* * * OnStar iPhone application - UPDATE * * *

[bigsquirrel]

Wow you guys are still arguing...... now I know how to get thousands of posts

[Toasty]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

Negative, my good sir. Go back and look at everything I have said in this topic.

OK, I did.

I have said since day one that there MAY be some features that the new hardware interfaced with that were not on our Camaros BUT every feature that we currently have NOW would be available without any new hardware.

You didn't make this revelation until page 4. prior to that, you merely stated that they were too stupid or lazy to write a program for the 2010's not sigling out the current vs new features.

This means IF I can do it by:

a) Calling the OnStar advisor on a phone and asking them to perform.
b) Receiving in the monthly OnStar Vehicle Report.
c) Pressing the blue button on the mirror and requesting.

...then it will not need new hardware AND should be TRIVIAL to give us the features we already have using the hardware we have.

Not necessarily. Perhaps it's some form of different encrypted communications protocol that isnt supported by the current hardware... that might not be able to be fixed with a firmware upgrade.

I have said THIS much from day one.

If you have, you haven't stated it well, if at all, like I said, you didn't state as such until page 4 of the thread after some of us called you on it.

You seem to think that I'm complaining because they don't offer the entire suite of functions and I expect them to have all the same features. This is where you are wrong. I object to them stating unequivocably that the Gen 9 hardware is REQUIRED for ANY smartphone access. I have said since this first came up that there's no reason for them to say that you NEED Gen 9 hardware to use a smartphone app. They could make a smartphone app for the features we already have. They just refuse to do it and claim they cannot because of hardware. I object to this explanation.

Let me make this clear... I don't care if they leave out some capability the hardware lacks from the app. I care that they insist that the hardware can't do ANYTHING and that no app is available for any 2010 owner.

Furthermore, the excuse that this is impossible because of the hardware we have is indicative of the plan to NEVER offer an app for us. If they just were sitting around trying to decide which 2010 models to support they would have said "We are working on ways to make other cars work with the app." not "Sorry. Your hardware is not compatible. Please look at our fabulous 2011 models."

This is about the most coherent statement you have had in this thread. Had you started out explaining what you meant in the first place, we wouldn't be at this point in the thread.

I'm only insisting because they did screw us. I only insist on factual statements.

I didn't say that you don't feel screwed. What I said was that in my opinion, GM and OnStar were not out to screw you. Meaning that you feeling screwed was not their intention.


you can not please 100% of the people 100% of the time.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Have some of you thought that maybe there IS a hardware limitation?
This isn't even available on all 2011s. And depending on how the technology progresses, I won't be surprised if they need a new app every new iteration of this thing.

I'm really shocked at the attitude in here...it's so irrational. Is anybody REALLY surprised that something new came out after they bought their vehicle? And to accuse them of screwing their customers by not being able to make the system work on every car ever made...geeze...

you can not please 100% of the people 100% of the time.

Isn't that the God's honest truth.

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by scritchy

Do you even know what a channel is? You claim I don't work with these systems but you make statements that are beyond ignorant like this? Channels are not related to memory, at all.

Careful who and what you call "beyond ignorant". For someone who knows so much about memory and channels you apparently have never heard about "Dual Channel RAM" or "DMA Channels". Look it up.

They are a physical connection that a box can connect to a system, similar to the way RC transmitters/receivers work in a RC plane. No amount of firmware upgrades are going to fix a physical limitation.

The Verizon Wireless Module is a digital system. It is not restricted in the outmoded ways of analog systems. Just as my PC can connect to thousands of other computers through a single twisted pair connection, the digital module in the car can have an enormous number of "virtual" connections to other devices and computers. The limit to the number of connections is determined by the amount of memory and the speed of the processor. One more connection is not going to bring down the system.

To think that they would intentionally hold back something as benign as a smart phone app to spur sales of a newer model of car is ridiculous. I'm pretty sure a few people nerd raging on the forums about the injustice of it all isn't part of their business plan to force people to upgrade to a 2011 model from 2010.

It probably costs a bunch of money to get the app certified and meet all the draconian safety and emissions and green energy regulations that cars need to meet these days. The testing of the app to make sure that you cannot remote start it for longer than 2 minutes (polluting) or making sure nobody gets killed by a car starting accidentally (safety) or a hacker opening the doors and stealing your laptop (liability) is probably expensive. They'd rather spend that money on political campaigns and lobby groups than provide the support to 2010 owners.

One day we will know the truth. I will definitely have this topic bookmarked so I can say "I told you so."

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by bigsquirrel

Wow you guys are still arguing...... now I know how to get thousands of posts

It's not arguing. It's "A Teachable Moment".

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

It's not arguing. It's "A Teachable Moment".

Believe me, my friend -- I know a teachable moment. This is arguing with a pinch of education.

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by Toasty

OK, I did.
You didn't make this revelation until page 4. prior to that, you merely stated that they were too stupid or lazy to write a program for the 2010's not sigling out the current vs new features.

There was a previous topic devoted to this subject a couple weeks ago. My first post since it was revealed that they were claiming "Requires Gen 9 hardware" states exactly what I just said I stated:

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showpo...&postcount=158

Not necessarily. Perhaps it's some form of different encrypted communications protocol that isnt supported by the current hardware... that might not be able to be fixed with a firmware upgrade.

If the OnStar Advisors can tell the car to do "X" then it's already capable of doing "X" remotely.

If you have, you haven't stated it well, if at all, like I said, you didn't state as such until page 4 of the thread after some of us called you on it.

I did not realize you were thinking this thread was the entirety of the discussion. The title says "Update" which says this is a new thread with updated info.

This is about the most coherent statement you have had in this thread. Had you started out explaining what you meant in the first place, we wouldn't be at this point in the thread.

I'm not going to call you names. That's not helpful.

[Rogue Leader]

I give up... just not worth talking to a wall.... a wall that contradicts itself and believes the other walls are out to knock it over

[Memphis SS]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

There was a previous topic devoted to this subject a couple weeks ago. My first post since it was revealed that they were claiming "Requires Gen 9 hardware" states exactly what I just said I stated:

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showpo...&postcount=158

Somehow I don't think I need a facebook site to tell me anything about this subject.

Currently, OnStar has the ability to read my car's oil life and tire pressure and unlock the doors. Otherwise they would not be able to send me those nifty "Diagnostic Repoorts" in my email every month or unlock my car if I call them up. The ability to control the car has been built into OnStar for years. There is NO need to "upgrade" the car because it already does this stuff.

This "app" merely contacts the OnStar service and allows the smartphone to digitally tell the service to send the signals to the already capable car to do these things that it already can do.

This is not black magic or anything... the car doesn't need special hardware upgrades to do what OnStar has done for years.

My comments are as in-line as physically possible. I design embedded systems a lot more complex than OnStar for a living and even if I didn't I wouldn't be so gullible to believe a facebook page trumps common sense... and common sense tells me that if OnStar already controls my car when I call them with a voice line, then there's NO EARTHLY REASON for them to not be able to do the same thing using a digital message from a smartphone.

The only thing that might come into play is if they added new capabilities to the OnStar vehicle control that previously were not used, like the ability to control the windows or something. But that's 99.999% likely just a software upgrade to the car.

In conclusion, there's no way that this app cannot be used with a 2010 Camaro.

Yep... You did and I replied with the following.

I know hardware does have its limitations. I work for a company that we design Homeland Security, Military, and Law Enforcement surveillance equipment. I’m currently a US Patent holder on two wireless communication products, one of them uses GSM and mesh radio options. While developing these products we looked at several different types of GSM and mesh hardware units to integrate into the final version based off what functions the device had. During the course of development we found companies continued to update their GSM modules which allowed us to add features to our final product. Sometimes adding these new features required only firmware updates and sometimes it required hardware replacement.

In saying that I know this has nothing to do with OnStar but it comes back to my original statement each model year GM going to update their cars and sometimes there are limitations that prevent previous years from getting the option. Can GM and OnStar add this to the GEN8? Maybe. It could be that the 2010 owners have to buy a replacement module to add the feature. Right now this product App is not even out for the 2011. I still don’t agree with flaming OnStar because a year older model doesn’t have a year newer feature. I see no reason not to let them know you’re disappointed and would like to see a upgrade but your comments are going overboard IMHO.

Originally Posted by Rogue Leader

I give up... just not worth talking to a wall.... a wall that contradicts itself and believes the other walls are out

Originally Posted by Rogue Leader

to knock it over

Rogue Leader.. I agree with your comments..

I would love to see this app come out for everyone. I just don't agree with people making statements that "It can work, I know for sure" when they are not employed by OnStar and working directly on the project. Maybe at some point someone within OnStar can give us some info to the limitations as to why it's not on the 2010.

[383ss]

what a bunch of WHINERS!!! how many of you are actually hardware or software engineers? seems to be a lot of experts in here who can do it better than GM

grow up and live with it.

[jokerswild]

I'm only insisting because they did screw us. I only insist on factual statements.

Unless you bought your car on the premise that this feature was going to be available to you in the near future, neither GM or OnStar owe anyone anything. This is a FREE feature upgrade. You may feel left out, but that doesn't mean they owe you anything. That's like saying Toyota owes me new brakes because my 2003 Tacoma had rear disc brakes and they upgraded it in 2005.

[PoorMansCamaro]

Originally Posted by Rogue Leader

Thanks that was a useless response.

So it's in line with the rest of the responses in this thread?

[Camaro8810]

Originally Posted by 383ss

what a bunch of WHINERS!!! how many of you are actually hardware or software engineers? seems to be a lot of experts in here who can do it better than GM

grow up and live with it.

AMEN!

[Toasty]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

I'm not going to call you names. That's not helpful.

I'm not sure why you would be calling ME names, but All I was saying there was that if you had explained what you did in that paragraph at the beginning of the thread, we wouldn't be arguing the point... as much.