25 ms·
Apple Scales Back Its Ambitions for a Self-Driving Car
- adamnemecek 9y agoWelcome to the club.
- senatorobama 9y agoThey probably realized that designing a safe (to their standards) self-driving car is equivalent to strong AI.
- dboreham 9y agoThe same conclusion any person thinking about the problem for a while would reach..
- MichaelApproved 9y agoI think we will need roads designed for autonomous cars, to make them truly safe and autonomous. They'll need sensors and digital markers to augment the visual markers. Otherwise, conditions like snow or rain would make it too difficult to work.
- drewrv 9y agoThis should be a big part of the conversation around self driving cars. If we added some basic markers and beacons to our roads we could have self driving cars a lot sooner. Start with the interstates, we'll save a ton of lives and bring down the cost of shipping.
- kartD 9y ago"But people within the industrial design team including Jonathan Ive, Apple’s chief designer, believed that a fully driverless car would allow the company to reimagine the automobile experience, according to the five people." Ah Jony Ive, first he ruined iOS 7 and now this constant need to tinker with things that work fine. I love the hardware design but please leave the software and HID bit alone... of course YMMV P.S. Anyone feel iOS usability has been going down with the move to a flat design?
- jhurliman 9y agoNo
- wcarron 9y agoWell put /s. C'mon. That's low effort and not conducive to actual discussion. At least say why you disagree.
- slackoverflower 9y agoNope. Flat design for iOS was Apple's best move. iOS 7 was what made iOS amazing. I have no clue what you're talking about. Full credit to Jony Ive, some of the UI design I've seen.
- robertlagrant 9y agoIt was nice that they followed the Microsoft flat design stuff. Weird that it was all psychedelic, though. That was hilarious.
- htormey 9y agoWhat do you think he got wrong with ios7?
- kartD 9y agoWell to be clear it's everything UI wise since ios7. Links: https://www.fastcodesign.com/3053406/how-apple-is-giving-design-a-bad-name https://www.fastcodesign.com/3053406/how-apple-is-giving-des... https://youtu.be/RT46MpK39rQ?t=2104 https://youtu.be/RT46MpK39rQ?t=2104 TL;DR ver: -> Inconsistent UI within an app -> Gestures that are inconsistent across apps and within the same app -> No undo (I mean shake to undo doesn't count)
- abledon 9y agoYes, old design icons made more sense, new flat ones are too abstract
- 9y ago
- mozumder 9y agoWhy does the tech industry focus on self-driving cars so much? It's absolutely never going to happen, ever. The world would be much better off if we converted our roads to a rail/streetcar system and drop the personal car concept entirely. The hype around this is worse than VR.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- Stanleyc23 9y agobecause local maxima vs global maxima?
- slackoverflower 9y agoIs it that you don't want self driving cars to happen or you don't THINK it will happen? I, for one, am super excited for self driving personal vehicles and will be glad to see the eradication of mass public transportation like trains and buses.
- jamestimmins 9y agoThere's a strong case to be made that this isn't a desirable outcome in a lot of areas. Trains and buses are much more efficient at moving people than individual cars, even if they're self-driving. I'm also extremely excited about autonomous cars, but neither desire nor think they will replace mass transit. edit: As a few people have mentioned, my suggestion that "trains are buses are much more efficient" is dubious. And I certainly don't mean to say they're better in all circumstances. It's more accurate to say that in certain scenarios, it still makes sense to use mass transit instead of self driving cars. Moving inside Manhattan, or commuting from a suburb to Manhattan, are examples where mass transit likely makes sense. With the obligatory disclaimer that I could be incorrect, this is simply my understanding.
- hossbeast 9y ago"Trains and buses are much more efficient at moving people than individual cars, even if they're self driving" Dubious claim that needs evidence. I think you're underestimating the potential throughput gains from autonomy. As just one example, speed limits can probably be greatly increased when you take the realities of human reaction times out of the equation.
- anilshanbhag 9y agoThis is the right way. Building a mass market car is an enormous exercise. We have seen this with Tesla, which has thrown money at the problem and will still take 4 years to become mass market (2.5 already over + another 1.5 years). After these 4 years, its unclear what the value add will be.
- bobsil1 9y agoDesirable EVs which define the category.
- hkmurakami 9y agoTesla has built a category from the ground up. That is a very different challenge from replicating an existing business that has gone through decades of refinement.
- ctdonath 9y agoBut isn't what Apple (at least via rumor) was planning to do - build a category from the ground up a la Tesla, even if outright buying the full capacity of a major automotive manufacturer which barely has a grasp on EVs (think Bolt, Leaf, i3, etc)? I mean the OP referenced rumors of spherical wheels and other total revamping/replacing of existing tech plus totally new tech to boot. If anything, "replicating" (or outright purchasing) what was developed over decades is just entrenching the past. Apple succeeds as it does by practically inventing future tech and making it instant commodities (yes, they're not always first, but hit so hard and go so far they dominate first movers).
- rconti 9y agoThe Roadster started production in 2008. I don't even know how long it was in development before that. To me, that counts as part of trying to build a mass market car. Yes, it was a niche vehicle, but if you want to point to the Model S as the start point, it's either ALSO a niche vehicle, or already represents success at building a mass market vehicle.
- ianai 9y agoCall me crazy but why not consider ways to let someone remote drive the vehicle? I'm sure there are all sorts of corner cases (bad signal for one) but it's done all the time with drones.
- dogruck 9y agoSpeed of light limitation.
- likelynew 9y agoHow will it solve anything?
- azinman2 9y agoTheoretically you could find someone far away who will drive cheaply. Lot of trust in that individual when they too don’t get killed if the car crashes. Also hope you never have packet loss!!! There’s also that pesky speed of light restrictions on low latency, etc.
- pramodzion 9y agoThat "someone" is exactly a Lyft/Uber driver !
- thisacctforreal 9y agoMaybe we should put them in the trunk of the car instead? Have another lyft driver drop them off at your car before you leave for work in the morning
- ianai 9y agoI think the key would either have them not be far away (so same city), hauling long distance, or even just driver assistance. I'm fully in the free thinking zone here tho. It's probably not practical but if it were it might make for decent cubicle work for unskilled labor.
- 9y ago
- pvg 9y agoA moral of this story is "don't name things 'Titan' or titan-related names". It's asking for trouble - Blizzard's 'Project Titan', Titan A.E., the Titanic. Things didn't end all that well for the titans in Greek mythology either.
- jpm_sd 9y agosee also: http://www.businessinsider.com/google-shuts-down-project-titan-drone-program-2017-1 http://www.businessinsider.com/google-shuts-down-project-tit...
- schoen 9y agoNice point, but I guess so far the chemical element titanium is doing all right.
- pvg 9y agoIt's faking it, still bitter about the time Apple kicked it out their laptops.
- cma 9y agoTo the extent Project Titan served as the seed of Overwatch it was probably profitable (maybe even when you take into account opportunity cost).
- mypalmike 9y agoIf Apple were truly serious about building self-driving cars, they would buy one of the big 3 US auto manufacturers. It could buy all 3 with cash and still have one of the largest hoards of cash ever accumulated.
- coffeevradar 9y agoReasonably sure their buying all three automakers would attract the attention of antitrust regulators.
- bsimpson 9y agoThe culture and support issues that would incur seem non-trivial.
- hkmurakami 9y agoThey wouldn't get the tech they're looking for. Manufacturing scale is not something they need until after they have the self driving tech (and also, I'd just partner with a Japanese or German automaker tbh. Toyota under the current CEO has made moves that hint that it would be open to a joint venture). The main differentiator of current big auto is the engine and drivetrain engineering, which you can circumvent when going electric. It's unclear what you're buying with a big 3 company that actually helps with the self driving part of the problem, which is currently a much larger problem than manufacturing scale and quality assurance.
- erikpukinskis 9y agoYou're also buying huge liabilities: - constrictive agreements with dealers - rapidly deprecating manufacturing assets - a workforce with sunk costs in last generation skills - a warranty burden on old vehicles - pensions and other union agreements - a beloved brand that the public may not be happy seeing chewed up and regurgitated as iTaxi Supplier 4A If you believe in an autonomous and electric near future, some of these companies should have Yahoo-style negative valuations.
- fennecfoxen 9y ago
- MicroBerto 9y agoGood, now if only we can get Musk to stop live alpha-testing his decapitation death code and slow down for a few years, then maybe some actual experts who have working sensors can get this done properly.
- MichaelApproved 9y ago> decapitation death code What are you referencing here? If you mean the accident that caused a car to drive under a truck, that driver ignored several alerts and warnings from the auto pilot system. That accident was human error, not software. Edit: Results of NTSB investigation https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2017/06/20/tesla-self-driving-car-crash/411516001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2017/06/20/tesla-s...
- nadim 9y agoMore proof Apple is done innovating. This is literally a story about giving up, in the NYT. Can we have SJ back please?
- objclxt 9y ago> More proof Apple is done innovating. It's literally the opposite of that. They spent billions of dollars on R&D in a new market segment. Just because you cancel the project or decide it's a failure doesn't mean a) you didn't learn anything, b) you didn't get any tech out of it, and c) it's not innovation. You cannot be innovative if you are not prepared for your efforts to fail. If Apple was "done innovating" they wouldn't be taking massive bets like this at all.
- tambourine_man 9y ago“From the beginning, the employees dedicated to Project Titan looked at a wide range of details. That included motorized doors that opened and closed silently. They also studied ways to redesign a car interior without a steering wheel or gas pedals, and they worked on adding virtual or augmented reality into interior displays. The team also worked on a new light and ranging detection sensor, also known as lidar. Lidar sensors normally protrude from the top of a car like a spinning cone and are essential in driverless cars. Apple, as always focused on clean designs, wanted to do away with the awkward cone. Apple even looked into reinventing the wheel. A team within Titan investigated the possibility of using spherical wheels — round like a globe — instead of the traditional, round ones, because spherical wheels could allow the car better lateral movement.” Very interesting, and one heck of a leak if true.
- make3 9y agoVery large tech companies always have people looking into weird slightly bullshit things. Doesn't necessarily mean that they had any real intention of committing to these ideas.
- intoverflow2 9y agoSomeone correct me if I'm wrong but it was my understanding Apple specifically stopped having teams "looking into weird slightly bullshit things" when Jobs returned. The Apple Knowledge Navigator video comes to mind, it feels very similar to video-vaporware like Microsoft Origami and Microsoft Courier
- stephengillie 9y agoOne example is Xerox's PARC.
- colechristensen 9y agoSeems like they were biting off way more than they could chew. If Apple partnered with an existing car company to apply their design principles on top of an existing car platform (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_Mini_platform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_Mini_platform ) they could see a lot of success if they weren't too ambitious. They wouldn't win if they tried to reinvent the wheel because there would be far too big of a chance of either taking 10 years to build nothing or for building something that ended up being overly strange (e.g. Segway) Build a car that was familiar built out with quality materials and an iOS dash interface and you'd sell like hotcakes.
- segmondy 9y agoApple really is a one hit wonder. Outside of computing devices, phone, tablets, laptops, (let's throw in desktops & watches) They really haven't been able to build and innovate much since Jobs. I was short on the idea when they announced a self-driving car. Without a major change and internal culture shock, they are going to stay on this course, hit peak cash extraction until they start mortgaging cash quickly. The only thing that has been pretty interesting has been AR. Innovation dilemma is strong.
- BoorishBears 9y agoI can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not
- D-Coder 9y agoI'm reading it as, "What have the Romans ever done for us? Apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health."
- Nuance 9y agoYou called them a one hit wonder and then implied that they've had hits in all their product categories, fascinating.
- damon_c 9y agoWhat about the aqueducts?
- askafriend 9y agoThis is either very cleverly veiled sarcasm or straight up obliviousness with a side of trolling. Hard to tell which, well done!
- gruturo 9y agoI literally don't know whether to upvote or downvote you. The first sentence is beautifully sarcastic, but the rest makes me think it wasn't sarcasm at all. Apart from this, I sort of agree with your view of not having been able to innovate much since SJ, but this is actually evidence of the opposite: not much new has been coming out of Apple, but clearly stuff is happening inside, which sometimes doesn't turn into a product, but their R&D appears to be alive and well.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- freehunter 9y agoHow much energy does it take to move one train 500 miles? How much energy does it take to move 10 cars 25 miles each? That's your question. Why do people always frame public transport in the light of "everyone can just take a single train!"? It doesn't work like that. It never works like that. It's a ridiculous argument barely even worthy of a response. 500 people might take one train in LA or NYC, but how about Greenville, Wisconsin? How about in Bitely, Michigan? How about Linn Grove, Indiana? Suddenly the argument breaks down, doesn't it? Good luck replacing 500 cars with one train when the town only has 150 people and they all work in different cities. Now suddenly cars are looking pretty damn efficient, aren't they?
- Apocryphon 9y agoYou raise good points, but they're specific to American urban design, and the long-term solution is probably to redesign and rebuild our cities to move away from those designs.
- freehunter 9y agoSo the solution is to tear down our cities, abandon our homes, and rebuild everything somewhere else. Gotcha. I mean that's probably environmentally friendly, right?
- Apocryphon 9y agoUrban renewal is a policy which exists, yes.
- freehunter 9y agoYeah that Empire State Building is almost 90 years old, time to tear it down and build a new one closer to the streetcar line. Jesus you are absolutely insane.
- Apocryphon 9y ago
- uberuberuber 9y agoA vehicle with a similar external sensor array has been parked in a lot near my workplace every weekday at lunch time for the past several weeks. Given the proximity to AC3 at Central and Wolfe, my coworkers and I had all assumed it was an Apple test of some kind. Accords with the rumor mill surrounding Apple leasing a former Pepsi bottling plant down the street. https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2016/03/01/apple-leases-old-pepsi-bottling-plant-in-sunnyvale.html https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2016/03/01/apple-le...
- briandear 9y agoWas it a Lexus?
- uberuberuber 9y agoI believe so... however it is gold unlike most of the media pics showing a white Lexus.
- pentae 9y agoI'd just be happy if they put all those people back on the Mac and OSX team.
- 1_2__4 9y agoCan the "mass production self driving cars are just a couple of years away" meme finally die yet? Are we ready to admit that maybe this is a harder thing to invent than we've been trying to make ourselves believe?
- Eridrus 9y agoWhat about this article makes you think this? Do you have some insight that all the major automakers are missing when they say they expect to have autonomous cars on the road in the next 5 years?
- 1_2__4 9y agoYeah, they've been saying that for the past five years.
- zb 9y agoAs of last year, Waymo were saying it will take up to 30 years, and they're widely considered to be in the lead: http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/google-selfdriving-car-will-be-ready-soon-for-some-in-decades-for-others http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self...
- MarkMc 9y agoThe article you linked to indicates that places with good weather and good roads could see the technology in 3 years. For all places in all conditions it may take 30 years: "this technology is almost certainly going to come out incrementally. We imagine we are going to find places where the weather is good, where the roads are easy to drive — the technology might come there first. And then once we have confidence with that, we will move to more challenging locations."
- stevenwoo 9y agoEven in the Bay Area, there is periodically bad to less than perfect weather - we had 30+ straight days of rain about 15 years ago in one of the El Nino years, and that would have killed Waymo's steering wheel-less cars' useability. It's almost like none of the people who made that decision were here when that happened.
- cletus 9y agoSo anyone who has been around for even a few years has witnessed probably more than AI hype cycle. This has been going on since probably the 1960s. While there have been (I'm sure) advances over the years, some no doubt substantial, what's clear is that the big thing that was and is needed is a truly massive amount of computing power. Now I believe that self-driving cars will ultimately be transformative for society in a way not seen since the automobile itself or possibly even mass electricity generation. But I just think this is still way further off than the more bullish pundits are predicting. To be clear, there are two milestones here: 1. Assisted driving 2. Autonomous driving. It's the second that'll be truly transformative. This is when cars won't be designed to have human drivers at all. There is a lot of low hanging fruit here like highway driving where basically you need to not hit the vehicle in front of you and you need to stay in a lane at a fairly constant speed. Assisted driving is the incremental approach needed to prove these technologies and bring self-driving to market (IMHO). This will be gradual and slowly replace some aspects of manual driving. It will probably soon reach the point where the car will intervene to prevent an accident. I expect even this to be cautiously adopted as there is a massive product liability issue here. A drunk driver drives on the wrong side of the road and has a head on collision and society just tends to write that off as unfortunate, the cost of doing business basically. But as swoon as the car makes a decision that injures or kills someone (and it will) the lawsuits will be swift and massive. That's a problem. In fact, it may be the biggest problem. Nevermind the inherent risk to drivers, passengers and bystanders when you put a meat sack behind the wheel. But the long tail of this problem is huge, to the point where I'm not sure you can really solve it without having an almost or actual general AI. So much of this is anticipating what humans will do. I mean things like placing a bucket or a plastic bag on the road and seeing what an autonomous car does. Thing is, people seem to think this is totally going to happen real soon now when we have a long history with this in the form of aviation. People have been trying to automate humans out of flying planes forever. Unfortunately there seems to be an uncanny valley type situation where too much automation can actually make things more unsafe. I'm talking here about incidents where automated systems did or nearly did cause incidents that the humans had problems overriding. And planes have to deal with probably substantially less situations than cars do. I honestly don't know why Apple thinks it can compete in this space. It doesn't play to any of their core strengths. If I had to pick anyone in the box seat here it would be Tesla. Tesla already produces cars and has a go-to-market strategy. After Tesla, I'd add Google simply because you can never totally discount Google. I take Apple scaling back as a positive sign here... for the company. I take it to mean that they realize just how far away this is and how difficult a go-to-market strategy is and also that this just doesn't play to their strengths.
- IBM 9y agoThis is a weirdly titled report which implies it just happened. The "Apple scales back" part was already reported first by Bloomberg last year (which seems to be behind a paywall now) [1]. Bob Mansfield was brought on to refocus Project Titan on the fundamentals (being self-driving) rather that producing a car [2]. But both of these reports have the exact same hedging: >Apple Inc. has drastically scaled back its automotive ambitions, leading to hundreds of job cuts and a new direction that, for now, no longer includes building its own car, according to people familiar with the project. >Five people familiar with Apple’s car project, code-named “Titan,” discussed with The New York Times the missteps that led the tech giant to move — at least for now — from creating a self-driving Apple car to creating technology for a car that someone else builds. And that's because the idea that Apple is going to be an auto parts supplier like Delphi that sells middleware to car companies is completely laughable. There isn't actually much news in this report. The tidbits that the reporter got clearly motivated writing this article but it doesn't actually live up to its premise. In fact, PAIL seems like an expansion of Apple's efforts from what was previously reported. [1] https://www.macrumors.com/2016/07/28/apple-car-autonomous-driving-system/ https://www.macrumors.com/2016/07/28/apple-car-autonomous-dr... [2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-17/how-apple-scaled-back-its-titanic-plan-to-take-on-detroit https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-17/how-apple...
- IBM 9y agoLooks like John Gruber has confirmed what I suspected. https://daringfireball.net/2017/08/titan_nyt https://daringfireball.net/2017/08/titan_nyt
- dilemma 9y agoLooks like he didn't confirm anything at all.
- IBM 9y ago>“Shelved” is an accurate word, but I think many people have interpreted it as meaning that Apple has given up on designing its own vehicles. My understanding is that it’s more like “Let’s get the autonomous shit down first, and worry about designing vehicles to put it in after that.” Eat the steak one bite at a time rather than all at once.
- tunetine 9y agoThis is news from almost a year ago when they laid-off a few hundred in October 2016.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- 0xbear 9y agoIf they scale them down even more than they already have, we'll end up with a horse drawn buggy. Hey, it's self driving!
- dovdovdov 9y agoThey'll do just fine with their self-driving hype. :)
- feintruled 9y agoReminds me of a story my dad told about a guy in his village who still drove a horse and cart in the 1960s. He drove it down to the pub where he would get blind drunk but it didn't matter as "the horse would take him home".
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- iiiggglll 9y ago> Even though Apple had not ironed out many of the basics, like how the autonomous systems would work, a team had already started working on an operating system software called CarOS. There was fierce debate about whether it should be programmed using Swift, Apple’s own programming language, or the industry standard, C++. Wow. Few things guarantee success like starting off a project with a good old-fashioned language flamewar!
- timcederman 9y agoSame type of conflict happened with iOS. http://appleinsider.com/articles/17/01/11/video-shows-early-competing-iphone-prototypes-developed-by-tony-fadell-and-scott-forstall http://appleinsider.com/articles/17/01/11/video-shows-early-...
- skywhopper 9y agoI'd say the choice of language you write your OS in is a pretty important one. There should be a fierce debate about such things.
- ams6110 9y agoIf you're talking about the actual vehicle motion control systems, they probably should have been looking at what languages avionics companies use, not what their app developers are familiar with. You'll need languages and operating systems that are battle-tested (literally) in hard-real-time fault tolerant systems. Swift should never have been on the whiteboard for something like that. It's never been used in that scenario.
- shandor 9y agoSo what do avionics companies use? C, C++, Ada? Anything else?
- bluGill 9y agoAvionics companies have very complex rules. They can use any of the above, but generally a subset. For example you might use C, but ban malloc, and recursion. There will be static analysis tools that look through your code and calculate exactly how much memory you are using using in the worst case of function call tree, that way they know they cannot run out of memory or stack.
- chrisbennet 9y agoWhat are the margins on making the physical part of automobiles compared to other things that Apple could be doing? Average profit margin is 8% for auto manufactures. [1] [1] http://marketrealist.com/2015/02/intense-competition-leads-low-profit-margins-automakers/ http://marketrealist.com/2015/02/intense-competition-leads-l...
- fastelephant 9y ago"But __our_ai_project_here__ ran into trouble, said the five people familiar with it, dogged by its size and by the lack of a clearly defined vision of what __our_company_here__ wanted in a __our_ai_product_here__. Team members complained of shifting priorities and arbitrary or unrealistic deadlines."
- amelius 9y agoTransportation is becoming a service rather than a product. There is no room for a Veblen good in a market of non-owners.
- tim333 9y agoIn the future perhaps, not just now https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/08/02/ferrari-race-second-quarter-q2-2017-earnings.aspx https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/08/02/ferrari-race-secon... Though I expect in the future some people will still want fancy cars
- amelius 9y agoThat's not really the market segment Apple will be aiming for.
- capex 9y agoI wonder if Apple would consider building a driver-less RV. That's something they could do really well.
- annnnd 9y agoRV = Recreational Vehicle (camper van,...) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recreational_vehicle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recreational_vehicle
- bernardsoundest 9y agowas a failure from the beginning...
- flylib 9y agoI mean they didn't scale anything back really, neither Google or Uber are manufacturing the cars either
- coredog64 9y agoApple's corporate attitude is fundamentally incompatible with Magnuson-Moss.
- baybal2 9y agoCan somebody explain for what reason Apple suddenly decided to make cars?
- hungerstrike 9y agoThat's too bad. I was really hoping for Apple to spend all of their resources trying to build a car and then go out of business because IMO they ruined computing for everybody by popularizing walled gardens, anemic UIs and super limited software.
- Retric 9y agoPhones where a walled garden long before the iPhone. J2ME apps sucked, but there where a lot of them. Calling the iPhone the first smartphone is mostly just marketing and form factor. They got the interface right and built a better browser, but you could use the web, email, apps, take pictures etc on phones long before the iPhone.
- hungerstrike 9y ago> Phones where a walled garden long before the iPhone. No they weren't.
- Retric 9y agoThere have always been a unlocked phones. But, in many cases these phones did not even have data ports, just the built in connection to a walled garden unless you physically opened them. PS: I was writing phone software 2004-2006 so really walled gardens where a thing. People would even gasp pay for ring tones.
- asadlionpk 9y agoSay what you will, walled gardens do help in quality control. Which is pretty evident. Also, I don't think macOS is a limited software. As for iOS, the phone software was way more limited before iPhone came along.
- iamgopal 9y agoThey should be more focused on iPhone and related stuff, and invest a million here and there in such self driving companies. One of them is going to be successful, or many. And after car being driven automatically, people will be using smartphone more, hence win win. And with VR, AR, 3D scanning etc, we are very far from reaching epitome of mobile technology anyway.