* * * OnStar iPhone application - UPDATE * * *

[nashstat]

Originally Posted by Toasty

yes, iOS4 is backwards compatible with the 3G & 3GS, but HARDWARE limitations prevent the same functionality as the iPhone 4, so it's not the same experience.

That is a fair point. However 99% of the functionality is there. Yes Facetime and a 5MP pic is not possible, but my point was that they did give you 99% of the functionality and they built/tested different builds for the different iPhone models, so that everyone could enjoy something from IOS 4.

Originally Posted by Toasty

android phones, you're still talking about the software. you're not gonna get new hardware functionality.

you say that the hardware is there in our current vehicles... it's there as far as remote unlocking, and likely locking too... but can onstar currently remotely start your car? don't ever recall seeing this as an option... and it's not neccessarily just a software limitation- it's possible, but not likely.
as to weather or not they could put together an app that would let you remotely unlock and lock the vehicle as currently designed? yeah, probably they could... but then again, would such an app that can't remote start the car really be worth it? maybe.

Another good point. So lets assume that remote starting is not possible (I have a LS3, so it does not matter), then why not at least offer the remote lock/unlock and statistics on the app? We know this is possible.

That's all I am saying, release something for the 2010 Camaro customers. They owe it to us for sticking on their side.

Originally Posted by Toasty

onstar went through a similar issue back when transitioning from analog service to digital. alot of vehicles were left behind, due to hardware limitations. it's not an ideal situation, but it is what it is. I can understand frustration with this, but to say that GM is upgrading and offering new services on new vehicles, simply to force consumers to buy new vehicles is a bit over the top, in my opinon. I am not saying that they don't think about that, but I doubt that they're sitting in a room somewhere thinking of how they can screw over current owners. It's more about attracting new owners, at this point- Offering new services that other mfg's dont have.

The analog to digital was actually a rule by the FCC. The FCC had given all cellular carriers enough time and warning to start transitioning over to digital and freeing up the analog airwaves... not GM's fault. They had to do that because Verizon was getting rid of their analog service.[/COLOR]

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by nashstat

On the same note... Apple just released IOS 4 and they made it backwards compatible to iPhone 3GS and 3G... Both of them run different hardwares.

When Google releases an upgrade, they make sure that ALL OF THEIR PHONES can work with it. You know how different Android phones are from each other!

So this is an endless argument. My point being that the hardware is there in our current vehicles. When a person can press a button and remotely unlock our cars, a mobile app can do it too. They just have to write an interface that will work with the existing hardware (Gen 8). IMO there are no "hardware limitations", thats all a marketing ploy!

Being a project manager by profession, my theory is that GM just did not decide to invest in the Gen 8 interface and went with Gen 9 only. From their perspective they could have thought that its not worth spending it in gen 8 since it will not help them sell additional cars... who knows, but we have been left in the dark and that is a FACT!

GM is not exactly the smartest company in the world, they have made stupid decisions before that have cost them big time.

Apparently GM cannot hire good programmers since they forgot to write in the code to update what octane level is being used when you switch to a higher octane for the L99 owners (this has carried over to the 2011 model year as well).. Now they are too lazy to hire someone to write new code for the 2010 and probably never will since the car is over and done with when it comes to them making a profit out of it.. This detachment from the loyal customers seems to be growing.. It is as if GM is simply selling the cars to the dealers only and then looking the other way..As long as the dealers buy the cars, that is more important than worrying about a handful of loyalists on an internet forum. Having an iphone myself, this would get me real upset if I still had my 2010..

[stet]

I still say that the decision to not support pre-2011 vehicles is a marketing decision. They are promoting this as "new for 2011", not to upset those of use who bought a 2010 Camaro but to entice those who are in the market for a new vehicle this year to buy one of the many vehicles that will have this feature.

As others have already pointed out, the functionality that we've seen so far from this app is already possible with our current vehicles. There really is no technical reason why it can't work.

Also, why ignore Blackberry? There are more Blackberrys in use than either iPhones or Androids and more were sold during the first 6 months of this year than either according to recently released sales figures. It is the still most popular smart phone platform.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by stet

I still say that the decision to not support pre-2011 vehicles is a marketing decision. They are promoting this as "new for 2011", not to upset those of use who bought a 2010 Camaro but to entice those who are in the market for a new vehicle this year to buy one of the many vehicles that will have this feature.

As others have already pointed out, the functionality that we've seen so far from this app is already possible with our current vehicles. There really is no technical reason why it can't work.

Also, why ignore Blackberry? There are more Blackberrys in use than either iPhones or Androids and more were sold during the first 6 months of this year than either according to recently released sales figures. It is the still most popular smart phone platform.

A very dumb marketing decision if it is that..However that would require planning and deciding on not supporting the 2010 system anymore for future software upgrades.... Furthermore it begins to look more like they simply do not want to pay their programmers to work on the older car now that they are done with the 2010 model year and will no longer make a profit on it.. Either way it is not good business practice to get your early adopters upset.. Not including the HUD because it wasn't ready is understandable so using that as marketing improvements is perfectly fine, however this is completely different. This is basically having someone write a code to work for the older platform.. It is the same as all those printer companies not supporting a 1 year old printer with new drivers for the updated version of windows.. That happens all the time and is a big screw you to those who bought those expensive printers.

[Blade]

The functionality is there because we can call OnStar and get 99% of this done. The remote start from our Key Fob, is done through software too. Upgrading the OnStar firmware to work with this software should not be a big deal.

The argument is that OnStar/GM would not have held this information when selling the 2010 models is pathetically naive. Developing a software like this can take well over a year, and by the time Spring 2010 rolled around, SAT testing should have already started, so that means the app was already written.

My point is that GM had to know they were going to produce this software almost by the time they released info on the 2011 models having HUD.

I bought my car in the spring time, so I am a little ticked that I won't be able to make use of this app. Will I live w/o it? Ofcourse, but in the tech world, innovation and adaptability work hand in hand. Otherwise IBM and Apple would have never become successful again. Their inability to adapt in the late 80s early 90s is what killed them, before making their comeback.

Do I blame GM entirely for this? No, I am laying the blame at OnStar and hold GM irresponsible for poor oversight of a simple software development project.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by Blade

The functionality is there because we can call OnStar and get 99% of this done. The remote start from our Key Fob, is done through software too. Upgrading the OnStar firmware to work with this software should not be a big deal.

The argument is that OnStar/GM would not have held this information when selling the 2010 models is pathetically naive. Developing a software like this can take well over a year, and by the time Spring 2010 rolled around, SAT testing should have already started, so that means the app was already written.

My point is that GM had to know they were going to produce this software almost by the time they released info on the 2011 models having HUD.

I bought my car in the spring time, so I am a little ticked that I won't be able to make use of this app. Will I live w/o it? Ofcourse, but in the tech world, innovation and adaptability work hand in hand. Otherwise IBM and Apple would have never become successful again. Their inability to adapt in the late 80s early 90s is what killed them, before making their comeback.

Do I blame GM entirely for this? No, I am laying the blame at OnStar and hold GM irresponsible for poor oversight of a simple software development project.

The blame falls on both sides of the court here.

[justincase_2008]

Originally Posted by nashstat

On the same note... Apple just released IOS 4 and they made it backwards compatible to iPhone 3GS and 3G... Both of them run different hardwares.

When Google releases an upgrade, they make sure that ALL OF THEIR PHONES can work with it. You know how different Android phones are from each other!

So this is an endless argument. My point being that the hardware is there in our current vehicles. When a person can press a button and remotely unlock our cars, a mobile app can do it too. They just have to write an interface that will work with the existing hardware (Gen 8). IMO there are no "hardware limitations", thats all a marketing ploy!

Being a project manager by profession, my theory is that GM just did not decide to invest in the Gen 8 interface and went with Gen 9 only. From their perspective they could have thought that its not worth spending it in gen 8 since it will not help them sell additional cars... who knows, but we have been left in the dark and that is a FACT!

GM is not exactly the smartest company in the world, they have made stupid decisions before that have cost them big time.

Ok bolded that out for a reason. You're way wrong on that one buddy. The Droid os is modded per phone. Say a Droid Eris doesn't have all the features the Droid Moto or Droid X does. Example Live wallpapers and small other things really nothing stopping me from dropping my eris and upgrading.. Droid has several different OS versions for the different brands. As a whole yes it works for all but some things are left out of the others. But as many have said why is it i can call onstar and ask them to do the same things this app can do and it work but the app wont? And as i said its a samll thing my 2010 cant do but you know what a 2011 cant clam to be what the 2010 was. A trusted outstanding car that needed no gimmicks to sell. Yeah im a little upset i cant remote start my car since its a 1SS but i can live with that god knows i already did for 9 months.

[scritchy]

Has anybody called OnStar and asked them to lock your doors for you?

[Rogue Leader]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

I paid good money for my auto manufacturer and I am a very stern boss.

When I see my employees doing a shoddy job and/or disappointing customers, I put my foot down. When I find out which one of my lazy programmers didn't support previous model years there's going to be hell to pay.

As co-owner, I hope you will not be one of those "pushover" bosses...

I just wish we could get a technical answer other than "...... generation 9 hardware...." as to why it doesn't work. Then at least someone like you who has experience in the field can say "ohh yeah I guess so" or "hire me because I could fix that shit".

[justincase_2008]

Originally Posted by Rogue Leader

I just wish we could get a technical answer other than "...... generation 9 hardware...." as to why it doesn't work. Then at least someone like you who has experience in the field can say "ohh yeah I guess so" or "hire me because I could fix that shit".

Yeah that would help out a lot knowing what some of use know about these things leaves us thinking bs.

[lock]

Let it die people. Guess what, in 2012 the cars will have some new features that 2011 owners wish they could get. Its called imrpoving the cars each year to make them more appealing. Its not an option for 2010 yet you guys act like GM should continue to reverse engineer everything to older models. That is bad business.

[PoorMansCamaro]

I just don't get it. Why are people so upset? JUST GET THE VIPER ALARM WITH THIS FEATURE!

[Blade]

Originally Posted by lock

Let it die people. Guess what, in 2012 the cars will have some new features that 2011 owners wish they could get. Its called imrpoving the cars each year to make them more appealing. Its not an option for 2010 yet you guys act like GM should continue to reverse engineer everything to older models. That is bad business.

I disagree.........writing code isn't that cumbersome or a costly process as redesigning a car or building a 5.5 liter V8. I am sure the 2012 will have options that 2011 owner will desire, but saying that you can't re-work code is plain laziness and ignorance.

In that case, Windows 7 computers should never be able to talk to Windows XP computers. The whole point of having software is to make everything compatible with none to minimal hardware changes. Otherwise we should all just go back to using our old 486s.

Like I said earlier, software engineering can be done correctly with good project management, GM failed at that and decent coders and vision which OnStar failed to provide.

I code for a living and for GM/OnStar to tell me that this is a hardware issue is plain lunacy.

Come to think of it, I should just write GM and ask for the code and I will make it work with the 2010 cars.

[Blade]

Originally Posted by PoorMansCamaro

I just don't get it. Why are people so upset? JUST GET THE VIPER ALARM WITH THIS FEATURE!

Then what the hell is the point of an OnStar box in my car?