May it never be!!!! Lets hope that Toyotas quality doesn't stoop to the same level as GM where they feel the need to put a 3rd party recovery system into their vehicles so people can call for help when they are stranded. ONSTAR is available in most GM vehicles for a good reason, they are unreliable pieces of Chrysler. Cadillac being the most unreliable and most troubled GM vehicle on the road. 82/100 Cadillacs do have to be garaged for various TSB/recalls. GM's answer is not to fix the quality control problem but offer a fee for service option that makes the ignorant buyer feel more comfortable in a piece of crap. my 2 cents worth
Or a less biased reason....
- someone gets a flat
- runs out of gas
- is in an accident
- needs directions.
none of which have to do with build quality.
Yep. And also, I am a hearing impaired driver.. those systems definitely will save me. I can't always have someone with me with a cell phone to watch over every bit of kilometer or mile I drive on those highway/freeways. Would be good to just press that button and bygone with it
Or a less biased reason....
- someone gets a flat
- runs out of gas
- is in an accident
- needs directions.
none of which have to do with build quality.
while these may be some of the occurances that people use onstar for, 3/4 of the drivers out there with onstar do not subscribe. So, if they don't pay, the only thing it is good for is emergency service. so whats the point? i believe the only reason GM put it in their cars/trucks is to make the buyer feel more comfortable about breaking down in the middle of tim-buk-too. Breaking down is probably less rare than most people would admit. Just look at their TSBS. b
Toyota already uses Onstar,it's called Lexus Link. Acura's system is also Onstar. I read somewhere that they're actually making a profit now after other manufacturers started using their service.
__________________ Try SEARCHING before posting. Thanks!
onstar is fun but unneccessary, unless of course you drive a GM vehicle. heh. ever heard their radio commericals? i'd like to hear an "actual call" from someone who broke down.
Do you guys bother to ever read my post, then you guys will have a understanding why I would like to have something like this service!
Toyota already uses Onstar,it's called Lexus Link. Acura's system is also Onstar. I read somewhere that they're actually making a profit now after other manufacturers started using their service.
Yep. When I bought my Tundra in May of this year they attempted to sell me Onstar. It was some kind of deal like buy the unit and pay for the first year and we will throw in the second year for free. I didn't bite.
__________________
2003 Tundra SR5 Access Cab - Phantom Perl Gray, 4WD TRD
LSD, Tow Package, Front Skidplate, Auto Dim Compass/Temp Review Mirror, Factory Tonneau Cover, PPD Billet TB Cover , GFX Chrome Nerf Bars
Stone Mountain Racing Headers, Modified Stock Y Pipe, Custom Exhaust Pipes, Flowmaster Delta 50 Series, Polished Stainless Tips
Blaupunkt San Jose Head, Delphi XM Satellite Radio, Kenwood KFC-1779ie (Front), Rockford Fosgate FRC 3206 (Rear), Terk XM11 Antenna
I would love to hear an actual call from someone who broke down also. I know a person that has an 03 cadillac CTS, with less than 100 miles on it, the key was supposibly mistreated and the car wouldn't start. onstar was useless. they had to take it back to the dealer to reset the key. Now comon, when you make a car so sophisicated that the key, if droped or smudged, it locks out the whole car then you need to re-evaluate the level of quality you need to provide. People are going to smudge and drop their keys. make something that works for most people, not just the OCD people. comon. GM and Ford both suck big time. The lexus link is more for navigation and not broke down service. and besides that, why do deaf people need to be driving. if you can't hear horns and squeeling tires etc, that is a safety hazard. maybe you do need onstar although you wouldn't be able to hear it anyways so whats the point??
Quote:
Originally Posted by hovisimo
onstar is fun but unneccessary, unless of course you drive a GM vehicle. heh. ever heard their radio commericals? i'd like to hear an "actual call" from someone who broke down.
The lexus link is more for navigation and not broke down service. and besides that, why do deaf people need to be driving. if you can't hear horns and squeeling tires etc, that is a safety hazard. maybe you do need onstar although you wouldn't be able to hear it anyways so whats the point??
Read up on Lexus Link. http://www.lexus.com/lexuslink/ They are pushing road assistance first and navigation second. You pay more for navigation and then it means speaking with a real person.
As far as your comments on deaf people not driving. I find that insulting. As a disabled person I take offense to that. Why don't you grow up. I have had enough first hand experience with discrimination against disabled people without having to be subjected to it here.
__________________
2003 Tundra SR5 Access Cab - Phantom Perl Gray, 4WD TRD
LSD, Tow Package, Front Skidplate, Auto Dim Compass/Temp Review Mirror, Factory Tonneau Cover, PPD Billet TB Cover , GFX Chrome Nerf Bars
Stone Mountain Racing Headers, Modified Stock Y Pipe, Custom Exhaust Pipes, Flowmaster Delta 50 Series, Polished Stainless Tips
Blaupunkt San Jose Head, Delphi XM Satellite Radio, Kenwood KFC-1779ie (Front), Rockford Fosgate FRC 3206 (Rear), Terk XM11 Antenna
calm down, people. this is one of the most polite forums on the net, no need to gomer it by insulting each other.
anyway, there are other pros and cons to the onstar system not listed below. do any of you know the technology used with the onstar system, is it a cell link or a satellite link? can it be remotely enabled?
Read up on Lexus Link. http://www.lexus.com/lexuslink/ They are pushing road assistance first and navigation second. You pay more for navigation and then it means speaking with a real person.
As far as your comments on deaf people not driving. I find that insulting. As a disabled person I take offense to that. Why don't you grow up. I have had enough first hand experience with discrimination against disabled people without having to be subjected to it here.
I am not intending to discriminate against anyone regardless of race or handicap. I'm sure if I live long enough my hearing will decrease. however, common sense should prevail in most situations. I think you would agree that if you are DEAF that you are lacking a critical sense that is needed to drive safely for yourself and others. Onstar can't help a DEAF person, you wouldn't be able to hear it or read lips. I do not think blind people should drive, but then again, that is the most critical sense needed to drive. Here in oklahoma, i know some people have to pass a hearing test to get their license renewed, so I am not the only one that feels this away. If I were DEAF, then I would not be driving. Hearing impaired is different because you can hear somewhat. we are talking about DEAF.
Thanks Deepstealth, I apoligize if I offended anyone by my comments, I am not discriminate. I love all people regardless of race or handicap.
I think it is a satellite link because it is supposed to work anywhere. Cell phones cant do that yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeepStealth
calm down, people. this is one of the most polite forums on the net, no need to gomer it by insulting each other.
anyway, there are other pros and cons to the onstar system not listed below. do any of you know the technology used with the onstar system, is it a cell link or a satellite link? can it be remotely enabled?
and besides that, why do deaf people need to be driving. if you can't hear horns and squeeling tires etc, that is a safety hazard. maybe you do need onstar although you wouldn't be able to hear it anyways so whats the point??
I agree with you to some extent but then, with the stereos they are putting into vehicles these days, who the heck can hear traffic noise anyhow?
For those of you old enough to remember Johnny Carson, does the name Floyd R. Turbo come to mind?
satellite linked. the technology used to unlock or recover cars could also be used to steal them. think about it.
already did, mang, already did. i don't feel the need for a remote third-party unlocker for my automobile, any more than i like the idea that my cable modem and cell phone can be remotely operated without my knowledge. the latter is the reason cell phones are not allowed, period, in many military installations, and incidentally is how people who don't want to be found can be caught--they turn up as soon as they use a cell phone, or when a friend visits them with their cell phone on. the same applies to a satellite automobile link.
it is a classic double-edged sword, however in modern corporate america, i see little real need for such tools, but much potential for misuse to the detriment of the consumer. real instances of such tools (other than lo-jack, which is specifically for that) being used to track and secure criminals are few and far between, as are real instances of people being in the middle of bfe and locking their keys out of their car (somehow the guy remembers his cell phone??). more likely future usage is consistent with the idea of universal RFID tagging, which personally i find disgusting. my car (much less my couch or clothing) does not need the ability to phone home, for any reason.
incidentally, before you all go off thinking i'm a conspiracy nutball, a system of tracking has already been proposed in london for automatic identification and billing of minor traffic infractions (details on slashdot, you'll have to search). no thanks...
ONSTAR in Toyotas? Tundras? L@@K
Linear Mode
