I just tried this with my Tesla. The app cannot connect over the internet to the car, but unlocking and starting the car still works, as does using the app to open the charge port and the front trunk.
The Tesla app uses both internet and bluetooth to connect to the car. I would expect that even with no internet connectivity, bluetooth-related functionality would continue to work, and at least today, that is the case.
EDIT: After seeing dawnerd's comment, I just re-opened the app (didn't kill it, it was in background), and now the entry for my car is gone, which means all the bluetooth functionality I mentioned above no longer works. That's one hell of a bug.
Mechanical systems generally have well established failure modes, frequently related to parts wearing out with use. Often these failures can be predicted by warning signs or history of use.
Networked software systems generally have completely unknown and unpredictable failure modes.
Do you really want important infrastructure like your automobile dependent on networked software?
The key card still works, as I would expect. The car isn't dependent upon network infrastructure; an optional convenience is dependent upon it. You can operate a Tesla fully without installing the Tesla app.
As a comparison, my last car was a BMW. For that car, I had key fobs. I always had to take one of these key fobs in order to unlock and use the car. So going out, I would have one key with which I could operate the car.
Now, because I always carry the key card in my wallet, and I always have my phone, I always have _two_ keys with me. This isn't worse than having only one key, even if one of the keys is failing today due to an internet outage.
Essentially, I'm experiencing the worst case scenario right now, which is that I'm exactly the same situation as when I had my BMW. It's annoying (and as an iOS dev, I Have Questions on how the app came to be architected such that a network outage erases the app's settings). But I'm not worse off
Is it standard practice to carry around the keycard? Most owners I know don't bother. So this could potentially strand them unexpectedly but I suppose that's the same for any other car if you lose your keys (but at least not losing your physical keys is in your control).
I personally carry my key card at all times. It's the size of a credit card in my wallet so it's no bother. Regardless of how good their network services could be, I would never want to depend only on my cell phone to drive. You know, the thing I own that's most likely of all things to run out of battery, break, get stolen, be out of service range. All things that would strand me.
I can't speak for every owner and I'm sure some don't, but I certainly carry my key card in my wallet 100% of the time. It just makes sense; what if your phone dies? You are already required to have your driver's license while driving, so it's not like you can avoid carrying cards around, and carrying one more card is not as much of a burden as a giant key fob.
Yeah, they're credit card sized so I usually carry one in my wallet. Mostly to give to a valet if I need it. Some people have melted them down into fun key chain fogs. My gf has it as a ring.
> as an iOS dev, I Have Questions on how the app came to be architected such that a network outage erases the app's settings
Never storing it in the first place. Too many apps I’ve worked on have been of the opinion that being on a phone means you always have internet access, so why not eliminate cache invalidation issues by just storing all of your data on a server instead of locally?
> Do you really want important infrastructure like your automobile dependent on networked software?
Is the automobile actually dependent on this infrastructure, or does that infra just provide some nice perks and extra features? If the car will still lock, unlock, drive, and refuel -- indefinitely -- without the network components, then I wouldn't consider it dependent on the network.
Of course, when adding extra features, we should strive to only make them dependent on the network if they truly require the network as a part of their basic premise. I suspect the Tesla has some extra features that could work fine without the network, but are probably broken because of this, and that's... not great.
Your idea is correct, the network access is optional. Everything works, it even has downloaded maps. You can't remotely unlock or lock via phone when the net is down. But your keyfob will just work. I checked just now and I can seemingly do everything at the moment with the app...
When I took delivery of my car, the guy told me to just always keep the NFC card in my wallet. Honestly I thought it was more likely that I would have a dead phone than Tesla would have a network outage, particularly one lasting multiple hours, but I guess my phone charging is more reliable than their network configs. Given how unreliable and flaky I am, it's pretty damning of Tesla's technical chops.
The problem is even more complex. For most people it is just the app right now. But what people do not realize is, that the devices networked in the car itself are trusting each other by some means of certificates. These certificates needs to be renewed regualry. If there servers are becoming unavailable for a longer time while the certificates expire, the connected device will not trust each other and will refuse to work.
Can you cite any specific parts that are handshaking via certificates that need renewal? In many cases device authentication is turning towards certificates that don't expire, and I'm unaware of any certificate renewal cases inside a Tesla. If they are there, I'd love to know about them.
I suppose you wouldn't be able to update the os. But the car is just fine without network access. You can unlock with key, charge it, etc. It doesn't require network connections in any way. It has downloaded maps. Unlike say your BMW, your car maps get updated periodically over the internet.
I am happy and impressed that they are using standard, secure cryptography without any intentional obfuscation. Typically car "security" relies on obscure, obfuscated protocols that rarely use strong cryptography and the entire "security" is provided by obscurity (which doesn't last long).
Love blue tooth, it is how Hong Kong guys circumvented the internet censorship. Really looking forward to when, users realize to NOT rely on the internet, and an app should work without internet.
I wouldnt expect any vehicle to only work from a network connection as a lot of people regularly live or park their car outside of cellular and wifi coverage, I guess thats why they say to take your keys/rfid card with you
Tesla very clearly says that you should have your physical key (card or fob) with you at all times. I keep my card key in my wallet, next to my unused mass transit card.
There are a lot of people saying, "This isn't a problem, just use the key/keycard". Which is a fair thing to say, but not what Tesla markets.
Tesla strongly markets the idea that "all you need is the phone".
I know that my in-laws with a Tesla don't carry the key cards. They just use their phone.
So either Tesla needs to make a much stronger push for carrying one's key/keycard, or they need to fix the bug that makes the local bluetooth on the app stop working (or both).
Maybe some people will learn an important lesson here and start carrying their cards.
Where does Tesla market the idea that "all you need is the phone"? When you enable the phone as a key, it explicitly tells you to keep your keycard with you as a backup and that the phone is for convenience only.
People may primarily use their phone because it's convenient (I definitely do) but that doesn't mean Tesla marketed it that way to me.
Tesla barely markets anything. They don't do any advertising so their only real informational marketing is what is on their website and what you hear directly from Tesla employees including Musk (who often speaks out of his ass). Tesla would probably be better served to have a more defined and clearer marketing message. That would certainly help avoid the controversy about how Autopilot is or is not marketed.
As a practical matter this is reinforced as well by the need to still carry a driver's license. In principle the government could offer a secure digital ID, but it doesn't. Phone payment also isn't at 100%, so a backup credit card also still a good idea.
So it's necessary to have the ability to have a card on hand anyway, and at that point it's not much of a stretch to have a couple. Either via a phone case or whole wallet, but it's not like someone can (legally) just take their phone with them when going for a drive. Keeping the keycard along with license and credit card is still fairly minimal (phone digital wallet can consolidate a lot of fat card packs beyond those).
I guess the bigger risk is that while I always at least take my wallet with me in the car, I don't always take it with me out of my car while I always have my phone. Might be nice if Tesla had at least an option for some sort of fallback auth mechanism built into the car itself, be it keypad or biometric. The ones in phones are pretty good and are a pretty tiny item on the BOM, in a $35k+ vehicle seems like there should be room for it as an option?
Maybe that's overthinking it though, not like regular cars tend to have those either. Sometimes people just lock themselves out with regular keys too and that's that.
> I know that my in-laws with a Tesla don't carry the key cards. They just use their phone
Are you actually sure you know that they don't carry the key card in their wallet? Why wouldn't they? I find this pretty doubtful, it just seems like a pointlessly unnecessary way to risk getting locked out of your vehicle if your phone happens to die or becomes otherwise incapacitated. What possible reason could anyone have for not just keeping the card in their wallet as instructed by Tesla associates upon receipt of the vehicle and the cards themselves? It just doesn't make sense.
Playing devil's advocate: what wallet? As more and more functionality is moved to the smartphone, the less reason to carry a wallet there is. A smartphone can already replace credit cards (Google Pay and similar), cash (several per-country payment systems, the one for my country will be released in a couple of months), and even the driving license! (https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=br.gov.serpro....)
In a more humorous note, I've seen many people use their cell phone as their wallet... by putting their identity card and cash inside the aftermarket cell phone cover on the back of the phone.
Over many years I have accidentally broken one card (I snapped it while using it as a scraper) and two have lost swipe and / or chip and pin functionality due to general wear and tear.
I disagree, I've never heard them market it as 'you just need the phone'. I've had one for 10 years now. Relying just on a phone is incredibly stupid, for obvious reasons. Do they never drive into a parking garage with no service? Have they never had a phone die suddenly - that's how mine always seem to go? What if you drive where there is no service, out in the country?
This is just wrong. All the instructions tell you to keep your keycard on you at all times. And the keycard is literally the size of a debit card. Just put it in your wallet with your ID and you never have to worry about a network outage.
I keep my keycard with me at all times and it's come in handy when my phone died or the app was just being stubborn.
I mean, the card is shaped like a credit card so people can keep it in their wallets so there's not much excuse. It seems pretty dumb to 100% rely on a device whose battery can run out.
And it's a thin card with no embossing. There's really no excuse. And convenient if you drop your phone in a river, like I did a few weeks ago while out kayaking. Upon returning to my Tesla, I unlocked it with my key card because of course I carry it with me.
> So either Tesla needs to make a much stronger push for carrying one's key/keycard, or they need to fix the bug that makes the local bluetooth on the app stop working (or both).
I think they just did that stronger push, albeit involuntary :)
Regardless of what Tesla markets, it would seem to be incredibly foolish to rely on your phone in this manner. If you're miles away from home, and you drop your phone and it breaks, or your phone's battery simply dies, I bet you'll feel pretty stupid when you walk up to your car and are unable to unlock or start it via any other means.
Carrying around the key cards just seems like taking a basic amount of responsibility.
I don't recall being told that during my test drive or during delivery, but even if they didn't, it seemed like a no-brainer thing to do.
A lost, broken, or dead phone is a common failure case. If you know your phone is your key, then you should be considering what your backup will be. Since you already need to be carrying something with your license, it makes sense to keep a key card with it.
I think the weird thing is the app won't finish starting until it has linked up over the Internet, which is problematic on a bunch of fronts. Even when things are working properly, it keeps the app from loading quickly... not something you want to see with a key-entry system.
But it isn't strictly just for that. For example, I can quickly check the VIN of the car, and what version of software was on the car the last time I was able to connect. It also seems to wake up the bluetooth on my phone on occasion.
> For example, I can quickly check the VIN of the car, and what version of software was on the car the last time I was able to connect.
which you can also check by opening the settings menu on the car screen itself with a couple of clicks or, if you need just the VIN, the driver side door of the car (just like any other car). So, as the parent comment said, using app for this is just a remote convenience function.
There are plenty of other places where you can check your VIN number too, like the insurance card (which you are supposed to have on you at all times while you drive btw)/website or your vehicle registration paper.
Yeesh. It's fine for us to admit that things sometimes have flaws which could be improved.
The app not opening without network connectivity just seems like one of those, we can acknowledge that without conceding the whole concept and/or ecosystem.
It isn't the ecosystem, you are not conceding anything.
The app is just an additional extra service, it isn't crucial for anything. All of those things you listed that are affected by the app not working can be looked up the exact same way they could be looked up on any other car, no app needed.
I agree with you overall though, it could be improved, but I am struggling to think of a better solution to this that they could implement, aside from caching the vin number and the software version on the client (which i totally agree with, would be a good solution for that specific issue). The rest of the functions like remote controlling the car from the app obviously won't work with that approach, but that's not a trivial problem to solve (if possible at all), and their current solution seems to be very reasonable (talking about them refreshing certs in the background once in a while).
The app clearly does cache a ton of information locally already. The "must call out to the network" thing is pretty clearly just to simplify the design of the app so they don't have to worry about conditions where the app hasn't authenticated itself and grabbed the latest information from Tesla.
Right, but when I'm filling out an insurance form, I'm usually not in my car, so the settings screen in the car is even less useful than the app. The website does totally work, but then again that also requires an Internet connection so...
Again, there are ways to deal with this stuff, but my point is just that the app is helpful in more ways than just remote control of the car.
Also, I usually only use my car keys for one purpose. I'm using my phone all the time, for a variety of purposes. I've had my phone stolen from me when I was using it for one of those purposes, and meanwhile, my car keys were still in my pocket.
If you have your Tesla account password memorized, you can turn any old smartphone -- a friend's, one you buy at Target -- into the key if you so choose.
> Tesla strongly markets the idea that "all you need is the phone".
I've been a Tesla owner for quite a while now. I don't recall seeing that in any marketing material. More-so being "strongly". It's pretty silly not to carry the key cards as a backup for the Model 3/Y (S and X use traditional RF key fobs).
I'm rather surprised that the Tesla app can't operate in offline mode directly with the car. Due to the nature of a car I would think it's a forgone conclusion that the owner might drive to where the app can't connect with the cloud but should still be an authenticated and trusted issuer of digital commands to the car.
Time to add some use cases to the acceptance testing script...
Even with my phone in Airplane mode (WiFi / Cellular disabled), and only Bluetooth on, I'm still able to get into my Model 3. Internet connection is not required by the car, or the phone, to be able to unlock the car, drive, or operate the frunk / trunk.
It is required if your app hasn't downloaded a new cert. If you're still able to get in via Bluetooth, it's only because the cert on your phone is still valid. Once that cert expires, you'll be locked out.
Model S and X don't have the same bluetooth antennas to do the proximity triangulation is my understanding and rely on the network connection from Car -> Tesla and App -> Tesla to unlock and start so may be different for S and X drivers?
They require Google connectivity to change the temperature through the app. You can always change the temperature using the thermostat itself. Although it is absurd that there is zero local connectivity, this is Google we're talking about. If they allowed that, it would be trivial to just keep the thermostat offline and not allow Google to siphon up your precious data.
I want to know what kind of signals they are getting from your temperature preferences. Something like "wow, this person keeps their house hot, let's send them marketing for vacations in the tropic?"
It tells them what times of which days of week you are at home, which can be used to infer other lifestyle buckets based on age and gender and purchase histories.
I'm wonder if a line of "smart IoT" devices where the assumption is that cloud-down is the primary use case (and cloud-connected is a secondary "nice to have" mode even if that's how it's used 90%+ of the time) would succeed?
If I'm remembering right, if you do have one of those acting as a hub, it should work fine in that capacity on a local network with no internet. This lets you have fully local automation triggers, among other things.
Well I'd love that kind of systems; in my flat, the heating and ventilation is controlled by a central server that is managed by a local startup.
When I lose internet access, or the server is not reachable (and this is super frequent), my floor heating (my only source of heat) stops running, and ventilation starts.
Have to wait for someone to reboot the networked server, but they work only Mon-Fri, 10am to 5pm.
A lot of IOT things go through the internet because it's easier than making network device detection work. Everything going through a single process is also just simpler to test and make sure there are fewer surprises or issues with having two different methods of control.
You can still use it physically, just it won't work over network...which seems absolutely reasonable (its a smart device that has a backup non-smart function)
I'm glad it seems reasonable to you. It does not seem reasonable to me.
This is essentially the Google philosophy, and it stands in contrast to the Apple philosophy. Yes, Nest is ex-Apple people and followed this bad pattern before their acquisition by Google, but still.
Apple HomeKit-certified devices don't communicate with Apple. They establish secure local connections and operate locally. For home devices, this makes good sense to me. It means, however, that HomeKit-certified devices have to be powerful enough to establish secure local connections, which the first couple of generations of IoT devices were not.
I'm willing to wait longer and pay extra to get devices that don't require a third-party corporate intermediary. Anything else seems unreasonable to me.
This isn't a defense, but Nest products worked this way before Google bought them. A lot of smart home stuff works this way, I am guessing because it's easier to setup, manage and troubleshoot.
Unfortunately it makes buying this stuff a pain because you have to research who owns what and what kind of control you have.
I just buyed an air cleaner, and amongst other I looked at the one by Xioami. To operate, requires you to install an app which tracks you locations and sends it to Xiaomi servers. This really troubled me.
I ended up buying one which can be operated without an app, which there seems to be fewer and fewer.
There is definitely some functionality that works when offline. Phones are the primary key for Model 3 and that works fine when unlocking the car in subterranean garages that have no reception.
For Model S and X there is, for Model 3 and Model Y there is a contactless key card that normally sits in the driver's wallet. If the phone key is unavailable, the contactless card is the other option, but unlike the phone it isn't a walk-up-and-use-the-car, it's more like walk-up-and-tag-in.
This is unlikely correct, because in many parking garages there is no Internet connectivity and hence this issue would have been heard of many many years ago.
It's partially correct. The app will still work without internet connectivity if the cert that the app downloaded is still valid. If you close the app and re-open, the app tries to download another cert and would fail without internet connectivity. At that point, you would need to use a backup keycard.
They were supposed to have a Robotaxi network running this year, I wonder how it would have handled it? All cars pull over and wait on further instructions? Return to home base all at once?
Honestly, the prospect of having parts of my car have to depend on American network reliability is a huge issue for me. I've had friends stuck outside their Zipcars because they can no longer unlock it in the parking lot of a trailhead.
No part of Tesla cars requires the use of mobile networks for basic car operation. It is just the extended functions such as pre-cooling the car remotely, or initiating "Smart Summon" (to have the car drive to you from across the parking lot) that requires mobile network connectivity. If you just want to do typical car stuff like drive somewhere you don't need cellular or Wi-Fi.
Zipcar could have implemented a quick/easy solution to this problem: allow the card to unlock the car offline until it has been returned. Or force the renters to lock it using the keys during the duration of the rental. This just seem to be too common an issue not to have been addressed somehow.
If this is a common enough problem, then maybe the issue is the fact that they offer a marginally more convenient but network-limited option that lulls people into a false sense of security.
It isn't a common enough problem. Over my 1 year of ownership with almost daily driving, I only had to use the card twice. Once when setting up the car for the first time, the second time when I was dealing with valet parking (for obvious reasons).
It is basically a kind of a failsafe solution, just in case your phone dies or something like that.
And mind you, i don't live somewhere where my car gets constant network connection. In fact, the underground garage of my apt building where I park the car has zero network or cell coverage. It all works just fine.
You don't need to have active internet connection to unlock the car with your phone, it just needs bluetooth and an unexpired certificate from Tesla servers, which syncs occasionally in the background. But until that cert expires, it works perfectly fine with no internet. Never had such a situation happen to me before, despite me opening the Tesla mobile app only once in forever.
The phone still worked fine to unlock/drive the car over direct bluetooth to your phone as long as you don't sign out of the app; you just couldn't access the extended functionality or log back in manually (see: activate a new phone) during the outage. I drove all over during the outage without a functional issue.
From the article: “If you’re unable to unlock your car and drive, that’s a problem,” he said.
That's a bogus comment hovering on FUD.
In no general usage do you need app access to the car via the Internet in order to unlock or drive. My wife just drove one of our cars during the outage and didn't even known it was ongoing.
I would assume that even with the Model 3 using the phone as a key, it just uses LE Bluetooth -- not Internet access via the app.
Apparently the multiple Tesla owners on this thread and online are all just spreading FUD about how they can't open their own cars this morning...
As other commenters have noted, the problem arises if your Tesla app needs to update its license or whatever this morning. If it did, you're SOL until they fix the bug. If it didn't, like apparently your wife's Tesla app, then you won't experience the problem.
I wouldn't call it FUD. I wasn't aware of any outage and just went about my day dropping the kiddo off at Daycare this morning without issue.
I just now opened up the App to see if I was affected and it gave the usually "Waking up car" message before kicking me out to a splash screen that says "No Products Found\r\nJoin the Mission"(https://i.imgur.com/n34IKUc.png). When I try to view my account it displays an error (https://i.imgur.com/JnD6gev.png).
And with the App in that state I just checked and the car let me put it in gear. So even without my key(card) it still recognized me.
Idk what's going on but I wouldn't outright dismiss it as FUD.
Appears to be some confusion. I was calling the parent comment to my reply FUD, not the claims by Tesla owners about not being able to unlock their cars.
So I noticed the app would not connect earlier when I went to lunch so I just hopped in an drove to and from the store. I did use the app to open the frunk but I did not bother to see if it would sync up to the car.
However in the name of science I swiped the app off the phone so I had to restart it. Still could use my car. Now if the app is not loaded I cannot use the car. So I start the app and instantly I can use my car.
Now let me make it clear, at no time has the app forgotten which car I own. I am not sure how that falls off the app if it cannot connect? I am using an iPhone if that matters.
My Mac App, ValetforTesla of course cannot find the car as it needs to get back to the mothership.
On a side note, I had similar issues with my Volt's app when OnStar went on the blink but that car relies on the fob to unlock the car and drive off, all I lost was stats and ability to remote start.
I mean, I agree with you that Elon is typically full of shit, but it's FUD because it's not a problem in real life, the bluetooth isn't always reliable in the general case anyway, anyone who relies on the car in a practical sense understands that the key-card is the key, not the phone.
Every outage is a "real problem", I'm using a turn of phrase to express that it's not at all a big deal. Instead of the car magically unlocking and starting from your mere presence you must deign to reach for the physical key like some type of barbarian.
I was unaware of the outage and did my normal routine obliviously and without ever opening the App. When I read about the outage, I opened the app and it basically gave me the middle finger. For shits and giggles I tried to use the car and it still worked.
So I'm not sure how the Phone talks to the Car but for me, on Android, the App losing it's mind didn't kill my phone's ability to drive the car.
I also carry my card with me at all times in case something happens to my phone. Seeing as how the replacements are only $25, I might pick up one or two just in case.
S/X drivers will, since they can't use the phone as a key anyway. And unlocking the car through the app is extremely slow and cumbersome compared to the app (IMO).
A lot of newer tech products seem intended to move us to a place where we don't need to carry separate wallets/keys alongside our phones. That's a reasonable goal.
Ok but the question isn't whether it's a good idea. The question is how much it harms tesla owners. It sounds like this might significantly disrupt people who only use their phone and I wouldn't be surprised if a decent number of people made that(poor) decision.
They're not passive. If they were, you'd see a lot of articles about Teslas being stolen after someone walking by used an RFID reader. They contain a private key to create a challenge-response system with the car that essentially makes them impossible to clone.
I've seen articles of people using Java cards to create a Model 3 key card that works, but it wasn't possible to clone an existing card. They created a card, then had to use an existing authorized card (or phone) to unlock and turn on the car, then use the car's tablet screen to add the created card to the list of authorized cards.
The cards are Tesla branded passive RFID Java Cards, you can confirm this with the NXP RFID reader app on Android. They are powered by the RFID reader.
I'll take your comment a step further, you don't need any of the screens to drive the car (2018 S) either. I once had a (software) crash and reboot at highway speeds, only thing I noticed (besides the screens going black) was the A/C turned off and back on.
I think that's a step too far. Losing the screen while in motion is quite disorienting, yes the car continues to function fine mechanically, but you lose all of your telemetry, voice commands, maps/navigation, and some other critical functions like wiper settings. In addition to that, the Model 3 has very poor rear visibility, so it's pretty unsafe to do much of any backing up without screen-view cameras.
I had the screen crash on my Model 3 once as we drove out of our neighborhood. I initiated a reboot while driving and by the time we got where we were going 15 minutes down the road it was operating normally again.
DLC can be problematic but it can also be a benefit. An example with Tesla is that the Model 3 recently received an option to improve its off the line acceleration after Tesla monitored enough usage to see if there were any motor and battery issues in their new model 3. You'd have to wait to get a new car in the old world.
It has been very problematic in the case of Tesla, as they have stripped features from resold vehicles.
If I bought a car from anyone else, everything I bought the car with will be on the car when I resell it. I'm sure some people will tell me I just need to understand this exciting and innovative new paradigm pioneered by Tesla, but I'd like to think most people can understand how this is anti-consumer behavior and really gross.
How long until Tesla (or some other car maker) goes the EA Games route and requires pre-owned buyers pay fee to "activate" their car after the transfer of ownership?
My previous comment was discussing paid DLC - content that may require an active connection to check authorization for and may disable features if it cannot verify online that you have purchased.
Free DLC/software updates that do not have such a check would not be impacted by a loss of network connectivity, but thank you for raising that issue explicitly.
I don't see how this is a problem. My Tesla comes with a key (card) so even if the app might fail, I'll always be able to drive perfectly fine. The card is in my wallet, I just hold my wallet up to the door and get in.
Just one of a variety of conveniences is currently down.
Isn't a problem in the sense that a company hypes itself up and markets itself by all these market differentiators, but then when these fail, the company and others just shrug it off and they suddenly become just conveniences?
What's the point of having these features in the app if you need to carry a key around all the time due to the app features being unreliable and poorly implemented?
How does the card work if the electronic mechanism to read it fails? Do you then need to also carry around an actual key fob?
My car, like most modern cars, has a keyless entry fob, but if that fails or the battery in the car completely dies, there is still mechanical entry points to get into the car and start the car.
> What's the point of having these features in the app if you need to carry a key around all the time due to the app features being unreliable and poorly implemented?
The point is that the key fits in your wallet. It's way nicer to carry, and then the phone gives you the convenience features that you'd usually get from a bulky fob, and much more.
The app is anything but unreliable; in fact the keyless entry and walk-away lock features have worked completely flawlessly for me for more than a year (very uncharacteristic of a feature that relies on Bluetooth). An app malfunction is way less likely than my phone being lost or broken or out of battery; those are the more important reasons to carry the key card.
If the car battery dies then the key card won't open the door. But the car also can't drive, and that seems like the bigger problem. Your ICE car also can't start with a dead battery, so being able to open the door is marginally useful. In both cases you need to fix the battery before you can drive the car. (Yes, there is emergency access to the battery without opening the door.)
Okay, thanks, that makes a bit more sense, but also still the wrong way to handle this. It should work like SSH where the car accepts certain (digital) keys that can be revoked...
I was thinking the car would contain the set of acceptable keys. If you get a new phone, the car accepts the new phone's key. If you loose that phone, you set the car to stop accepting that key.
Imagine a scenario where you realize you've lost your phone, but you don't have physical access to the car to remove the phone as a key.
For example, you've parked your car in long term parking at an airport, then accidentally leave your phone in the airport bathroom and didn't realize it until you were already on the plane. Whoever finds your phone can now steal your car. If you want to use someone else's device to disable your phone's key remotely, the car needs to be able to connect to the Internet to sync the list of authorized keys.
I don't see how this is more risky than traditional car keys. You've parked your car in the airport parking lot, then accidentally leave your keys in the airport bathroom. Whoever finds your keys can now steal your car.
That's not to say that this isn't a problem, but if the only way to fix it is to make access to your car dependent on Tesla's servers, that does not seem like a good trade-off. Especially since if the app can randomly stop working one day, car owners basically required to carry their keys too as a backup, and as discussed, those cannot be revoked.
I don't own a Tesla, but I hope that you have to unlock your phone to be able to unlock your car? If you left your phone in the bathroom...it should be locked. If it's not locked, then you're going to have bigger issues like someone having access to your e-mail and ability to reset bank passwords, etc...
Additionally, if you can disable your phone key remotely using someone else's phone...technically, a hacker who has phished your credentials can also disable your phone key? Scary.
> I hope that you have to unlock your phone to be able to unlock your car?
Nope.
Is that really any different from someone finding your car keys? These days, with every car including a remote, if someone did find your key fob, they could press the panic button on it as they strolled around the parking lot to easily find your car. At least with the Tesla phone key, they'd still have to walk around and try to open up every Tesla on the lot, unless they were able to unlock your phone.
It's not that different. But for a company that's trying to be better than a traditional car, maybe it should be? If you need to unlock your phone before unlocking your car, then you don't need to be able to revoke your key remotely.
It only needs it to sync the cert that tells the car the phone is authorized as a key. If your cert is still valid, you can still unlock with Bluetooth via your phone. If it's not, it'll try to update and download the cert, fail, and won't let you use Bluetooth.
Tesla has beaten everyone to the electric car mass market and that’s great. However, every report I see contains failures of the cars like these such that the car itself is poorly designed. What’s stopping Toyota or Isuzu from making a me-too version of the Tesla? What competitive advantage does Tesla have beyond being first to the market?
Speaking as a car nut and long-time Tesla skeptic who eventually broke down and bought a Model 3 - the car is not poorly designed, it's just not perfect, and any imperfection gets amplified by the company's high profile and the army of people that seem to want to tear them down.
Same. Bought a 3 at the beginning of August. Is it perfect? No. Is it the best driving experience I've ever had? Bar none. I sometimes take it out just to drive in the evenings. I plug it into my house and have a full tank every day. The power on demand is incredible. Is there room for improvement? Yes. Do I feel like I overpaid? Not in the slightest. My last new car was a Mazda 3 and I feel as though the 5k difference in cost is negligible to the gas savings.
There is a lot of wind and road noise on the highway - it's not as well-isolated as comparable luxury sports cars (BMW, Audi, etc.) No, this isn't an illusion due to the lack of engine noise, the car needs more acoustic insulation.
The BLE phone-as-key works about 95% of the time. Not good enough.
Some parts of the car feel cheap and insubstantial - the doors and front trunk, notably.
These are minor complaints. I agree that it is by far the best all-around everyday car available today. Unless you want a purpose-built 2-seater sports car or convertible, need the cargo capacity or ground clearance of an SUV/truck, or have some other special requirement, the Model 3/Y is a far superior car to everything else on the market.
Tesla cars are the worst-built, worst-furnished cars you can buy at their price points. If you care about comfort, ride quality, etc., go with anything but a Tesla.
But Tesla's batteries are industry-leading. If Tesla were to shed their EV-money pit, they'd easily earn their current valuation just by selling their batteries to everyone in the auto and power industries.
But by keeping their batteries limited to just their small share of the auto market, they've given their competitors reason to do their own research into battery/EV technology, and it's already starting to hurt them in Europe, where Tesla was outsold by other EV brands/models in several countries over the past few months, and that's without their major competitors having yet brought mass-market EVs to market.
The only reason Panasonic tolerates the existence of Tesla is that Tesla operates as the global marketing division of Panasonic batteries. If Tesla sheds the EV business then Panasonic will no longer deal with them.
The idea that Tesla is fundamentally a battery company is just weird. All of their battery chemistry, technology, and capacity is from Panasonic in one way or another.
All of their battery chemistry, technology, and capacity is from Panasonic in one way or another.
The battery cell technology in current batteries is all Panasonic (i.e., the chemistry, cell container, etc.), but the battery assemblage is all Tesla. That's the stuff related to assembling the cells together into a battery, adding voltage controls, cooling assemblies, etc.
As a point of comparison: Porsche's Taycan also uses Panasonic EVs, and has even an even better lap-racing performance than any Tesla, because Porsche's battery assemblage includes extra cooling assemblies that allow the car to be used for extended periods of high performance. While a Tesla can do full speed for 1 lap, a Taycan can do full speed until the battery dies.
A battery is more then just a cell, if you don't understand that you don't have a clue about how modern EV work. To hit everything that you need to do from safety, charge and so on, requires massive effort that is located on the pack level.
> Panasonic tolerates the existence of Tesla
Tesla is the biggest buyer of batteries on the planet and Panasonic should be beyond happy that they are the primary supplier.
> If Tesla sheds the EV business then Panasonic will no longer deal with them.
What? If Tesla just decided not to do cars?
> The idea that Tesla is fundamentally a battery company is just weird. All of their battery chemistry, technology, and capacity is from Panasonic in one way or another.
Tesla actually buys cells from Panasonic, LG Chem and CATL. All of these are integrated into Tesla owned and controlled packs that do the overall management.
Also, Tesla works much closer with Panasonic then you think. They are not just a costumer, they have a partnership with Panasonic and they make many decisions together.
Additionally Tesla has a large internal battery group that builds not just battery cells and packs, but actually they build battery manufacturing equipment. They bought the Canadian Hibar system that specialized in electrolyte filling and they are now Tesla exclusive. Tesla Grohmann Automation in Germany is building dedicated battery manufacturing equipment. Tesla has multiple agreements with research universities, including with Jeff Dahn's lab at Dalhousie University. They are part of the Battery 500 consortium. Plus they have a massive internal group on everything from cathode/anode manufacturing, cell design and more.
I agree that it is wrong to say that right now they are a battery company, but that it is 'all Panasonic' is totally wrong. Tesla will be a vertically integrated from cells to EVs.
I was in a friend's new-ish BMW recently and I felt the interior had a poorly-built, cheap, plasticky feel compared to Tesla. So let's just say that your opinion is not universal :)
I've been in poorly-made non-Teslas before as well. But it happens rarely, since most consumers wouldn't accept cars with the fit and finish issues that Tesla owners ignore for the first few months of ownership. After a few months, even the most die-hard Tesla owners I know constantly complain about all the "small" issues that everyone else would have rejected a car for at the lot.
I've only been in a properly made Tesla once. And they don't make Teslas that way any more (entirely by hand).
Some BMWs do look and feel like KIAs on the inside, especially their lower-end "beginner" luxury models. (That's not a knock on KIA, they deliberately target the low-end market but make up for it with relatively durable cars.)
Tesla have the highest consumer satisfaction so you are exaggerating how much people complain. General its good practice not to accept it until it is perfect, that is true.
And in initial quality surveys while Tesla is bad, other luxury cars are not that great.
Different surveying companies have different results for their surveys, especially as they measure different things.
JD Power, for example, reports that Tesla owners report the highest number of problems and complaints with their vehicles, which is supported by Consumer Reports' owner satisfaction surveys (but CR finds that Tesla owners "forgive" Tesla for these issues and have high satisfaction ratings despite the numerous problems with their vehicles).
CA investigations have found that Tesla has the highest number of cars of any brand that would be subject to lemon laws (meaning defects serious enough to require the dealership to take the car back).
> Tesla cars are the worst-built, worst-furnished cars you can buy at their price points. If you care about comfort, ride quality, etc., go with anything but a Tesla.
Ride quality? The Tesla is by far the nicest, smoothest, and most fun ride I've ever experienced.
I've ridden in every model of Tesla (owing to a now-former boss who has owned every model of Tesla, back to their first, limited edition Roadsters).
If you think Tesla is the smoothest, nicest ride you've ever experienced, then I feel sorry for you. Most luxury cars ride far smoother, and even my 10-year old Camry is a smoother, nicer ride than the Model 3.
Teslas are fun, if you have the opportunity to drive them somewhere you can go fast and safely accelerate. Otherwise, they're quite stiff with the handling.
Their in-car tech is nothing innovative, and as far as usability, it's far less usable than physical controls. I can control pretty much every function in my car blindly. You can't do that on a Tesla (or any other car with pure touchscreen controls).
> Otherwise, they're quite stiff with the handling.
Maybe we're using different ideas on "stiff handling", but I don't think the handling is stiff enough. My previous car was a Subaru BRZ, which had super tight handling.
I've considered getting a stiffer anti-roll bar installed on my Model 3 to try to bring back a bit of the stiffer handling I liked on my BRZ, but there's only so much you can do when the car weighs 4,000 lbs. Can't exactly make a mid-sized 4-door sedan handle like a 2,800 lb 2-door sports coupe.
The batteries, the supercharger network, the software.
I think you’re reacting to the media presentation. Even though 100s of thousands of people have perfectly fine operation every day, that isn’t going to make the news. The few breakages do.
Are their other charging networks? Yes, certainly. But they're either too slow for road tripping, they're spread thin, and/or they're expensive. I can drive my Model 3 from my home in Portland, OR to any anywhere in the USA and never spend more than 30 minutes charging, with most stops being 10-20 minutes every 100-200 miles.
I don't know what a typical supercharger costs as they vary on location, I just know that the one I've used is 29 cents per kWh. So to charge my Model 3's 75 kWh battery to full would cost $21.75, which would give me about 250 miles (It's rated at 299 miles, but you'll never get that unless you're going 55 mph with climate controls off), which is 8.7 cents per mile. If you assume gas is $3.50/gallon, then in terms of price per mile, it's the equivalent to a 40 mpg car.
Other charging networks are usually 40 cents/kWh or more, while charging slower. Some have a ridiculous charge per minute rather than charging per kWh.
Keep in mind that the current massive dip in gas prices is temporary and only caused by COVID causing people to drive less. Once COVID goes away (however long THAT'S gonna take) and people start going out more and taking road trips, prices will return to their $3+.
I bought my Tesla in October. I've had multiple people now ask me "Do you regret buying an EV since gas is so cheap right now?" and I think it's an incredibly short-sighted question.
Besides, if you're buying an EV to save money on gas, then you're either bad at math, or you drive over 1,000 miles per week, because the money savings isn't enough to offset the price difference between an ICE and an EV until you start to reach 200,000 miles or so, where the lower maintenance costs start to also become a factor.
Toyota doesn’t have a celebrity CEO that can push through unreasonable product tied to a promise of having a good product in the feature. Tesla’s competitive advantage is Elon Musk.
Try selling crappy and expensive product with a promise of using the money and expertise to build a better one next time.
Yesterday’s battery day was also a promise to do great things in the future.
Autopilot is something that Tesla sells with the promise of one day becoming self-driving car.
Who else can do that? The others need to put their own money to bet on that and need to deliver good value products with reasonable quality for the money asked.
Other car manufacturers are producing EVs today. Not Toyota, they did bet on hydrogen cars and lost years.
Also, I would argue that Nissan was first to release an good enough and affordable EV in 2011.
The concurrence for EVs is strong in Europe now, and Tesla is not the best selling car company anymore. See for example the Norwegian stats : https://elbilstatistikk.no/ That may change when Tesla will make smaller and more affordable vehicles in Europe.
The Model 3 is the most well designed car I've ever used. There are some rough edges, but it's a huge leap forward for car UX. I'd actually argue that Tesla has as much or more of an advantage and head start on UX as they do on battery technology.
For comparison, I have a Kia Optima SXL, and I find the fit and finish to be beyond any Tesla that I have ridden in. Kia has a strange reputation (despite now being one of the best automakers), and even with this reputation, the car gets many complements and comments. I am also a big fan of buttons, and I simply find having buttons where I know where they're at and how they feel are far superior to navigating a touchscreen. Is the touchscreen cool? Yes, I suppose. Is it better UX or functionality? No, in my opinion. At no point have I ever wished to take all the functionality my car has and have it jammed into a single large touchscreen in the middle of the dash.
I have also ridden in multiple Chinese brands like NIO, BYD, and other more affordable brands. The NIO, upon initial impression, immediately outclassed the Teslas that I have ridden in (Model S and X) in terms of design, especially on the inside. The BYD and others that you find the DiDi drivers driving are all very impressive and affordable such that they easily compete with Tesla. When I was in China, it was "wait, what car is this?!" day after day. We must have saw half a dozen fully electric car models.
Personally, I like the minimal design. You don't need all those physical controls because you don't need to keep messing with settings in a Tesla. Everything is automatic. Lights, climate, you name it. This is how it should be.
The doors unlock automatically when you approach, lock when you walk away. You only need one pedal to drive! Essentially all you need while driving this car is one pedal and the speed limit. THAT is excellent UX. Needing a ton of buttons and nobs is a distraction and unnecessary. This is why it's years ahead of everything else.
Phantom brakes did kill the dream for me. I simply can't drive a car that will randomly brake hard for no good reasons when using basic features such as adaptative cruise control. It's uncomfortable, scary, and dangerous.
The app does talk directly to the car, when you're in range of Bluetooth. That's how the phone key functions, all handoff and communications are done via bluetooth, not the internet when the devices are in range. Even with my phone in airplane mode (WiFi/Cellular disabled), and only Bluetooth on, I'm still able to unlock/lock the car, drive, and open the frunk/trunk.
That's not what I meant. I mean why can't the app learn the car's IP address using the cloud and then just connect directly to the car? That way if the cloud goes down it still works as long as its IP doesn't change.
It just amazes me that literally everything has to round trip to the cloud for everything. It's like we forgot that things can connect to each other.
This doesn't have to do with communicating with the car.
I believe internet is needed because tesla acts as a CA for your phone. That allows you to revoke a device, for instance if it were stolen. My guess is that the phone has authorizations that it renews fairly frequently and in this case apps could renew auths so once the current set expired you couldn't use the phone to unlock, etc. I can't immediately think of a better solution to the problem that allows using a phone for some functions and being able to remotely revoke a device.
If letsencrypt went down we'd similarly see a large portion of sites be inaccessible through browsers after 90 days even though you could directly connect to those servers
Why is it harder to secure the cloud endpoint than the car? Is it immune to remote attacks because it lives in a data center? A CPU is a CPU. Code is code.
Having every car aggregated at one cloud system means if you got into that you could simultaneously attack every single Tesla in the world.
There is no good reason for this. It's just a mixture of "how things are done nowadays" and superstition.
The car does not have a publicly reachable IP. It is using message bus (Kafka pub-sub, I believe) to bridge phone and car. Tesla does publish an API for anyone that wants to control a car (uses OAUTH for authorization.) Other than being unable to revoke tokens from within the car, it works great and solves the fleet management problem. (It is possible to simply entirely disable remote access from within the car, so this is a partial solution that Tesla does already.)
I'm surprised by many of the comments in this thread. For those who keep referring back to the keycard/fob access, those are still software solutions and can themselves be susceptible to some bug. Just because it's a backup doesn't mean it's any more reliable than the more "convenient" solution.
CAUTION: Always carry your key card with you in your purse or wallet to use as a backup in case your authenticated phone has a dead battery, or is lost or stolen.
Again, sure maybe people will NOT do this, but you cannot blame Tesla for this. Services fail all the time. The phone as a key is just a convenience. This same silly FUD went around earlier this year as well. Nobody got locked out of their car by a failure of Tesla. They locked themselves out of their own cars.
It's also posted in the car when the phone key is added. In my case, the handover agent specifically told me to keep my key card with me. It's not really a secret, nor is Tesla saying you should only use your phone as a key and nothing else. Tesla's marketing is that you can use your phone as your key - and they're right, and it's also very convenient. It's not the same thing to say that users should only rely on their phones. They can't anyway, since the car will require the key card when adding a phone.
Of course, if you read that literally, none of those things ("phone has a dead battery, or is lost or stolen") happened, and Tesla's screwup still caused a problem.
(Note, both my wife and I own Model 3's and I own $TSLA, so I'm no hater... I do carry a card key in my wallet, but I don't carry my wallet 100% of the time that I need to get into my car.)
Most of this thread is material for @internetofshit[1].
Hot take: I would rather walk than use my phone to unlock my car, not to mention having my car connected to the internet in the first place. If you're affected by this, you have no one but yourself to blame. This really is the clowniest timeline.
The Tesla app uses both internet and bluetooth to connect to the car. I would expect that even with no internet connectivity, bluetooth-related functionality would continue to work, and at least today, that is the case.
EDIT: After seeing dawnerd's comment, I just re-opened the app (didn't kill it, it was in background), and now the entry for my car is gone, which means all the bluetooth functionality I mentioned above no longer works. That's one hell of a bug.