5 ms·

I really miss DriveNow in SF and the South Bay. It was really convenient if I missed my shuttle in the mornings, or if I had to come back to the city on the wee

by yarou 11y ago

I really miss DriveNow in SF and the South Bay. It was really convenient if I missed my shuttle in the mornings, or if I had to come back to the city on the weekends. One more reason to ditch SF and move to Seattle I suppose.

dmoy 11y ago
No don't move to Seattle it rains a lot and there's no sun for 9 months. Also, volcanoes.
- wlesieutre 11y ago
  If you're trying to keep people from moving to Seattle, at least mention the earthquakes and tsunamis. > FEMA projects that nearly thirteen thousand people will die in the Cascadia earthquake and tsunami. Another twenty-seven thousand will be injured, and the agency expects that it will need to provide shelter for a million displaced people, and food and water for another two and a half million. > we now know that the odds of the big Cascadia earthquake happening in the next fifty years are roughly one in three. The odds of the very big one are roughly one in ten. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-...
  - jonknee 11y ago
    Seattle isn't at a significant risk of a tsunami thanks to the large mountain range between it and the Pacific, but it is an issue for those on the peninsula and even more so for coastal Oregon (higher population). A big quake will happen, but that shouldn't deter someone from SF.
- mikestew 11y ago
  You'll get used to the rain. Earthquakes and volcanic eruptions are rare. If you want to keep people away, tell 'am about the astonishingly shitty drivers, because after sixteen years they continue to annoy me on a daily basis.
  - rifung 11y ago
    What's wrong with the drivers? I find they drive slowly sometimes but it's not really a big deal. I find driving in SF to actually be scary on the other hand with people forcefully merging into your lanes. I've been here for almost two years but I'm still not used to the lack of sunshine for most of the year.
    - rconti 11y ago
      You mean you haven't noticed the "you go first" wave battles that can last minutes on end? And the fact that, no matter how many lanes an Interstate has, they'll all be going exactly 59mph, making passing or trying to make your exit near-impossible?
  - jonknee 11y ago
    A slow going Subaru in the left lane?
- bch 11y ago
  Mt. Rainier looming in the background. Judging...
- mahyarm 11y ago
  The reason why I don't live in seattle is because the only big employer HQs you have a choice of is MSFT and Amazon, both a negative in their own way. In the SFBA you have far more choice
- rdl 11y ago
  Especially don't move to Seattle to start technology startups to take advantage of all the great Amazon and Microsoft people who would be great hires 5 to 5000 at new startups (as well as a lot of other big companies), great university, etc. (i.e. don't be like SpaceX, Google, Facebook, ... who have all opened offices up there)
guptaneil 11y ago
Looks like this is the same service. They must be trying again in Seattle under a new brand. https://us.drive-now.com/ https://us.drive-now.com/ redirects to http://www.bmwcarsharing.com http://www.bmwcarsharing.com
- ajju 11y ago
  Same cars, different technology platform :) BMW partnered with us (RideCell) to relaunch in North America.
adriaanm 11y ago
SF killed it by not giving them parking permits: http://www.bmwblog.com/2015/10/05/drivenow-to-suspend-operations-in-sf-bay-area/ http://www.bmwblog.com/2015/10/05/drivenow-to-suspend-operat... > The company says the decision was influenced by the lack of parking permit regulations necessary for one-way car sharing. “Until the current regulations are amended, we must suspend service in the San Francisco Bay Area,” DriveNow reads in a statement. “We fully expect to return once the city reforms its parking policies to allow for one-way car sharing. We will continue to work with the city of San Francisco toward achieving that goal.”
robbiet480 11y ago
IMHO As one of the top DriveNow customers i'm pretty upset that they shot themselves in the foot here in SF by attempting to get 100's of on street parking permits for ELECTRIC cars which need to be constantly charged. I really don't understand who thought that would be a great idea for a parking constrained city like San Francisco. I do miss DriveNow, at least weekly. Having an ActiveE or later, an i3 to run errands or take friends around town was really really great, and the pricing was insane ($60 for 24 hours, all inclusive! It started at $30 when they first launched. I was renting cars for a month at a time because it was cheaper than owning/leasing when you consider that parking at my office building was $700/month).
- jonknee 11y ago
  > IMHO As one of the top DriveNow customers i'm pretty upset that they shot themselves in the foot here in SF by attempting to get 100's of on street parking permits for ELECTRIC cars which need to be constantly charged. I really don't understand who thought that would be a great idea for a parking constrained city like San Francisco. Since they are paying for the parking I don't really see what the issue is. If the cars are out somewhere being charged they won't be in a parking spot. Using parking spots for shared cars is more efficient and should actually increase the turnover of spots while still providing consistent revenue to the city (without having to worry about enforcement or actually collecting the revenue).

by yarou 11y ago

dmoy 11y ago

No don't move to Seattle it rains a lot and there's no sun for 9 months. Also, volcanoes.

wlesieutre 11y ago
If you're trying to keep people from moving to Seattle, at least mention the earthquakes and tsunamis. > FEMA projects that nearly thirteen thousand people will die in the Cascadia earthquake and tsunami. Another twenty-seven thousand will be injured, and the agency expects that it will need to provide shelter for a million displaced people, and food and water for another two and a half million. > we now know that the odds of the big Cascadia earthquake happening in the next fifty years are roughly one in three. The odds of the very big one are roughly one in ten. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-...
- jonknee 11y ago
  Seattle isn't at a significant risk of a tsunami thanks to the large mountain range between it and the Pacific, but it is an issue for those on the peninsula and even more so for coastal Oregon (higher population). A big quake will happen, but that shouldn't deter someone from SF.
mikestew 11y ago
You'll get used to the rain. Earthquakes and volcanic eruptions are rare. If you want to keep people away, tell 'am about the astonishingly shitty drivers, because after sixteen years they continue to annoy me on a daily basis.
- rifung 11y ago
  What's wrong with the drivers? I find they drive slowly sometimes but it's not really a big deal. I find driving in SF to actually be scary on the other hand with people forcefully merging into your lanes. I've been here for almost two years but I'm still not used to the lack of sunshine for most of the year.
  - rconti 11y ago
    You mean you haven't noticed the "you go first" wave battles that can last minutes on end? And the fact that, no matter how many lanes an Interstate has, they'll all be going exactly 59mph, making passing or trying to make your exit near-impossible?
- jonknee 11y ago
  A slow going Subaru in the left lane?
bch 11y ago
Mt. Rainier looming in the background. Judging...
mahyarm 11y ago
The reason why I don't live in seattle is because the only big employer HQs you have a choice of is MSFT and Amazon, both a negative in their own way. In the SFBA you have far more choice
rdl 11y ago
Especially don't move to Seattle to start technology startups to take advantage of all the great Amazon and Microsoft people who would be great hires 5 to 5000 at new startups (as well as a lot of other big companies), great university, etc. (i.e. don't be like SpaceX, Google, Facebook, ... who have all opened offices up there)

guptaneil 11y ago

Looks like this is the same service. They must be trying again in Seattle under a new brand. https://us.drive-now.com/ https://us.drive-now.com/ redirects to http://www.bmwcarsharing.com http://www.bmwcarsharing.com

ajju 11y ago
Same cars, different technology platform :) BMW partnered with us (RideCell) to relaunch in North America.

adriaanm 11y ago

SF killed it by not giving them parking permits: http://www.bmwblog.com/2015/10/05/drivenow-to-suspend-operations-in-sf-bay-area/ http://www.bmwblog.com/2015/10/05/drivenow-to-suspend-operat... > The company says the decision was influenced by the lack of parking permit regulations necessary for one-way car sharing. “Until the current regulations are amended, we must suspend service in the San Francisco Bay Area,” DriveNow reads in a statement. “We fully expect to return once the city reforms its parking policies to allow for one-way car sharing. We will continue to work with the city of San Francisco toward achieving that goal.”

robbiet480 11y ago

IMHO As one of the top DriveNow customers i'm pretty upset that they shot themselves in the foot here in SF by attempting to get 100's of on street parking permits for ELECTRIC cars which need to be constantly charged. I really don't understand who thought that would be a great idea for a parking constrained city like San Francisco. I do miss DriveNow, at least weekly. Having an ActiveE or later, an i3 to run errands or take friends around town was really really great, and the pricing was insane ($60 for 24 hours, all inclusive! It started at $30 when they first launched. I was renting cars for a month at a time because it was cheaper than owning/leasing when you consider that parking at my office building was $700/month).

jonknee 11y ago
> IMHO As one of the top DriveNow customers i'm pretty upset that they shot themselves in the foot here in SF by attempting to get 100's of on street parking permits for ELECTRIC cars which need to be constantly charged. I really don't understand who thought that would be a great idea for a parking constrained city like San Francisco. Since they are paying for the parking I don't really see what the issue is. If the cars are out somewhere being charged they won't be in a parking spot. Using parking spots for shared cars is more efficient and should actually increase the turnover of spots while still providing consistent revenue to the city (without having to worry about enforcement or actually collecting the revenue).