Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [RoboMower] User Upgradable Software (maybe even OSS)?

Expand Messages
  • Austin Morgan
    While I am not in agreement with Stuart about the conspiracy, I do have to say there is evidence on his side. First the upgrade cost has gone down over time,
    Message 1 of 2 , Aug 4 10:33 AM
      While I am not in agreement with Stuart about the conspiracy, I do have to say
      there is evidence on his side. First the upgrade cost has gone down over
      time, considerably. When I upgraded my RL500B to the 3.2 software it was
      actually cheaper for me to purchase an mower that had hardware issues and
      remove the chip than what I was quoted to have it handled by a dealer. (Dealer
      claimed I need a new MB, and some other stuff it would cost more than the
      mower at the time).

      The RL-500 actually have a port that was designed to allow for uploading
      programming onto the unit. It was decided later that this would be removed
      and has not been seen since. On top of that I was told over and over again
      that the port could not be used for that, but have received info from a very,
      very reliable source that is what it was originally designed for.

      So, while I don't believe that the dealers are making much off upgrading the
      software, I think most people end up upgrading more than just software when
      they send it in (wheels, motors, all the stuff that is better now) due to the
      fact after shipping, purchasing the software etc it isn't that much more to
      get one more part that is better and will make it run longer...

      Austin Morgan

      Dan Barclay (Dan@...) wrote:
      >
      > > There are a zillion excuses, but I think the bottom line is that they view
      > > it as a money maker for dealers.
      >
      > You've proposed this conspiracy several times, but you still haven't
      > explained how you think dealers are making money on it. Please explain.
      > Have you priced an update? If not, you need to do that.
      >
      > Then figure out:
      > 1. What is the value of the update (why are you doing it in the first
      > place)?
      > 2. What is the cost to the dealer for the update (labor, materials,
      > equipment he has to have).
      > 3. What is left over?
      >
      > If that "left over" part is anywhere near "lucrative" then I'd agree with
      > you. Since the initial *total* price isn't anywhere near lucrative I still
      > don't "get it" so you need to explain.
      >
      > Sorry, but if you insist on going for the conspiracy theory then you'll need
      > to back up the claim.
      >
      > As for "excuses" they don't need any excuses to run the business the way
      > they want to run it. If you want a mower to tinker with, this ain't it.
      >
      > Dan
      >
      >
      >
      > > -----Original Message-----
      > > From: RoboMower@yahoogroups.com [mailto:RoboMower@yahoogroups.com] On
      > > Behalf Of stuarth44@...
      > > Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 11:59 AM
      > > To: RoboMower@yahoogroups.com
      > > Subject: Re: [RoboMower] User Upgradable Software (maybe even OSS)?
      > >
      > >
      > > They could still have controls in place to prevent unauthorized tinkering
      > > with the software and allow upgrades to occur. Having to replace a chip
      > > to
      > > upgrade the firmware is an antiquated idea. Robomowers are based on
      > > modern
      > > technology, it makes no sense to have to replace a chip! That's how
      > > things were
      > > done a decade ago.
      > >
      > > There are a zillion excuses, but I think the bottom line is that they view
      > > it as a money maker for dealers.
      > >
      > > Stuart
      > >
      > > In a message dated 8/4/2006 12:52:41 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
      > > Dan@... writes:
      > >
      > > These are designed to be commercial "off the shelf" robot mowers. They're
      > > not designed as hobby toys. In order to run that kind of business you
      > > need
      > > to know what software the mowers are using. If you don't control that
      > > then
      > > you have no baseline for real problems or behavior of the mower. Two
      > > years
      > > out Joe could be running a modified mower from Jim without even knowing
      > > Jim
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      >
    • Dan Barclay
      I can t speak about the RL500 s but my bet is that they were trying to keep the Woot mess from killing their income for a while. Keeping upgrade costs high,
      Message 2 of 2 , Aug 4 11:03 AM
        I can't speak about the RL500's but my bet is that they were trying to keep
        the Woot mess from killing their income for a while. Keeping upgrade costs
        high, to get a current mower equivalent, would have been a strategy I'd have
        looked at for sure. It wouldn't be to make the dealers money per-se, but to
        get control of the market back. That is, if you wanted the "current" mower
        you'd just as soon buy a new mower as try to upgrade a cheep woot. That's
        for marketing, not dealer income.

        I think some of the 500 upgrades required board and/or controller changes if
        I'm not mistaken, and you won't be downloading that anyway.

        As for sending it in for pure software upgrade, there is no need. It takes
        about 5 minutes (tops) to pull a mowing motor, reach in and change the chip.
        The upgrade I just purchased for the RL1000 is a whopping $45.00. It's $69
        if you send it in.

        Dan



        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: RoboMower@yahoogroups.com [mailto:RoboMower@yahoogroups.com] On
        > Behalf Of Austin Morgan
        > Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 12:34 PM
        > To: RoboMower@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: RE: [RoboMower] User Upgradable Software (maybe even OSS)?
        >
        > While I am not in agreement with Stuart about the conspiracy, I do have to
        > say
        > there is evidence on his side. First the upgrade cost has gone down over
        > time, considerably. When I upgraded my RL500B to the 3.2 software it was
        > actually cheaper for me to purchase an mower that had hardware issues and
        > remove the chip than what I was quoted to have it handled by a dealer.
        > (Dealer
        > claimed I need a new MB, and some other stuff it would cost more than the
        > mower at the time).
        >
        > The RL-500 actually have a port that was designed to allow for uploading
        > programming onto the unit. It was decided later that this would be
        > removed
        > and has not been seen since. On top of that I was told over and over
        > again
        > that the port could not be used for that, but have received info from a
        > very,
        > very reliable source that is what it was originally designed for.
        >
        > So, while I don't believe that the dealers are making much off upgrading
        > the
        > software, I think most people end up upgrading more than just software
        > when
        > they send it in (wheels, motors, all the stuff that is better now) due to
        > the
        > fact after shipping, purchasing the software etc it isn't that much more
        > to
        > get one more part that is better and will make it run longer...
        >
        > Austin Morgan
        >
        > Dan Barclay (Dan@...) wrote:
        > >
        > > > There are a zillion excuses, but I think the bottom line is that they
        > view
        > > > it as a money maker for dealers.
        > >
        > > You've proposed this conspiracy several times, but you still haven't
        > > explained how you think dealers are making money on it. Please explain.
        > > Have you priced an update? If not, you need to do that.
        > >
        > > Then figure out:
        > > 1. What is the value of the update (why are you doing it in the
        > first
        > > place)?
        > > 2. What is the cost to the dealer for the update (labor,
        > materials,
        > > equipment he has to have).
        > > 3. What is left over?
        > >
        > > If that "left over" part is anywhere near "lucrative" then I'd agree
        > with
        > > you. Since the initial *total* price isn't anywhere near lucrative I
        > still
        > > don't "get it" so you need to explain.
        > >
        > > Sorry, but if you insist on going for the conspiracy theory then you'll
        > need
        > > to back up the claim.
        > >
        > > As for "excuses" they don't need any excuses to run the business the way
        > > they want to run it. If you want a mower to tinker with, this ain't
        > it.
        > >
        > > Dan
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > > -----Original Message-----
        > > > From: RoboMower@yahoogroups.com [mailto:RoboMower@yahoogroups.com] On
        > > > Behalf Of stuarth44@...
        > > > Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 11:59 AM
        > > > To: RoboMower@yahoogroups.com
        > > > Subject: Re: [RoboMower] User Upgradable Software (maybe even OSS)?
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > They could still have controls in place to prevent unauthorized
        > tinkering
        > > > with the software and allow upgrades to occur. Having to replace a
        > chip
        > > > to
        > > > upgrade the firmware is an antiquated idea. Robomowers are based on
        > > > modern
        > > > technology, it makes no sense to have to replace a chip! That's how
        > > > things were
        > > > done a decade ago.
        > > >
        > > > There are a zillion excuses, but I think the bottom line is that they
        > view
        > > > it as a money maker for dealers.
        > > >
        > > > Stuart
        > > >
        > > > In a message dated 8/4/2006 12:52:41 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
        > > > Dan@... writes:
        > > >
        > > > These are designed to be commercial "off the shelf" robot mowers.
        > They're
        > > > not designed as hobby toys. In order to run that kind of business you
        > > > need
        > > > to know what software the mowers are using. If you don't control that
        > > > then
        > > > you have no baseline for real problems or behavior of the mower. Two
        > > > years
        > > > out Joe could be running a modified mower from Jim without even
        > knowing
        > > > Jim
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.