You missed the biggest flaw in all those arguments: “yet”.
I’m not going to have “slippery slope” arguments today. If they do those things you’re claiming they will then, I’ll argue with you (perhaps on your side) if they do.
Because there’s nothing to discuss besides wild speculation. If they’re going to do “something” what is that “something”? Nobody knows because its a future undefined event. We CAN objectively discuss what exists today.
We know exactly what that something is. It is putting features that have been in cars for a long time (distance start or heating seats for example) behind a subscription. Some car manufacturers already tried that (BMW in 2022). There is no slippery slope here, it’s already happening.
“The first approach has been to go to specialized companies that, for a one-time fee, will unlock the software-locked features. According to Slashgear, the U.K. tuner Litchfield Motors can unlock the features for under $50. It can also unlock the ability to show content on screens while the vehicle is moving. Slightly illegal, don’t you think?”
You, the buyer, benefit because BMW lowered the price of the car expecting to get seat heating for years. The person that lives exclusively in warm climate and will never use seat heating benefits because of the lower priced car.
Doesn’t change the fact that is is already happening as per the original poster of this comment chain. It is not because you can circumvent it that it is not a trend that we see in the industry. And what about when this is no longer possible? Then what is the option?
It is a lot easier to not open the pandora box than to try to close it.
I am pretty sure that regardless of the subscription or not, it is less expensive to produce one model and lock the options and sell them, than fitting each option separately. But this is me talking out my ass.
I’m not going to have “slippery slope” arguments today. If they do those things you’re claiming they will then, I’ll argue with you (perhaps on your side) if they do.
How is that a slippery slope when we see how every other industries handled the same thing in the same way?
Because there’s nothing to discuss besides wild speculation. If they’re going to do “something” what is that “something”? Nobody knows because its a future undefined event. We CAN objectively discuss what exists today.
We know exactly what that something is. It is putting features that have been in cars for a long time (distance start or heating seats for example) behind a subscription. Some car manufacturers already tried that (BMW in 2022). There is no slippery slope here, it’s already happening.
First, thank you for giving a specific example. For this example, you can pay a third party $50 for a one-time unlock and not have a BMW subscription.
“The first approach has been to go to specialized companies that, for a one-time fee, will unlock the software-locked features. According to Slashgear, the U.K. tuner Litchfield Motors can unlock the features for under $50. It can also unlock the ability to show content on screens while the vehicle is moving. Slightly illegal, don’t you think?”
You, the buyer, benefit because BMW lowered the price of the car expecting to get seat heating for years. The person that lives exclusively in warm climate and will never use seat heating benefits because of the lower priced car.
Doesn’t change the fact that is is already happening as per the original poster of this comment chain. It is not because you can circumvent it that it is not a trend that we see in the industry. And what about when this is no longer possible? Then what is the option?
It is a lot easier to not open the pandora box than to try to close it.
I am pretty sure that regardless of the subscription or not, it is less expensive to produce one model and lock the options and sell them, than fitting each option separately. But this is me talking out my ass.