Q1 2026 Forum Survey Results (And what we're doing next)

[bthanos]

It all comes down to time and effort to implement and test any changes in the software. I've been a software engineer for many years. And the reality is, it may be a minor change, but when it comes to embedded software for a car, it needs to be tested to make sure it's working properly in all instances and it doesn't cause some other side effect.

And I'm sure the software team at Ford has more important things to do with their time in their mind.

I'm not saying it's right, but in the end, embedded software for a new model year vehicle will always take priority over older vehicles.

Someone should really leak the entire embedded code base and associated tools to create the firmware files. Then we could have a community software effort. Or Ford should open source the embedded software for these features.

Everything you said up till leaking the code base made sense. You gonna test someone’s new features they added without testing on your Lightning? You wanna void any warrantee from Ford? I think not…

Sponsored

 

[CoolViper777]

I have done lots of embedded software at Eaton Cutler-Hammer Back in the day, we would setup a hardware test bed for industrial breaker control. But today, I would probably use a software emulator, based on what CPU architecture it's running.

Once I tested that it actually ran in a limited way, I would back up my firmware and test it on my truck.

I should apply to Ford software group. It sounds interesting, compared to the financial software I've been doing the last few years.

Everything you said up till leaking the code base made sense. You gonna test someone’s new features they added without testing on your Lightning? You wanna void any warrantee from Ford? I think not…

 

[Altivec]

It all comes down to time and effort to implement and test any changes in the software. I've been a software engineer for many years. And the reality is, it may be a minor change, but when it comes to embedded software for a car, it needs to be tested to make sure it's working properly in all instances and it doesn't cause some other side effect.

And I'm sure the software team at Ford has more important things to do with their time in their mind.

I'm not saying it's right, but in the end, embedded software for a new model year vehicle will always take priority over older vehicles.

Someone should really leak the entire embedded code base and associated tools to create the firmware files. Then we could have a community software effort. Or Ford should open source the embedded software for these features.

The problem I have with your comment is that Ford engineers themselves boasted about OTA updates and that they are going to push updates to previous year vehicles. An engineer was even asked specifically about the 22 and 23 getting pro-power with truck off (video is on YouTube somewhere) and he said yes. I based my purchase on these and the dealers comments.

The philosophy you mentioned that new model year vehicles always takes priority is exactly how legacy auto thinks. That model no longer works in a software driven world. Would you buy a phone or computer that won't get updates in this day and age because the OEM already took your money and no longer cares about you? No! and that's just a few hundred dollar device. There is an expectation of at least 5 years of software support for those devices.

Is it hard for Apple, Samsung and Google, etc to develop their platform so that they can offer 5 years of support. Absolutely... Don't you think they would love to do it the Ford way so you buy a new phone every year? This type of thinking is EXACTLY why legacy auto will die. I buy Apple products because of the exceptional support for the life of the product. Startups such as Tesla, Rivian and China are prioritizing their current customers... WHY? Because those are the customers that will buy again. Do you think I am going to be buying a Ford again if they continue this legacy philosophy of ah ha, we got your money. Absolutely never. That is why I say, I'm watching how Ford handles this. Brian says SOON we will see good things. I waiting for this SOON.

 

[CoolViper777]

I'm not supporting Ford software process. Just saying that's apparently how they approach it. Coming from a software engineering background, sometimes you just don't have enough resources to handle everything. We all know how management is. It's always do more with less.

That's my informed guess as to why Ford seems to NOT be supplying OTA updates to older Lightnings. In theory, one could capture the firmware of the newer Lightnings, save the firmware of the older Lightning, and try flashing it. It's likely the hardware is compatible. But, it's possible that there have been enough changes in it, that Ford isn't confident, or more likely, want's to avoid any potential liablity.

The problem I have with your comment is that Ford engineers themselves boasted about OTA updates and that they are going to push updates to previous year vehicles. An engineer was even asked specifically about the 22 and 23 getting pro-power with truck off (video is on YouTube somewhere) and he said yes. I based my purchase on these and the dealers comments.

The philosophy you mentioned that new model year vehicles always takes priority is exactly how legacy auto thinks. That model no longer works in a software driven world. Would you buy a phone or computer that won't get updates in this day and age because the OEM already took your money and no longer cares about you? No! and that's just a few hundred dollar device. There is an expectation of at least 5 years of software support for those devices.

Is it hard for Apple, Samsung and Google, etc to develop their platform so that they can offer 5 years of support. Absolutely... Don't you think they would love to do it the Ford way so you buy a new phone every year? This type of thinking is EXACTLY why legacy auto will die. I buy Apple products because of the exceptional support for the life of the product. Startups such as Tesla, Rivian and China are prioritizing their current customers... WHY? Because those are the customers that will buy again. Do you think I am going to be buying a Ford again if they continue this legacy philosophy of ah ha, we got your money. Absolutely never. That is why I say, I'm watching how Ford handles this. Brian says SOON we will see good things. I waiting for this SOON.

 

[JayF]

That would be cool but effectively remove the company(to include dealers and service) from the loop and you know remove money… it ain’t right but it’s real.

I could see a world where something like that gets released with a semi-open license; perhaps explicitly stating that by installation/use of the software you voluntarily void your warranty or something along those lines. In a real consumer friendly world, any device that needs software to operate would have to release the software if they no longer supported it (particularly for security).

 

[22legit2quit]

I could see a world where something like that gets released with a semi-open license; perhaps explicitly stating that by installation/use of the software you voluntarily void your warranty or something along those lines. In a real consumer friendly world, any device that needs software to operate would have to release the software if they no longer supported it (particularly for security).

I don’t know. You can get the ford performance programmer and it doesn’t void your warranty. I figured if there was some sort of guardrail to limit what you can or can’t change that it shouldn’t void the warranty. Although I’ve got about a year left on my bumper to bumper so I’d be more inclined after that.

 

[Altivec]

I'm not supporting Ford software process. Just saying that's apparently how they approach it. Coming from a software engineering background, sometimes you just don't have enough resources to handle everything. We all know how management is. It's always do more with less.

That's my informed guess as to why Ford seems to NOT be supplying OTA updates to older Lightnings. In theory, one could capture the firmware of the newer Lightnings, save the firmware of the older Lightning, and try flashing it. It's likely the hardware is compatible. But, it's possible that there have been enough changes in it, that Ford isn't confident, or more likely, want's to avoid any potential liablity.

Oh.. I get you... You're just trying to give some perspective on why you think Ford is approaching software the way it is. I agree with many of your conclusions... I think most of us here have a good understanding of the many reasons why Ford CHOOSES not to fix things or the difficulties involved in doing so. All of us here want Ford to succeed but we get frustrated with the choices they make.

As I mentioned, the world has changed, cars are now computers on wheels and software has become the differentiator of what the customer feels and experiences. Doing things the old way where you just invest in the future and ignore the customers of the past will get you out of business in the long run.

In the example of pro power with truck off for 22 and 23's, the software is complete and already installed in most of the trucks. If all I need to do is go into forscan and change a few parameters, that means it's all there. Someone at Ford CHOOSES not to put any resources to test and validate it so they can fulfill the PROMISE they made. Great...are they saving money? Sure are...but are they really. the negative experience and outright lies sticks for the next time customers purchase.

As you said "you just don't have resources to handle everything". This is so true. But everything is a choice. Legacy autos past has always been to treat software as an afterthought and if they haven't figured out that software and customer experience is a priority for those resources then god help them. Is it better to sell 10 models that give customers a poor experience or 2 models that provide an exceptional experience making them come back for more? In other words, customers don't care about your problems. They expect you to figure It out and have the resources to do it. I was fooled by Farley. He was making great decisions around the lightning reveal and saying all the right things. I believed that Ford got the memo on software. But as we all know, he recently did a complete 180 and is back to the old legacy ways.

I am currently of the opinion that Ford is done long term. took a write off at the cost of their future. EV's are the global future and Ford tarnished their name and trust in that department with the choices they made. Their strategy moving forward is to make as much as they can as fast as they can for their shareholders with ICE and then hope and prey for the best. So believing this, my sentiment is they don't care about us cancelled lightning owners. As you said, we are a cost and a waste of resources that can go to their new fancy sparkling vehicles. I don't expect to get very much in terms of OTA's other than recall's, important bug fixes, and maybe the odd lawsuit (like Pro power with truck off promise). BUT...maybe I am wrong. Brian comes on here all happy with his "soon" comments telling us how important we are. Seeking feedback and going back to Ford. Sounds all sunshine and unicorns, yet nobody ever sees any results. I think that's what a lot of people are upset about here. The words don't match the actions... We are all grown adults here (well except for a few but I won't mention names) and just want to be told like it is. Soooo. I sit here with the above thoughts while I wait for Brians "soon"™ to prove me wrong so that I can have a more positive outlook on Ford. I'm not holding my breath

 

[JayF]

I don’t know. You can get the ford performance programmer and it doesn’t void your warranty. I figured if there was some sort of guardrail to limit what you can or can’t change that it shouldn’t void the warranty. Although I’ve got about a year left on my bumper to bumper so I’d be more inclined after that.

What you are describing is explicitly not possible with open source software -- if you give me all the code, I can break down any guardrails that wanna be setup. Frankly, that's super appealing to me and would be some of the goal/desire there -- for instance, if I wanted to disable the modem (like this guy did: https://arkadiyt.com/2026/05/13/removing-the-modem-and-gps-from-my-rav4/), it'd be neat to do it in software.

This is actually a *very similar* problem to smart phones. In a smart phone, even if you run an open source operating system like GrapheneOS instead of "official" Android, the real brains of the phone -- the parts that communicate to the cell network are in the "baseband" -- a completely separate firmware/hardware combo that you can't get rid of. I would imagine a true "open source" car would have to follow this same model: some locked-down piece of hardware enforcing the legally required bits.

It's a legitimately hard problem, and it's likely why nobody has tackled it yet (including the newer EV companies like Scout).

 

[TaxmanHog]

Sure are...but are they really. the negative experience and outright lies sticks for the next time customers purchase.

Extremely frustrating to a 46 year customer!!!!

 

[bc1]

Extremely frustrating to a 46 year customer!!!!

Just a youngster at 46 years. I still wish I had my 66 Ford F100 and the first brand new one, a 1976 Ford Elite. Really enjoyed that car but somehow got the idea from my boss that I needed to trade in for a new car every 2 years. The 78 Cougar was a step in the wrong direction after that.

 

[22legit2quit]

What you are describing is explicitly not possible with open source software -- if you give me all the code, I can break down any guardrails that wanna be setup. Frankly, that's super appealing to me and would be some of the goal/desire there -- for instance, if I wanted to disable the modem (like this guy did: https://arkadiyt.com/2026/05/13/removing-the-modem-and-gps-from-my-rav4/), it'd be neat to do it in software.

This is actually a *very similar* problem to smart phones. In a smart phone, even if you run an open source operating system like GrapheneOS instead of "official" Android, the real brains of the phone -- the parts that communicate to the cell network are in the "baseband" -- a completely separate firmware/hardware combo that you can't get rid of. I would imagine a true "open source" car would have to follow this same model: some locked-down piece of hardware enforcing the legally required bits.

It's a legitimately hard problem, and it's likely why nobody has tackled it yet (including the newer EV companies like Scout).

Ah yes the scout. Another wet dream that’s more of a wet the bed like the ram charger or rev. To be clear I think that we should be able to go down to the code level for whatever options we want. Whether that be provided by Ford at no charge (on the initial) or by a small non-repeating purchase as an initial option package. Like changing light color, frequency, etc…

I’m not naive enough not to see that there’s no future in that for the automaker tho.

 

[DavidS]

The problem I have with your comment is that Ford engineers themselves boasted about OTA updates and that they are going to push updates to previous year vehicles. An engineer was even asked specifically about the 22 and 23 getting pro-power with truck off (video is on YouTube somewhere) and he said yes. I based my purchase on these and the dealers comments.

The philosophy you mentioned that new model year vehicles always takes priority is exactly how legacy auto thinks. That model no longer works in a software driven world. Would you buy a phone or computer that won't get updates in this day and age because the OEM already took your money and no longer cares about you? No! and that's just a few hundred dollar device. There is an expectation of at least 5 years of software support for those devices.

Is it hard for Apple, Samsung and Google, etc to develop their platform so that they can offer 5 years of support. Absolutely... Don't you think they would love to do it the Ford way so you buy a new phone every year? This type of thinking is EXACTLY why legacy auto will die. I buy Apple products because of the exceptional support for the life of the product. Startups such as Tesla, Rivian and China are prioritizing their current customers... WHY? Because those are the customers that will buy again. Do you think I am going to be buying a Ford again if they continue this legacy philosophy of ah ha, we got your money. Absolutely never. That is why I say, I'm watching how Ford handles this. Brian says SOON we will see good things. I waiting for this SOON.

The F150 Lightning is not a software defined vehicle like Teslas and new generation Rivians. It’s a bunch of different modules with their own controllers, some provided by third party suppliers. That makes feature updates more difficult because you’re dealing with changing hardware sources, part revision, and coordinating firmware updates with vendors. Also, Engineers don’t make final decisions on feature releases or development priorities.

Sponsored