. Who is removing paid enabled addons? Can you cite an example?
On top of that there are issues with servicing and also forced firmware updates.
Besides NTSB recall firmware updates, a you can make a Tesla not force a firmware update. It may nag though.
This isn’t something new though, its just the delivery. About 18 years ago, there was a Honda firmware that I DID NOT WANT INSTALLED. I had to take the Honda 2003 car to a Honda dealer for warranty work, and SPECIFICALLY TOLD THEM NOT TO INSTALL THAT FIRMWARE. They did anyway. So this is nothing new to EVs or even modern cars.
A friend was late to work the other day because his Tesla was doing an update when he tried to leave, like what happens if someone was trying to rush a partner to a hospital or something and you happen to jump in the car as it’s mid way through an update.
Your friend may not have told you the whole story.
A Tesla firmware will prompt you when it wants to install. It will tell you “this takes about 25 minutes to complete and the car will be unusable during that time”. You can choose to install it immediately by pressing the button when prompted, or set a time for it to wake the car and install it. Even if you accidentally say “install now” it gives you a 2 minute countdown on screen to cancel it. So your buddy either scheduled it to install 30 min before he was supposed to go to work, or he hit the button to install it, waited for the entire 2 minute cancellation period to expire and did nothing.
It’s not just waiting to charge the car that’s the issue, it’s waiting for the charger… when each vehicle takes up to 30min-an hour to get a meaningful amount of range back suddenly you need like 10x as many charging stations as you had petrol/diesel pumps.
You’re projecting for a problem that likely won’t happen in the scale you’re describing. Battery tech is evolving fast. Modern batteries can charge in a fraction of time of those even sold 3 years ago. This charging speed of battery as well as faster chargers look to be solving this.
Further, 80% of EV drivers charge at home. source Nearly 0% of petrol drivers refuel at home, so comparing the two isn’t equivalent.
No. The add ons are already installed. The car would not cost the manufacturer any more money. Turning on your pre-installed heated seat does not cost them any money. In fact it would have been cheaper to not install a blocking mechanism.
So now we have to pay for all this equipment on the car that we don’t want or need. We have to pay for their subscription mechanism that’s already in the car as well. And then if we did want to use a feature, we’d have to pay that subscription to turn it on.
That’s the definition of rent seeking behavior. They haven’t added any actual value for that second payment. They merely blocked you from using part of what you already bought until you paid them an arbitrary amount.
No. The add ons are already installed. The car would not cost the manufacturer any more money. Turning on your pre-installed heated seat does not cost them any money. In fact it would have been cheaper to not install a blocking mechanism.
Except those add ons wouldn’t be in the car if the OP got their way. If “its installed already turn it on for free” was the action, then manufacturers wouldn’t put those addons in. They’d have to create separate versions of the cars with, say, seat heaters and not instead. That doesn’t save you, the consumer, money. It makes it *more expensive for you because they now have to have separate production line options, inventory management, logistics, etc.
So now we have to pay for all this equipment on the car that we don’t want or need.
Except you’re NOT paying for it. Its in there, but the manufacturer REDUCED THE CAR COST TO YOU by disabling it.
We have to pay for their subscription mechanism that’s already in the car as well. And then if we did want to use a feature, we’d have to pay that subscription to turn it on.
I’ve seen third party workaround options for paid seat heaters. So no, you wouldn’t have to pay a subscription if you used those.
I’m sorry has the cost of a car gone down at any point? No? Then it’s not cheaper is it? It might be cheaper to make, but then if that’s true we’re paying for installed items plus an extra monopoly premium.
I’m sorry has the cost of a car gone down at any point?
This is a bad faith statement. You’re not an idiot and you’re well aware that thousands of different inputs raise or lower the overall price of a car including basic things like inflationary actions which have nothing to do with the components of the car, but result in prices increases of the car.
I could probably find an equally bad faith statement indeed showing the car being cheaper because of the prior increases in 2020 during the pandemic shortage, but I’m not going to find a misleading statement to back that up just to score “points”. Its not honest, and I"m not willing to do that.
If this is the level of conversation that we’re now at, I think we’ve reach the end of it being productive.
Oh no, I’ll give you inflation. But the “real” cost of an average new car hasn’t ever gone down. So if they’re making them for lower costs and charging DLC for them…
Sure fine, fuck tesla, but can you separate your feelings from Tesla for a moment to discuss the topic or do we need to shop for a brand that you are okay discussing that also has paid addon features before you contribute to the discussion?
You didn’t tell us about what you had for breakfast, the weather in your locality, or perhaps your current bathroom habits yet. Each would have been equal to your contribution to the conversation so far.
Irrespective of that, may I ask you to address the message instead of the messenger? What part of what I posted do you disagree with? I’m open to discussion and interested in your opinions if we can be civil with one another.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@lemmy.world
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
It’s not EV’s I’m skeptical of hey.
It’s the cars they are making. The evs are all quite expensive and then all new cars seem to be taking the opportunity to tack on all these extra subscriptions and such.
I’m never buying a car where heated seats are bound to my car app account on a subscription like seriously…
Bless your heart if you think this is limited to EVs.
Most of the car subscription items don’t bother me. Many are like cosmetic skins in game. The car still works well without them. Lets look at Tesla just because they are popular:
None of that stuff is required and the usability and features of the car are still really good.
Further, for many of those factory hardware locked features there are one-time aftermarket solutions to enable them from third parties, though I have never had the need or desire for those things.
I refuse to believe you are a real person. Maybe a masterful troll. This statement is bottom of the barrel levels dumb.
I’m not a troll. Are you interested in discussing your opposing position or just crapping on mine and walking away?
If my first post was too wordy my thesis boils down to this: At least in Tesla, which is the only one I have first hand knowledge of, the paid addons are not required. If others want to buy them, they’re welcome to, but I’m not and the resulting experience of the car I’m quite satisfied with. If you read a number of the replies from others, they’re trying to make my position something it isn’t and then knocking down that strawman.
I am not wasting my time other than to argue over this position. Anything else take up with anyone else, not me specifically. What I’ve quoted is a stupid position that relys for us consumers to overly rely on the car manufacturers. If tesla wants to strictly lease cars that is their right but if you are selling me a car as a service be explict. If you are selling me a car you are selling me a car with complete functioning features. I cannot depend on a company to last forever. When it tanks and my car bricks, that is unacceptable risk for buyers. Do not capitulate to the auto manufacturers. Its a brain dead mistake and no amount of corporate cup and ball games will make me change my mind.
I’m not aware of any core features for functionality that would stop working if the company tanks. The only re-occurring subscription with Tesla is the premium connectivity which the web browser and internet streaming music services.
Do you have the expectation that automobile manufacturers should be required to provide a free internet service in perpetuity for purchasing a car?
What part of the car do you believe stops working if the company tanks?
This is the end game of add-on services. This is the end game of subscription based service. Transfer all the liability to the customer and put them on subscription based services. Buy our cars, now featuring enshitificstion.
It sounds like you’re speaking about a possible future of where this could go, and not what is today with Tesla at least. Since the only subscription on Tesla is the optional premium connectivity, Tesla isn’t the start of that. Your complaint is with General Motors with its Onstar service started 28 years ago. source. Just like GM Onstar, the Tesla car still works fine without that subscription.
Which liability are you talking about?
You didn’t answer my clarifying question about your statement of how the car would be bricked if the company goes under.
I’m done go away
Honestly it’s sort of the principle of it.
Like the car has it, it’s already cost the manufacturer to install it sure there are ongoing dev costs for some things, but not all.
On top of that many manufacturers are locking the features to the one person.
So for example I pay for heated seats. Then I sell the car, and the new owner has to “buy” heated seats again.
I’m sorry I’m not supporting that bullshit or the manufacturers who are doing this one bit even if I don’t pay for a feature.
On top of that there are issues with servicing and also forced firmware updates.
A friend was late to work the other day because his Tesla was doing an update when he tried to leave, like what happens if someone was trying to rush a partner to a hospital or something and you happen to jump in the car as it’s mid way through an update.
I want to be in control of the things I own and pay for, that’s the whole point of owning something. Car manufacturers these days seem to be under the delusion that they still own our vehicles and we are just the money sacks they are renting them to.
This has been going on for a while, but seem much much worse on the electric cars.
Also frankly the infrastructure isn’t there in many places around the world.
It’s not just waiting to charge the car that’s the issue, it’s waiting for the charger… when each vehicle takes up to 30min-an hour to get a meaningful amount of range back suddenly you need like 10x as many charging stations as you had petrol/diesel pumps.
And while this may be in place in some places in the world it’s not in most. Add this to the fact that charging points are often out of order well you start to see the issue.
I know this isn’t an obvious point, but if you got the car how you wanted it, it would actually cost more for things you may not care about. The complaint then would be “why is the car so expensive? Why don’t they sell a more basic version?”
When a manufacture has to actually build different cars with different features at time of manufacture it drives up the costs for ALL models. They can’t easy substitution when market conditions change and could be stuck with only the premium versions which cost more. A great example of this is the Ford Lightning. There were as many as 12 different model/trim levels. One of the primary complaints of prospective buyers is only the premium priced versions were on dealership lots. This is what you get.
The car is cheaper with the addons disabled. If forced to sell with all addons enabled, the car would be much more expensive for things may people don’t care about.
I’m not understanding your argument here. If we’re talking Tesla, and you bought the $2k Acceleration Boost, if you sold the car to someone, that $2k feature would still be there. Who is removing paid enabled addons? Can you cite an example?
Besides NTSB recall firmware updates, a you can make a Tesla not force a firmware update. It may nag though.
This isn’t something new though, its just the delivery. About 18 years ago, there was a Honda firmware that I DID NOT WANT INSTALLED. I had to take the Honda 2003 car to a Honda dealer for warranty work, and SPECIFICALLY TOLD THEM NOT TO INSTALL THAT FIRMWARE. They did anyway. So this is nothing new to EVs or even modern cars.
Your friend may not have told you the whole story.
A Tesla firmware will prompt you when it wants to install. It will tell you “this takes about 25 minutes to complete and the car will be unusable during that time”. You can choose to install it immediately by pressing the button when prompted, or set a time for it to wake the car and install it. Even if you accidentally say “install now” it gives you a 2 minute countdown on screen to cancel it. So your buddy either scheduled it to install 30 min before he was supposed to go to work, or he hit the button to install it, waited for the entire 2 minute cancellation period to expire and did nothing.
You’re projecting for a problem that likely won’t happen in the scale you’re describing. Battery tech is evolving fast. Modern batteries can charge in a fraction of time of those even sold 3 years ago. This charging speed of battery as well as faster chargers look to be solving this.
Further, 80% of EV drivers charge at home. source Nearly 0% of petrol drivers refuel at home, so comparing the two isn’t equivalent.
No. The add ons are already installed. The car would not cost the manufacturer any more money. Turning on your pre-installed heated seat does not cost them any money. In fact it would have been cheaper to not install a blocking mechanism.
So now we have to pay for all this equipment on the car that we don’t want or need. We have to pay for their subscription mechanism that’s already in the car as well. And then if we did want to use a feature, we’d have to pay that subscription to turn it on.
That’s the definition of rent seeking behavior. They haven’t added any actual value for that second payment. They merely blocked you from using part of what you already bought until you paid them an arbitrary amount.
Except those add ons wouldn’t be in the car if the OP got their way. If “its installed already turn it on for free” was the action, then manufacturers wouldn’t put those addons in. They’d have to create separate versions of the cars with, say, seat heaters and not instead. That doesn’t save you, the consumer, money. It makes it *more expensive for you because they now have to have separate production line options, inventory management, logistics, etc.
Except you’re NOT paying for it. Its in there, but the manufacturer REDUCED THE CAR COST TO YOU by disabling it.
I’ve seen third party workaround options for paid seat heaters. So no, you wouldn’t have to pay a subscription if you used those.
I’m sorry has the cost of a car gone down at any point? No? Then it’s not cheaper is it? It might be cheaper to make, but then if that’s true we’re paying for installed items plus an extra monopoly premium.
Which is called rent seeking behavior.
This is a bad faith statement. You’re not an idiot and you’re well aware that thousands of different inputs raise or lower the overall price of a car including basic things like inflationary actions which have nothing to do with the components of the car, but result in prices increases of the car.
I could probably find an equally bad faith statement indeed showing the car being cheaper because of the prior increases in 2020 during the pandemic shortage, but I’m not going to find a misleading statement to back that up just to score “points”. Its not honest, and I"m not willing to do that.
If this is the level of conversation that we’re now at, I think we’ve reach the end of it being productive.
Have a nice day.
Oh no, I’ll give you inflation. But the “real” cost of an average new car hasn’t ever gone down. So if they’re making them for lower costs and charging DLC for them…
Ew. No, fuck tesla.
Sure fine, fuck tesla, but can you separate your feelings from Tesla for a moment to discuss the topic or do we need to shop for a brand that you are okay discussing that also has paid addon features before you contribute to the discussion?
That was my contribution to the discussion. Have a nice day!
You didn’t tell us about what you had for breakfast, the weather in your locality, or perhaps your current bathroom habits yet. Each would have been equal to your contribution to the conversation so far.
Thank you for taking the time out of your day to tell me what a waste of time my comment was.
Can tell you’re in your 20s.
Your detector needs calibration then.
Irrespective of that, may I ask you to address the message instead of the messenger? What part of what I posted do you disagree with? I’m open to discussion and interested in your opinions if we can be civil with one another.
We need an open source electric car.
It’s been tried