August sales and Octopus Intelligent lobbying!

[PristDean]

The conspiracy theorist in me thinks it could be because SAIC is state owned

Thinking about that, it's a good shout. Part of the connectivity setup will very likely involve an NDA along with business disclosure of other factors. So, Octopus connecting directly to MG cars has a high probability of being a non-starter. Much more hope of charging unit companies coming onboard such as Hypervolt if the technical scrutiny etc is easy to overcome. Individuals lobbying SAIC or MG directly is pointless and would duplicate what Octopus are doing already.

 

[WonkoTheSaneUK]

Thinking about that, it's a good shout. Part of the connectivity setup will very likely involve an NDA along with business disclosure of other factors. So, Octopus connecting directly to MG cars has a high probability of being a non-starter. Much more hope of charging unit companies coming onboard such as Hypervolt if the technical scrutiny etc is easy to overcome. Individuals lobbying SAIC or MG directly is pointless and would duplicate what Octopus are doing already.

I would've thought the Hypervolt would be easy, as it's brain is a Raspberry Pi Compute Module (an industrial version of the standard Pi).

 

[johnb80]

I would've thought the Hypervolt would be easy, as it's brain is a Raspberry Pi Compute Module (an industrial version of the standard Pi).

All wallboxes have relatively simple computers of some description, when I made my unit I used an Arduino as the intelligence, I also did an old school Z80 based wallbox just for the hell of it. Very little is needed in terms of computing power, the ability to generate a 1 kHz square wave with a variable duty ratio and some simple (read not so accurate) analogue voltage measurements.
The issue that Octopus will have is communication with some of the wallboxes, not all are connected to the internet.

 

[PristDean]

I would've thought the Hypervolt would be easy, as it's brain is a Raspberry Pi Compute Module (an industrial version of the standard Pi).

Yep, should be very simple, however will need both Octopus & Hypervolt to agree NDA and IT security agreements along with other business criterion between the two companies.

 

[tsedge]

Yep, should be very simple, however will need both Octopus & Hypervolt to agree NDA and IT security agreements along with other business criterion between the two companies.

Yes, there is much more than just commodity hardware involved.

 

[sinhaEVnoob]

I’ve posted in another thread that I have got Octopus Intelligent activated on my WallBox Pulsar Plus and MG ZS LR SE.

It was quite easy to do. Although it is described as a Beta.

Is this thread a specific problem for the MG4 getting on Octopus?

 

[PristDean]

I’ve posted in another thread that I have got Octopus Intelligent activated on my WallBox Pulsar Plus and MG ZS LR SE.

It was quite easy to do. Although it is described as a Beta.

Is this thread a specific problem for the MG4 getting on Octopus?

Yes, getting an MG car directly connected to Octopus will be a big challenge I suspect. However having other wall chargers connected will be less of a challenge.

 

[ldtfllj]

But it's not down to Octopus and just how much weight do you think it would carry with SAIC? Surely customers of SAIC have far more pressure to bear on SAIC, potentially voting with their feet when new car time arrives, one of the 'features' buyers demand. SAIC have obviously considered market forces and included apple carplay etc, this would be no different and effectively costs them nothing.

The discussion on which route to take re lobbying either manufacture or the energy supplier is a little odd, why not lobby both it will hardly take any effort, both sides of this augment have valid points.

 

[johnb80]

The discussion on which route to take re lobbying either manufacture or the energy supplier is a little odd, why not lobby both it will hardly take any effort, both sides of this augment have valid points.

My take is just that if loads of people contact Octopus re MG linking to Intelligent, they already have a huge workload developing links to co operating car manufacturers and wallbox makers, they may just get fed up with all of the MG owners and cross them off the list. That's why I suggested that we collate a joint lobby on here, present one email to Octopus with hundreds of names on all requesting SAIC open the API. Minimal work for Octopus, here is the epicentre of MGUK and we could also contact SAIC directly.

 

[ldtfllj]

My take is just that if loads of people contact Octopus re MG linking to Intelligent, they already have a huge workload developing links to co operating car manufacturers and wallbox makers, they may just get fed up with all of the MG owners and cross them off the list. That's why I suggested that we collate a joint lobby on here, present one email to Octopus with hundreds of names on all requesting SAIC open the API. Minimal work for Octopus, here is the epicentre of MGUK and we could also contact SAIC directly.

I don't disagree with your approach, I would definitely add my voice to this, and hope the same data could be given to SAIC which may provoc a positive response, if you don't try .....
The other party in this is the home charger manufacturers, if SAIC are stubborn, we should perhaps try three pronged approach.
I'm with Pod point, Intelligent Octopus worked very well with the current car. But not so much with the new one when it arrives.
These manufacturers must see that this the way the industry is going and if they don't get on board they will loose market share.

 

[Barbette]

An issue that any manufacturer has when they publish an API is that they must then maintain it and support it, ensuring backwards compatibility when new versions of the API are released etc. This creates an overhead in terms of support costs and can also restrict enhancements opportunities. This may be the reason behind SAICs refusal so far to release the API, or it could be their corporate arrogance or it could even be that the API is sufficiently to be published.

 

[johnb80]

An issue that any manufacturer has when they publish an API is that they must then maintain it and support it, ensuring backwards compatibility when new versions of the API are released etc. This creates an overhead in terms of support costs and can also restrict enhancements opportunities. This may be the reason behind SAICs refusal so far to release the API, or it could be their corporate arrogance or it could even be that the API is sufficiently to be published.

Agreed but usually API's will have core data thats needed eg SOC, Local Time, Location, charge mode, plugged in which would always be accessed in the same way, additional features that may be added such as service data, updates etc can be in 2nd level lower priority data.