Dealer Software Update

Docjonday

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jonathan
Joined
Oct 4, 2020
Threads
8
Messages
127
Reaction score
71
Location
UK
Vehicles
Taycan 4S
Country flag
So it's been a couple days. Do you know when you'll be able to pick it up? The forum really needs a detailed look and feedback of the new update (at least I do ? ).

Not as yet, but I pledge to update the forum once I’ve received the vehicle back.

In fairness, there are a number of connectivity gremlins that I mentioned in my earlier post also hopefully being addressed; I think both me and the dealer aren’t clear as to whether the SU will address these as well. One suspects the longer the vehicle remains with them, the SU hasn’t seen these issues be resolved and conversations between them, Reading and AG continue. However, that’s only speculation on my part. I know Porsche Preston have been speaking with AG directly about my issues and have pledged to only return the car once all the gremlins are addressed so I can’t fault them for taking as long as is needed to do so.

One other thing to point out that I note from some of the posts about how Tesla update OTA and Porsche require a recall. It’s only a matter of time before a software update of cars like Taycan’s and Tesla’s becomes corrupted with a virus, either maliciously or otherwise. The benefit of a phased update brought about by all vehicles being recalled over a period of time sees any potential virus being picked up and patched before all vehicles are affected. I can personally understand the more cautious approach of Porsche vs Tesla in this regard. Ultimately, it comes down to risk v convenience and your faith in data security. A bricked car is going to be a lot more costly to address than a bricked laptop or phone.

Personally, I prefer the Porsche way.
Sponsored

 

daveo4EV

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Threads
160
Messages
5,793
Reaction score
8,599
Location
Santa Cruz
Vehicles
Cayenne Hybrid, 911(s) GT3/Convertable
Country flag
It’s only a matter of time before a software update of cars like Taycan’s and Tesla’s becomes corrupted with a virus, either maliciously or otherwise.
ummm - yeah - no - this is more FUD than reality - I’m more worried a “live” exploit than ”corrupted” updates…there are security techniques to avoid exactly this issue - other than “yeah everything can be attacked” - fears like this do little to advance any conversation. OTA updates do not have to eventually become corrupted and that is not a valid excuse for failing to do them.
 

kreshi

Well-Known Member
First Name
hansi
Joined
Feb 4, 2021
Threads
10
Messages
464
Reaction score
924
Location
Switzerland
Vehicles
Taycan 4s
Country flag
Thank you in advance for the effort!

I agree with you on the OTA process. I work in IT and I find it very very rarely that important updates go through smoothly while being extremely safe and secure. Especially with a car that goes 260kph, I do not want to live on the dangerous side of life with a corrupt software update. Comparing Tesla and the european/asian carmakers, you can clearly tell that Tesla just throws things at their customers. Most of the time it worked well, especially since they are strong on the software side. But things like Teslas smashing into parked/fully stopped vehicles should be scary to people. As it is with anything related to Tesla, negativity is drowned with concrete.

For me personally it is no hassle to drive over to Porsche and it's fun having a different Porsche as a loaner for a day or two. ?

About the update: I was hoping improvements to the PCM. Maybe even new functionalities to get closer to Tesla. Let's wait and see.
 

Bobby

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2020
Threads
13
Messages
99
Reaction score
58
Location
Bucks
Vehicles
Taycan
Country flag
Having received a letter last week and experienced some ‘connectivity’ issues since taking delivery of my MY2021 4S in Jan, mine has been at the dealership since Monday having been promptly booked in as a priority.

In fairness to the dealership (Porsche Preston), and to give credit where it’s due rather than just calling out negative experiences, I’ve felt very appreciated as a customer and thoroughly looked after by them. I’ve been given a brand new Panamera 4S straight after PDI as a loaner and told to ‘enjoy it’ by the Business Manager. Not only that, but I’ve had gifts and my vehicle handbook personally delivered to my home by staff in recent weeks. As they say, customer service isn’t about a fault-free motoring experience, it’s about how you address the issues when they arise.

As great as the loaned Panamera is, it’s re-enforced my decision to buy a Taycan. The Panamera is no slouch, but the Taycan feels like a missile in comparison and very much more ‘next gen’. My advice to anyone reading this would be, if you love to experience the technology envelope and current know-how pushed to it’s limits and to enjoy the benefits of that, while accepting the pit-falls that come with being a ‘technology first-adopter’, sign on the line for a Taycan. It‘s likely going to come with more gremlins than a 911 and it’s well-honed tech and require some patience. However, you really do appreciate the technology leap-forward that the Taycan represents once you step into a Porsche ICE car, even one as good as the Panamera. Even if more gremlins await in time, I can’t wait to get my Taycan back.

Anyway, big call out to Porsche Preston for outstanding customer service! ?
Good to hear this. I have a very similar experience with Porsche East London. John Lewis type service - very focused on problem resolution.
 

epirali

Well-Known Member
First Name
Edmund
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Threads
13
Messages
752
Reaction score
1,123
Location
USA, East Coast
Vehicles
RS Etron GT, Jaguar I-Pace, BMW i8, ex Taycan TTS
Country flag
I work in IT and I find it very very rarely that important updates go through smoothly while being extremely safe and secure. Especially with a car that goes 260kph, I do not want to live on the dangerous side of life with a corrupt software update.
I also am in technology, and have been involved in updating many different digital components (control systems, FPGAs, embedded flash, NVRAM, etc). Although it is something that needs to be handled in a very error tolerant way it is not an impossible task. So, not calling out Porsche here but most manufacturers except Tesla, I really do not understand why this is considered so “tricky.”

The main complexity from what I have found with cars is that there are so many different control systems, and that not all of them have the comm channels to relay information for an update. But assuming this was “baked in” from the start then the actual update, once the data is relayed, is simply good design. The only requirement is the ability to update the non volatile code and confirm that there was no corruption (again not difficult with various techniques) WITHOUT altering the current version. That means the ability have two selectable load paths. That way if the update fails during the process of storage the device simply never switches over and continues to use the older version until it can confirm an update has occurred.

I can only imagine there must be some legacy control hardware that does not have this capability and until it does then an OTA can potentially brick a part of the car.
 


daveo4EV

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Threads
160
Messages
5,793
Reaction score
8,599
Location
Santa Cruz
Vehicles
Cayenne Hybrid, 911(s) GT3/Convertable
Country flag
basically if you can’t secure your software for OTA updates - you can’t secure it for what’s delivered from the factory, and you can’t secure it from other distribution mechanisms - if you fear virus/corruption via update, you have to also fear it from the manufacturing site as well and/or non-OTA delivery mechanisms - or updates to revisions at the factory during the lifecycle of the product…

it’s a simple fact that software is not static - it changes over time to address concerns, improvements, changes, defects, masking mechanical issues (detune for emissions compliance perhaps) and requirements (new regulations) - there is no vehicle that is manufactured today that doesn’t need software updates - OTA updates are just a different delivery mechanism - if your OTA updates are not secure, neither is _ANY_ other mechanism.

in fact OTA updates are actually stronger in the face of corruption due to centralized control (yank the update from the servers and it stops distribution world wide) vs. dealers/service techs that might continue to install an update for which they have a local copy and not “read” the memo to stop using a known bad update…

if you allow software to modified post manufacture - this problem exists - period full stop - the mechanism of distribution does not add/remove risk - period full stop - if it’s not secure enough to be delivered by OTA - there is no other mechanism that makes it “more” secure

as noted by my bias - I’ll trust centralized control by the manufacturer rather than my local dealer service tech who hasn’t read his eMail this morning to note to stop using the software update flash drive distributed two weeks ago…yeah I’ll take OTA updates any day of the week.
 
Last edited:

Docjonday

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jonathan
Joined
Oct 4, 2020
Threads
8
Messages
127
Reaction score
71
Location
UK
Vehicles
Taycan 4S
Country flag
basically if you can’t secure your software for OTA updates - you can’t secure it for what’s delivered from the factory, and you can’t secure it from other distribution mechanisms - if you fear virus/corruption via update, you have to also fear it from the manufacturing site as well and/or non-OTA delivery mechanisms - or updates to revisions at the factory during the lifecycle of the product…

it’s a simple fact that software is not static - it changes over time to address concerns, improvements, changes, defects, masking mechanical issues (detune for emissions compliance perhaps) and requirements (new regulations) - there is no vehicle that is manufactured today that doesn’t need software updates - OTA updates are just a different delivery mechanism - if your OTA updates are not secure, neither is _ANY_ other mechanism.

in fact OTA updates are actually stronger in the face of corruption due to centralized control (yank the update from the servers and it stops distribution world wide) vs. dealers/service techs that might continue to install an update for which they have a local copy and not “read” the memo to stop using a known bad update…

if you allow software to modified post manufacture - this problem exists - period full stop - the mechanism of distribution does not add/remove risk - period full stop - if it’s not secure enough to be delivered by OTA - there is no other mechanism that makes it “more” secure

as noted by my bias - I’ll trust centralized control by the manufacturer rather than my local dealer service tech who hasn’t read his eMail this morning to note to stop using the software update flash drive distributed two weeks ago…yeah I’ll take OTA updates any day of the week.
With all due respect, I think you misinterpret the point I was making. Namely that a phased recall SU allows any issues to be identified with the SU before all vehicles are affected. An OTA SU will see more vehicles updated quickly and risks a problem not being identified before the majority of vehicles are affected, particularly given most users would have the option selected to receive OTA updates automatically by default. There are pros and cons of this. Likely, most Tesla owners prefer the OTA SU model. I’m a Porsche owner and I like their current dealer-led update methodology for major SU’s. There’s not a right or wrong here. It’s merely personal opinion.
 


daveo4EV

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Threads
160
Messages
5,793
Reaction score
8,599
Location
Santa Cruz
Vehicles
Cayenne Hybrid, 911(s) GT3/Convertable
Country flag
but your point was corruption or virus - not faulty update - and even with Tesla OTA updates are “not” automatic…the user has to approve them - I also believe Porsche does not enable automatic updates…

again the problem here is letting a faulty update through the quality process - not the distribution mechanism - releasing a bad update has serious repercussions regardless of distribution mechanisms - and even non OTA updates these days are “OTA” - in that software is delivered via download - not chiseled in stone on a mountain and brought down unmodified/unchangeable - it’s downloaded from somewhere

it appears what you like is not being the first to receive an update - great - don’t apply the OTA updates - but let’s not pretend Porsche is doing this because it’s a better process - they aren’t doing it because they can’t and still have a lot of infrastructure to put in place to catch up to Tesla in this space - being out of date longer is not a security mechanism it’s simply remaining out of date - the fact that it may insulate you from a faulty QA process is not a goal to be aspired to.
  • if you’re distributing faulty software you’re doing it wrong
  • if you’re distributing tainted/modified software you’re doing it wrong (virus/corruption/post manufacture modification)
  • if you‘re distributing software that will cause the fleet to having problems you’re doing it wrong
  • if you have to “yank” a software update you’re doing it wrong
  • if you have updates that are too complex to be applied via OTA - you're doing it wrong
  • if you update mechanism is subject to viruses or corruption - you're doing it wrong
the distribution mechanism does not change any of the above issues - it only changes how quickly all of these problems will propagate through the fleet, and there are mechanisms to control that also - Tesla doesn’t release the software to the entire fleet - phased roll outs…they control the roll out to see the impact - once impact is shown to be acceptable open up the update to more vehicles…

there is NO excuse for not having secure and trusted OTA updates - and the lack of OTA updates is not a security mechanism or a quality control mechanism - it is simply relying on an expensive manual distribution process that has it’s fair share of problems as well…

if it’s not safe for your customers to update their own vehicles, it’s not safe to let a tech apply the same update during a service visit - either way you’re going to find the problem - and once a problem is found you now have the issue of how to rescind the update from the field.
 
Last edited:

Dee

Well-Known Member
First Name
Dee
Joined
Dec 14, 2018
Threads
63
Messages
2,653
Reaction score
3,109
Location
The Netherlands
Vehicles
A lot
If it takes at least 8 hours of installing the update, it's more like logical to do that at the dealership, don't you think? (despite the technical discussion and assumptions here).
What if the OTA-connection is unstable?
Is the LTE connection of the Taycan able to receive such a large amount of data in a short period of time?
I don't think so.
That's also the reason Porsche does this at the workshop so they can check if the updates went well.
The OTA update capability of the Taycan is for much smaller updates I think.
 

daveo4EV

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Threads
160
Messages
5,793
Reaction score
8,599
Location
Santa Cruz
Vehicles
Cayenne Hybrid, 911(s) GT3/Convertable
Country flag
An OTA SU will see more vehicles updated quickly and risks a problem not being identified before the majority of vehicles are affected
who says you have to release OTA update to the entire fleet all at once?
 

ccooke01

Well-Known Member
First Name
Carl
Joined
Oct 27, 2020
Threads
7
Messages
70
Reaction score
54
Location
UK
Vehicles
Taycan 4S and ID.4
Country flag
OTA updates are fine for small incremental changes, the assumption is that the update will work, I suspect this is more than an incremental change, otherwise Porsche would have used the OTA option.

It's not in Porsche's best interest to have the dealer network make the updates, it will end up costing them, eight hours per car isn't going to be cheap.

Also if the update is significant, they probably want to confirm its successful before handing it back reducing the risk of owners having to return a second time, the fact you need to bring both keys and fobs re-enforcing my view its a major update.

The Taycan is Porsche's most sophisticated production car they have ever built, this is the first major update of the software, I suspect they are being over cautious and would rather have it updated by a qualified person in the dealership who can ensure its's been applied correctly than take the risk of it not working.

I am ok with having to go into the dealer for the update, it actually gives me confidence that the car will be checked before being handed back, something the OTA option cannot do.
 

caytan

Active Member
First Name
Zim
Joined
Feb 13, 2021
Threads
2
Messages
44
Reaction score
30
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
2020 4S
Country flag
OTA updates are fine for small incremental changes, the assumption is that the update will work, I suspect this is more than an incremental change, otherwise Porsche would have used the OTA option.
From what I have heard, Porsche does not even have dedicated OTA team, not even a single person, so if that is true then they would not send out any update over the air... And they haven't so...
 

epirali

Well-Known Member
First Name
Edmund
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Threads
13
Messages
752
Reaction score
1,123
Location
USA, East Coast
Vehicles
RS Etron GT, Jaguar I-Pace, BMW i8, ex Taycan TTS
Country flag
If it takes at least 8 hours of installing the update, it's more like logical to do that at the dealership, don't you think? (despite the technical discussion and assumptions here).
What if the OTA-connection is unstable?
Some of this goes to the idea of "fundamental design architecture" for a complex system. If the update is indeed monolithic then yes, a very large update will be hard. It requires long time to transfer, requires large storage to hold while downloading, then larger final storage to update and verify. This is less than ideal. For a true modern OTA system this should be achievable in smaller "chunks." But I am pretty sure there is a lot of legacy control systems and code brought into the new cars.

I believe I read somewhere where VW was attempting a "ground up" rewrite for the ID EVs and it resulted in a large delay in release while production cars were being stored until code was ready. So maybe at some point auto manufacturers will realize that software design may need the same degree of resources as other major undertakings.

And considering time is money, its hard to start over, etc, I wouldn't hold my breath. It still costs much less at 8 hours per car to update low volume (relatively) production costs (which are sold at a premium, like Porsche rather than Nissan) than to do all that basic rework.
 

daveo4EV

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Threads
160
Messages
5,793
Reaction score
8,599
Location
Santa Cruz
Vehicles
Cayenne Hybrid, 911(s) GT3/Convertable
Country flag
If it takes at least 8 hours of installing the update, it's more like logical to do that at the dealership, don't you think? (despite the technical discussion and assumptions here).
What if the OTA-connection is unstable?
Is the LTE connection of the Taycan able to receive such a large amount of data in a short period of time?
I don't think so.
That's also the reason Porsche does this at the workshop so they can check if the updates went well.
The OTA update capability of the Taycan is for much smaller updates I think.
again the fact that this takes 8 hours - is simply a indicaton of how big an update this is and how bad the the original software was in the current Taycan - updates should always be downloaded/verified in their entirety before being “applied” - i.e. you Taycan could download a large update and store locallly over the course of weeks on a slow LTE connection and only present you with the “apply now” button once the update is “resident” and local on the vehicle’s local computer storage - the duration of how long it take to apply/install the update should be constant regardless of the speed of the distribution mechanism (i.e. slow carrier pigeon) - it could takes weeks to download an update that takes 8 hour to appy

now I’m not suggesting OTA updates that take 8 hours to apply is good idea - I’m simply suggesting 8 hours as the cost to apply update to a vehicle probably has nothing to do with ”downloading the update” - also some systems in the Taycan maybe slow to update, even when teh update itself is “small/simple” - some systems have a minimum cycle time - i.e. the device needs 5 min to reboot once an update has been applied, it doesn’t take very many 2, 3 or 5 min “updates” to add up to 8 hours

the set of updates making their way through the Porsche service network are probably inappropriately complex for ”self” service (i.e. customer applied OTA updates) - I see this more as a sign of the lack of maturity of the Porsche software eco-system rather than an improvement in quality or distribution control - Porsche released the Taycan early and on a schedule - and the update taking 8 hours to apply at a dealership and being too complex or risky to allow customers to “self” service speaks volumes as to where we are at - but again I’m not going to buy in to the fact Porsche is doing this because it’s a better mechanism - they are in fact incurring great and hard dollar costs to distribute this software in this manner - and that’s a sign of failure of the current software version installed on the vehicles that Porsche has to incur this very expensive distribution mechanism to update the software on the entire fleet - cause it was soooo bad to begin with.

they did it wrong.
Sponsored

 
 




Top