I like the thinking. I visited the Netherlands, and some of the last mile vehicles I saw there are amazing. Think electrified cargo bikes - stunning and moz def the future :)
honestly, who cares anymore? last thing we need is yet another monopoly, this time in the EVs industry. AAPL is known for innovation, but in reality, they just take their time until the other competitors have already solved the main obstacles and sold the idea to customers. Then they swoop in and offer an overpriced luxurious product and claim to be the first and the best in the business.
Interesting article, but I disagree with the conclusion. Smart car style vehicles never really caught on. They have a poor user experience. Cramped and they don’t feel very safe. Most people can’t ride a motorcycle either. They’re cool, but Apple isn’t about to target a specialty market with a play like this.
I theorize Apple will produce a car, but surprise us by having zero ownership. It’ll be entirely plan based, a service subscription to compete with Uber. They’re just waiting for self driving to be feasible, so there are no drivers required.
I also hate the fact that cars with “smart” technology start feeling dated after just a handful of years, just like my smartphone. And I’m not planning to commit to a similar upgrade cycle.
If some stories are to be believed then Tesla has sales people that expect Tesla owners to buy a new car after 3-5 years.
I don't think that's possible for the vast majority of people. A car should reliably take me for A to B and not lose 70% of its features just because the manufacturer decided to EOL the online service.
In states like CA, this means paying $4,000 to $10,000 in sales/use tax with each purchase. It’s an incredibly inefficient way to pay for having access to a car. If you’re going to trade in that frequently, it’s probably smarter to lease. (I say this as someone who generally opposes leasing and has never done so.)
It does cost money, but if you sell, you can pass part of that tax on to the buyer, as they’ll want to pay a bit more to avoid having to pay that tax themselves.
I drive a 10 year old vehicle and I feel like it has all the technology I really need or want. I might upgrade to something electric in the future, but I don't feel 'compelled' for any reason.
My vehicle's primary purpose is to get me from Point A to Point B. Anything else that gets crammed in there is just more gravy on my meat and potatoes.
Help me to understand why the "feeling dated" part of a vehicle is important to you? Or rather, what does a car from 2015 lack, that a car from 2020 has, that you find differentiates them enormously?
Good lane keeping and collision avoidance could be a lifesaver in some situations. Same for having other driver assistance features like good adaptive cruise control and auto-steering - long trips can be less fatiguing when the car is driving itself most of the time.
Our family has a 2012 VW Golf and a 2017 VW Golf. Compared to the former, the latter has a number of worthwhile upgrades. CarPlay makes both navigation and music enormously better. Automatic parallel parking comes in handy for getting into tight spaces, especially when there's pressure from cars waiting behind you. Automated emergency warning/braking has probably saved our 16-year-old from at least one minor accident so far. Radar cruise control definitely lessens fatigue during road trips.
None of this is essential, but to me the difference in user experience is notable when going from one car to the other.
A year or two ago I had access to a Tesla Model X for a period of time. I remember when the Netflix and YouTube watching features came out; I thought it was the dumbest thing. But then I realized I was spending probably a couple of hours a week sitting in parking lots waiting for my kids to get out of extracurricular activities (pre-covid), or waiting at the cell phone lot at the airport, etc. And having a huge screen and high quality audio to pass the time was pretty nice.
not OP, but I think the 'smart' features are what feel dated. Perhaps not quite the same, but in late 90s, I first saw 'high end' cars with GPS/maps built in to dash. not even a few years later, you could buy much fancier ones, that would update, and were faster, and had more features. The 1998 'luxury' in-built GPS felt way out of date by 2002 (UI, responsiveness/speed, display, etc). The rest of the car didn't feel as dated, just the "high tech" bits.
CarPlay (don't know about Google's system) is a huge upgrade over car manufacturers' systems. Still wouldn't cause me to sell my 10 yo vehicle with <70K miles though.
That, I believe, is a function of one material: PLASTIC.
There's just something about plastic that feels cheap and replaceable even when used in a "high end" product. There are toasters from the 50s made in stainless steel that are timeless. Contrast that with the plastic enclosed toasters of the last few decades and it's just no contest.
The plastic definitely makes modern cars feel dated quickly, but the tech alone ages really fast. Even simple back up cameras that are 3 years old seem really low definition compared to the new birds eye surround cameras. Not to mention the UIs are laggy, and Bluetooth even feels like old tech now. If it doesn’t have CarPlay or equivalent it’s a downgrade.
That would fit really well with their brand and current smartphone business. I wonder what they will do about the issue of people leaving the car dirty.
Please no! No one is asking for ownership to be disrupted, we want someone to disrupt terrible cars. Modern cars are terrible, the UX is horrid, the software never gets updated, and the look and feel of a good middle class car is just trash.
I own a model 3 and love it, yes it has some gap problems, yes structurally it might not be as sound as a Toyota but the car is a dream to drive. The experience is so much better than an internal combustion engine that i'll never go back. There's nothing quite like instant torque on the freeway while traveling 80 miles an hour.
Your use case is probably different. But the vehicle parked outside my house is one:
- Whose features I very deliberately chose
- Has a roof rack that can accommodate my canoe and/or kayak
- Has all the stuff I carry around with me--especially for northern winter driving
And if I want to run to the store right now, I can be on the road in 1 minute. I don't want fractional ownership and I'm sure I'm not unusual. Most of the depreciation is in the miles anyway. And, to the degree it becomes more related to how old the car is, that will be reflected in the costs.
Your car is only second in the place you feel comfortable to your home. I'm at work all day (pre covid) and my home is sitting empty 50% of the time, so why should I own a home, maybe I can just sleep in a shared fractionally owned home.
Never going to be accepted, by all means electrify cars and make them smarter and have robotaxis for when I can't drive. But the car ownership thing will never go away.
I'm always confused by statements like this. A Toyota runs 25+ years pretty reliably, they have a reputation for being well made.
Tesla has large fitting problems with panel gaps, not closing doors, leaky or even loose roofs, bad paint, etc.
How do people trust Tesla to make cars that work even remotely as long as a Toyota? I don't want to own a car that I cannot resell after 10 years because it's worn down too much.
I'm not advocating for ICE here, I'm talking about the chassis part of the car.
> How do people trust Tesla to make cars that work even remotely as long as a Toyota? I don't want to own a car that I cannot resell after 10 years because it's worn down too much.
Anecdotal experience, but most Tesla owners I know don’t really care about resale value 10 years down the line. Tesla owners are pretty well off who wouldn’t be buying a Toyota Corolla in the first place anyway.
They are willing to overlook reliability issues for an EV experience with considerably better UX than traditional manufacturers (tbf some parts of it are bad too like not having a heads up display or all-touch interface), some shiny features and gimmicks which is more akin to using an iPhone than operating a car.
I personally think the build quality is an abomination for a $40k+ price tag car, which is why I don’t own one. But I can see why some people prefer a Tesla for the overall experience and a certain cool factor.
Doesn't that mean though that tesla will be limited to people with money to waste or that it will lose a big chunk of its early to the market customer base once traditional car manufacturers enter the game at similar price ranges?
You could say that about just ICE cars too. Why would anyone want to buy a Porsche or a BMW (or even a Ford or VW) when they can have the rock solid reliability and lower depreciation of a Toyota?
Also, leasing has become so much more common that Toyota and other (mostly Japanese) manufacturers key strength in long term reliability isn't as big of a factor as it used to be. If you're only keeping the car around for 3 years anyways, it doesn't matter so much if the car is notorious for falling apart after 5 years.
That's why I buy reliable cars from established carmakers with proven reliability records. I buy used cars coming off their three year lease. Most leases require all the service be done on time and by the dealer so you know you're getting a quality used car - and I'm saving thousands of dollars. Then you drive it for five years because there's a market for people looking for cheap, reliable cars for second cars or for their kids to drive. Seems to work for all involved and for me personally, I'm minimizing my purchase price while minimizing my need to do major repairs.
And I 100% respect your approach and consider it logical and sound.
That said, it's not for me, and not for many, many other people for whom a car is not just a reliable appliance to go from point A to point B with minimal fuss and minimal financial expenditure.
Which is why even brands with horrific reliability and depreciation like Alfa Romeo still sells.
Personally, in the context of fully autonomous self driving cars, I can’t see how ownership would make any sense any more. If the car can drive itself off to find a charging station somewhere densely packed and leave the streets free of any parked cars, imagine how much space would be reclaimable.
I see how it would take a shift in mindset, but the liberation that I think would come with the freedom for the car that drives you to your destination not needing to be the same one that drives you home... I think that’s revolutionary.
How is an autonomous car any different from taking an Uber? I think most people who currently own a car rather than taking an Uber or taxi everywhere will continue to own a car after self driving cars are a thing - there is a lot of value in having a car immediately available to you no matter what, and it's nice to drive around in your car that is set up how you want and has all of your things in it.
I think if autonomous cars are much cheaper than Uber it could push some people to get rid of their car due to cost, but personally I would never do that since a cheap car isn't a huge expense.
It’s mostly like taking an Uber, but I think the future will have many more instant-car users, since it is so convenient in major cities.
There are benefits of course, a self driving taxi could show up configured to your exact specifications, would probably be a more standard/reliable experience than Uber, no need to interact with people if you don’t feel like it, and no need to consider them either. Play loud music or sit in silence. Make a private call. Sleep.
Relatively minor benefits in the big picture but it’s mainly that I don’t see Apple hiring a bunch of drivers, so I think a self driving fleet could be the dream. They’re big on UX control, kinda their signature.
I think a lot of people overestimate how much of a cost uplift comes from having a ~minimum wage driver piloting the vehicle. Been a while since I looked at the numbers but say you could cut the prices of an Uber by about 50% per mile--which is the ballpark number--how many people would give up their cars outside of dense cities if they haven't already done so. (Assuming they can buy autonomous vehicles themselves.)
Surfaces and handwashing were a distraction by American public health officials largely too stupid and proud to listen to Asians telling them to open all the windows and wear masks. Spend more time asking why your office windows are stuck closed.
I’m imagining that without ownership, car companies would begin to operate like the worst American companies.
You’d have super complex mileage caps. Per-minute surcharges for peak & late night hours. Early subscription termination fees. Zoning issues: Only Kia & Suzuki will service your neighborhood, while your neighbor down the block can get a Toyota with twice the range allowance at half the cost. The median income for your particular area may not justify building charging center hubs by other manufacturers.
In the event of a power or telecommunication outage, the centralization will undoubtedly strand people wherever they are.
Then, the moralists. Since you don’t own the vehicle, they can dictate how you use it. No driving to the strip club or liquor store on Sunday. Arbitrary restrictions on what you’re allowed to transport. It can be a new vector to govern behavior and control populations.
You’re probably right, but doesn’t Apple kind of seem like a company that would be well positioned to reduce all these issues for a luxury price? Well, perhaps besides moralist issues, if the App Store is any indication.
Interesting point. I did want to point out a slight update to the moralist caricature though: I think these past 12 months have made clear that the modern moralist would be more concerned that you drove to a republican political rally or to patron a stubborn bakery than controlling your drinking habits.
In larger cities, yes. In midsize cities, unlikely. The walkability score in my neighborhood is not very good. If I want to go to the store, I can hop on my car when and be there in 10 minutes. If I had to wait for a car to come pick me up everything, that would be annoying.
Not only that, but lots of people’s identities are grounded in the type of car they drive. You’ll never pry that away from those people, you’ll have to wait for a new generation who haven’t formed that type of bond to an vechicle.
I agree on the immediate availability of your car being an issue that will hinder this model but the 2nd concern can be addressed by having multiple subscription levels with a premium level guaranteeing only luxury cars pick you up.
Either way I consider cars a personal item same way as I wouldn't share my laptop.
Everyone on the supply side seems to want ownership disrupted. It reduces material waste, and permits for continuous monetization in a world where the environment's needs supercede the externalities of productive growth.
I'm not happy about it (in fact I'm quite terrified of it). But to quote the IMF in their predictions for 2030, "You'll own nothing, and you'll be happy".
I think the model 3 UI is terrible too. I believe there should be a status display directly ahead of the driver, and direct controls for critical driving functions.
Why can't Tesla relent just a bit - adding a dashboard and discrete single-use controls for windshield wipers, defog, lights and autopilot?
Musk is like Jobs in that regard. Putting stuff on the 3/Y like a simple instrument dash like on the S/X or even a HUD seem to be things he is vehemently opposed to. Supposedly because the car will drive itself, thus there is no need for such instruments (of course we know as of January 2021 that hasn't happened yet and not likely to happen soon).
Rumor has it the S/X will lose its instrument cluster for its next (imminent) refresh too.
Shame because the 3 would otherwise be perfect for my next car, which I'd like to make an EV.
Huh! My experience is the opposite. Modern cars are engineering marvels.
> the UX is horrid
My car's UX is absolutely delightful. I have well defined controls (steering wheel, brake pedal, clutch pedal, accelerator pedal, gear shift, light buttons) that are close to 100% reliable and easy to operate. The car works every time just as I expect it to. No surprises, no bs.
> the software never gets updated
Why would I ever want to update my car's software?? It works perfectly. It is almost 13 years old and I don't recall ever encountering a software bug. I'm sure I will continue to use this car as long as my local RTO continues to renew the license.
> look and feel of a good middle class car is just trash.
Now this is subjective, so I'll let you have this one.
I'm sure your Tesla is way better to drive than my $10k car, but that's not to say modern cars are "terrible". They are absolutely amazing.
No. Car UX is fine by me. I turn the key or press the button that says "start" and the car starts. Each button does what it should on a single press. Wipers, tail lights, headlights indicator lights, brake, pedal, accelerator, everything works as it should. It is an example of good ux that my phone, my desktop , laptop and my server should copy. But they can't because they serve different functions. So just let it be.
> software never gets updated
Thank God for it. I never have to wait for my car to start because it is waiting for updates to be installed like my laptop does. There is no last update that needs patching for the speedometer to show me the speed. There's no bug that causes security concerns for me.
Seriously removing ICE hardware and replacing it with simpler electric hardware was a great move. Lets not screw it up with adding more software into it. Except self driving.
sounds amazing and i really want what you’re describing
i dont want to buy a new car (new as in replacing my current car,im ok with used cars) because theyre overpriced, but i dont want to lease either due to what i consider bullshit costs, plus lock-in. as a result, ive had the same car since 2009, despite easily being able to afford something new. but fuck that, id rather put that money towards investing
Even so, they’re still dangerous. No one in car crazy America is going to put their kids on an Apple motorcycle and run through rush hour traffic where everyone is watching TikTok videos while driving. Even the wind noise, debris hitting you, and weather considerations alone make it a no-go. Losing a wheel usually means going down. 99% of people strongly value that they will walk away from a crash fine with great probabilities. That simply cannot be said of 2 wheeled vehicles like it can be said of crumple zone air bag equipped 4 wheeled vehicles.
Reasons Apple won't build a car: (1) low margin industry, (2) diverse, well-capitalized, experienced legacy players, (3) fundamentally different business model, (4) limited technical ability to differentiate (that integration doesn't already provide), etc.
Reasons Apple will build a car: (1) it's one of the few industries big enough to move their revenue needle, (2) it's one of the few greenfield physical platforms that their cloud competitors (Facebook, Amazon, Google, Microsoft) don't own a major stake in (from this perspective, think of it as XBox-for-Apple).
With the Biden win, the only way I see Apple going into cars in a big way is if it's fully electric, speaks to an environmentalist company ethos, and is a low-volume, high-margin product (e.g. Tesla Roadster) that's effectively subsidized PR & marketing spend and lets them make presentations about it for the next 5+ years.
Which seems like an awful lot of R&D and product polish dollars and hours to spend, and I think would say more about their alternate options (or lack thereof) than how attractive building a car is.
I can't construct a plausible scenario where Apple vs Hyundai + VW + BMW + Mercedes + Ferrari + Porsche + Tesla looks anything like Apple vs Palm. There's just not that much difference between (hypothetically optimal and technically possible driving experience) and (current driving experience).
Apple has historically excelled in areas where they're able to offer an improved (usually by integration of existent technologies, at scale) hardware platform coupled with a well-integrated software interface.
If past Apple is anything to go by they'll be aiming for a high-volume, high-margin product. Very few people were willing to pay £600+ for a phone pre-iphone, but plenty of people do now.
> Very few people were willing to pay £600+ for a phone pre-iphone, but plenty of people do now.
That doesn't really translate. Most people are "willing" to pay that because most carriers offer 24 month financing.
A high end luxury car is going to be, at the low end $50K. Probably more towards $100K. You don't get interest free installment plans for $100K cars, and most people simply cannot afford them. There's plenty of appeal to current high end luxury cars but how are the sales of Model S P85s or higher (picking it as the most "hyped"), even compared to the 3.
The only feasible route to this is if Apple sold a car that allowed for increased utilization. (E.g. person-in-car 95% of the time vs 5% of the time)
If it were providing value more of the time, it could cost more and still be worth the increase in price.
But I don't see any path that gets there without a self-driving singularity to allow for humanless valet movement between "users." Maybe remotely operated human valet service, but that seems like an ugly rabbit hole? And that still leaves the fact that luxury users aren't going to be okay with ketchup stains and odors from the last user...
iTaxi as a social platform starts to get more plausible.
But that's more along the lines of a bus-van-social network hybrid. "Travel only with other vetted, high-net-worth Apple users" is an interesting twist, as well as a direct stab at Facebook and Microsoft (LinkedIn).
> But I don't see any path that gets there without a self-driving singularity to allow for humanless valet movement between "users."
Is self-driving really that unlikely? It probably won't be ready for another 10 years, but Apple probably won't be looking to launch this until then either.
That just isn't viable. People simply won't be able to afford a high margin Apple car no matter how willing they are. So the volume will have to be low.
I find it amusing that people try creating these concept cars purely based on what already exists and slapping the brand's logo on the front. Like the early Cybertruck mockups[0], without any actual leaks, it's just a shot in the dark.
Note: not trying to dig on this guy's work, creating such a complete concept is good work, but speculating on the design feels pointless.
I'm surprised the article doesn't mention the (Sony Electric Car)[https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/8/21056404/sony-vision-s-ele...}. Sony isn't getting into building cars either, they did this partially as a design exercise and to help them understand the needs of their customers, who are the car manufacturers using Sony chips.
Apple is in the auto industry with Apple Auto, and it's entirely possible they are building cars to not be constrained by the design of what the car makers are supplying, like reference design for PCs that intel makes. Intel was never going to make a laptop, but it helps them better understand the market, and sell more of their products, if they have a deep understanding of, and can help their customers sell/use more of Intel's product.
I haven't used Apple Auto, but I assume they don't have much of a leg-up on Android Auto, and with Volvo using Android as the OS for it's cars now, I'm sure Apple is looking at the opportunity for deeper integration and Apple Auto only features they may be able to develop with auto makers
That's an interesting point. The amount of electronics in cars has increased massively in recent years. They probably see a growing opportunity there because the car manufacturers aren't very good at it.
Apple's "Car" will not be a traditional "Car". I don't know why so many keep thinking this will be the case. Completely remove all those assumptions you have about what a car is today, and think what it will be in 10 years. As Jobs said, go to where the puck will be.
All the predictions out there are 100% wrong, inaccurate, and lazy. Apple will NOT release a "car" as you currently know it.
It will be software on wheels; it will be an entertainment system, work/social hub, and by accident happen to take you places. It won't have a steering wheel. It won't need maintenance or a dealership network like traditional auto makers. It won't need insurance or even a drivers' license to own, because you won't be operating it. There's a good chance you won't even be able to OWN it. Those future profit margins exist is the future automatous taxi fleet, the entertainment system, and the ecosystem that exists inside and around the car as a product.
There's so much potential here if you just forget what you already know. Yes, Apple will partner with some existing manufacture to produce the car (like they do with existing products). No, it won't be based on any existing platform, it will be built from the ground up, both hardware and software, and be totally unlike anything that currently exists.
Apple is laser focused on one thing: the end user experience -- take the user somewhere, with as little input as possible, and wow the consumer with something so profound they didn't even know they wanted it; instantly make everything before look so old and clunky you will never look back.
Yes. Unfortunately Waymo continues to act more like an R&D company not a product company. Ultimately I don't think Waymo will be a major player when it all shakes out.
Apple in talks with Hyundai reminds me of that play. Release Kia with full Apple integration, maybe little 'by Apple' on the back and test the waters while learning by doing. second iteration will be the real deal manufactured by someone else entirely.
"Would it fit the company’s profit profile? Tesla achieved close to 20% Gross Margin in 2020, GM came in at 10% and Ford about 12%. Apple’s Gross Margin exceeded 38%, a different game."
The opportunity to integrate in to peoples' lives - and the services revenue that would continue - may make up for a, say, 15% gross margin on the initial car. No? Maybe?
Would be a bit disappointing for a supposedly environmentalist company as Apple to get into automobile development. We should be trying everything we can to limit automobile development.
Of course for as environmentalist as Apple insists they are, they built a typical automobile oriented new campus with heaps of parking space...
I still use every android phone I have ever bought for various home automation tasks.
Apple is a marketing company that sells computers, and apparently you have bought the pitch that they are somehow better for the environment because of what exactly?
Get off your high horse and just admit you enjoy a premium product for it's features and stop pretending it has anything to do with the environment.
105 comments
[ 1.9 ms ] story [ 209 ms ] threadI theorize Apple will produce a car, but surprise us by having zero ownership. It’ll be entirely plan based, a service subscription to compete with Uber. They’re just waiting for self driving to be feasible, so there are no drivers required.
I don't think that's possible for the vast majority of people. A car should reliably take me for A to B and not lose 70% of its features just because the manufacturer decided to EOL the online service.
My vehicle's primary purpose is to get me from Point A to Point B. Anything else that gets crammed in there is just more gravy on my meat and potatoes.
Help me to understand why the "feeling dated" part of a vehicle is important to you? Or rather, what does a car from 2015 lack, that a car from 2020 has, that you find differentiates them enormously?
None of this is essential, but to me the difference in user experience is notable when going from one car to the other.
A year or two ago I had access to a Tesla Model X for a period of time. I remember when the Netflix and YouTube watching features came out; I thought it was the dumbest thing. But then I realized I was spending probably a couple of hours a week sitting in parking lots waiting for my kids to get out of extracurricular activities (pre-covid), or waiting at the cell phone lot at the airport, etc. And having a huge screen and high quality audio to pass the time was pretty nice.
I still like vintage junkers that are easy to work on, but there’s about two decades of nope for me now.
There's just something about plastic that feels cheap and replaceable even when used in a "high end" product. There are toasters from the 50s made in stainless steel that are timeless. Contrast that with the plastic enclosed toasters of the last few decades and it's just no contest.
I own a model 3 and love it, yes it has some gap problems, yes structurally it might not be as sound as a Toyota but the car is a dream to drive. The experience is so much better than an internal combustion engine that i'll never go back. There's nothing quite like instant torque on the freeway while traveling 80 miles an hour.
They are almost always stationary parked somewhere when privately owned.
The horror.
- Whose features I very deliberately chose
- Has a roof rack that can accommodate my canoe and/or kayak
- Has all the stuff I carry around with me--especially for northern winter driving
And if I want to run to the store right now, I can be on the road in 1 minute. I don't want fractional ownership and I'm sure I'm not unusual. Most of the depreciation is in the miles anyway. And, to the degree it becomes more related to how old the car is, that will be reflected in the costs.
Never going to be accepted, by all means electrify cars and make them smarter and have robotaxis for when I can't drive. But the car ownership thing will never go away.
I'm asking for it right now. And have been for some time.
https://www.volvocars.com/us/care-by-volvo/
I just want it for an electric car.
Tesla has large fitting problems with panel gaps, not closing doors, leaky or even loose roofs, bad paint, etc.
How do people trust Tesla to make cars that work even remotely as long as a Toyota? I don't want to own a car that I cannot resell after 10 years because it's worn down too much.
I'm not advocating for ICE here, I'm talking about the chassis part of the car.
Anecdotal experience, but most Tesla owners I know don’t really care about resale value 10 years down the line. Tesla owners are pretty well off who wouldn’t be buying a Toyota Corolla in the first place anyway.
They are willing to overlook reliability issues for an EV experience with considerably better UX than traditional manufacturers (tbf some parts of it are bad too like not having a heads up display or all-touch interface), some shiny features and gimmicks which is more akin to using an iPhone than operating a car.
I personally think the build quality is an abomination for a $40k+ price tag car, which is why I don’t own one. But I can see why some people prefer a Tesla for the overall experience and a certain cool factor.
Also, leasing has become so much more common that Toyota and other (mostly Japanese) manufacturers key strength in long term reliability isn't as big of a factor as it used to be. If you're only keeping the car around for 3 years anyways, it doesn't matter so much if the car is notorious for falling apart after 5 years.
That said, it's not for me, and not for many, many other people for whom a car is not just a reliable appliance to go from point A to point B with minimal fuss and minimal financial expenditure.
Which is why even brands with horrific reliability and depreciation like Alfa Romeo still sells.
I see how it would take a shift in mindset, but the liberation that I think would come with the freedom for the car that drives you to your destination not needing to be the same one that drives you home... I think that’s revolutionary.
There will be no shift in mindset. No. Just no.
I think if autonomous cars are much cheaper than Uber it could push some people to get rid of their car due to cost, but personally I would never do that since a cheap car isn't a huge expense.
There are benefits of course, a self driving taxi could show up configured to your exact specifications, would probably be a more standard/reliable experience than Uber, no need to interact with people if you don’t feel like it, and no need to consider them either. Play loud music or sit in silence. Make a private call. Sleep.
Relatively minor benefits in the big picture but it’s mainly that I don’t see Apple hiring a bunch of drivers, so I think a self driving fleet could be the dream. They’re big on UX control, kinda their signature.
You’d have super complex mileage caps. Per-minute surcharges for peak & late night hours. Early subscription termination fees. Zoning issues: Only Kia & Suzuki will service your neighborhood, while your neighbor down the block can get a Toyota with twice the range allowance at half the cost. The median income for your particular area may not justify building charging center hubs by other manufacturers.
In the event of a power or telecommunication outage, the centralization will undoubtedly strand people wherever they are.
Then, the moralists. Since you don’t own the vehicle, they can dictate how you use it. No driving to the strip club or liquor store on Sunday. Arbitrary restrictions on what you’re allowed to transport. It can be a new vector to govern behavior and control populations.
Usage: Some gay : Hiya we would like one of your nice cakes please. Bakery : Nope sir, sorry. We are stubborn.
Not only that, but lots of people’s identities are grounded in the type of car they drive. You’ll never pry that away from those people, you’ll have to wait for a new generation who haven’t formed that type of bond to an vechicle.
Either way I consider cars a personal item same way as I wouldn't share my laptop.
That didn't happen by accident. It has taken a huge effort on the part of car manufacturers to get to that point.
I'm not happy about it (in fact I'm quite terrified of it). But to quote the IMF in their predictions for 2030, "You'll own nothing, and you'll be happy".
Why can't Tesla relent just a bit - adding a dashboard and discrete single-use controls for windshield wipers, defog, lights and autopilot?
Rumor has it the S/X will lose its instrument cluster for its next (imminent) refresh too.
Shame because the 3 would otherwise be perfect for my next car, which I'd like to make an EV.
Huh! My experience is the opposite. Modern cars are engineering marvels.
> the UX is horrid
My car's UX is absolutely delightful. I have well defined controls (steering wheel, brake pedal, clutch pedal, accelerator pedal, gear shift, light buttons) that are close to 100% reliable and easy to operate. The car works every time just as I expect it to. No surprises, no bs.
> the software never gets updated
Why would I ever want to update my car's software?? It works perfectly. It is almost 13 years old and I don't recall ever encountering a software bug. I'm sure I will continue to use this car as long as my local RTO continues to renew the license.
> look and feel of a good middle class car is just trash.
Now this is subjective, so I'll let you have this one.
I'm sure your Tesla is way better to drive than my $10k car, but that's not to say modern cars are "terrible". They are absolutely amazing.
Apple shareholders are asking for more services revenue.
I still like Apple Taxi Services better than all of their current services revenue stream direction.
I am increasingly siding with Horace Dediu on Micromobility. So Taxi and No Car ownership seems like an extension to that.
That's not very persuasive.
Here is something I want, MacBook Pro 2015 fitted with M1 and dont touch anything else.
Not me. All I want is something like a modern day Lexus or BMW, but with a Tesla drivetrain. They can leave everything else the same.
No. Car UX is fine by me. I turn the key or press the button that says "start" and the car starts. Each button does what it should on a single press. Wipers, tail lights, headlights indicator lights, brake, pedal, accelerator, everything works as it should. It is an example of good ux that my phone, my desktop , laptop and my server should copy. But they can't because they serve different functions. So just let it be.
> software never gets updated
Thank God for it. I never have to wait for my car to start because it is waiting for updates to be installed like my laptop does. There is no last update that needs patching for the speedometer to show me the speed. There's no bug that causes security concerns for me.
Seriously removing ICE hardware and replacing it with simpler electric hardware was a great move. Lets not screw it up with adding more software into it. Except self driving.
i dont want to buy a new car (new as in replacing my current car,im ok with used cars) because theyre overpriced, but i dont want to lease either due to what i consider bullshit costs, plus lock-in. as a result, ive had the same car since 2009, despite easily being able to afford something new. but fuck that, id rather put that money towards investing
etc
The tech always seems to come.
Try letting off the throttle on a sport bike in a turn and see how well it works.
Please don't actually do this.
I’d definitely get one though.
Reasons Apple will build a car: (1) it's one of the few industries big enough to move their revenue needle, (2) it's one of the few greenfield physical platforms that their cloud competitors (Facebook, Amazon, Google, Microsoft) don't own a major stake in (from this perspective, think of it as XBox-for-Apple).
With the Biden win, the only way I see Apple going into cars in a big way is if it's fully electric, speaks to an environmentalist company ethos, and is a low-volume, high-margin product (e.g. Tesla Roadster) that's effectively subsidized PR & marketing spend and lets them make presentations about it for the next 5+ years.
Which seems like an awful lot of R&D and product polish dollars and hours to spend, and I think would say more about their alternate options (or lack thereof) than how attractive building a car is.
Apple could easily do this...
Existing phones vs iPhone
Existing cars vs iCar
I can't construct a plausible scenario where Apple vs Hyundai + VW + BMW + Mercedes + Ferrari + Porsche + Tesla looks anything like Apple vs Palm. There's just not that much difference between (hypothetically optimal and technically possible driving experience) and (current driving experience).
Apple has historically excelled in areas where they're able to offer an improved (usually by integration of existent technologies, at scale) hardware platform coupled with a well-integrated software interface.
Cars, ain't that.
What about: Sony, Ericson, Nokia, Motorola, LG, Samsung, HTC?
Palm were like the Tesla of the day in phone land.
If past Apple is anything to go by they'll be aiming for a high-volume, high-margin product. Very few people were willing to pay £600+ for a phone pre-iphone, but plenty of people do now.
That doesn't really translate. Most people are "willing" to pay that because most carriers offer 24 month financing.
A high end luxury car is going to be, at the low end $50K. Probably more towards $100K. You don't get interest free installment plans for $100K cars, and most people simply cannot afford them. There's plenty of appeal to current high end luxury cars but how are the sales of Model S P85s or higher (picking it as the most "hyped"), even compared to the 3.
If it were providing value more of the time, it could cost more and still be worth the increase in price.
But I don't see any path that gets there without a self-driving singularity to allow for humanless valet movement between "users." Maybe remotely operated human valet service, but that seems like an ugly rabbit hole? And that still leaves the fact that luxury users aren't going to be okay with ketchup stains and odors from the last user...
iTaxi as a social platform starts to get more plausible.
But that's more along the lines of a bus-van-social network hybrid. "Travel only with other vetted, high-net-worth Apple users" is an interesting twist, as well as a direct stab at Facebook and Microsoft (LinkedIn).
Is self-driving really that unlikely? It probably won't be ready for another 10 years, but Apple probably won't be looking to launch this until then either.
Nokia N-series smartphones were in that price range and sold in their tens of millions.
Note: not trying to dig on this guy's work, creating such a complete concept is good work, but speculating on the design feels pointless.
0: https://emrehusmen.myportfolio.com/tesla-pickup
Apple is in the auto industry with Apple Auto, and it's entirely possible they are building cars to not be constrained by the design of what the car makers are supplying, like reference design for PCs that intel makes. Intel was never going to make a laptop, but it helps them better understand the market, and sell more of their products, if they have a deep understanding of, and can help their customers sell/use more of Intel's product.
I haven't used Apple Auto, but I assume they don't have much of a leg-up on Android Auto, and with Volvo using Android as the OS for it's cars now, I'm sure Apple is looking at the opportunity for deeper integration and Apple Auto only features they may be able to develop with auto makers
All the predictions out there are 100% wrong, inaccurate, and lazy. Apple will NOT release a "car" as you currently know it.
It will be software on wheels; it will be an entertainment system, work/social hub, and by accident happen to take you places. It won't have a steering wheel. It won't need maintenance or a dealership network like traditional auto makers. It won't need insurance or even a drivers' license to own, because you won't be operating it. There's a good chance you won't even be able to OWN it. Those future profit margins exist is the future automatous taxi fleet, the entertainment system, and the ecosystem that exists inside and around the car as a product.
There's so much potential here if you just forget what you already know. Yes, Apple will partner with some existing manufacture to produce the car (like they do with existing products). No, it won't be based on any existing platform, it will be built from the ground up, both hardware and software, and be totally unlike anything that currently exists.
Apple is laser focused on one thing: the end user experience -- take the user somewhere, with as little input as possible, and wow the consumer with something so profound they didn't even know they wanted it; instantly make everything before look so old and clunky you will never look back.
Think back to UX 101: All user input is error.
Not saying Apple won't do a better job at it, but it sounds exactly what Waymo seems to be aiming for.
I agree with your larger point though. I don't know what Waymo is doing internally but we haven't seen a complete product vision outside.
Apple's UI is so clean that it actually reverses entropy.
Pretty sure that was Wayne Gretzky.
Apple in talks with Hyundai reminds me of that play. Release Kia with full Apple integration, maybe little 'by Apple' on the back and test the waters while learning by doing. second iteration will be the real deal manufactured by someone else entirely.
The opportunity to integrate in to peoples' lives - and the services revenue that would continue - may make up for a, say, 15% gross margin on the initial car. No? Maybe?
Of course for as environmentalist as Apple insists they are, they built a typical automobile oriented new campus with heaps of parking space...
They are a massive company the generates enormous amounts of ewaste on a yearly basis through planned obsolescence.
Good luck updating your Android phone after a couple of years.
Apple is a marketing company that sells computers, and apparently you have bought the pitch that they are somehow better for the environment because of what exactly?
Get off your high horse and just admit you enjoy a premium product for it's features and stop pretending it has anything to do with the environment.