NightOwl

I asked my local dealer about a week ago when I picked up my brake parts, if it was any software updates for the engine or the transmission etc. He admitted that the first few years after the car was built, it normally came a few updates for most of the electronics in the car, but if it wasn’t any problem or a “good reason” they didn’t recommend doing the update. It was just a question while being there anyway, so I didn’t follow up on the answer.

Also read the same in various forums and sites that says the same, if there isn’t any symptoms to be cured, don’t do it. I wonder about this reluctance to do updates. Aren’t the update an upgrade to make something work better or to fix something that don’t work, or is unstable? Do they have an unwritten rule that says if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it? In my world, everything can be improved or made better in one way or the other, including myself.

jakematic

Updates are usually charged internally so there is no real cash changing hands to pay the dealership for it's time and materials.

I have to agree with the "if it's not broken don't fix it" logic.
Unless new features (e.g. MMI update to get AMI) I wouldn't update just for the sake of it.

Most updates require additional testing, and a few require new fluids or other parts.
You have to carefully check the TSBs and TPIs so a can of worms (and liability) isn't opened.

MP4.2+6.0

1. It isn't an iPhone or a PC or a Mac. Way more complicated, not same support, etc. People's lives ultimately depend on these--both as drivers and as people on the street who hopefully see them safely pass by.

2. Very difficult to know true history of who has done what to a vehicle, multiple owners, many configurations, etc.

3. If you screw it up, it's a blame game. Always has been with cars. Brick MMI and it's U.S. $2,000 via dealers as just one example. Maybe similar an ABS as another. Blow a few airbags and it can be up to thousands, and someone can literally die--if it either goes off in their face, or doesn't go off in a crash. Essentially updating something that "works" becomes radioactive.

I keep my own up to date, but I'm adult about it and proceed at my own risk.

jakematic

I'm so using that... very nice.

NightOwl

The mantra "if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it" is one of the contributing factors to the downfall of the car industry in Detroit. While in Japan they have the complete opposite mantra, "if it ain’t broke, break it". They always and constantly try to improve by stretching the chain until it breaks, then reinforce the weakest link and then do it all over again.

Interesting theory though, that the first edition of the cars software is the best and the more feedback the manufacturer get during the generations lifespan, the more buggy and potentially deadly does the later versions of the software become.

In my mind it’s the other way around. For a new generation of cars, there are about a handful of prototypes out in the real world doing test. Of course it’s good, but they can only do so much. After a couple of years for sale the manufacturer has potently thousands of feedback from customers’ cars when they are in for service or other repair. After another couple of years they have tens of thousands of feedbacks from more cars and returning cars, and obviously can make better software based on those feedbacks. Or does seriously someone think the manufacturer makes the newer software buggier and buggier? For what purpose?

Let’s say Bosch releases a firmware update for the ESP or ABS, should we be afraid that it will blow up all the airbags if we update a 4 year old car? If so, what makes it safe to do on a later model in the same generation with the same electronics and the same ABS unit?

jakematic

Testing a chain is completely different than software and firmware.
Wonder if Toyota/Honda/etc stop doing billable work and update vehicles at the drop of a hat ***** nilly requests from customers... would be interesting to know.

VAG will not change their position, but properly authorized guys like Jack will do it all day long for a price if there is a good reason.

Mister Bally

Here in the USA, all cars have a manufacturer's label stating "This vehicle meets all Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards as of the date of manufacture". That is all I need to know that the software/firmware controlling the safety-related systems is adequate. The modifications may not meet the standards and technically does not have to.

MP4.2+6.0

Besides that I don't think this is what I even said or implied, I don't know where you are going. If you want to change the car biz, have at it. A few billion dollars from now and you will hardly even make a dent, other than in your skull from the banging. I also owned a well equipped supposed vaunted quality vehicle from Toyota and was not impressed. They never even got to the electronics, having to recall it early for laughable stuff like p/s hoses not engineered for the cold. And as already pointed out, hard to see how a code update analogy applies to a physical chain. Nor did I appreciate that maybe years later they might later rev. the lower control arm that would let the road wheel move backward and forward literally 6 inches and that took 14 book hours to replace, or the half *** rear diff support that wore at a bushing routinely and then let the car role backwards the better part of a foot even with parking brake applied. If you love the update idea and tied to a ginormous screen for even more "tech" though, go down to Tesla. Of course I guess they did do the over the air s/w release to raise the ride height after a few patty melts with everyday road objects ;/ Or, as the owners are now howling about, oops they forgot to mention the upcoming AWD or that ones built before a certain date won't ever get the newer possible electronics, like say the adaptive cruise already in my 2006 A8. No amount of over the air updates are going to deal with those.

More seriously, let people play with the electronics too openly and bad things can happen. And how can you tell owner A who knows exactly what he is doing, from owner B who sticks butter knifes into toasters in other veins? And, please consider changes in specific sensors and brake set ups and calibrations may roll through all of ABS, ESP, throttle, brake, cruise and lots of other things. Do I want to buy a used car where some guy did some user patch to some code on an embedded controller somewhere, but it didn't apply to that specific set up. Run...! Oh yeah, and you basically need to fence off anything emissions related, and tampering or facilitating it can literally be a crime.

Audi actually recently came up in some car hacking reviews as one of the best designs out there, in that they had the drivetrain and security related systems very well "firewalled" off from the electronic toys type systems. Some others didn't fare well and were pretty easily hacked.

As before, sure nice concept--maybe and in some systems--but they aren't iPhones. And from a safety perspective I don't particularly want them that way either. Not without uniform control by the manufacturer. In theory, that is the Tesla idea I guess.

mishar

Engine, transmission or ABS software are hardly developed from scratches and tested on a bunch of disguised cars.They are generally upgrade of a previous generation software based on all available experience and adopted to a hardware changes. They are not covering one brand or model, although there are some specifics. Before the first in car test engineers spend thousands of hours testing software and hardware in laboratories. Software has to work flawlessly before it gets it's first chance to kill somebody.

Only good reason to upgrade, actually change, software is if the hardware is changed. For example flashing gold with blue ATF requires new software because new fluid is different.

MMI software is different. It is more complex and it has to adopt to the ever changing third party technology.

NightOwl

Ok, to keep it simple and to build on Mister Ballys post.

Let’s say we have two identical Audi A8 D3 with the same engine and with exactly the same options, but built two years in between. Essentially twins born two years apart, one in 2004 and the other in 2006. Both have the latest software for their model year, but the 2006 has newer generation software. Obviously both meet the US standards and all other countries standards as it’s implemented in a production model. So, why is it unsafe, unwanted and potentially dangerous to update the 2004 model to the same software version as the 2006 model? Forget about the fluid stuff now, in this example they are twins, and only difference is the version number on the software.

And one more thing, is it safer to play around in VCDS, than to update a genuine Audi firmware with newer genuine Audi software?

And the last thing, will all things possible with VCDS meet the FMVSS?