Playing devils advocate, if you were the CEO at John Deere and your IT division spent years and millions of R&D dollars developing the software for the "digital future of farming", would you want to give it away so that your foreign competitors can copy it and sell it dirt cheap?
The same goes for more tame software for the fuel mapping (for example) of a tractor. The software took significant time and development hours. Giving it out to customers does them very little good (who really can reprogram the computers) but opens the manufactures up to theft of intellectual property that can be reused in knock-off products.
I'm not sure why the manufacturers are fighting back with the liability thing. It' probably possible, but pretty unlikely. I just don't see a lot of demand for hot-rodding a combine or such vehicle. Nor do I think that a gaff made by a farmer re-programming his tractor will even allow it to operate.
That being said, they need to be better prepared to either provide cost effective service on demand or simple plug and play components that satisfy both the manufacture and the customer. I'm of the repair-it-yourself group. But I've never reprogrammed a vehicle computer.
[snip]
Another repair right is the right to buy parts and have work done the mechanic of your choice, or by yourself. Most car and truck makers do that (Moss-Magnusen act requires it for auto warranties. Tractors are not subject to that act).[snip]
All the diagnostic and adaptation software could be in the tractor with a easy to use interface for customers. A simple conversation with a service manager and the right parts could be waiting at the dealership with the farmer being enabled to install the parts. Right now farmers are being held at ransom by some tractor manufacturers. I have very little sympathy for equipment manufacturers. This isn't any thing but about money with very little regard for the farmer who needs to get his crop off.
It is not that simple. I agree that customers are being held hostage, but the issue is even if the farmer installs the parts, the dealer has to flash the ECU so it will recognize the new parts in some cases. And this is not limited to just JD tractors, Try automobile from all the manufactures, but also Husqvarna and Stihl products. With the new advances in lawnmowers and EFI with some of the new units now using CAN bus systems. You now have to have 2 separate diagnostics software packages, one for the engine and one for the mower. And the EFI software for the engine is not an OBD type system. Each mower engine manufacturer has their own software.
The issue with Deere and others with software is they don't want to expose the goods to the public. Do you think Tesla would be OK with unlocking the software for everyone to see? That is never going to happen without a court battle. I'm thinking this thing with Deere is being pushed by people looking for a money making opportunity selling reprogram kits that might even cause damage to the tractor. If a Deere blows up out in the field, who's reputation gets damaged, Deere or the software company that the farmer had work on the tractor?
No, this is being pushed by people buying a product and then being told it's not theirs to be worked on as they wished.
In automotive with the OBD standard readers can read error codes and provide guidance on what is going out.
As far as it being too technical for the owners and mechanics that is pure bull,
I have had code readers and scanners for years and even if I go to the dealer for warranty work after a CEL I have scanned it and have a good idea of the issues.
And to other posters , manufactures not wanting to expose the software so other manufacturers can copy it, that's also bull.
Any one with the resources to build one has the resources to clone copy and modify the software.
Leasing the parts that operate a piece of equipment is theft, if I buy it belongs to me, if I want someone other then the manufacture to work on that is my right and to make the interfaces that need to be accessed propitiatory should be criminal.