Major software update announcement coming July 13th…

[Arjan_]

I don’t! Made a few edits to clarify a few points….I’m definitely not a software engineer, but I can see the argument for both small bug fixes and for big OS updates. Trying to understand this in the context of “stop sales” and supply chain inconsistencies is what’s interesting.

Sorry I agree with Derek. Small increments is way faster due to less complexity. The software industry switched from large once per 6 to 9 months releases to smaller bi weekly updates.

Sponsored

 

[Icey4s]

I had my ANA5 recall work done today.

The service team had no knowledge of this software release nor nothing further pending in terms of recall for my car.

I continue to remain skeptical on availability for all MYs.

Any documentation from the dealership on what they did for the ANA5? Would love to have something to show the dealership here.

 

[Windpower]

Sorry I agree with Derek. Small increments is way faster due to less complexity. The software industry switched from large once per 6 to 9 months releases to smaller bi weekly updates.

And I agree with you! Incremental improvements is the right way to go. But we're dealing with Porsche who are still learning about the software complexities of a car in the 21st century.
Performance car owners demand a reasonable level of software features which make the driving experience safe (voice to text messages as one example, which we have in the Taycan) and enjoyable (example: streamed music from your phone which works for some of us but not others).
I'm not the expert here but from what I have read, Porsche outsourced the PCM and therefore is at the mercy of their supplier who created the experience we have today: limited in features, features which a number of Taycan owners find buggy.
In my opinion, Porsche needs to take control of the PCM to avoid alienating their customer base. If Porsche gets control over the PCM, then they can gradually roll out new features and bug fixes and keep their customers (me included) happy.

 

[KensingtonPark]

I have always believed that Porsche and other ICE+EV manufacturers would be at a disadvantage to EV-only manufacturers in this regard until they have a sufficient number of EVs to avoid significant part sharing between ICE and EV lineups. From the wire harness outward, the complexity of the equation that they have to solve for is huge and is in no way helped by needing to accommodate characteristics and controls in parts that are not necessary in one vehicle type vs. the other. As each component is improved/replaced, the different combination introduces a new variant from a system perspective that requires testing and resolution/mitigation. This is made worse by the fact that some of the improvements/replacements are made to address issues that are unique to one of the platforms.

The incremental improvement is definitely superior, but the testing regimen for the numerous configurations that exist now after three years challenge the incremental approach, since this adds both time and uncertainty to the process. So, here we wait for large chunky fixes which themselves now add additional uncertainty because the configuration testing itself is necessarily compromised.

What is reassuring is seeing that the manufacturers that have a bigger lineup seem to be growing out of similar pains. (See, e.g., Volvo and Hyundai)

I have accepted this current state as part of the bleeding edge nature of the vehicles that I have owned, but it's still frustrating to see it remain. It will get better simply because they will have more cars.

 

[rs38]

also need to be QA/regression tested.

hahaha, nice humor!

tested by the customer!

 

[DerekS]

Sorry I agree with Derek. Small increments is way faster due to less complexity. The software industry switched from large once per 6 to 9 months releases to smaller bi weekly updates.

It's not really about "faster" but "safer."

When an app is in development, larger chunks of work at a time are more efficient.
Then once it has been deployed - and especially to a mission critical / large user base - you have to make each push with care. Limiting the scope of each push makes that easier to do with confidence.

 

[ThomasDK]

Has anyone in Europe heard from their dialer? Or is this update only in US?

 

[W1NGE]

Any documentation from the dealership on what they did for the ANA5? Would love to have something to show the dealership here.

ANA5 is the reworking of a wire harness for the front seats which potentially could snag and therefore lead to unwanted consequences.

Simple fix / patch-up.

I have an MY21 car and not sure if this applies to all MY's.

 

[rs38]

I finally found the long awaited software update announcement for July 13th right on the spot !!

https://www.taycanforum.com/forum/threads/how-to-reboot-pcm.3021/page-3#post-172186

 

[itsRandy]

I had an appointment scheduled for ANA6 today, but the dealer said they were unable to perform it at this time. Cited lack of software

 

[DerekS]

I pushed mine to next week. My (awesome) service advisor confirmed he doesn't have it yet.

 

[Max Powers]

I've been told the dealership will have the software on the 22nd. Once they have it, I'll be able to schedule the update.

 

[Arjan_]

It's not really about "faster" but "safer."

When an app is in development, larger chunks of work at a time are more efficient.
Then once it has been deployed - and especially to a mission critical / large user base - you have to make each push with care. Limiting the scope of each push makes that easier to do with confidence.

Faster and safer. deal Derek?

 

[Arjan_]

Has anyone in Europe heard from their dialer? Or is this update only in US?

I have an ANA6 appointment end of August and I live in Netherlands (Europe)

 

[TDon007]

Does anyone have screenshots of the new software update?

Sponsored