dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
I've been doing software development (mostly in open source, but a fair bit of proprietary stuff) about as long as you. And I think I understand testing methodology very well. And testing a firmware beta with a misleading UI. Umm. Occam's razor would point in the other direction. I grant you that it is possible that they are doing A/B testing with different options, but given what I know about the size of the firmware team at Tesla I am quite skeptical.Some fair points. That said, your experience with beta testing, in this context, is no more significant than mine. Hence, my original assertion that people are really getting worked up over something that they do not have yet / have not actually seen yet. And you've been at the front of that line and quite vocal about it. The way you're pushing the point, IMO foments discord when you honestly know as little as I do. It's vaguely irrational and difficult to understand.
Frankly, I find it extremely likely that this is the direction that they currently think they are going. If we are lucky we can change their mind, but given the time frame for the Model X release I'm pretty sure that this is what we'll get.
Actually, that's a fact. This is a Qt user interface. What's interesting in this context is that to the best of my knowledge Tesla is the only of the major car makers who is doing their Qt UI development in house. I happen to be reasonably close with several of the major Qt development houses who between them do the IVI interfaces for most of the major car makers (Qt is pretty much the standard for UIs shipping in 2013-2015... things are slowly moving to web apps with the first vendors prototyping that for their '17 model year cars).Heh. Ye think? Thank you for that bit of condescension.This isn't a web app.
I'll be honest - I'm not sure if you should call out Hank for being condescending. To me it's your posts that read a lot more condescending than his.