A few thoughts:
* It’s disappointing to me that these plans were only publicized as the result of his largely negative review. Lucid should have made owners aware of this roadmap regardless, not as the result of feeling compelled to address an almost viral negative review.
* Similarly the need for the new chip for UX3 on older cars should have been made clear by Lucid when the chip was introduced. There was conjecture here as to any ‘hidden’ need the chip might have in future developments, but it was just that, conjecture. Since I’m skeptical that the new UX will be released on time and I’m not even 100% sure I’ll still own the car by then, I’ll still hold off on the $1,000 upgrade. I’m perfectly fine with the current speed of different aspects of the software, so that’s not a selling point for me.
* The premise that the car would supply enough power for his house for 4+ days is predicated on a full charge. This is simply not reasonable. Very few people will have a full charge coincidentally upon the loss of home power. The overwhelming majority of people like myself only charge to 80% and many don’t do so on a daily basis. Further, having an 80% charge is only a reasonable assumption if you do charge on a daily basis and haven’t driven since your last charge when the power outage occurs. This is not to say the feature isn’t desirable, but expectations about how long a house can be powered should be tempered with realistic expectations.
* I had similar cupholder issues with my Jaguar I-Pace, but found that taping the little rubber protrusions to the side solved the problem.