Be sure to remind all your friends with 350z's what the utec lacks when they talk about it for their car. Oh well, at least I've got something nice to dump openecu logs with.

 

LOL, exactly

 

LOL!!

 

This is bump #394 i have been waiting since dec of 2005 for some new info. By the time Turbo XS decides to give you any sort of update. We'll all be driving around in space ships while you guys are still "waiting" for a update.

Booooooooo to you Turbo XS. Your going on my poop list!

But hey BUMP again for Turbo XS response. Nathan i hope your reading this!

 

Not true, I'll gladly show up where I am invited.

So, here we are the 2nd of August 2006. Many months have past since my last post. But yet I am here on a mission to speak with you guys. TurboXS still does have a software upgrade to be released to you.

I do have a question, would you like a nice Graphical Interface that allowed you to have live tuning, auto tuning, graphs, fully functional speed density and/or maf conversion abilities or half of the feature set just to have an update with the old Hyper Terminal Interface?.

??

 

I'll take it all! I had to pull mine out for the time being, but I have it set aside to try out when you get the update out..

I'm patient.. Since alot of those features you mention in passing were similar to things I had suggested..
I just had to move onto something else for the time being.

 

Jermaine is on a mission to speak with us... wow!

So is this a trick question? GUI would obviously be wonderful, but what kind of additional software development/coding time hit would be taken if that's the way you go? And will we have speed density regardless?

Cheers,
Adam

 

I have no tricks, honestly I don't write software. But I am in a position of portrayal of the feelings of die hard UTEC fans. Software is always a rolling target, so dates "I" personally don't give them. The UTEC base features have not changed, which is why most of you purchased the UTEC in the first place. Would I be wrong in this assessment?

I do know that it would be wasted effort to release a hyper terminal version that is only half as good to just have a software release vs. releasing a quality graphical interface with the correct functionality. GUI will take slightly longer than Hyper Terminal but the benefit of Time versus functionality is where it's at for me.

Speed Density is on the list of features.

 

Live tuning

 

Your assessment is correct. I know I bought because of the ease of it, with the harassment of Jack through late night and in work boredom convo's I have picked up a large amount of knowledge.

I would love to have an AEM EMS style GUI interface as long as it is easy to use still, and we have the features mentioned above. Some more then others. I know cold start, launch control and NLTS correctly, and speed density are some of the most important ones.

Biggest would be the speed density especially when seeing quite a few threads lately of the MAF honeycomb folding up and popping off. A lot of us have gone with some very impressive setups that could become limitations.

I totally agree with you on the not just throwing out an update to be an update, BUT it was kinda crappy the way some of us felt or thought about how we were treated. It appeared as if you guys left the market and just told people yeah an update will be out just to quiet us down.

I think we are truly looking for a accurate date (which you say you don't give out dates) for the release. I mean if it is off by some weeks ok, but I mean a few hundred posts back people mentioned a release that was "accurate" and it never came out.

Nuff venting,
Tim

 

The venting is cool, I expect it. I would love to say we are releasing new software on XX/XX/XXXX Date. What I know about dead line, is that they are always moving or negotiable. In this case, moving is more suitable. As we continue to write pages of code we continue to find way to improve our system which is frankly what is taking so long. It just keeps getting better!

If I didn't think the UTEC's software upgrade wouldn't be the most bad *** thing to be released I wouldn't bother posting. If I wanted to quiet down you guys, I would just say, well we aren't offering software upgrades and we quit in the EVO market. Totally not the case!

I love the EVO, it's probably the most fun car for me to tune.

Jermaine~

 

So could we have some listings of the new enhancements or maybe screen shots of the testing.

Also, could we have just a broad time frame, the last one was horrible. But is this something we would see in the next month or next year kinda thing....

Just to help feed the apetite..

 

Make up sex is the greatest :-D

 

Well, in the mean time while you guys are making all this great new front end software, you are loosing customers left and right, many of us even called in and asked if you guys were even workingon anything only to be told no or given no estimation of delivery.

The utec was the best option at the time, but I just sold my utec, mapswitch, and dtec mapsensor on ebay for less than half what i paid for it and bought an ECU+ and tactrix cable.

What you guys need is:
1. more timely response to customers questions
2. way better logging capabilities and sample rates
3. A pretty gui

I do appreciate your response here man, but for me it was too little too late and several others as well.

 

I agree we have lost a lot of customers. If I could build a sick version of code right now if I could. TurboXS hasn't forgotten about you guys. I mean truthfully, you guys can call me and ***** me out till no end "I do understand". If I could post here every day, I don't think I would have changed customers minds to use other devices. They would only be further enraged.

As we get closer to a final spec, I will leak some screen captures and functionality listings. I think that is fair. I even hope to get some of you guys back.

You guys have a good weekend!

Thanks,

Jermaine~