2004 to 2020 Mazda 3 Forum and Mazdaspeed 3 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 110 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Mazda Canada is telling dealers that the Mazda Connected Services feature that delivers real-time traffic, weather and fuel prices has been DISCONTINUED.

Indeed, those options are new grayed out in my infotainment system (v25) as of this past week after working without issue since I took delivery of the car in early December.

Can other owners report back on the status of this feautre with their car and also what the word is in their region of the world?

If this is all true, it is a real kick-in-the-teeth to Mazda customers who sprung for the navigation system in their 2014 Mazda3s.

Indeed, the Mazda NaviExtras site lists 'Not Available' for this now:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
590 Posts
Mazda Canada is telling dealers that the Mazda Connected Services feature that delivers real-time traffic, weather and fuel prices has been DISCONTINUED.

Indeed, those options are new grayed out in my infotainment system (v25) as of this past week after working without issue since I took delivery of the car in early December.

Can other owners report back on the status of this feautre with their car and also what the word is in their region of the world?

If this is all true, it is a real kick-in-the-teeth to Mazda customers who sprung for the navigation system in their 2014 Mazda3s.

Indeed, the Mazda NaviExtras site lists 'Not Available' for this now:

TRUE...I am writing a large post about this, my mother was doing the research for me.

the bottom line, they cannot come up with an agreement with the company that supplies the info.

They have been in negotiations for some time with no luck.

I am just 1 inch from filing for a buy back on the car. My mom was waiting for the final word on this.

ALSO MAZDA SPUN OFF THE technology portion of the car to a subsidiary which means that Mazda wants to relinquish all responsibility to anything to do with the infotainment system.

If you only knew how cheesy the system really was, I would not put it past if the Navi was discontinued as well some day.

HERE IS A KICKER, THE BLUETOOTH CHIP IN THE UNIT IS ONLY VERSIONS 2.1 5 YEAR OLD TECHNOLOGY. V5.0 will be out this fall. V4.1 is the current. Like I said, "Mazda Connect" is made up by my guess the "Obama programmers" who did his original health care site...

I may seek the opinion from an attorney to see what my rights are, for misrepresentation from the dealer.

PS if you call Mazda and ask them, they will give you "it may come back one day...who cares about one day, its now. I bet with the next software release connect service will be gone.

I know there are alot of features in the manual that are not in the car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
My only hope is Mazda will come out with a new service that can be installed onto the existing hardware.. I can't see them leaving everyone with no options, the car is brand new. Hopefully then you won't need a wifi connection to get any of this info!!! Biggest mistake I have seen a company make in a long time.. who has a wifi connection in their car all the time (except for some with smart phones.. but of those who actually know how to turn on the feature)... The way I see it, might be a good thing, get Mazda to put a new system on there that actually can display traffic without a wifi connection!!!
 

·
... Is Watching.
Joined
·
384 Posts
Bluetooth version really doesn't matter. Version 2.1 has enough data bandwidth for calls etc, so it's not like it's completely useless. Yes newer versions will have better support for newer technology, but that support is largely aimed at the computer industry. Just because your smartphone might be rocking BT4.1, that doesn't mean your car needs too. Simply because your car has no need for the higher bandwidth.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
If Mazda cannot come to terms with the company providing the data, they would go a long way to satisfying their buyers by modifying the infotainment code if possible to permit the mirroring of customers' smartphones' traffic data on the screen, although I suspect melding the various mapping software data with the Mazda system might be too challenging to get right.
 

·
... Is Watching.
Joined
·
384 Posts
You never know, mazda might be aiming to get Waze support on the infotainment system :thumbup 1:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
590 Posts
You never know, mazda might be aiming to get Waze support on the infotainment system :thumbup 1:
THAT would be oh so cool....you never know, but I feel it not fair to us, the consumer to buy VAPOR ware. :thumbup 1:

I am in the computer industry. So this bothers me. :argh 1:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
590 Posts
Bluetooth version really doesn't matter. Version 2.1 has enough data bandwidth for calls etc, so it's not like it's completely useless. Yes newer versions will have better support for newer technology, but that support is largely aimed at the computer industry. Just because your smartphone might be rocking BT4.1, that doesn't mean your car needs too. Simply because your car has no need for the higher bandwidth.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
I can understand your point, but with new chip sets, the compatibility with be greater. Also that is why so many have connecting issues with other phones. Some have complained about slower BT streaming...well now you know ...slower BT Chip... My dads Audi, once you press to select another playlist, song, artist, it instantaneous. Mine, another story,,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
590 Posts
I had this screen with N/A since the beginning, nonetheless it was available.

Let's wait short time, we will know soon... If it's really discontinued, let's see... :detective:
Well, the dealer should be informed and tell a shopping customer that it is not available.

Instead the dealer bragged about it as a selling point..
 

·
... Is Watching.
Joined
·
384 Posts
A new BT chip will not mean better compatibility with new tech. Because the new standards are backwards compatible. The only benefit if using a newer BT chip is *advanced compatibility* of newer features that are not implemented in the older one's.

BT 2.1 has a transfer rate of 3Mbit, 2.1Mbit real speed.
BT 4.1 has a transfer rate of 24Mbit (lowest maximum from BT3.0 so may be higher)
The maximum variable bit rate for an MP3 is 320k (NOT Mbit, Kbit) excluding lossless audio types.

Therefore the bandwidth of BT 2.1 can still easily stream 320K over a 2.1 Mbit connection.

The only reason it might be faster in newer tech, is most likely down to just that, newer tech. Faster BUS speeds, CPU's with more optimised instruction sets & protocols, cores, multi/hyper threading, faster internal cable connections, or simply, faster/higher quality components that make up the hardware of the system in general.

Let's not forget the device sending the stream also has to process data. Typically you'd expect a Galaxy S4 to stream audio better in the same car than a Galaxy S, even if the S4 still only had a BT2.1 chip. (but in reality it's BT4+)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
590 Posts
A new BT chip will not mean better compatibility with new tech. Because the new standards are backwards compatible. The only benefit if using a newer BT chip is *advanced compatibility* of newer features that are not implemented in the older one's.

BT 2.1 has a transfer rate of 3Mbit, 2.1Mbit real speed.
BT 4.1 has a transfer rate of 24Mbit (lowest maximum from BT3.0 so may be higher)
The maximum variable bit rate for an MP3 is 320k (NOT Mbit, Kbit) excluding lossless audio types.

Therefore the bandwidth of BT 2.1 can still easily stream 320K over a 2.1 Mbit connection.

The only reason it might be faster in newer tech, is most likely down to just that, newer tech. Faster BUS speeds, CPU's with more optimised instruction sets & protocols, cores, multi/hyper threading, faster internal cable connections, or simply, faster/higher quality components that make up the hardware of the system in general.

Let's not forget the device sending the stream also has to process data. Typically you'd expect a Galaxy S4 to stream audio better in the same car than a Galaxy S, even if the S4 still only had a BT2.1 chip. (but in reality it's BT4+)
Yes, all newer BT Chips are backward compatible to some degreem but some newer tech coming this fall, like the infamous iPhone 6 and Apples New iWatch will not work with anything lower that 4.1, tah dah....PS I cant say how I know just do.....

I really think there will be issues with newer tech with the 2.1. Well, it not that much more to put in a new one. Just stupid cost cutting.

Here ya go...2007 2.1 come on...

https://www.bluetooth.org/en-us/specification/adopted-specifications
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
https://www.bluetooth.org/en-us/specification/adopted-specifications
BLUETOOTH SPECIFICATION RELEASE COMPATIBILITY
This specification can be used with Bluetooth Core Specification Version 1.2 or later when using the profile on the BR/EDR physical link and Bluetooth Core Specification Version 4.0 or later when using the profile on the LE physical link

Bluetooth low energy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Compatibility

Bluetooth low energy is not backward-compatible with the previous, often called Classic, Bluetooth protocol. The Bluetooth 4.0 specification permits devices to implement either or both of the LE and Classic systems. Those that implement both are known as Bluetooth 4.0 dual-mode devices.
The only way apple could break compatibility would be to implement BT LE. This would break compatibility with the majority of BT headsets, speakers, etc. as anything that wasn't BT4.0 wouldn't work. While Apple continues to have it's market share quickly eroded by android, it would be asinine for them to hasten their loss of market share.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
590 Posts
The only way apple could break compatibility would be to implement BT LE. This would break compatibility with the majority of BT headsets, speakers, etc. as anything that wasn't BT4.0 wouldn't work. While Apple continues to have it's market share quickly eroded by android, it would be asinine for them to hasten their loss of market share.
I agree, but they dance to a different drum. One you and I cant figure out. One of the objectives with "wearable technology" is security. BT so far does not have good security. I know apple is working on a new payment system, with the advent of the Targets hacking.

Why don't you think NFC has not taken off for Apple yet.

I give up on being computer nerdy,,,"I just want to have fun" ....here.....at work, well it's a different story. I hear about this all the time, more nerdy people than I.

Getting back to the thread, the infotainment system has let many down, and now even more!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
I agree, but they dance to a different drum. One you and I cant figure out. One of the objectives with "wearable technology" is security. BT so far does not have good security. I know apple is working on a new payment system, with the advent of the Targets hacking.
It's pretty straight forward, there is no reason for apple to make a phone that breaks compatibility with most every blue tooth device on the market. Also the Target hack, wasn't much of a hack, it was a poorly designed security model at Target that gave HVAC maintenance folks far too much access and allowed one stolen password to be used to grab millions of CC #s. Essentially Target's IT folks where too lazy to have proper security and they paid for it.

Why don't you think NFC has not taken off for Apple yet.
Because Apple is generally behind the curve when it comes to new technology. They just have really good marketing.
I give up on being computer nerdy,,,"I just want to have fun" ....here.....at work, well it's a different story. I hear about this all the time, more nerdy people than I.
You should really try to understand technology better. You will get left behind if you don't. I'll also say the tech industry can be very lucrative and easy to get into. To willfully choose ignorance is short sighted on your part.


Getting back to the thread, the infotainment system has let many down, and now even more!
As far as the subject of the thread goes, discounting the connected services as they were offered when the car was released is no loss. It was poorly designed and too expensive. All Mazda had to do was look at the low adoption rate and decide cutting the feature and focusing on stabilizing the ITS. The smart thing to do is simplify the data connection, make the feature free, and improve the usability of it. If I remember correctly much of it didn't even work when the car was in motion. If I have to stop to use the service, I'm going to use the far better software on my phone to get the same information.

Ultimately Mazda did the right thing by pulling the feature. It was terrible.
 

·
... Is Watching.
Joined
·
384 Posts
As far as the subject of the goes, If I remember correctly much of it didn't even work when the car was in motion. If I have to stop to use the service, I'm going to use the far better software on my phone to get the same information.

Ultimately Mazda did the right thing by pulling the feature. It was terrible.
The touchscreen was disabled in motion for safety. The 'commander' dial is still usable in motion. (at least in the uk)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
590 Posts
It's pretty straight forward, there is no reason for apple to make a phone that breaks compatibility with most every blue tooth device on the market. Also the Target hack, wasn't much of a hack, it was a poorly designed security model at Target that gave HVAC maintenance folks far too much access and allowed one stolen password to be used to grab millions of CC #s. Essentially Target's IT folks where too lazy to have proper security and they paid for it.


Because Apple is generally behind the curve when it comes to new technology. They just have really good marketing.


You should really try to understand technology better. You will get left behind if you don't. I'll also say the tech industry can be very lucrative and easy to get into. To willfully choose ignorance is short sighted on your part.




As far as the subject of the thread goes, discounting the connected services as they were offered when the car was released is no loss. It was poorly designed and too expensive. All Mazda had to do was look at the low adoption rate and decide cutting the feature and focusing on stabilizing the ITS. The smart thing to do is simplify the data connection, make the feature free, and improve the usability of it. If I remember correctly much of it didn't even work when the car was in motion. If I have to stop to use the service, I'm going to use the far better software on my phone to get the same information.

Ultimately Mazda did the right thing by pulling the feature. It was terrible.
Like I said I work with a lot of nerdy people, geeks, geniuses.... I can't say where I work at. But I do know what I'm talking about. What Mazda's mistake was hiring a incompetent company to do the programming. My mom purchased the car for the tech because I felt the connective services with an important factor in future communications.

My mother has MS and if the automatic 911 system does not work in the car anymore it's useless.

We were also told by the dealer in the event of an accident the car automatically dials 911 what about that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
297 Posts
Is that why I cant use the service anymore? What the hell is going on here????
I'm beyond angry now, so what's the purpose of having integrated WIFI?
 
1 - 20 of 110 Posts
Top