• Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    You are 100% right it improves the lifespan, and when selling it, a battery in better condition makes the car worth more.
    I think somehow some people misunderstand your post? Or they don’t get how it can be an advantage to have a bigger battery than you pay for?

    Mind you I don’t condone this business model, which to me feels like cheating.

    • ch00f@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s funny how frequently this business model is used in the digital space, but when it comes to physical hardware, people freak.

      Like look at movies. Does anybody really think it costs substantially more to deliver the 4K version of a product over the HD version? Everything, Everywhere, All At Once is $12 on Blu-ray on Amazon. It’s $20 on 4k UHD.

      The movie was mastered at 4k or higher, so why not just give you the UHD version with the Blu-ray version? The physical disc can’t cost more than a few cents to manufacture.

      It’s because some people have decided they don’t need 4k and are happy to take a shittier version of the product for a lower price.

      Don’t get me started how much people hate when content is included on the game disc locked behind a paywall yet somehow have less of an issue when there’s day 1 downloadable content also locked behind a paywall.

      • deranger@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        None of those other behaviors you describe are any less shitty. “Look, Tesla is doing the same shitty things as other corporations, they’re not so bad!” What a terrible argument.

        For the record I pirate my content for the reasons you describe; I also don’t fuck with AAA games with day 1 DLC or paywalled content. Those get pirated or purchased on a heavy discount later.

        Got any compelling argument as to why this software nerf should exist?

        • ch00f@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Sure:

          It’s cheaper to manufacture and maintain a single version of a product. It’s cheaper to ship and store a single version of a product. It’s also easier to adapt to quickly changing market needs if you don’t need to spend six months spinning up a production line for a different version of a product.

          Also, the existing market for low-range EVs might not be large enough to justify the expense of maintaining a separate line.

          If there is competition in the space, it’s safe to assume that some portion of these savings are passed on to the customer to better edge out competitors over price.

          If you want to be very charitable: wealthier people who can afford the full-range version are partially subsidizing the lower range (tighter margin) version for more budget-conscious consumers.

          Edit: Especially when talking about the structural battery of the Model Y, it may help to understand how these packs are made: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozesI3OZEG0

          The batteries themselves maintain the rigidity of the pack. If they removed some, they’d have to slide some dead weight in there. Also, once the packs are sealed, it’s impossible to remove a portion of the batteries without destroying the pack. These are designed features developed to reduce the overall weight and cost of manufacturing the pack.

          • deranger@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            If they can sell the same battery, just one has a software limitation, they can just forgo the limitation altogether and sell full battery capacity models at the reduced limited capacity price. The only reason this limitation exists is to juice customers and it’s bullshit. They are going out of their way to make a product worse that costs them exactly the same regardless of if the limitation is there or not. You cannot convince me that the software limitation they impose is anything but hostile to consumers.

            • ch00f@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              I mean, they can just give the batteries away for free too, but most businesses have a vested interest in making money. In Tesla’s case, they also have an interest in paying back the massive investment it took to get the first car off the lot.

              Saying “they can sell the same battery” is ignoring the fact that they would not be able to sell the limited capacity version of the battery if nobody was buying the full capacity version.

      • tabular@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Perhaps typical people can more easily understand how a physical device might work. People probably understand gears and electricity more so than “software” (never even heard of source code or binaries).