Lucid interim CEO on Gravity software issues and hopeful resolution

[9point81]

https://insideevs.com/news/784153/lucid-gravity-software-bugs-update/

Two parts of note (to me anyway):

"At CES, Winterhoff said that at least one more OTA update is coming to the Gravity at the end of January, followed by another one in two months. "So our expectation is that for the Gravity, we will be over the hump by end of January, latest, latest, end of March," he said."

and second:

"Another OTA update coming in the next few weeks will address how the key continually "pings" the car until its own battery runs out."


I remain hopeful that we are on track to have our vehicles performing and acting as they should. Then hopefully we can get to the other new promised features like phone as a key and CarPlay/Android Auto.

 

[goldengate]

Yeah, good first start to fire the team, but the fish stinks from the head down. Did the "interim CEO" not take a Gravity out for an hour or two drive to see how it performed before it was released? I prefer it when leaders take accountability themselves, then quietly make changes below them.

 

[tmichael]

Yeah, good first start to fire the team, but the fish stinks from the head down. Did the "interim CEO" not take a Gravity out for an hour or two drive to see how it performed before it was released? I prefer it when leaders take accountability themselves, then quietly make changes below them.

He would have been quite impressed with my car! It has been fabulous!

 

[socktucker]

Did the "interim CEO" not take a Gravity out for an hour or two drive to see how it performed before it was released?

He might not have. You can’t run a company if you can’t trust the execs in your team. They aren’t a mom and pop shop, they have 6000 employees.

Source: I run a company.

 

[prgarg]

Yeah, good first start to fire the team, but the fish stinks from the head down. Did the "interim CEO" not take a Gravity out for an hour or two drive to see how it performed before it was released? I prefer it when leaders take accountability themselves, then quietly make changes below them.

I was thinking exactly the same...

 

[L-Dude]

Yeah, good first start to fire the team, but the fish stinks from the head down. Did the "interim CEO" not take a Gravity out for an hour or two drive to see how it performed before it was released? I prefer it when leaders take accountability themselves, then quietly make changes below them.

Perhaps, but I think Winteroff had no choice but to keep the SW team in place until Gravity was launched. Or perhaps he should have acted sooner. Hard to know.

 

[HC_79]

Perhaps, but I think Winteroff had no choice but to keep the SW team in place until Gravity was launched. Or perhaps he should have acted sooner. Hard to know.

Keep in mind, this is the 3rd reboot. Consequences were faced with the Airs software disaster then came Michael Bell, who left and someone else took over then they were given the boot and now here we are with Emad.

 

[allenmhc]

Perhaps, but I think Winteroff had no choice but to keep the SW team in place until Gravity was launched. Or perhaps he should have acted sooner. Hard to know.

The last thing you want is to replace a team (or the leaders of a team) before a launch; you'd in effect delay the launch for months while new leadership gets in place and understands what's going on. Granted, that's maybe what they should have done (and have done in practice, if the Dec → June 2025 delays were any indication), but having been in a position similar to this myself in leadership, this is IMO appropriate: acknowledge the problems, give both examples of concrete steps to fix them (new firmware, new software leaders) and what you'll continue to do (roadmap, upcoming firmware). People still griping about Lucid's response either are just venting or don't know how products are built and maintained.

 

[L-Dude]

Keep in mind, this is the 3rd reboot. Consequences were faced with the Airs software disaster then came Michael Bell, who left and someone else took over then they were given the boot and now here we are with Emad.

I didn't know the history--thanks for cluing me in.

 

[msaunders9430]

Keep in mind, this is the 3rd reboot. Consequences were faced with the Airs software disaster then came Michael Bell, who left and someone else took over then they were given the boot and now here we are with Emad.

Very relevant information in the evolution of the company.
Long time forum members definitely provide a valuable perspective to this forum with historical facts.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[hwy17er]

Keep in mind, this is the 3rd reboot. Consequences were faced with the Airs software disaster then came Michael Bell, who left and someone else took over then they were given the boot and now here we are with Emad.

At least with Emad, you it's not that the guy's a kook..he's solid (and super bright)

 

[HC_79]

At least with Emad, you it's not that the guy's a kook..he's solid (and super bright)

Yeah, no disrespect to Emad at all. I’ve met the guy and he’s definitely very smart and a nice guy as well. He’s certainly got some challenges ahead of him though.

 

[Ron A]

• Lucid Motors' interim CEO, Marc Winterhoff, said that the company replaced much of its software team in the wake of the launch.
• Winterhoff said he expects those final glitches to be fixed at the end of January, or "at the latest, the end of March."

I work for a large software company, so that 2nd bullet is extremely aggressive considering an org change. I am hopeful it will happen, but I'm sure bugs will persist.

Another datapoint is the underlying OS is based on Android Auto, which there are things Lucid cant change easily. This was discussed in Jason's video here:

 

[socktucker]

Another datapoint is the underlying OS is based on Android Auto, which there are things Lucid cant change easily

Is it a coding skill issue? Man power? For example, the vehicle shown on the lower screen is always the same car, regardless of your own car, but it shows the car accurately on the upper screen. Is there not just “a way” to make that work? Or cross traffic alert stupidly and pointlessly alerts you to front AND rear cross traffic. And creep doesn’t work more than one time without throwing warnings or just stop working. Is it not a simple task to program those kind of things when already baked into the base OS? it’s like it’s almost right, but it’s not. Or am I grossly oversimplifying it.

 

[TahoeMichael]

Is it a coding skill issue? Man power? For example, the vehicle shown on the lower screen is always the same car, regardless of your own car, but it shows the car accurately on the upper screen. Is there not just “a way” to make that work? Or cross traffic alert stupidly and pointlessly alerts you to front AND rear cross traffic. And creep doesn’t work more than one time without throwing warnings or just stop working. Is it not a simple task to program those kind of things when already baked into the base OS? it’s like it’s almost right, but it’s not. Or am I grossly oversimplifying it.

Coding skill is rarely the problem, and it's also probably not a manpower issue. It's much more likely to have been an organizational/culture problem. And it's quite possible that the problem was directly related to having a big software team that reports to engineering leadership who are hardware people. Speaking from personal experience, it can be incredibly challenging to lead an organization that reports up to people who don't really understand what your organization does. Someone else noted that this isn't the first reboot, but the prior reboots weren't nearly as sweeping. Rawlinson is a great engineer, but it's entirely appropriate for his head to have been on the chopping block at this point. Given his strengths, I admit that if I'd been board chair I might well have suggested demoting him to only run hardware, but it's possible that was suggested and he wouldn't accept it.

 

[socktucker]

Coding skill is rarely the problem, and it's also probably not a manpower issue. It's much more likely to have been an organizational/culture problem. And it's quite possible that the problem was directly related to having a big software team that reports to engineering leadership who are hardware people. Speaking from personal experience, it can be incredibly challenging to lead an organization that reports up to people who don't really understand what your organization does. Someone else noted that this isn't the first reboot, but the prior reboots weren't nearly as sweeping. Rawlinson is a great engineer, but it's entirely appropriate for his head to have been on the chopping block at this point. Given his strengths, I admit that if I'd been board chair I might well have suggested demoting him to only run hardware, but it's possible that was suggested and he wouldn't accept it.

Thank you for the insight. That makes sense, I’ve worked for places like that in a sales capacity where people too get detached from the reality of the competition come up with terrible ideas.