Why Hide?

Hi folks,

I have an observation. I'd appreciate your views.

Firstly - a disclaimer. I'm a content GE customer. Gen 1 inverter, 8.2KWh battery on 3012 SW. I upgraded from 3007, from which I saw regular crashes down to 4% from anything up to 50%. I now see "controlled steep declines" from 20%, a feature I understand. The BMS is realigning with the true SOC. I can trigger this realignment myself with a bit of load-juggling. I can work with this. I'm not saying I should have to, but for me, the gain outweighs the pain by a considerable amount.

I'm seeing a lot of negativity again in this forum. Some folk still have issues with BMS version 3012/3013 and the AIO is proving troublesome.

@TheDragon (GivEnergy) My observation, mainly to you, Paul, is: Please will you explain the rationale behind hiding the beta test threads? I, and many others, were avid followers of the thread that resulted in 3012/3013 being delivered. We could see the work progressing. We could see the progress and setbacks. We could see it was tricky to resolve, but importantly we could see the volume of work and the commitment going in to resolve customer problems. We were part of the journey. I can't speak for others, but it made me more patient. We saw you championing the cause and making stuff happen.

While the beta tests chats are hidden, folk cannot see progress. Some might assume the worst. Is it that not much is happening? I doubt it, but we cannot judge for ourselves. Would visibility demonstrate that we are miles from a solution? I hope not, but again, we cannot judge for ourselves. Would the chat indicate some uncomfortable prioritization of one issue over another? That might be true, but let's have the debate.

Also, when the new SW is eventually launched folk won't have the history of the thread to understand how it is supposed to address the issues.

Even if the threads do remain hidden, please will you explain the reasoning behind the decision? That in itself might calm folk down a little.

Thoughts, folks?

better if it could be read-only for non-beta participants - this way you don't get pulled off topic. But agree otherwise with your post... visibility is key

Excellent contribution Bob. I too am largely satisfied with my GivEnergy system and having had a lifetime working in IT I know how hard it is to debug complex software, especially on the boundary of hardware and software interacting together.

I too see the vocal people who genuinely have issues with their GivEnergy products for which they’ve paid a lot money for, and it disappoints me that firstly these issues are occurring but secondly that GivEnergy is almost entirely silent on responding to them. To acknowledging the issues, to reassuring that they are being worked on, and to give some context - 20 reported issues out of 40 or 4000 AIO sold, etc.
I’m optimistic to believe that GivEnergy did do a lot of testing prior to the product launch - we’ve seen massive delays on the BMS and the EV charger as a result of testing activities- but again GivEnergy being silent doesn’t help anyone.

I appreciate responding to feedback on this forum could become a significant job for someone, and largely that’s not required because there’s a lot of self help from the community, and we don’t want a company whitewash on everything, but some clear and genuine commitment to responding to major items of feedback (product issues, product enhancement requests, etc) is required

Nowadays, closed betas are pretty much the standard for testing software. It was a little surprising to see an open beta thread tbh. There is an Octopus Intelligent Zappi integration currently ongoing - again a closed beta.

There is a vocal minority on here at present who jump on every thread to post negatively - there are even some who don't even have a GivEnergy system who troll the forum to stir things up. Betas by their nature will have negative elements and these get picked up and broadcast without context and never in a positive light. This may well be why the betas are now closed.

You reap what you sow...

The outcome will simply be that anyone not in the beta (with any sense) won't go anywhere near the next version of BMS firmware for months. I certainly won't be touching it until someone actually explains how it fixes their (currently) broken existing BMS. If the update is then subsequently forced on people and SoC crashes continue then its refund time. No more chances.

I don't believe for a second that its a tiny minority with problems. I think its actually a tiny minority who don't have problems (and even then I suspect that's mainly because they never look at the system).

You simply don't end up with 23% of your reviews on Trustpilot being 1 star (almost all to do with battery problems/faults) if its a tiny minority with issues.

Hide the beta away by all means but don't expect people to believe what you say when there's been YEARS of people reporting the same problems and multiple failed attempts to fix them. YMMV of course, you may be a more trusting soul than me...

Pandorian No reason to hide the beta threads away after all the months/years they were visible, simply lock them so that non-beta users only have read access.

Vestas It's better to learn by your mistakes rather than keep repeating them.

If you look at the last SOC beta, some users were reading the beta content and posting negatively in the old 3007 thread.

Betas should be closed, perhaps an occasional update to users. Standard practice.

Those without GE products, who troll. 😂😂
This one was going to get a hybrid, then was going to get a g2 hybrid due to low output on a g1, then a g3 due to supply issues. The battery wasn’t clearly free of SoC issues on hybrid, so we decided to move to libbi and after problems with max panel inputs we looked at the GE AIO.
We were going to do that but delays, then installer issues, the new installers (GE approved) stating they wouldn’t do it.

We’ve ended up with a PW battery, because it was cheaper. I tried to stay the GE course, but honestly it’s not ideal to have such long running complaints by owners poorly addresses.

I still have an eye on GE, as other family members look at solar, so I’m not going just yet.

Trolling however is strong as many of us that had ge or were due GE reply when we see things on threads. We would probably all shut up if they fixed it or just replaced defective equipment.

Was not my decision to move the beta discussions to the new beta forum. Which is actually trialing as a replacement for this one.

Yes constant off topic injects. When it was 1st set up here, it was requested for beta discussions only.
It became a thread for all sorts of posts. The real issue buried in noise.

The new BMS has tested well. Not a single issue among the 30 or so testing it.
From SoC drops, to 0% reported when full.
Random BMS lost commms, which has been seen a few times, with no known cause. was also discovered and fixed.

A much more focused non distracted set of beta threads one for each beta trial has worked well.
Ready for release.
BMS 3015
Gen3 D306-A307
Gen2 D912-A912
Gen1 still in test
AC coupled D202-A202 been ready a while.
For new BMS protection routines it has an update. Which will make it D203-A203

AIO inverter Minor bugs in scheduling fixed.
HV battery BMS test version as of Tuesday last week 95% good. Minor tweak needed from the data gathered from 10 systems using it. So this won't be long.

In summary.

Beta trials are going well. No need to panic, no need to overthink.
The affected systems are minimal in numbers vs those deployed.
Also I'm busy, very busy and this forum is far too busy.

Oh add the 4 Facebook groups, this forum, actual real work testing and prototype which is getting not enough attention as it should.

Coming here 10x a day has clearly taken a hit.
Which I can only apologise for. I cannot be everywhere all the time, with my current work load.

TheDragon (GivEnergy) Ready for release.
BMS 3015
Gen3 D306-A307
Gen2 D912-A912
Gen1 still in test
AC coupled D202-A202 been ready a while.
For new BMS protection routines it has an update. Which will make it D203-A203

Thanks Paul. This is interesting. Didn't mean to add to your workload. The increase in comms since you arrived has been significant. I'm sorry for the additional burden but communication - especially in the ticklish times - is vital.

I'll get back in my box now!

TheDragon (GivEnergy) thanks for the update. I’m not suggesting that you spend your day responding to the forum and the Facebook group. Periodic updates are useful to give those who are not in the beta a sense of what’s happening.

And I still stand by my comments that GivEnergy in general should get more engaged with its customers and be more visible. Responding to bugs, feature requests and feedback.
Whether you classify that as PR, customer service, part of the CEO role, or whatever, a much better job could be being made. We all know how hyper visible we are now in the social media world and I’m sure it would pay positive dividends.
If you can pass this up the line please.

TheDragon (GivEnergy)

Hi, thank you for the update, and it sounds promising. I just hope v8 fixes the issues.

A few questions if I may please:

1. Is there any planned firmware update to the GE Gateway, this includes the cloud portal as it’s still reporting as an Inverter? And the tabs don’t have any data in.
2. As the Gateway has Meters on all the lines in and out, are there any plans to update the cloud portal to be more accurate with the graphs etc, instead of a mismatch between the Meter tab and the graphs?
3. Are GE still hoping to release the extra AIO’s in 2024 to have up to 6 in parallel?

geoffreycoan Maybe a set weekly update, unrealistic to do a day by day update when you still analyzing data and whatnot, quick TLDR at end of week might put some at ease that feel nothing is being done.

I seem to be having quite severe issues compared to most with my unit though, not seen anybody else mention that flat to full charges were taking less than 2kwh.

Jellybaby great idea. I think there’s lots of us that’d be very appreciative of a weekly GivEnergy product/ support update on this forum and Facebook. It would really be a step up in engagement

geoffreycoan Doesn't have to be super detailed, lets not forget most people probably wont understand what on earth is going on but a "oh we found what may be going on and working with out beta testers to see if this aids in resolving this issue and if it presents any further complications" etc etc and any soon to be released info to say that they are compiling it for release and making sure it will update with issue.

Even if its just to say "We are still trying to identify what may be causing this issue in collaboration with out software beta testers" kind of thing.

OK. Point taken.

I'll find time to do a weekly update.

Likely in my own time, like this is. I simply don't have enough work hours.

TheDragon (GivEnergy) The portal has a "What's new" section which used to have a weekly update but stopped about a year ago (maybe someone left?). It was really helpful.

TheDragon (GivEnergy) Maybe fortnightly if cannot be done during work hours but the TLDR version I was referring to should only take a couple of minutes, just highlights of the major issues and their current progress, doesn't have to be super detailed even if you update that its still being worked on but have nothing substantial to add it is just a peace of mind thing for the customers that are experiencing any issues.

Maybe GE can get someone in once a week for updates to post so you don't have to do it on your own time if things are that tight.

It's rather scary that GE does not seem to have resources to support communication about and the final development of their flagship consumer products, and that we are relying on the goodwill of (talented and dedicated) staff.

I hope that this is just a reflection of short-term growing pains and labour shortages, and that the company does not fold before the firmware stabilises.

Thank you, TheDragon

TheDragon (GivEnergy)

If you can do this it will help but take care not to overdo it. It's no good burning the candle at both ends all the time. People always want more and will take and take it is human nature.

PianSom
Just a general wow at how supercilious you come across!

killythebid Both ends, as i actually enjoy the job, that's why I joined the company, from a well paid defence role

So a long time ago, when I worked tech support, it was actually the role of the tech support side to support the chat and web forums and to do a rotation among the various tech support folk so everyone was aware of what the problems were on that side of things. When consistent problems occurred, it was escalated to someone like TheDragon (GivEnergy) to get some serious eyes to look at it and figure out what's going on but let tech support do their job so people like Paul could focus on the big picture. Just my two cents...

KamenMacKay I wish

TheDragon (GivEnergy)

I've been vocal in the past that the megathread for beta firmware what chaos, one thread covering multiple hardware models and firmware iterations, 3000+ comments often not linked to the current developments.

The firmware versions are not feature releases, they are often patch releases, fixing issues for some of the user base. A user base that has made a significant long term investment in the Giv Platform and these issues have an ongoing monetary impact on that investment.
Going closed beta is the correct move but leaves a void for the wider community. Giv staff are less frequently posting in the non beta threads and information of the firmwares becomes restricted.

Can I request a pinned read only thread per beta version, with the first post including the hardware in scope, fixes and enhancements planned and estimated release date. Update periodically with a status of the development.