DeadStar - Analog shutdown kills pre-'02 OnStar

[PurdueGuy]

What if GM could offer a non-integrated OnStar setup? It could boost OnStar revenue greatly if anyone could get a standalone unit for their car, and GM could offer free or incredibly cheap standalone units for those with the outdated setups. The major downside is the loss of exclusivity for GM vehicles...

[daves87rs]

What if GM could offer a non-integrated OnStar setup?  It could boost OnStar revenue greatly if anyone could get a standalone unit for their car, and GM could offer free or incredibly cheap standalone units for those with the outdated setups.  The major downside is the loss of exclusivity for GM vehicles...

222151[/snapback]

Not a bad idea..

I have a feeling there are going to be some copycats soon anyways...

[Rainbow1616]

By virtue of the fact alone that this does not include models in the last 6 years in the least its unreasonable to solely blame GM. Theres a degree of fair use and that doesnt change with anything. Cassettes, pentiums, socks, c.d's, laserdiscs...t-shirts . vacuum tubes. or valves. ...whatever you want to call it. ...

Anyone living in 2006 realizes nothing is going to last forever.

The effects of this will be so minuscule I'd be surprised if anything even ever came of this.

Do you know what its like finding an rca valve? Those bastards. I want my $h! to sound good jack> you know what I mean?

Seriously, who gives a sh*t?

besides the hungry

pregnant (or with small children.)

safety conscious (esp w/ocd)--diagnostically speaking.

confused

elderly

handicapped

diabetic

anemic

perpetually lost

. Wouldnt want to find out any other way my airbag wasnt

working- or the abs, engine, trans, airbags if I was that concerned as not to be.

Fear sells.

I think your facts are a little off. I have a 2004 Impala LS which I have onstar on ever since I bought it, I got a letter saying it cant be upgraded. SO it DOES include the models in the last 6 years. I have no intention of trading in this car to appease GM. They jut lost a loyal customer. I have owned GM's all my life but this will be the last one.

[Oracle of Delphi]

Ummm, GM isn't shutting down your service, the cell phone companies are. Because of the FCC ruling, cell phone companies are allowed to shut down their analog cell phone systems in 2008.

OnStar is basically a cell phone system, on older model cars they use the technology that was available at the time of production. Technology changes as time goes on, you were just caught in a bad decision from the FCC, not GM.

[Drew Dowdell]

I got my Onstar "upgrade" letter yesterday. $15 to upgrade to the digital equipment if I subscribe for another year. My lease is up in February, but the discount on a yearly rate is enough to make it not matter. I may do the upgrade just to get the better signal as I've had the "remote horn and lights" feature fail on me in a parking garage <4th floor, open sides> before. They couldn't get signal through to the car even though I was parked on the outer rim of the garage.

I park downtown a lot, often in multiple garages per day, so sometimes I forget where I put the car.

[enzl]

Ummm, GM isn't shutting down your service, the cell phone companies are. Because of the FCC ruling, cell phone companies are allowed to shut down their analog cell phone systems in 2008.

OnStar is basically a cell phone system, on older model cars they use the technology that was available at the time of production. Technology changes as time goes on, you were just caught in a bad decision from the FCC, not GM.

It's an FCC decision that GM didn't adjust to, nor plan for correctly. The cell phone service providers have been itching to shut down the analog system for years...GM either knew or should have known this was coming down the pike...

Most importantly, GM will be blamed (unfairly or not) for the interuption of a very useful service and denied future income as a result, a double negative for a company that cannot afford to dissappoint customers, especially loyal, paying ones.

[Drew Dowdell]

It's an FCC decision that GM didn't adjust to, nor plan for correctly. The cell phone service providers have been itching to shut down the analog system for years...GM either knew or should have known this was coming down the pike...

Most importantly, GM will be blamed (unfairly or not) for the interuption of a very useful service and denied future income as a result, a double negative for a company that cannot afford to dissappoint customers, especially loyal, paying ones.

I believe that my Onstar upgrade letter that I received yesterday said that if I decided not to upgrade to digital, my onstar service would end in December of '08. I'll check it again tonight, but that's what I think it said.

look, any car that can't be upgraded is going to be an '01 or earlier. At the end of 2008 when the shut down might begin those cars will be a minimum of 7 years old with most being much older. Even a top of the line '01 STS is worth, what, $8,000 now on the used market and probably $6,000 at the end of 2008? People who buy those cars won't care about the Onstar. People who have those cars probably let it expire already. Worst case scenario is Grandma with her 1998 Park Ave who never shut off the OnStar service after Granddad died.

I know mom stopped subscribing to onstar on her '01 Aurora years ago..... and she's one who really needs it.

Edited March 20, 2007 by Oldsmoboi

[Oracle of Delphi]

It's an FCC decision that GM didn't adjust to, nor plan for correctly. The cell phone service providers have been itching to shut down the analog system for years...GM either knew or should have known this was coming down the pike...

Most importantly, GM will be blamed (unfairly or not) for the interuption of a very useful service and denied future income as a result, a double negative for a company that cannot afford to dissappoint customers, especially loyal, paying ones.

Of course they did, it's only the older cars that can't be upgraded (there is a point where it's not cost efficient), like olsmoboi said, he got his upgrade letter yesterday.

[Camino LS6]

Non-issue.

[AAS]

I think your facts are a little off. I have a 2004 Impala LS which I have onstar on ever since I bought it, I got a letter saying it cant be upgraded. SO it DOES include the models in the last 6 years. I have no intention of trading in this car to appease GM. They jut lost a loyal customer. I have owned GM's all my life but this will be the last one.

So... you've owned GM vehicles all your life, which means lots of those did NOT have OnStar. And, just because your most current one does have it, and it can't be upgraded, you will never buy another GM vehicle? Since OnStar is so important to you, what vehicle (that must offer OnStar) will you buy next, that isn't a GM vehicle? Cuz... it wouldn't exactly make sense to ditch GM for not being able to upgrade your OnStar, and then buy a new car that doesn't even offer it.

[Drew Dowdell]

So... you've owned GM vehicles all your life, which means lots of those did NOT have OnStar. And, just because your most current one does have it, and it can't be upgraded, you will never buy another GM vehicle? Since OnStar is so important to you, what vehicle (that must offer OnStar) will you buy next, that isn't a GM vehicle? Cuz... it wouldn't exactly make sense to ditch GM for not being able to upgrade your OnStar, and then buy a new car that doesn't even offer it.

I think it'd be more likely that he'd never buy a GM again based on the fact that he has an '04 Impala.... but that's just me.

[Rainbow1616]

So... you've owned GM vehicles all your life, which means lots of those did NOT have OnStar. And, just because your most current one does have it, and it can't be upgraded, you will never buy another GM vehicle? Since OnStar is so important to you, what vehicle (that must offer OnStar) will you buy next, that isn't a GM vehicle? Cuz... it wouldn't exactly make sense to ditch GM for not being able to upgrade your OnStar, and then buy a new car that doesn't even offer it.

Its not just the older cars, my 2004 can't be upgraded according to the letter. My service will end December 31 2007.

I don't drive this car personally my wife and kids do, the car always got reception in places where my wife's cell phone had no signal. I know Onstar is not 100% but it did offer a little more peace of mind then not having it.

GM should have foreseen this, My car is barely 3 years old with low miles and in showroom condition and My wife and kids love the car so getting rid of it is not an option.

So your saying I shouldn't be upset? I work in the high tech field and can't believe these can't be upgraded. I have been thinking about dumping GM for a while but its tough because I get the GMS Employee pricing which saves a lot of green.

Just frustrated....

[Drew Dowdell]

Its not just the older cars, my 2004 can't be upgraded according to the letter. My service will end December 31 2007.

I don't drive this car personally my wife and kids do, the car always got reception in places where my wife's cell phone had no signal. I know Onstar is not 100% but it did offer a little more peace of mind then not having it.

GM should have foreseen this, My car is barely 3 years old with low miles and in showroom condition and My wife and kids love the car so getting rid of it is not an option.

So your saying I shouldn't be upset? I work in the high tech field and can't believe these can't be upgraded. I have been thinking about dumping GM for a while but its tough because I get the GMS Employee pricing which saves a lot of green.

Just frustrated....

Considering in 2004 Onstar was pretty much standard and you had GMS already you likely paid next to nothing for the equipment itself. Heck, GMS pricing alone saved you more than the cost of the Onstar at sticker price! If you were complaining about a $48,000 '04 STS that you paid full sticker for, you'd have a bit of sympathy..... not so much on an '04 Impala that you got GMS pricing on and probably paid less than 20k for.

edit: And it your wife and kids love it so much, have you asked your wife and kids what they though about the OnStar going away? If it's as big an issue for them as it is for you. You friendly local Cheverolet dealer will gladly sell you a shiny new Impala with Active Fuel Management, FlexFuel, Flip storage rear seats and the newest digital OnStar...... all at a low low GMS price.

Edited March 21, 2007 by Oldsmoboi

[Rainbow1616]

Considering in 2004 Onstar was pretty much standard and you had GMS already you likely paid next to nothing for the equipment itself. Heck, GMS pricing alone saved you more than the cost of the Onstar at sticker price! If you were complaining about a $48,000 '04 STS that you paid full sticker for, you'd have a bit of sympathy..... not so much on an '04 Impala that you got GMS pricing on and probably paid less than 20k for.

edit: And it your wife and kids love it so much, have you asked your wife and kids what they though about the OnStar going away? If it's as big an issue for them as it is for you. You friendly local Cheverolet dealer will gladly sell you a shiny new Impala with Active Fuel Management, FlexFuel, Flip storage rear seats and the newest digital OnStar...... all at a low low GMS price.

Its an "SS" and they don't like the style of the new ones. They test drove a Monte Carlo SS and didn't like that either. They are the ones that it brought it to my attention that they were losing it, like I said I never drive the car.

She's now looking into Toyota or Lexus now but i just cant believe it cant be upgraded. I will visit the dealer over the weekend in case its a mistake and the 04 Can be upgraded.

[Flybrian]

She's now looking into Toyota or Lexus now but i just cant believe it cant be upgraded.

Ironic since this also affects older models with LexusLink as well as Subarus, Audis, and VWs with OnStar.

[Drew Dowdell]

Its an "SS" and they don't like the style of the new ones. They test drove a Monte Carlo SS and didn't like that either. They are the ones that it brought it to my attention that they were losing it, like I said I never drive the car.

She's now looking into Toyota or Lexus now but i just cant believe it cant be upgraded. I will visit the dealer over the weekend in case its a mistake and the 04 Can be upgraded.

So.... let me get this straight. You're willing to leave Chevy because they can't upgrade your OnStar.... and go to a model line that doesn't have a telematics SOS system anything close to Onstar....

Again, I can understand if you were upset about an STS and were thinking of going Lexus...but being upset with a Chevy and Lexus is now one of your considerations.... that's just silly.

A GMS Impala SS was likely in the mid-20s for you. That'll get you a loaded 4cylinder Camry or a basic V6.

but either way... good luck with your purchase. The Impala is the best value full sizer this side of a Crown Vic.

[Drew Dowdell]

Ironic since this also affects older models with LexusLink as well as Subarus, Audis, and VWs with OnStar.

*gasp* you don't mean!?!

Lexus couldn't upgrade their older equipment either?! NO WAY!

[enzl]

So.... let me get this straight. You're willing to leave Chevy because they can't upgrade your OnStar.... and go to a model line that doesn't have a telematics SOS system anything close to Onstar....

Again, I can understand if you were upset about an STS and were thinking of going Lexus...but being upset with a Chevy and Lexus is now one of your considerations.... that's just silly.

A GMS Impala SS was likely in the mid-20s for you. That'll get you a loaded 4cylinder Camry or a basic V6.

but either way... good luck with your purchase. The Impala is the best value full sizer this side of a Crown Vic.

Why does it matter that he's buying thru the GMS program? You've used that rationale twice to imply that his expectation should be lower or that the disappointment is less real. I don't get that.

The OnStar system was touted as a revolutionary tech. GM abandoning MY2004 vehicles (and its their tech, not Audis, Lexus' or anyone else's) is bad business, period.

Telematics and the ability to download or 'real time' traffic, TV. Movies, maps, information, et al...is almost here...Can we trust GM to produce systems that aren't going to be obsolete in 3 years time? The OnStar experience sez no...and the fact you'd defend this atrocious PR nightmare by saying that a GMS customer should expect less is patently absurd and is exactly why GM is in the &#036;h&#33;ter.

They either don't care, or don't mind giving the appearance that they don't care. Either way, it's awful and you'd hold other co.'s (Toyota, et al.) to higher standards.

[BubbaGump]

Hold on guys. Just so you all know GM didn't do this by choice. Verizon is the carrier for onstar. Verizon is killing their analog signal which not only left Analog onstar in the wind but any analog cell phones still in use become obsolete to, and Verizon was the last analog holdout. Gm has attempted to upgrade as many as possible with digital boxes but in some cases the vehicles wiring and other associated electronic hardware simply won't allow digital support. Its certainly not like they saw it comming. Verizon is who everyone should be Teed at. Its kinda like when that your upgrading your home PC only to find that everything in it became obsolete all the sudden because technology moved forward, so your left with no option than to upgrade the whole machine.

Edited March 21, 2007 by BubbaGump

[Drew Dowdell]

Why does it matter that he's buying thru the GMS program? You've used that rationale twice to imply that his expectation should be lower or that the disappointment is less real. I don't get that.

The OnStar system was touted as a revolutionary tech. GM abandoning MY2004 vehicles (and its their tech, not Audis, Lexus' or anyone else's) is bad business, period.

Telematics and the ability to download or 'real time' traffic, TV. Movies, maps, information, et al...is almost here...Can we trust GM to produce systems that aren't going to be obsolete in 3 years time? The OnStar experience sez no...and the fact you'd defend this atrocious PR nightmare by saying that a GMS customer should expect less is patently absurd and is exactly why GM is in the &#036;h&#33;ter.

They either don't care, or don't mind giving the appearance that they don't care. Either way, it's awful and you'd hold other co.'s (Toyota, et al.) to higher standards.

No, I'm not defending GM/Onstar on an '04. I'm saying that it's silly to "never again buy GM" because of it....especially when little to nothing was paid for it in the first place. Should his '04 get upgraded? Yes of course! My '04 can get upgraded.

[enzl]

No, I'm not defending GM/Onstar on an '04. I'm saying that it's silly to "never again buy GM" because of it....especially when little to nothing was paid for it in the first place. Should his '04 get upgraded? Yes of course! My '04 can get upgraded.

Gotcha...just checking.

OnStar, at least in our place, is a selling point that, in today's marketplace, is a differentiator and has value...GM can squeeze an extra $10-20/month in revenue out of it, so I just don't see the point in allowing the system to be turned off for those that are interested.

[z28luvr01]

Given that Onstar piggybacks off of a cell phone network, it might be worth bringing up the fact that cell phone manufacturers and companies are also guilty of doing this same thing to their own customers. As cell phone networks in the US migrated from CDMA to GSM, most phone manufacturers didn't make phones that could handle both, and providers forced customers to either get a new phone or have a surcharge added to their monthly bill to keep their old phone alive.

And I don't even think I have to get into how the PC industry frequently leaves people in the dark. I'm not necessarily sticking up for GM here because I think it's idiotic that a three year old car can be called "obsolete". I'm just showing that it just seems to be the rule that people sometimes get left in the cold when technology progresses.

[enzl]

Given that Onstar piggybacks off of a cell phone network, it might be worth bringing up the fact that cell phone manufacturers and companies are also guilty of doing this same thing to their own customers. As cell phone networks in the US migrated from CDMA to GSM, most phone manufacturers didn't make phones that could handle both, and providers forced customers to either get a new phone or have a surcharge added to their monthly bill to keep their old phone alive.

And I don't even think I have to get into how the PC industry frequently leaves people in the dark. I'm not necessarily sticking up for GM here because I think it's idiotic that a three year old car can be called "obsolete". I'm just showing that it just seems to be the rule that people sometimes get left in the cold when technology progresses.

You're 100% right. But, this thing was pitched as a safety device, a quasi-replacement for real navi units and concierge services....if someone told you your airbags had become obsolete or parts for your car would not be available in 3-5 years time, you might hesitate to purchase said vehicle. And wait until the lawyers get involved with the first accident that OnStar would have brought first responders....it'll be a PR nightmare of epic proportions.

Why not have available a digital replacement unit installed in all ACTIVE subscribers cars?

[Drew Dowdell]

Gotcha...just checking.

OnStar, at least in our place, is a selling point that, in today's marketplace, is a differentiator and has value...GM can squeeze an extra $10-20/month in revenue out of it, so I just don't see the point in allowing the system to be turned off for those that are interested.

Sadly... it's not GM's or Onstar's call.

Look at it this way. Would enough revenue be generated for GM from all those older Onstar vehicles to justify developing an upgrade package?

How about I flip the coin another way...... GM had the foresight all the way back in 2000 to start releasing vehicles that could be upgraded. They didn't offer the upgrade back then because they didn't know where the Verizon technology would be. So instead, they just made the vehicles upgrade capable.

[Drew Dowdell]

You're 100% right. But, this thing was pitched as a safety device, a quasi-replacement for real navi units and concierge services....if someone told you your airbags had become obsolete or parts for your car would not be available in 3-5 years time, you might hesitate to purchase said vehicle. And wait until the lawyers get involved with the first accident that OnStar would have brought first responders....it'll be a PR nightmare of epic proportions.

Why not have available a digital replacement unit installed in all ACTIVE subscribers cars?

because that isn't just 1 unit. Onstar wasn't static technology from the time in was introduced till today. There are many many different variations of the onstar hardware straight from the begining. More than likely GM would have to develop a digital version of EACH analog version of Onstar that was produced. Again, could the revenue generated from those subscribers pay for the cost of the development? How much would those subscribers be willing to pay for the upgrade hardware.... or should that just be free?

[enzl]

because that isn't just 1 unit. Onstar wasn't static technology from the time in was introduced till today. There are many many different variations of the onstar hardware straight from the begining. More than likely GM would have to develop a digital version of EACH analog version of Onstar that was produced. Again, could the revenue generated from those subscribers pay for the cost of the development? How much would those subscribers be willing to pay for the upgrade hardware.... or should that just be free?

I can't answer the cost question...I'll concede that it may be astronomical....

But, I regard the situation as analogous to a recall repair or part availability issue...it shouldn't be a yes/no situation....

Again, it looks crappy and half assed & the problem regarding it's advertised use as a safety device regarding accidents will lead to lawsuits. Guaranteed. Blame the lawyers (which is fair), but the headlines will not be kind, as the 'OffStar' will be blamed for someone's death.

[FAPTurbo]

Again, it looks crappy and half assed & the problem regarding it's advertised use as a safety device regarding accidents will lead to lawsuits. Guaranteed. Blame the lawyers (which is fair), but the headlines will not be kind, as the 'OffStar' will be blamed for someone's death.

+1

[Flybrian]

You're 100% right. But, this thing was pitched as a safety device, a quasi-replacement for real navi units and concierge services....if someone told you your airbags had become obsolete or parts for your car would not be available in 3-5 years time, you might hesitate to purchase said vehicle.

Airbags are a federally-mandated safety feature; OnStar is not a federally-mandated safety feature.

OnStar units shut down are not receiving service and are not being paid for. There is no contract.

If my airbags go off in an OnStar-equipped car with no service connected to it, no one is notified, and I die, I do not have a valid case for a lawsuit regardless if it uses an antiquated network or I just don't mail in my check.

Period.

Bad press? Sure.

The right thing to do? Debatable.

Will their be lawsuits? Yeah, but lawsuits are filed for everything.

Is there valid legal foundation for a lawsuit? No.

Now, a used car dealer that sells a vehicle and purposely lies to the customer about an activated, working OnStar unit may be liable in some degree. But that's it.

[Oracle of Delphi]

Well I stopped into my Local Pontiac dealer today after class, (yes you can teach an Old Dog new tricks) it seems my OnStar in my 2005 Grand Prix GT is OnStar issue free. However I wouldn't care if they did take mine away since they have dumbed OnStar way down, it can't read e-mail like it did before, it no longer tells you what road your on anymore, it seems like each year that goes by it loses more and more functionality, yet the price never seems to go down! What's up with that?

[Duncan]

Three things, quickly.

First thing: The people who claim this isn't that big a deal are more than likely the same people who discount the notion of quality interior materials making a difference. (Example: The first thing my dad noticed about the Ford Five Hundred at an auto show was that it has "a &#036;h&#33;ty-looking trunk" as he put it, compared to the Camry my mom drives.) These people are the ones who then continue to bemoan GM's continuing loss of market share while bashing Toyota for having better technology, just because. Since this isn't technically GM's problem, but more Verizon's, GM should AT THE VERY LEAST be doing everything it can to shift blame properly. If they don't at least do that, who's the average uninformed person going to believe is at fault?

Second thing: Like most things installed in a car, OnStar is most times added on as an option. This means that there has to be a module or receiver somewhere in the car that can be exchanged for something more useful. Offering a free or low-cost replacement to loyal OnStar customers is the very least GM can do. If they can instantly pull up all those Polk ownership records to find out owners' names for recall purposes, they can sure do it for this problem.

Third thing: Honestly, were you really using your OnStar to have emails read to you? Seriously, really?

[enzl]

Perhaps someone at GM is listening?

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/03/23/analog-...ear-of-service/

Or agrees that this is a PR nightmare waiting to happen.

Article mentions 500,000 active account customers to be turned off....that's alot of pissed off customers, no?