Polestar Exiting US Market

[JeffKeryk]

The government deciding which auto makers are available in our market is scary on many levels. A favorite topic (that takes palce in many forms on this forum) is affordability-yet a company that could solve this issue, such as BYD can't sell here either.

Protectionism is nothing new. Anywhere in the world, especially in China.

 

[loneryder]

That’s unfortunate. Polestar made some attractive vehicles, and we are considering an EV for the next car.

I guess we’ll have to go with the Taycan, instead…

As @JeffKeryk says, what’s a poor boy to do?

I see a lot of them in No. Va and think they are good looking. I had no idea they were Chinese made. The sedan is really nice looking with a wide stance.

 

[Astro14]

Interesting... As the author of perhaps thousands of software solution modifications, I can tell you, the end user is the only real test. Your product is not tested until it hits the masses and all their attempts to destroy it, unintentional and otherwise.

Not saying it's right, but the price of progress is high.

Just my experience.

Again, it’s fine in software when software doesn’t really do anything important.

But when dealing with control systems on cars, structures on aircraft, reliability of medically implanted devices, for example, that kind of error rate would be abhorrent and criminal.

I guess it’s another way of saying that software doesn’t really do anything important. Because if it did, you would never accept that error rate.

The software that’s installed in a weapons control system in a military aircraft, for example, has nowhere near that failure rate. It’s been tested before it’s deployed.

The software that’s installed in a pacemaker has to be perfect.

You don’t test it on the end user.

The idea that the end user is your beta tester is unethical, even if it is common.

 

[GON]

Again, it’s fine in software when software doesn’t really do anything important.

But when dealing with control systems on cars, structures on aircraft, reliability of medically implanted devices, for example, that kind of error rate would be abhorrent and criminal.

I guess it’s another way of saying that software doesn’t really do anything important. Because if it did, you would never accept that error rate.

The software that’s installed in a weapons control system in a military aircraft, for example, has nowhere near that failure rate. It’s been tested before it’s deployed.

The software that’s installed in a pacemaker has to be perfect.

You don’t test it on the end user.

The idea that the end user is your beta tester is unethical, even if it is common.

Quite sure lobbyists have done an outstanding job getting legislation passed to hold harmless, by law, the technology companies, and their business practices. I know of know other industries that have been so successful in their ability to deliver a product/service, and be held harmless by federal statutes.

 

[CKN]

Protectionism is nothing new. Anywhere in the world, especially in China.

True-just read an article today stating the average USED VEHICLE is $30,000.00-the highest in three years. It would help to open our markets to cheaper new cars-to make cheaper new cars. Don't you think?

 

[JeffKeryk]

Again, it’s fine in software when software doesn’t really do anything important.

But when dealing with control systems on cars, structures on aircraft, reliability of medically implanted devices, for example, that kind of error rate would be abhorrent and criminal.

I guess it’s another way of saying that software doesn’t really do anything important. Because if it did, you would never accept that error rate.

The software that’s installed in a weapons control system in a military aircraft, for example, has nowhere near that failure rate. It’s been tested before it’s deployed.

The software that’s installed in a pacemaker has to be perfect.

You don’t test it on the end user.

The idea that the end user is your beta tester is unethical, even if it is common.

Astro, I am not disagreeing with the importance. I've been a strict adherent to test procedure test levels. I urged groups of testers to do destructive testing; don't just focus on what it is supposed to do as that's the easy part; hammer on it! Products real test is production due to the vast amount of additional variables introduced.

IMO, if I was delivering poor performing applications, what was I getting paid for? Testing is key, almost as important as understanding the business need being addressed.

 

[demarpaint]

Sounds like good news to me.

 

[Patman]

Sounds like good news to me.

Why? I don’t think it’s ever a good thing when people aren’t allowed to buy what they want. And Polestar makes a good EV.

 

[PandaBear]

Sure, that works well with things like pacemakers, parachutes, and planes, too.

Some of us work in fields were that kind of error rate is simply unacceptable and leads to people losing their lives.

Tech folks obviously don’t see it that way.

But since technology is controlling things like braking, and safety, systems on cars, perhaps they should.

I mean, if doctors operated at the same error rate as Tech people, you wouldn’t let them anywhere near you with a scalpel, would you?

I agree with you. In general most of the "bugs" are caught during in house testing, but there is never 100% just like a lot of the problem only found after warranty expires. That's what recall is about as you know in most modern cars today.

I am not saying that it is right and everyone should do this, what I am saying is, even if there's a law that force company to send in data or IIHS force manufacturers to send in test data, they can't guarantee nothing will happen and they will never need update.

So let me rephrase my question in a different way: do you prefer the manufacturer to just send in an over the air update to fix your problem, or do you want to drop off a car for a day and then Uber back to the dealer to pick it up after working from home?

I'm sure the answer is the later.

 

[PandaBear]

Interesting... As the author of perhaps thousands of software solution modifications, I can tell you, the end user is the only real test. Your product is not tested until it hits the masses and all their attempts to destroy it, unintentional and otherwise.

Not saying it's right, but the price of progress is high.

Just my experience.

The end user also can't test everything. Most of the time they may never get the extreme corner case manufacturer would see.

This is why those "recommended for all make" ATF doesn't cause problem. Most users are not living in the Artic Circle and have to start the car exactly at 3 mins 48 second and then shift into neutral by accident then shift back into D when ABS is engaging going downhill at 35Mph.

Worst case if someone's car got into problem and complain to the ATF manufacturer, they will still come out ahead replacing just 1 transmission out of 50000.

Human makes a (most of the time) benign coding mistake every 40 lines of code written. You can lock it into rom but there is a reason most people don't just pump out a bunch of rom code today. You are going to go out of business very easily.

 

[PandaBear]

The government deciding which auto makers are available in our market is scary on many levels. A favorite topic (that takes palce in many forms on this forum) is affordability-yet a company that could solve this issue, such as BYD can't sell here either.

Every nation does that on earth. That includes US, Europe, Japan, China, South Korea, etc.

Maybe only 3rd world countries don't care, but do you really want to live in those countries just to have no gov control on auto regulations?