Firmware 7.0 Beta Discussion

[Soolim]

Tesla should not have tied a major UI overhaul to other driving features like AP. Yes, AP needs UI changes, but they should be plug-and-playable -- such that TM can update one without affecting the other. For instance, put all the AP toy car and lane notifications into one of the side panel "apps" and not change the entire layout of the dashboard. That way, people can pick and choose what they want, and at the same time, TM can push continual updates to AP software without affecting the UI.

This makes total sense to me.

 

[travwill]

Oh man, I like most of us are hopefully sick of this thread. Can we just stop posting, lock it down, and wait & see at this point. What's done is done, its a company, and if you have issues at this point, wait until the release and complain in the bug or owners contact channels they provide.

 

[ICUDoc]

Oh man, I like most of us are hopefully sick of this thread....
... wait until the release ...

I'm on your side, travwill. Emotion running astoundingly high on this issue. And v7 not even been released yet!!
I hope the real release makes everyone as happy as possible...

 

[davidc18]

+1 +1

Tesla should not have tied a major UI overhaul to other driving features like AP. Yes, AP needs UI changes, but they should be plug-and-playable -- such that TM can update one without affecting the other. For instance, put all the AP toy car and lane notifications into one of the side panel "apps" and not change the entire layout of the dashboard. That way, people can pick and choose what they want, and at the same time, TM can push continual updates to AP software without affecting the UI.

 

[Ingineer]

Tesla should not have tied a major UI overhaul to other driving features like AP. Yes, AP needs UI changes, but they should be plug-and-playable -- such that TM can update one without affecting the other. For instance, put all the AP toy car and lane notifications into one of the side panel "apps" and not change the entire layout of the dashboard. That way, people can pick and choose what they want, and at the same time, TM can push continual updates to AP software without affecting the UI.

This is already how the architecture is. The Autopilot software runs on the EyeQ3 chip located in the camera housing, and it receives it's own software loads which they have been updating often, even on 6.2. The GUI stuff is independent other than enabling/disabling, so there is no dependencies to make AP work. Once AP is enabled, you can even reboot the IC/MCU and AP will keep right on rolling.

 

[apacheguy]

@Ingineer - Are the sonic sensors tied in directly with the EyeQ3 and camera housing?

 

[Cyberax]

@Ingineer - Are the sonic sensors tied in directly with the EyeQ3 and camera housing?

Yes, they use the common CAN bus for the data. Even the radar uses it.

 

[johnbro23]

Agree it's addicting to keep coming back to check for updates. Nothing more to hash out at this point. Except I will say bc it's worth repeating the new clock is awful

 

[SomeJoe7777]

Tesla should not have tied a major UI overhaul to other driving features like AP. Yes, AP needs UI changes, but they should be plug-and-playable -- such that TM can update one without affecting the other. For instance, put all the AP toy car and lane notifications into one of the side panel "apps" and not change the entire layout of the dashboard. That way, people can pick and choose what they want, and at the same time, TM can push continual updates to AP software without affecting the UI.

+1

It would make sense to concentrate resources in an alternate fashion each major revision cycle. e.g. Work on user interface without major new functionality for one release, then work on adding functionality without major change in the UI for a subsequent release, then repeat.

Intel does this with their CPU development cycles. They implement a new microarchitecture (new logic, functions, pipelining, features, etc.) in one CPU family release, then do a die shrink (e.g. 32 nm -> 22 nm) in the next family release. They call this "Tick-Tock".

Intel discovered long ago that it's too risky to attempt to do both at the same time in a single processor family release.

 

[Stoneymonster]

+1

It would make sense to concentrate resources in an alternate fashion each major revision cycle. e.g. Work on user interface without major new functionality for one release, then work on adding functionality without major change in the UI for a subsequent release, then repeat.

Intel does this with their CPU development cycles. They implement a new microarchitecture (new logic, functions, pipelining, features, etc.) in one CPU family release, then do a die shrink (e.g. 32 nm -> 22 nm) in the next family release. They call this "Tick-Tock".

Intel discovered long ago that it's too risky to attempt to do both at the same time in a single processor family release.

Except these aren't going to be the same team. No offense to UI guys (sometimes I am one!), but self-driving control systems is another field of software altogether.

 

[HankLloydRight]

This is already how the architecture is. The Autopilot software runs on the EyeQ3 chip located in the camera housing, and it receives it's own software loads which they have been updating often, even on 6.2. The GUI stuff is independent other than enabling/disabling, so there is no dependencies to make AP work. Once AP is enabled, you can even reboot the IC/MCU and AP will keep right on rolling.

Yes, I figured as such. When I said "tied together" I meant more from a conceptual level than an actual implementation level. The V7 firmware release is a milestone release in both a massive UI overhaul and significantly enhanced AP functions --- and they are being rolled out together.

To take the Intel example above, I think it would have made more sense for Tesla to devote all their resources to the core and critical AP functions and modify the existing UI only as needed to support new AP functions (lane change alerts, blind spot warnings, etc) -- as like I suggest using one of the side panels in the V6.x design. Then once the AP is released to the public and the bugs worked out, then maybe work on the UI changes as a separate project altogether.

 

[Stoneymonster]

Yes, I figured as such. When I said "tied together" I meant more from a conceptual level than an actual implementation level. The V7 firmware release is a milestone release in both a massive UI overhaul and significantly enhanced AP functions --- and they are being rolled out together.

To take the Intel example above, I think it would have made more sense for Tesla to devote all their resources to the core and critical AP functions and modify the existing UI only as needed to support new AP functions (lane change alerts, blind spot warnings, etc) -- as like I suggest using one of the side panels in the V6.x design. Then once the AP is released to the public and the bugs worked out, then maybe work on the UI changes as a separate project altogether.

Eh, I think much of the redesign is also driven by having the Model X come out looking fresh, not sporting the same UI the previous car in the lineup came with in 2012. You would say, I expect, "fine let the X have 7.0 UI and keep the S the same", but they have a small team and maintaining two seperate UI lines is a big pain.

 

[ohmman]

Eh, I think much of the redesign is also driven by having the Model X come out looking fresh, not sporting the same UI the previous car in the lineup came with in 2012. You would say, I expect, "fine let the X have 7.0 UI and keep the S the same", but they have a small team and maintaining two seperate UI lines is a big pain.

..just like how Apple announces milestone iOS releases nearly contemporaneously with new iPhone hardware. It makes it seem like you're maybe getting a little extra in that new phone, even though a big set of the features are software, not hardware.

 

[SomeJoe7777]

Except these aren't going to be the same team. No offense to UI guys (sometimes I am one!), but self-driving control systems is another field of software altogether.

True, but that's kind of the point. If you're having a tough time getting a feature implemented and working, you don't need to be simultaneously worried about coordinating with the UI guys on their new methods, requirements, and restrictions.

And on the other side, the UI guys shouldn't be overloaded trying to implement an entire new UI along with the functionality needed to show brand new features as well.

 

[Ingineer]

@Ingineer - Are the sonic sensors tied in directly with the EyeQ3 and camera housing?

Yes, As others have pointed out the EyeQ3 receives data from the other sensors over CAN, and it sends commands to the other systems in the car such as the drive inverter, braking system, power steering, etc. It is the brain behind all the driver-assistance systems.

 

[tomas]

I'm not saying this to make a snide comment. This is a serious question.

Do we actually have any indication that Tesla uses focus groups? And if so, do we have any reason to believe that they use focus groups for things like this?

I don't think I've seen any reference to Tesla using focus groups before the above post.

no evidence, just winging it :smile:

 

[vitaliy]

Is this current firmware of v7?

 

[Max*]

Is this current firmware of v7?

No one outside the EAP has v7 yet. It's still in beta testing, but the leaked images look a little different than that.

 

[travwill]

Is this current firmware of v7?

That is the concept but that is old compared to what we've seen in the latest releases in X, beta shots, etc. The "mini-cars" are a little less polished in new software, the energy meter has a circle and displays instant use/regen as well as history, etc. There are some shots out there - probably most on Teslarati.com.

-T

 

[vitaliy]

There is a date in URLs - teslamotors.com/sites/default/files/configurator/MODELS_20151005/2880/UI/ui_option_da02_2_large.jpg
Isn't that October 5, 2015 (yesterday) ?