8 ms·

This report refers to the earlier Bloomberg report but basically contradicts it [1]. In that report they said the strategy was shifting towards making the under

by IBM 10y ago

This report refers to the earlier Bloomberg report but basically contradicts it [1]. In that report they said the strategy was shifting towards making the underlying tech for self-driving rather than a car, but that never made any sense to me. The value in the business to Apple will be in the design, interior, and performance of the vehicle. Self-driving technology is going to be a commodity; buyers are certainly not going to be evaluating the self-driving capabilities when deciding which car to buy. The most important part is making a nice car, the self-driving tech is an implementation detail (and it will be like deciding whether to use Bluetooth and/or Wi-Fi for a wireless protocol like AirPlay). Many companies are working on self-driving tech, including Uber which Apple is indirectly an investor in now (and won't be competing with each other, like Google). There will be plenty of time to work on it internally, license/buy it or collaborate with someone like Uber. Their development efforts should be focused on everything else (like manufacturing processes to enable scale and avoid Tesla's problems), that's what their business will really be about. [1] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-28/apple-taps-blackberry-talent-as-car-project-takes-software-turn http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-28/apple-taps...

Fricken 10y ago
Well, you'd think it would be smart to license someone elses software but Tesla, GM, Ford, Uber, Mobileye, a couple dozen startups and any number of other players are all pursuing their own proprietary autonomous drivng OSs. The data is invaluable. Google, on the other hand, who intended from the beginning to license it's OS out to carmakers has yet to secure any meaningful partnerships.
Donwangugi 10y ago
This. Apple is already a luxury brand and has the money to make what Tesla cannot: a truly no-compromise electric car. Teslas, while perhaps faster than traditional ICE vehicles, have comparably less luxurious interiors. Additionally, Apple has such brand power that they could release a car tomorrow and have a guaranteed level of sales. Few companies would have the cash, expertise and brand value to develop such a product.
- aioprisan 10y ago
  You mean unlike Tesla that just announced and got billions worth of sales? I don't think the magic is reserved for Apple only
  - Donwangugi 10y ago
    But this would be their 4th car. Tesla has been in the car industry for 13 years, building brand awareness. Additionally, a lot of the people still buy Teslas with the motivation of saving the environment and abandoning fossil fuels. Where as hopefully Apple would just make an all around superior car.
    - vacri 10y ago
      > Tesla has been in the car industry for 13 years, building brand awareness. ... and building domain expertise. Apple is at the top of the smartphone game and still gets manufacturing significantly wrong at times - see the bendy iphone or the antenna-case that can't call if you hold it the wrong way. Jumping the fence to the world of vehicles is a brand new domain to make mistakes in. Keep in mind also that Apple has gone back on things they've said in the past. Radios in ipods were never going to happen, then they did. Mocked users of a stylus, then released Pencil. The iPhone is the perfect size for your hand... then they embiggened it. Getting it right the first time is something Apple sometimes does, and sometimes fails at. Apple has also released a lot of turkeys over the years that people conveniently forget about. I just can't see them jumping the fence to a significantly different product domain and simply beating everyone else there at the game.
      - lostlogin 10y ago
        Could you name one of the turkeys? Sure, some of the things you name weren't ideal, but I don't think they bothered most people and it certainly didn't seem to hit the bottom line.
        gruturo 10y ago
gnarbarian 10y ago
>"Self-driving technology is going to be a commodity; buyers are certainly not going to be evaluating the self-driving capabilities when deciding which car to buy." Totally disagree here. We have no idea what the range of capabilities will be with self driving cars. I could easily see some versions which would be more independent than others. For example, perhaps one manufacturer can only make them drive well on highways with your hands on the steering wheel, while others can be completely autonomous so it can drive itself over to pick your kids up from school or make its way over snowy and icy roads or dirt roads with no markings. That kind of difference would easily surmount the tribal brand loyalty most car buyers have. It's a killer feature, not a commodity.
- mulcahey 10y ago
  Agree. The "skill level" of an autonomous vehicle is continuous, not binary. I could totally see people buying a car based on how trustworthy it is (crash statistics). Perhaps there will be some legally standard terms or discrete statistical thresholds makers will have to meet in order to legally claim certain levels of autonomy.
  - semi-extrinsic 10y ago
    > I could totally see people buying a car based on how trustworthy it is (crash statistics). The problem with such an idea is that even if you sell 100 000 cars in the first year after launch (really good), you'll have to wait for about five years before you have the statistics to claim you car has any better than average safety record. But after those five years, your model is going to be near end-of-sales, so it won't matter. And that's with safety records today. As cars keep getting safer, this gets worse and worse. Remember, NHTSA averages today are over the entire car population. Today that population has a significant tail of cars from the late 80s or early 90s without basic safety measures like airbags and crumple zones. These will have a much higher fatality rate. But it ten years, when those are mostly gone from the roads, it's going to be ludicrously difficult to make statistically valid statements about car model safety while that model is still being sold.
    - 10y ago
gbin 10y ago
I disagree, once a self driving cars are on the market, there will be a complete shift in the way you think about cars ! Why anyone would own one ? Why park a car when they can drive all the time and you can hail one for super cheap ? Cities will have zero parking space, streets would be reduced to one lane for most of them, no red lights, etc...
- bolasanibk 10y ago
  >Why anyone would own one ? Cleanliness, customization, storing of personal items, availability at odd timings or locations. There are plenty of reasons why many will still own a car.
  - pmontra 10y ago
    Yes, but those many will be much less than they are now. I believe we'll own a car only if and when we can't avoid it (having babies to carry around could be a reason for many of us) or if we want to brag about our money. I don't own a car since 2012 because I was not using it enough. I'm using car sharing now and a little more trains. It's much less expensive, maybe a little more time consuming, but that time is gained because I have less things to care about. Cars became a commodity for me, and I see no reasons why they shouldn't be. All I ask from them is be safe.
  - astrodust 10y ago
    Cleanliness is completely subjective. I know many people with cars so cluttered it's absurd. I've also been in many shared vehicles that are utterly spotless. There are many reasons why you'd want to own a car, but the number of reasons for you to need to own a car plunges dramatically when the quality offered by shared rides meets or exceeds the experience your average car-owner has. Imagine a car that always has sufficient fuel or battery power to get you where you're going, that is clean every time you use it, that never has to be parked, that comes reliably within minutes of being summoned, and never, ever has to be taken in to the garage to be fixed. That's the future if things come together as they should. Rich people will own their own cars, probably several of them, but your average person won't see the need. If they want to splurge they'll rent a car solo. If they want to save money, ride-share with a few others.
ben_jones 10y ago
Wait until the safety facts come out for self driving cars: 1) $CAR_PROVIDER_X: 00.005% your daughter dies in a car crash 2) $CAR_PROVIDER_Y: 00.0045% your daughter dies in a car crash 3) $CAR_PROVIDER_Z: 00.009% your daughter dies in a car crash IMO it's going to completely transcend previous safety ratings. People will evaluate the quality of self-driving tech in the beginning, maybe after awhile people start viewing it as "god like" but in the beginning they will be PICKY.
- bryanlarsen 10y ago
  Sure, but there's absolutely no way to get such numbers in a statistically valid fashion without many years worth of statistics since fatal collisions / mile driven is such a low number. And since vendors push new software every few months, those numbers won't be available at all. But you're right that people will choose their cars based on this. But the information they will have will just be rumour, innuendo, fear-mongering click bait journalism and other sources of FUD. It's going to be ugly.
  - tim333 10y ago
    There are a bunch of ways you can test the systems apart from just looking at fatality numbers. Here's a TV show testing auto-braking systems for example. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzHM6PVTjXo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzHM6PVTjXo You could easily extend that to a test track with all sorts of stuff self driving cars find hard - oil spills, diversions, people / animals / plastic bags jumping out and so on.
deepGem 10y ago
If we equate today's car buyer with the self-driving car buyer, I agree with this statement, with one caveat, speed. Speed and the resulting driving safety at that speed will be a major deciding factor for the self-driving car buyer. That being said, I believe Apple will still build the self-driving car. This could really be Bob just shaking up the entire team, given his hardware background. One explanation - there's just no other sensible way to spend their humungous, growing cash pile.

by IBM 10y ago

Fricken 10y ago

Well, you'd think it would be smart to license someone elses software but Tesla, GM, Ford, Uber, Mobileye, a couple dozen startups and any number of other players are all pursuing their own proprietary autonomous drivng OSs. The data is invaluable. Google, on the other hand, who intended from the beginning to license it's OS out to carmakers has yet to secure any meaningful partnerships.

Donwangugi 10y ago

This. Apple is already a luxury brand and has the money to make what Tesla cannot: a truly no-compromise electric car. Teslas, while perhaps faster than traditional ICE vehicles, have comparably less luxurious interiors. Additionally, Apple has such brand power that they could release a car tomorrow and have a guaranteed level of sales. Few companies would have the cash, expertise and brand value to develop such a product.

aioprisan 10y ago
You mean unlike Tesla that just announced and got billions worth of sales? I don't think the magic is reserved for Apple only
- Donwangugi 10y ago
  But this would be their 4th car. Tesla has been in the car industry for 13 years, building brand awareness. Additionally, a lot of the people still buy Teslas with the motivation of saving the environment and abandoning fossil fuels. Where as hopefully Apple would just make an all around superior car.
  - vacri 10y ago
    > Tesla has been in the car industry for 13 years, building brand awareness. ... and building domain expertise. Apple is at the top of the smartphone game and still gets manufacturing significantly wrong at times - see the bendy iphone or the antenna-case that can't call if you hold it the wrong way. Jumping the fence to the world of vehicles is a brand new domain to make mistakes in. Keep in mind also that Apple has gone back on things they've said in the past. Radios in ipods were never going to happen, then they did. Mocked users of a stylus, then released Pencil. The iPhone is the perfect size for your hand... then they embiggened it. Getting it right the first time is something Apple sometimes does, and sometimes fails at. Apple has also released a lot of turkeys over the years that people conveniently forget about. I just can't see them jumping the fence to a significantly different product domain and simply beating everyone else there at the game.
    - lostlogin 10y ago
      Could you name one of the turkeys? Sure, some of the things you name weren't ideal, but I don't think they bothered most people and it certainly didn't seem to hit the bottom line.
      - gruturo 10y ago

gnarbarian 10y ago

>"Self-driving technology is going to be a commodity; buyers are certainly not going to be evaluating the self-driving capabilities when deciding which car to buy." Totally disagree here. We have no idea what the range of capabilities will be with self driving cars. I could easily see some versions which would be more independent than others. For example, perhaps one manufacturer can only make them drive well on highways with your hands on the steering wheel, while others can be completely autonomous so it can drive itself over to pick your kids up from school or make its way over snowy and icy roads or dirt roads with no markings. That kind of difference would easily surmount the tribal brand loyalty most car buyers have. It's a killer feature, not a commodity.

mulcahey 10y ago
Agree. The "skill level" of an autonomous vehicle is continuous, not binary. I could totally see people buying a car based on how trustworthy it is (crash statistics). Perhaps there will be some legally standard terms or discrete statistical thresholds makers will have to meet in order to legally claim certain levels of autonomy.
- semi-extrinsic 10y ago
  > I could totally see people buying a car based on how trustworthy it is (crash statistics). The problem with such an idea is that even if you sell 100 000 cars in the first year after launch (really good), you'll have to wait for about five years before you have the statistics to claim you car has any better than average safety record. But after those five years, your model is going to be near end-of-sales, so it won't matter. And that's with safety records today. As cars keep getting safer, this gets worse and worse. Remember, NHTSA averages today are over the entire car population. Today that population has a significant tail of cars from the late 80s or early 90s without basic safety measures like airbags and crumple zones. These will have a much higher fatality rate. But it ten years, when those are mostly gone from the roads, it's going to be ludicrously difficult to make statistically valid statements about car model safety while that model is still being sold.
  - 10y ago

gbin 10y ago

I disagree, once a self driving cars are on the market, there will be a complete shift in the way you think about cars ! Why anyone would own one ? Why park a car when they can drive all the time and you can hail one for super cheap ? Cities will have zero parking space, streets would be reduced to one lane for most of them, no red lights, etc...

bolasanibk 10y ago
>Why anyone would own one ? Cleanliness, customization, storing of personal items, availability at odd timings or locations. There are plenty of reasons why many will still own a car.
- pmontra 10y ago
  Yes, but those many will be much less than they are now. I believe we'll own a car only if and when we can't avoid it (having babies to carry around could be a reason for many of us) or if we want to brag about our money. I don't own a car since 2012 because I was not using it enough. I'm using car sharing now and a little more trains. It's much less expensive, maybe a little more time consuming, but that time is gained because I have less things to care about. Cars became a commodity for me, and I see no reasons why they shouldn't be. All I ask from them is be safe.
- astrodust 10y ago
  Cleanliness is completely subjective. I know many people with cars so cluttered it's absurd. I've also been in many shared vehicles that are utterly spotless. There are many reasons why you'd want to own a car, but the number of reasons for you to need to own a car plunges dramatically when the quality offered by shared rides meets or exceeds the experience your average car-owner has. Imagine a car that always has sufficient fuel or battery power to get you where you're going, that is clean every time you use it, that never has to be parked, that comes reliably within minutes of being summoned, and never, ever has to be taken in to the garage to be fixed. That's the future if things come together as they should. Rich people will own their own cars, probably several of them, but your average person won't see the need. If they want to splurge they'll rent a car solo. If they want to save money, ride-share with a few others.

ben_jones 10y ago

Wait until the safety facts come out for self driving cars: 1) $CAR_PROVIDER_X: 00.005% your daughter dies in a car crash 2) $CAR_PROVIDER_Y: 00.0045% your daughter dies in a car crash 3) $CAR_PROVIDER_Z: 00.009% your daughter dies in a car crash IMO it's going to completely transcend previous safety ratings. People will evaluate the quality of self-driving tech in the beginning, maybe after awhile people start viewing it as "god like" but in the beginning they will be PICKY.

bryanlarsen 10y ago
Sure, but there's absolutely no way to get such numbers in a statistically valid fashion without many years worth of statistics since fatal collisions / mile driven is such a low number. And since vendors push new software every few months, those numbers won't be available at all. But you're right that people will choose their cars based on this. But the information they will have will just be rumour, innuendo, fear-mongering click bait journalism and other sources of FUD. It's going to be ugly.
- tim333 10y ago
  There are a bunch of ways you can test the systems apart from just looking at fatality numbers. Here's a TV show testing auto-braking systems for example. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzHM6PVTjXo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzHM6PVTjXo You could easily extend that to a test track with all sorts of stuff self driving cars find hard - oil spills, diversions, people / animals / plastic bags jumping out and so on.

deepGem 10y ago

If we equate today's car buyer with the self-driving car buyer, I agree with this statement, with one caveat, speed. Speed and the resulting driving safety at that speed will be a major deciding factor for the self-driving car buyer. That being said, I believe Apple will still build the self-driving car. This could really be Bob just shaking up the entire team, given his hardware background. One explanation - there's just no other sensible way to spend their humungous, growing cash pile.