03.06.2025
The Hidden Cost – Customer Frustration, Delays, and Brand Erosion
Not every software defect leads to a recall or lawsuit. But that doesn’t mean there’s no damage. In fact, some of the most corrosive effects of infotainment software failures are slow-burning: eroded brand trust, declining customer satisfaction, and growing skepticism about OEMs' ability to manage the software era. Two recent cases — Ford and General Motors — illustrate how these problems play out, both publicly and painfully.
Ford: A $165 Million Penalty for Delayed Action
In November 2024, the NHTSA imposed a $165 million civil penalty on Ford, the second largest in the agency's history, for its failure to act swiftly on a known rearview camera defect. The NHTSA found that Ford’s actions violated federal recall requirements and showed a pattern of systemic delay.
This wasn’t just a regulatory slap on the wrist — it was a public indictment of Ford’s recall management process. Infotainment systems, once dismissed as “non-critical,” are now clearly under the regulatory spotlight. And when customer safety is compromised due to software faults, especially those tied to camera visibility, regulators expect OEMs to act fast. Ford didn’t.
The broader impact? Beyond the fine, the episode reinforced a negative perception among consumers: that modern cars are plagued with digital issues manufacturers can’t (or won’t) fix quickly.
GM: Working on Its Own AI-tools, But Bugs Persist
General Motors, on the other hand, has been making bold claims about its software quality efforts. In late 2024, the company announced the expansion of an AI-powered, in-house QA platform designed to discover bugs early in the development lifecycle. According to GM, this system represents a best-in-class approach to catching and resolving defects before they reach customers.
Yet reality paints a VERY different picture.
As of April 2025, GM has a growing list of infotainment bugs still waiting to be resolved, many of which have been acknowledged publicly. Common complaints include touchscreen freezing, slow boot times, connectivity issues with Apple CarPlay/Android Auto, and audio system failures. In total, we're looking at 116 infotainment SW bugs affecting 22 vehicle models.
More troublingly, GM issued a technical service bulletin instructing repair shops not to attempt hardware fixes, but rather to wait for software updates — without providing any timeline for resolution. This “please be patient” approach has frustrated customers and dealers alike, casting doubt on the effectiveness of GM’s QA system and the speed of its remediation process.
This isn’t the first time GM has struggled with infotainment system issues. The Chevy Blazer EV, launched in mid-2023, quickly drew sharp criticism after several serious software defects surfaced — issues that had slipped past GM’s quality assurance. The backlash was swift, forcing GM to publicly acknowledge the problems and issue a stop-sale order in December 2023. Sales only resumed in March 2024, once the most critical bugs had been addressed. The revenue impact and the damage to brand reputation must have been significant. As several GM brands and models share the same infotainment architecture, the damage was not limited to Blazer EV alone.
For further details:
Perception vs. Reality in the Software Era
These two examples — Ford’s delayed action and GM’s 1) unresolved backlog, and 2) QA system not being effective enough — reveal a deeper issue: OEMs are struggling to meet customer expectations in the software-defined vehicle era. Marketing language touts AI-driven quality assurance, OTA updates, and fast iteration cycles. But in practice, software bugs can persist for months or even years, with no clear resolution path, damaging trust in the brand.
- Customers don’t care whether the root cause is Tier1 integration or internal QA.
- They just want their systems to work — and to be fixed promptly when they don’t.
- Every delayed patch, every vague dealer message, chips away at customer confidence.
In this environment, brand loyalty is no longer just about ride quality or fuel economy — it’s about whether a vehicle’s digital systems are reliable, usable, and quickly repairable.
Takeaway:
You don’t need a recall or a lawsuit to damage your reputation. Slow fixes, poor communication, and broken promises about “smart” systems are enough to turn loyal customers into vocal critics. In the age of software-defined vehicles, the true measure of quality isn’t just defect avoidance—it’s how quickly and transparently issues are resolved when things go wrong.
Now that we've explored the many ways OEMs have struggled with poor software quality, in our next article, we'll examine why achieving high-quality software is such a challenge for them.
Other articles in this series:
- Chapter 1: Software as the New Root Cause – The Rise of Infotainment and Software-Driven Recalls
- Chapter 2: When Code Breaks Safety – Infotainment and Cluster Failures Behind Growing Recalls
- Chapter 3: From Glitch to Courtroom – When Infotainment Defects Become Legal Liabilities
- Chapter 5: Published on June 10th
- Chapter 6: Published on June 17th
