What's new
By:

Software Improvements and Features Suggestions

Westcory said:
If this is the case then I can’t fathom how the wipers don’t sense rain better. I’ve had my car since 12/16 and we’ve had rain all but 3 of those days and oh boy am I wearing out that poor button on the end of the stalk.
Click to expand...
Wow, I took delivery on 12/15 and my auto wipers have been flawless.
 
newlucidguy said:
Man do I not want my side mirrors to automatically fold when I approach home. They fold when I lock and that's great but I need them before I get out. Automatic folding would suck. There's a fold button, maybe you can just use that?
Click to expand...
We can agree to disagree. Just as a point of reference, Brand X lets the mirrors autofold when approaching "home." It has saved many a scratch or worse.
 
Science said:
We can agree to disagree. Just as a point of reference, Brand X lets the mirrors autofold when approaching "home." It has saved many a scratch or worse.
Click to expand...
That would usually be implemented as an option, not something that the car would always do (unless you wanted it to)…
 
borski said:
There is also a low manual and high manual mode, in case you’re not aware. You don’t have to rely on the sensor.
Click to expand...
Oh I’m aware. It’s just bothersome to use that. Most cars have several settings for manual and an intermittent timing adjustment. It’s admittedly not even in my top 8 issues with the car. Just an annoyance that could be fixed fairly easy given how most companies have done a semi good job of this. It’s still better than the ‘23 and on Tesla’s
 
New to Lucid after driving "another" EV for 4 years and having experience driving a few other EVs. So far the car is very well built and has a superior driving experience (ride, handiling etc.) compared to the competitor EVs, however it falls short on a few areas that could be improved with software updates. Listing below, some of my gripes:

1. SSP sounds system - needs further tuning. Lacks the crispness and clarity of a premium audio system. For having 21 speakers this system is a disappointment, however it has significant potential. Tidal HiFi with Dolby Atmos shows the system's capability but that should be at minimum the quality of streaming audio. Also, add more EQ settings.

2. Pilot panel and glass cockpit controls - need the option to segregate the controls. Very frustrating that you cannot split music and nav. Also, Carplay is somewhat of a letdown that doesn't use full glass cockpit - I would rather have Carplay in Pilot Panel.

3. Glass cockpit left info screen - need the ability to use the toggle switch to view data (tire pressure, consumption etc.)When DD not engaged the left toggles have no function.

4. Proximity entry needs work - this has been discussed widely and I am sure by now Lucid is aware this needs a fix

5. Google maps - time to admit they are the best in the business so why not go with the best?

6. PWS noise when stationary - this needs to be off when the car is not moving. Way too loud.

7. Dash cam addition - so many cameras and no dash cam or Sentry/Gear Guard like protection

Overall, great car that has the right hardware and only a few software updates short of being extraordinary.
 
bufnita said:
New to Lucid after driving "another" EV for 4 years and having experience driving a few other EVs. So far the car is very well built and has a superior driving experience (ride, handiling etc.) compared to the competitor EVs, however it falls short on a few areas that could be improved with software updates. Listing below, some of my gripes:

1. SSP sounds system - needs further tuning. Lacks the crispness and clarity of a premium audio system. For having 21 speakers this system is a disappointment, however it has significant potential. Tidal HiFi with Dolby Atmos shows the system's capability but that should be at minimum the quality of streaming audio. Also, add more EQ settings.

2. Pilot panel and glass cockpit controls - need the option to segregate the controls. Very frustrating that you cannot split music and nav. Also, Carplay is somewhat of a letdown that doesn't use full glass cockpit - I would rather have Carplay in Pilot Panel.

3. Glass cockpit left info screen - need the ability to use the toggle switch to view data (tire pressure, consumption etc.)When DD not engaged the left toggles have no function.

4. Proximity entry needs work - this has been discussed widely and I am sure by now Lucid is aware this needs a fix

5. Google maps - time to admit they are the best in the business so why not go with the best?

6. PWS noise when stationary - this needs to be off when the car is not moving. Way too loud.

7. Dash cam addition - so many cameras and no dash cam or Sentry/Gear Guard like protection

Overall, great car that has the right hardware and only a few software updates short of being extraordinary.
Click to expand...
Every single one of these items have been discussed in innumerable threads at this point. Lucid is well aware of all these requests.
 
bufnita said:
Carplay is somewhat of a letdown that doesn't use full glass cockpit - I would rather have Carplay in Pilot Panel
Click to expand...
This is a restriction of Apple not Lucid
bufnita said:
SSP sounds system - needs further tuning. Lacks the crispness and clarity of a premium audio system. For having 21 speakers this system is a disappointment, however it has significant potential. Tidal HiFi with Dolby Atmos shows the system's capability but that should be at minimum the quality of streaming audio. Also, add more EQ settings.
Click to expand...
Lucid has said further updates are coming soon

bufnita said:
Dash cam addition - so many cameras and no dash cam or Sentry/Gear Guard like protection
Click to expand...
This is on the roadmap
bufnita said:
Pilot panel and glass cockpit controls - need the option to segregate the controls. Very frustrating that you cannot split music and nav. Also
Click to expand...
This is available on the Gravity, I believe it’s coming to the Air as it was highlighted on the roadmap but can’t say with 100% they meant the Air & Gravity or just the Gravity. Time will tell.
 
bufnita said:
5. Google maps - time to admit they are the best in the business so why not go with the best?
Click to expand...
Agreed, but at length I've come to the conclusion this will never happen. It's unfortunate that I'd have to step down to one of many lesser vehicles to get the best navigation experience.
You can always connect your phone to the car (if it's an iPhone), and have better navigation through a tiny window.
 
bufnita said:
New to Lucid after driving "another" EV for 4 years and having experience driving a few other EVs. So far the car is very well built and has a superior driving experience (ride, handiling etc.) compared to the competitor EVs, however it falls short on a few areas that could be improved with software updates. Listing below, some of my gripes:

1. SSP sounds system - needs further tuning. Lacks the crispness and clarity of a premium audio system. For having 21 speakers this system is a disappointment, however it has significant potential. Tidal HiFi with Dolby Atmos shows the system's capability but that should be at minimum the quality of streaming audio. Also, add more EQ settings.

2. Pilot panel and glass cockpit controls - need the option to segregate the controls. Very frustrating that you cannot split music and nav. Also, Carplay is somewhat of a letdown that doesn't use full glass cockpit - I would rather have Carplay in Pilot Panel.

3. Glass cockpit left info screen - need the ability to use the toggle switch to view data (tire pressure, consumption etc.)When DD not engaged the left toggles have no function.

4. Proximity entry needs work - this has been discussed widely and I am sure by now Lucid is aware this needs a fix

5. Google maps - time to admit they are the best in the business so why not go with the best?

6. PWS noise when stationary - this needs to be off when the car is not moving. Way too loud.

7. Dash cam addition - so many cameras and no dash cam or Sentry/Gear Guard like protection

Overall, great car that has the right hardware and only a few software updates short of being extraordinary.
Click to expand...

I like your very last sentence the most.
 
BradSholl said:
I often accidentally signal when trying to activate the one wipe button. And yes, I turn the cabin light on almost every time I adjust the rear view mirror. It’s my copilot’s job to turn it off.
Click to expand...
Yes, the choice of making this a touch-only button instead of a push-click button was clearly incorrect.

<rant>
While we are on this topic, let's talk about the clever "pause a fraction of a second and then slowly dim" behavior of the reading lights. If I try to turn this light off, I invariably have to fiddle with it. That's because is looks like it is ignoring me. So what happens is I touch it, nothing happens, I touch it again, and then eventually I remember that this light behaves differently than every other light in my life. (I think this slowly-fade behavior happens on turning the light on, too - it fades up - but for some reason that is less of a problem for me, probably because there is a little light right away.)

What the light should do is go off - 100% off - as soon as I touch the button. Feedback. If there were tactile feedback from a push-click, then I would not need that instant-off behavior, but I have no tactile feedback that I pushed the button, so I need the light to tell me.

But let's talk about the design process here. It seems that someone said, "Gee, let's be super cool and make the light slowly dim when you turn it off." I have so many problems with that. (1) See above - it's a bad UX. Just because there is a marketing need to 'innovate" and do something "special and cool" does not mean you should do it on UI elements. (2) Someone probably wrote some code to do this, at the expense of other code we really need. (3) Cognitive load. I now have to "think about" something as simple as turning on/off the damn light. I have better things to do with my brain cycles. I am the human and you are the car: don't try to train me, but instead behave in a standard and natural way as much as possible.

This flawed design thinking is also the root of many of the complaints in this thread. For example, there is are several perfectly well accepted and intuitive standard steering wheel stalk solutions for the wipers. Why, oh, why would you abandon those in favor of "try to find a non-tactile button in the dark while you are focused on the pouring rain outside"? Just because it's cool?

I get that there is a UX design model that says, "OK, the software will handle all the complexity for you. So we're going to simplify the UI or hide part of the functionality - to make the UI "clean" - because you aren't going to need that UI element any more. It's automated!" And that's fine, but if you take that approach you need to be damn sure you do a perfect job with the automation. And, as we have read here, many folks find the wiper implementation far from perfect. And, while the button for the reading light is an annoyance, the crappy UI for the wipers is an actual safety issue.

In UI design, if you have to train your users, then you are doing something wrong. For example, why does the key fob not have three buttons, one each for the doors, trunk and frunk? Instead, you expect me to learn a hidden key sequence?

And, getting back to the "marketing need to innovate". The place to innovate in this car is in the drive train, suspension, body design. There is tons of design risk there. Why did you add to that design risk with silly "innovations" like the reading light, turn signals, those crappy toggle/scroll buttons on the steering wheel (a completely novel design, and one that is hard to use), door handle behavior. Don't innovate on those things unless you absolutely nail the implementation.

As the British say, Lucid is being "Too clever by half". I hope they stop doing that. And, by the way, if a future firmware update would change the reading light behavior to avoid the dimming, I would very much appreciate it.

</rant>
 
AltadenaAir said:
Yes, the choice of making this a touch-only button instead of a push-click button was clearly incorrect.

<rant>
While we are on this topic, let's talk about the clever "pause a fraction of a second and then slowly dim" behavior of the reading lights. If I try to turn this light off, I invariably have to fiddle with it. That's because is looks like it is ignoring me. So what happens is I touch it, nothing happens, I touch it again, and then eventually I remember that this light behaves differently than every other light in my life. (I think this slowly-fade behavior happens on turning the light on, too - it fades up - but for some reason that is less of a problem for me, probably because there is a little light right away.)

What the light should do is go off - 100% off - as soon as I touch the button. Feedback. If there were tactile feedback from a push-click, then I would not need that instant-off behavior, but I have no tactile feedback that I pushed the button, so I need the light to tell me.

But let's talk about the design process here. It seems that someone said, "Gee, let's be super cool and make the light slowly dim when you turn it off." I have so many problems with that. (1) See above - it's a bad UX. Just because there is a marketing need to 'innovate" and do something "special and cool" does not mean you should do it on UI elements. (2) Someone probably wrote some code to do this, at the expense of other code we really need. (3) Cognitive load. I now have to "think about" something as simple as turning on/off the damn light. I have better things to do with my brain cycles. I am the human and you are the car: don't try to train me, but instead behave in a standard and natural way as much as possible.

This flawed design thinking is also the root of many of the complaints in this thread. For example, there is are several perfectly well accepted and intuitive standard steering wheel stalk solutions for the wipers. Why, oh, why would you abandon those in favor of "try to find a non-tactile button in the dark while you are focused on the pouring rain outside"? Just because it's cool?

I get that there is a UX design model that says, "OK, the software will handle all the complexity for you. So we're going to simplify the UI or hide part of the functionality - to make the UI "clean" - because you aren't going to need that UI element any more. It's automated!" And that's fine, but if you take that approach you need to be damn sure you do a perfect job with the automation. And, as we have read here, many folks find the wiper implementation far from perfect. And, while the button for the reading light is an annoyance, the crappy UI for the wipers is an actual safety issue.

In UI design, if you have to train your users, then you are doing something wrong. For example, why does the key fob not have three buttons, one each for the doors, trunk and frunk? Instead, you expect me to learn a hidden key sequence?

And, getting back to the "marketing need to innovate". The place to innovate in this car is in the drive train, suspension, body design. There is tons of design risk there. Why did you add to that design risk with silly "innovations" like the reading light, turn signals, those crappy toggle/scroll buttons on the steering wheel (a completely novel design, and one that is hard to use), door handle behavior. Don't innovate on those things unless you absolutely nail the implementation.

As the British say, Lucid is being "Too clever by half". I hope they stop doing that. And, by the way, if a future firmware update would change the reading light behavior to avoid the dimming, I would very much appreciate it.

</rant>
Click to expand...
Respectfully, your post assumes everyone shares your view of these things that bother you. They probably don’t and therein lies the most challenging part of creating any complex product. Your decisions will please some and piss off others.
 
AltadenaAir said:
Yes, the choice of making this a touch-only button instead of a push-click button was clearly incorrect.

<rant>
While we are on this topic, let's talk about the clever "pause a fraction of a second and then slowly dim" behavior of the reading lights. If I try to turn this light off, I invariably have to fiddle with it. That's because is looks like it is ignoring me. So what happens is I touch it, nothing happens, I touch it again, and then eventually I remember that this light behaves differently than every other light in my life. (I think this slowly-fade behavior happens on turning the light on, too - it fades up - but for some reason that is less of a problem for me, probably because there is a little light right away.)

What the light should do is go off - 100% off - as soon as I touch the button. Feedback. If there were tactile feedback from a push-click, then I would not need that instant-off behavior, but I have no tactile feedback that I pushed the button, so I need the light to tell me.

But let's talk about the design process here. It seems that someone said, "Gee, let's be super cool and make the light slowly dim when you turn it off." I have so many problems with that. (1) See above - it's a bad UX. Just because there is a marketing need to 'innovate" and do something "special and cool" does not mean you should do it on UI elements. (2) Someone probably wrote some code to do this, at the expense of other code we really need. (3) Cognitive load. I now have to "think about" something as simple as turning on/off the damn light. I have better things to do with my brain cycles. I am the human and you are the car: don't try to train me, but instead behave in a standard and natural way as much as possible.

This flawed design thinking is also the root of many of the complaints in this thread. For example, there is are several perfectly well accepted and intuitive standard steering wheel stalk solutions for the wipers. Why, oh, why would you abandon those in favor of "try to find a non-tactile button in the dark while you are focused on the pouring rain outside"? Just because it's cool?

I get that there is a UX design model that says, "OK, the software will handle all the complexity for you. So we're going to simplify the UI or hide part of the functionality - to make the UI "clean" - because you aren't going to need that UI element any more. It's automated!" And that's fine, but if you take that approach you need to be damn sure you do a perfect job with the automation. And, as we have read here, many folks find the wiper implementation far from perfect. And, while the button for the reading light is an annoyance, the crappy UI for the wipers is an actual safety issue.

In UI design, if you have to train your users, then you are doing something wrong. For example, why does the key fob not have three buttons, one each for the doors, trunk and frunk? Instead, you expect me to learn a hidden key sequence?

And, getting back to the "marketing need to innovate". The place to innovate in this car is in the drive train, suspension, body design. There is tons of design risk there. Why did you add to that design risk with silly "innovations" like the reading light, turn signals, those crappy toggle/scroll buttons on the steering wheel (a completely novel design, and one that is hard to use), door handle behavior. Don't innovate on those things unless you absolutely nail the implementation.

As the British say, Lucid is being "Too clever by half". I hope they stop doing that. And, by the way, if a future firmware update would change the reading light behavior to avoid the dimming, I would very much appreciate it.

</rant>
Click to expand...

I definitely share your views about the wipers/stalk and fob (as most do, even though I don't use the fob except for service and car washes). It's crazy, while driving, to have to lean over and find the right wiper button on a touch screen rather than have it controlled from a stalk as it is on numerous other vehicles. A stalk and related wiper controls on it, can be activated purely from memory or tactile feel *without* taking your eyes off the road to find the appropriate little icon. Auto wipers work "ok", but a far from perfect (as most implementations are also flawed). And giving a spritz of wiper fluid often results in the turn signals activation, as many others can attest to.

The scroll buttons on the steering wheel don't bother me much, but we have all seen much better implementations.

That said, these are relatively minor compared to the overall driving experience, which makes a lot of these design decisions/annoyances more palatable - but they are still entirely valid complaints, and in the case of the wiper controls definitely a potential safety issue..
 
Amster said:
I haven't driven a Tesla. This is my first full EV. Which is probably why some of the more techie things missing from the Lucid don't bother me as much as they do other people. I've never owned a car with a dashcam or sentry mode or Homelink, or one that unlocked as you approached it.
Click to expand...
Homelink has been there in most (if not all) cars in US for at least 20 years.. I am not sure what the problem is with Lucid homelink is though.. it works just fine on mine.
 
thommev said:
Homelink has been there in most (if not all) cars in US for at least 20 years.. I am not sure what the problem is with Lucid homelink is though.. it works just fine on mine.
Click to expand...
There’s no issue with Lucid Homelink — it works beautifully. Some are bothered by the fact that it’s not geofenced and does not automatically open or close the garage doors for you as you approach / depart the way you can program some systems to do (including Tesla). While I DID find that to be a cool feature on my Tesla, on a scale of 1-100 in terms of being important to me? It ranks a solid 0.

I love driving my AGT — it’s a simply incredible car. Some folks allow their joy to be diminished because of things like this. While they matter not to me, they bother quite a few folks on this forum a LOT.
 
Homelink setup was a little wonky for me, though after getting configured it works fine. It *is* geofenced (mine realizes I'm close to home and presents itself for activation), but it does not do anything automatically. I quite enjoyed this feature in my Tesla, and I configured it to open, but not close the garage when I got home (but not when leaving). Since the Air "knows" when you approach home, one would think that auto open (or auto close) would be doable with a software update, unless they don't want to implement this feature for whatever reason.

Nothing wrong with calling out shortcomings with Lucid vehicles, which there are a few. Yes, it's an amazing car, but that's no reason not to discuss things that could be improved. It's fantastic, though not perfect, and there is no way that will ever improve if a blind eye is turned to those things that can be improved or implemented.
 
The most frustrating issue I’m currently facing is the slow loading of the driver profile. It takes a significant amount of time to load the profile, and when my wife with me even when she is standing outside the car, it sometimes loads her profile as if she’s still in the car.
 
Lucidami said:
The most frustrating issue I’m currently facing is the slow loading of the driver profile. It takes a significant amount of time to load the profile, and when my wife with me even when she is standing outside the car, it sometimes loads her profile as if she’s still in the car.
Click to expand...
Yes, the profile system isn’t great. Does your wife drive the car a lot? Since my wife only drives the car once in a long while, I just left it with my own profile and nothing else. That way there’s no loading necessary.
 
Hi All, I am new to the forum and have had my Lucid AT for about a month now (coming from BMW 5 series and MB E-class in the past, and currently Model 3 is driven mostly by my wife). Thus far I am enjoying the car, although I should admit it is quite buggy - and many of the bugs have been discussed here, so no point to list them again...
In terms of the feature suggestions - I was surprised to find out that the nav system doesn't have favorites or prior destinations, kind of a standard thing that's been around for many years. Is that Lucid's omission? Would be nice to have it...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Buffalo Bob
Mobile App Feature Improvements with 2.4.X
Replies
4
Views
269
Buffalo Bob
Buffalo Bob
Murcie
Lucid x Apple = CarPlay 2
Replies
10
Views
752
Bobby
Bobby
V
Hey Lucid improvements needed
Replies
18
Views
565
DeaneG
DeaneG
J
Auto wake feature
Replies
4
Views
183
Bobby
Bobby
A
Regenerative braking
Replies
9
Views
382
Steve181
Steve181
Back
Top