> I would pay more for a car where the software department is somewhat competent and knows what they're doing.

I have a Tesla Model Y and I was thinking of downsizing to an ID.4 and you just scared the shit out of me.

The ID 4 is coming off a recall and sales stop because the doors would open when in motion if the handles got wet.

I can't recall any car that didn't have any 'teething problems'. Some cars I've owned had multiple recalls. Of course it doesn't look good, but often it's to fix the probability of a problem occurring: it's not that the doors instantly swing open when touched by a drop of water.

Go for a Hyundai.

There are other competitors for that segment, even the Q4e on the same platform has better UI. People still buy the ID4 because it's not enough of a deciding factor.

Hyundai/Kia make very good EVs. I am extremely happy with my new Kona. I would not say the software is amazing, but it is responsive, nice to use and has pretty much everything you need.

Amazing claim to read considering I have experience with modern Audi software on the daily and it is an utter dumpster fire.

Well, consider, you could have paid more for a different car that has better software, like a Tesla, Lucid, Rivian ... but you didn't.

I'm not blaming you, I initially thought a VW ID.4 was a cool option. It just wasn't clear to the marketplace how bad the software was, and it's easy to assume "it's fine, I don't need fancy stuff" until you live with it and see how fundamentally bad the software is. How is the market to know? If it takes a couple years to figure it out, it makes sense for the hardware company managers to just make the hardware specs at the competitive price, and software is ... just whatever needed to get it out the door.

I worked for a few years at a sub-division of Samsung, and I've thought for a while about why "hardware" companies can be so bad at "software" ... in many cases, it's just that the leadership chain doesn't know what good software is and who is good at it. Managers don't really know what a good programmer is or does. Division heads don't know what managers are good at managing software teams and projects. And so on.

So at some point 2 years after the car is released, the CTO drives it and realizes that the software systems are fundamentally crap and can't be fixed, and it was not close or in-progress or anything, but he should have realized it 3+ years ago if he had good software sense, long before the car was released. And that's what happened with the VW ID.4

This is, incidentally, why it's so important to have a free market in software separate from hardware, despite what Apple may think. You can't have a free market competing on every possible feature; some features are going to be dominant. So people will choose cars based on size, aesthetics, price and brand .. but not on the quality of the software, which is very hard for them to evaluate even on a test drive.

> you could have paid more for a different car that has better software, like a Tesla, Lucid, Rivian ... but you didn't

At the time, I did not pay much attention to the software, because I never expected it could be so bad. Now I know better, and my next choice will consider software as one of the main factors (I don't be buying a swasticar anytime soon, though).

I have a VAG ICE vehicle and had a problem with the navigation system not working. When I brought it in to get it fixed, they apparently put a completely new version of the software on the hardware.

Suddenly everything was fast. No slow lags anymore. System is ready even before I start the engine. Navigation now zooms smoothly. Voice recognition is finally working 95% of the time and only tripping up on hard words.

I don't know how many different software versions are out there but apparently they are working on system speed without changing the hardware. Maybe I got an early access version and they are waiting for data before they push it to all vehicles.

If VW and all other product manufacturers of products containing universal machines as components were forced to charge customers a 100% sales tax on all such end-of-chain products, UNLESS all (and I do mean all, down to the controller on the SSD or the battery controller or whatever) universal machines in the product complied with the following:

A) If there is stored code for a specific universal machine in question and the storage is re-writeable, and

B) there is a control mechanism in place to integrity check the stored code before execution, and

C) the integrity check mechanism relies on a cryptographic secret, or any mechanism which prevents the owner from changing the code but permits the OEM to, then

D) the specific universal machine's key store MUST permit full wiping of all keys in a way where no keys are stored anywhere (no permanent manufacturer keys), and the key store MUST permit the owner to store his own root keys; additionally, in the interest of national security and the average citizen's digital sovereignty,

E) replacement software/firmware for universal machines should be encouraged rather than stifled, so additionally there must also be technical specifications detailing enough of the hardware's architecture and the overall design of the part or product (the logic in making design decisions to accomplish product functions), to permit a skilled owner to write his own firmware and achieve similar functionality as shipped.

Basically, think Louis Rossmann gets together with Richard Stallman, and they form a beautiful baby governmental regulatory body to come up with "Apple Laws" (sic: Lemon Laws) to answer and address the Apple Question.

Abandoned proprietary code on abandoned proprietary hardware is a national security concern much greater than the minute problems caused by the occasional tinkering script kiddie. It will mean the end of the easy money of putting everyone on subscription, and would encourage more evergreen platform/API design to reduce developer-driven code churn. If companies want to make cheap proprietary throw away product which will house malware in a decade when the company has long abandoned patching holes in it, and design it so no owner has a practical chance or hope of fixing the vulnerability, then companies can suffer a price-doubling tax that'll go to pay for their open source competitors to more easily compete!

Sorry, not sorry. Get expertise producing material things people need, if what I outlined above would mean the high paid software gravy train ends lol.