Savage Geese Takes a Long Look

[Lucidicrous]

It just takes time. For example….

It took 18 years for Microsoft Windows to became a mature, stable operating system, meeting the reliability expectations of non‑enthusiast users and laying the groundwork for subsequent refinements in Windows 7 and Windows 10. This was achieved with Windows XP SP2 (2004). Microsoft began selling Windows on November 20, 1985, when it officially released Windows 1.0.

 

[Ironhorse]

Their discussion about software was all about architecture and platform capabilities. Nothing they said sounded particularly crazy, except perhaps for a brief bit where they talked about how customized per car the software could theoretically be. Building a flexible software platform can certainly be expected to take 2 years. Actually, I'd view that as an aggressive timeframe for such a project. Assuming that part of the video was filmed about a year ago, then it's not surprising that there are currently numerous software bugs on such a complex system that's only 3 years old. Platform capabilities are an entirely separate topic from reliability, testing, and software QA. It's the latter part they messed up on.

Part of what we are facing isn’t really a complex thing to manage. Key fob issues, screen not coming back on time, settings not being remembered, I’m not really complex things that need three years to mature. That is literally car 101.
I’m not willing to give them a pass for missing the basics. And that seems to be the crux of pretty much every single review.

When my kids get in the car, and the music is not working, that shouldn’t really take three years to figure it out. In fact, music is a standard part of the architecture. Creating apps is a standard part of architecture.

 

[socktucker]

Part of what we are facing isn’t really a complex thing to manage. Key fob issues, screen not coming back on time, settings not being remembered, I’m not really complex things that need three years to mature. That is literally car 101.
I’m not willing to give them a pass for missing the basics. And that seems to be the crux of pretty much every single review.

When my kids get in the car, and the music is not working, that shouldn’t really take three years to figure it out. In fact, music is a standard part of the architecture. Creating apps is a standard part of architecture.

And Lucid only makes 2 cars!

 

[hmp10]

I'm not an owner yet, but I'm less worried about software (medium-to-long term), and more slightly worried about the motors (and/or inverters) that have needed replacing so far.

The software will improve. The hardware will age and experience stress. Hopefully whatever will fail, fails early (within warranty), and they figure out and fix whatever caused the issues.

FWIW, at least in our case, the rear drive unit failure was in an electronic component (probably in the inverter), not in the core mechanicals of the motor.

 

[Bunnylebowski]

That segment was so painful to watch. Knowing what most of the owners know now, it’s laughable at best and incompetence at worst.

They have no business releasing **** software after that somewhat self congratulatory segment. I believe they even mentioned about something making it a “new car overnight”. In 2 years. Why does a new skin take 2 years to develop? In today’s age that’s just publicly showing incompetence.

As you can guess, That segment really really ticked me off.

The SC is the face of Lucid and those poor folks are overwhelmed due lack of actual working software.

That being said, I love the way it drives. Can’t wait to get it back from the SC.

I’m sure they are already keenly aware of the consequences of releasing a fault prone vehicle to reviewers. I don’t think a single reviewed Gravity has been issue free thus far. Things will be great for them if they can wrangle control of these issues and rapidly solve them and I do think they’re very motivated to do so and are making progress at it. You can’t go back in time but being able to course correct is a huge asset. They’re taking steps to rectify the disaster that is Lucid Financial Services as well. I’ll try to remain positive and imagine a check list of issues that are getting crossed off quickly, and think happy thoughts. I don’t like it when Lucid makes me sad.

 

[hmp10]

I’m sure they are already keenly aware of the consequences of releasing a fault prone vehicle to reviewers.

Yet they still do it. I just don't get it.

Kyle Conner has not yet posted a review of the independent, thorough test driving he said was imminent six months ago. While often pointing out things he doesn't like about Lucids, Conner nevertheless seems to be the reviewer who most wants to give the company every benefit of the doubt when he can.

He also said six months ago that the Gravity was going to be the most significant EV release of the year, something that I would think a YouTube channel producer would be jumping at the bit to get out there ahead of others.

To me, his mysterious silence speaks more loudly with each passing week.

 

[allenmhc]

Hopefully without trying to sound critical of the Lucid software team, I'm not sure if we have any automotive software engineers on here, but any feedback on the words from the software team in the video.

For the software engineers and developers on here: Based on what the Lucid software team members said in the video, do you hear or get the sense that the software skillset/knowledge currently exists in-house for Lucid to have software that matches its engineering?

I know that's a hard, maybe impossible question to answer, so maybe a better question is: Do you see the software team as being on the right track for where they need to go?

So a disclaimer that I haven't done automotive software, but I have built and run software teams. Any speculation that we do here is pretty much armchair quarterbacking. As I've said in the other thread, software is hard—it's not about how big the company is or how much you're paying, look at the iOS 26 redesign rollout and bugs on what a $4t company is trying to do if you think it's just a couple of incompetent employees.

But the vid has the heads of the UX and infotainment teams. The vast majority of the bugs and glitches people have been dealing with—aren't really issues w/ the UI/UX of the infotainment systems, and the heads of departments who get interviewed wouldn't know the details anyway (but to be a manager, you have to sound enough like you know what you're talking about). In fact, the firmware engineers who are the ones flashing the keyfobs probably wouldn't get interviewed because, well, as others have said, this is pretty basic stuff that aren't and shouldn't be a differentiator.

 

[Bunnylebowski]

Yet they still do it. I just don't get it.

Kyle Conner has not yet posted a review of the independent, thorough test driving he said was imminent six months ago. While often pointing out things he doesn't like about Lucids, Conner nevertheless seems to be the reviewer who most wants to give the company every benefit of the doubt when he can.

He also said six months ago that the Gravity was going to be the most significant EV release of the year, something that I would think a YouTube channel producer would be jumping at the bit to get out there ahead of others.

To me, his mysterious silence speaks more loudly with each passing week.

He did have a car that was part of the MotorTrend review, but it left him stranded in a parking lot for 20 minutes due to keyfob errors, which have since been fixed. So he didn’t make that video but instead just contributed to the MotorTrend short ride along, mentioned the event and also a very long list of bugs to fix he was going to share with Lucid. I appreciate his videos because they’re educational and I think he even wants to help Lucid perfect their cars, for free. I think it’s respectable since they’ve granted him a lot of exclusive behind the scenes access.

 

[msaunders9430]

So a disclaimer that I haven't done automotive software, but I have built and run software teams. Any speculation that we do here is pretty much armchair quarterbacking. As I've said in the other thread, software is hard—it's not about how big the company is or how much you're paying, look at the iOS 26 redesign rollout and bugs on what a $4t company is trying to do if you think it's just a couple of incompetent employees.

But the vid has the heads of the UX and infotainment teams. The vast majority of the bugs and glitches people have been dealing with—aren't really issues w/ the UI/UX of the infotainment systems, and the heads of departments who get interviewed wouldn't know the details anyway (but to be a manager, you have to sound enough like you know what you're talking about). In fact, the firmware engineers who are the ones flashing the keyfobs probably wouldn't get interviewed because, well, as others have said, this is pretty basic stuff that aren't and shouldn't be a differentiator.

"Software is hard".
That's probably an understatement which is why I didn't want my post to come across as critical.
I've worked on the design, development, and deployment of educational software, but nothing involvement cars.

Regarding the keyfobs:
From reading many posts on the fob issue, a big rhetorical question seems to be, "What is Lucid not doing with this "pretty basic stuff" that other companies have done?".
The line from the video "Lucid tried to do too much" stands out.

 

[TahoeMichael]

Part of what we are facing isn’t really a complex thing to manage. Key fob issues, screen not coming back on time, settings not being remembered, I’m not really complex things that need three years to mature. That is literally car 101.
I’m not willing to give them a pass for missing the basics. And that seems to be the crux of pretty much every single review.

When my kids get in the car, and the music is not working, that shouldn’t really take three years to figure it out. In fact, music is a standard part of the architecture. Creating apps is a standard part of architecture.

I'd agree that individual features aren't the hard part. If they'd started with a mature platform and had just been building apps, I'd guess they'd be in much better place.

One has to wonder if Rawlinson was pushed out at the beginning of the year when the board realized how under-baked the vehicle was.

 

[Bdr100]

I'm not an owner yet, but I'm less worried about software (medium-to-long term), and more slightly worried about the motors (and/or inverters) that have needed replacing so far.

The software will improve. The hardware will age and experience stress. Hopefully whatever will fail, fails early (within warranty), and they figure out and fix whatever caused the issues.

Motors/drivetrain and batteries are warrantied for 8 years/100,000 miles

 

[prgarg]

He did have a car that was part of the MotorTrend review, but it left him stranded in a parking lot for 20 minutes due to keyfob errors, which have since been fixed. So he didn’t make that video but instead just contributed to the MotorTrend short ride along, mentioned the event and also a very long list of bugs to fix he was going to share with Lucid. I appreciate his videos because they’re educational and I think he even wants to help Lucid perfect their cars, for free. I think it’s respectable since they’ve granted him a lot of exclusive behind the scenes access.

The 2 main points I clearly remember from the 2 videos he made were:

- His concern about how far from being production ready the Gravity's software was
- Connectivity issues: the car would even lose connection when parked at Lucid's HQ

Sort of premonitory of what ended up happening after launch...

 

[merveille07]

I'd agree that individual features aren't the hard part. If they'd started with a mature platform and had just been building apps, I'd guess they'd be in much better place.

One has to wonder if Rawlinson was pushed out at the beginning of the year when the board realized how under-baked the vehicle was.

I think he did it to get his bonus and this is the result. I love Rawlinson; but I think it was a big mistake. He put Lucid under unnecessary pressure. A delay would have been better.

 

[TahoeMichael]

The biggest thing people are going to be critical of is what they see and it’s the software. While many of us die hard enthusiasts can appreciate the remarkable level engineering that has gone into the Gravity, to put it bluntly, the average car owner doesn’t give a shit.

Those 2 Lucid employees talked a big game about the software then they delivered a sub par version of it. I also question if Air & Gravity share the same codebase because if so, why isn’t the Air seeing things the Gravity has. Superchargers integrated into the Air Nav for example or the ability to run multiple apps. The kicker was when he said people should be prepared to wait up to 2 years for the software to improve and features promised to be delivered! If true, they really learnt nothing from the Air and making people wait so long for features.

Based on that comment alone I don’t see the AR part of the HUD coming anytime soon.

I think they explicitly said that the computing architecture for the Gravity was much different, and the code base for the Gravity is new. I don't think they ever said that it was shared.

 

[TahoeMichael]

I think he did it to get his bonus and this is the result. I love Rawlinson; but I think it was a big mistake. He put Lucid under unnecessary pressure. A delay would have been better.

It's not clear that releasing half-baked can be fully blamed on Rawlinson. He's been out of the CEO's chair for basically the whole year. I have to assume that the company decided to start shipping half-baked cars to customers in late June with the full awareness of at least the current CEO, and probably also the board of directors. As CEO in 2024, Rawlinson certainly deserves blame for the software team not being where it needed to be.

 

[Xminus6]

Okay, just finished it.

This is probably the most nailed down review I've ever seen done on any car with which I have personal experience. The wrap-up is simply superb in laying out what Lucid did right and did wrong with the Gravity.

End of the day, the Gravity is still the car I've been waiting for all my life . . . or will be once they slay some of the software dragons that so plague it at the moment.

Your eternal optimism about the Gravity is amazing. I've had 5% of the issues you've had with your car(s) and I'm starting to lose my patience. Honestly the fact that they gave me a Gravity as a loaner instead of an Air this time is a huge relief (no offense to you Air drivers). Although the loaner Gravity also has a couple issues that have popped up. But I'll at least be able to compare some things that are happening in my car versus another Gravity to see if my car has behaviors that are outliers or if they're just common software issues.

 

[HC_79]

I think they explicitly said that the computing architecture for the Gravity was much different, and the code base for the Gravity is new. I don't think they ever said that it was shared.

He said they share the same codebase and said it’s an advantage so they don’t need to create different applications for different models etc.

Yet the TiDAL, Nav apps etc. are different. You can set arrival SoC etc. in Nav on Gravity but not on Air Nav so if they are sharing the same code base I don’t understand why the Air is lagging behind with outdated apps compared to the Gravity.

 

[TahoeMichael]

View attachment 33724
He said they share the same codebase and said it’s an advantage so they don’t need to create different applications for different models etc.

Yet the TiDAL, Nav apps etc. are different. You can set arrival SoC etc. in Nav on Gravity but not on Air Nav so if they are sharing the same code base I don’t understand why the Air is lagging behind with outdated apps compared to the Gravity.

Rewatching that bit, I guess they aren't being entirely clear. I interpret what they say to mean that they've tried to build a new platform that could be used to operate the Air, Gravity, and future mid-sized, but they didn't say that new platform has already rolled out to the Air. Considering the problems they're currently having with the Gravity, it would seem quite premature to try rolling it out to the Air. But it's possible your interpretation is correct. Not being an Air owner, I haven't paid much attention to Air software versions to see if there's signs of a new platform being released.

 

[Ironhorse]

I'd agree that individual features aren't the hard part. If they'd started with a mature platform and had just been building apps, I'd guess they'd be in much better place.

One has to wonder if Rawlinson was pushed out at the beginning of the year when the board realized how under-baked the vehicle was.

They picked Android auto for the base OS. It’s fairly stable, except for device specific drivers.

 

[hmp10]

Your eternal optimism about the Gravity is amazing. I've had 5% of the issues you've had with your car(s) and I'm starting to lose my patience.

I think I'm getting through this in part because of my experience with owning an early Air (December 2021 delivery). The first ten months with the UX 1.0 UI suite was a nightmare, but once UX 2.0 came along and Lucid started issuing rapid-fire OTA updates, the issues began to die away fairly quickly. For most of the past couple of years the car has been relatively problem-free, leaving me to enjoy what a great driving machine it is without recurrent torment.

Also, the Air, like the Gravity, had to have a new rear drive unit installed (along with a new battery pack). But the service experience was so seamless, if a bit lengthy, that the drive unit failure with the Gravity didn't completely unnerve me. (We also had to have a rear drive unit and battery pack replaced in our 2015 Tesla Model S, so it's a rodeo I've been to three times now with EVs.)

As near as I can tell, the automotive engineering end of the Gravity and its structural solidity give the Gravity seriously good bones. If the software improvements travel the same trajectory as the Air's, then I think we'll end up with two truly superior vehicles.

What most annoys me, though, is that Lucid did no better with the introductory software of the Gravity than with the Air but is still continuing to put it into customers' hands. And my fear is they will do the same thing with the Earth mid-size, which might be the death knell of the company.