11 ms·

Software is eating the world, automobiles included. I'm a huge skeptic when it comes to Tesla, but JLG raises a good point here. Apple had all sorts of problem

Software is eating the world, automobiles included. I'm a huge skeptic when it comes to Tesla, but JLG raises a good point here. Apple had all sorts of problems in 2007, so many that established phone manufacturers largely brushed them off. A focus on software rewrote the mobile phone industry, and every day I get into my car and watch the onboard computer struggle to handle bluetooth properly. I need to look beyond the obvious inanity of Musk and remember this shift: software will eat this part of the world too.

mbesto 7y ago
> Apple had all sorts of problems in 2007 This analog is disingenuous. - Selling a $1k phone or a $2k computer is very different from selling a $80k luxury car - A smartphone is a full fledge computer, which is a massive change from a dumb-phone (which capabilities were limited to calling and SMS). An electric car has the same features as a gas car, with the exception that its drive chain has a different source of power. - Apple was an established business for 30 years before 2007, and navigated a software/hardware development environment (90's) that was very immature prior. > software will eat this part of the world too. Yet we're talking about a company that sells a big hunk of steel. The quote "software is eating the world" has to do with the replacement of human beings by software, not with "shiny new thing that still needs to be powered by energy". PS - Tesla's fully autonomous (Level 5) solution is unproven. Until then, let's take the "software is eating the world" talk out the question.
- neuronic 7y ago
  Let's make two points clear: Point 1) Tesla does not have SAE Level 5. It is an absolutely ridiculous claim. At most Level 3, but the SAE levels are kind of fuzzy between 2 and 3, so you could even argue level 2. [1] Tesla Autopilot cannot and will not be able to deal with ALL situations that can possibly occur - which would be SAE Level 5. They are spouting marketing bullshit in face of their poor quarterly results. Most engineers in the space will agree that level 4 will be the highest level reached for decades - if ever. Showing an Autopilot in heavily trained-for area during perfect weather and road conditions with infinite retries for getting the video right means nothing. This has to be viewed separate from some real progress and contributions that Tesla has made in the space. However, that doesn't mean they get to throw around the "Level 5" term yet. And they likely won't within the next decades. Level 5 is a whole other beast than Level 4 and nobody is even remotely close to get there. Point 2) Have you ever sat in a modern car beyond 1995? They ARE computers. And in most recent years, user access is widened. 10 years ago an onboard computer would calculate your air-fuel mix and you wouldn't ever interact directly with it. Today there are huge and ever growing interfaces and you can use voice control to make your car perform certain tasks. So yes, software is eating up the industry. Doesn't mean the steel hunks disappear. [1] https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2013/12/sae-levels-driving-automation https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2013/12/sae-levels-drivin...
  - natch 7y ago
    >Tesla does not have SAE Level 5. It is an absolutely ridiculous claim. Where did you see Tesla make the claim that they have SAE Level 5?
    - neuronic 7y ago
      I took it from my predecessor. Have not seen it from Tesla, but saw level 4 from Audi. It’s all bullshit PR talk.
- mcguire 7y ago
  There's more to your second point: aren't smartphones still a computer connected to an almost-completely separate cell phone? Haven't the phone producers repeatedly had problems with things like antenna placement and design? Google has repeatedly released their own physical phone, but it's never gotten much market traction.
- dexen 7y ago
  >A smartphone is a full fledge computer, which is a massive change from a dumb-phone (which capabilities were limited to calling and SMS). I'm sorry, but this is the very blindness the old smartphone manufacturers exhibited. Nokia, Sony-Ericsson, RIM, they all had well-established offerings of smartphones with the on-paper capabilities matching, or rivaling, that of iPhone. Unified messaging, camera, keyboard, handwritten recognition, web browser, you name it. Even apps ecosystems. All good, right? And yet the iPhone won via software. And via the hype. And via the app store in the longer run. And via tight integration with other Apple offering in the longer run. And via upmarket, "cool" brand. The customers were sold "the experience of future, today". Cringe? Sure, but it worked. >An electric car has the same features as a gas car, with the exception that its drive chain has a different source of power. Wrong, very very wrong. A gasoline car is goods sold via dealership network at about zero margins, with the tacit understanding the customer will be back frequently to change oil & filter & timing belt, service the engine (almost every new generation of ICE comes with serious deficiencies), upgrade firmware, and all the jazz. The money for the dealership is in the servicing, not in the initial sale. An electric car is, for better or worse, mostly absent those services. You rotate tires, replace brake pads & shock absorbers once every several years, and that's that. Any money to be made is in the charging network, if at all. There is a dual shift - software/perception/hype, and also the business model. The traditional vendors have already mostly figured out how to put electricity in cars (if at low efficiency); but they desperately need to un-learn how to sell cars via the legacy business model. Right now they aren't ready to ditch the dealerships, while at the same time they want to sell ever more of the dealership un-friendly electrics. Talk about stuck between rock and hard place.
  - throwayEngineer 7y ago
    >A gasoline car is goods sold via dealership network at about zero margins Citation needed.
    - dumbfounder 7y ago
      https://www.autonews.com/article/20171019/RETAIL/171019631/nada-data-shows-dealer-profits-eroding https://www.autonews.com/article/20171019/RETAIL/171019631/n... shows gross margins in 2017 at 5.9% This quora answer claims net margins at 1-2% back in 2013 (a lifetime ago) but there is no citation: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-profit-margin-of-a-new-car-dealer-Does-the-percentage-vary-between-normal-and-luxury-cars https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-profit-margin-of-a-new-car...
- cptskippy 7y ago
  > The quote "software is eating the world" has to do with the replacement of human beings No, it was made by Marc Andreessen in reference to how software companies were taking over. It had nothing to do with replacement of humans. https://a16z.com/2011/08/20/why-software-is-eating-the-world/ https://a16z.com/2011/08/20/why-software-is-eating-the-world... The OP's comments are spot on IMO. Tesla is presenting a new model for automobiles where your car isn't outdated every year by a new trim design or every 5-7 years by a generational uplift. Instead your car evolves as you own it and enhancements are made incrementally both to the software and hardware rather than being held back for annual or generational releases. In the less than 6 months I've had my Tesla Model 3 it has had software updates to: - improve braking performance - increase surpercharger performance - increase power output, speed, and acceleration - increase range - enhanced automatic electronic braking - enhanced lane departure warnings - add dashcam recording capabilities - add deterrence, video monitoring, and logging security features - add climate control management for pets With a traditional car company all of those things would be added incrementally in subsequent years or not at all. *edited for clarity.
  - hef19898 7y ago
    Or, especially the first one, would already have been there from the very beginning. But I see the advantage of Tesla's approach. On the other hand I can sign up with our family Peugeot for regular updates for free for, it was, 2 years or so. Not over the air the registration is a pain. But it's not that it isn't there.
    - cptskippy 7y ago
      On the flip side, my Nissan's connectivity module was 2G based and deprecated by the carrier shortly after the car was built. Nissan offered a free upgrade and I was eligible but I only knew about it because I'd read something on a forum referencing a service bulletin that I never received despite being the registered owner of the vehicle. The excuse being that the bulletin must have been lost in the mail.
    - cowmix 7y ago
      No. That braking problem would have plagued ANY car manufacture. The only difference it there would have been a mad rush of people setting up service appointments at dealerships all over the country to get it fix -- costing time and money for everyone involved. Tesla did OTA updates, no fuss. My Chevy Volt has had two software updates in the past 6 years.. not user noticeable improvements. I love my car but the car I was sold in 2013 is the same (problems and all) car I have now. My friends who have had their TM3s for over a year have drastically improved cars in almost every aspect.
bcatanzaro 7y ago
This is all true. But. My Model S has a worse Bluetooth implementation than my Chevy Volt did. Tesla’s software is objectively pretty terrible. Sometimes my center console reboots randomly while I’m driving, which means I lose all audio, and the climate control shuts completely off for several minutes. Tesla has not yet achieved Apple quality polish on their software.
- goshx 7y ago
  Model S from what year? I have not experienced this with my Model 3.
  - bcatanzaro 7y ago
    2017 P100DL Voice recognition just doesn’t work, period. Often I have to hold my phone to my ear for a call because the audio doesn’t come out over the speakers. It’s random, though - Bluetooth sometimes works great. I love the car because it’s fast and electric. But the software sucks. I was expecting better.
    - goshx 7y ago
      That's odd. Have you taken it for service with Tesla?
    - isalmon 7y ago
      I have 2018 P100D - never had these problems. I'd take it to a service - might be a quick fix.
- leesec 7y ago
  I have a model 3 and the Blutooth seems about average. All the rest of the software seems way better than any other car I've ever been in though. Wonder what your complaints are?
  - jvagner 7y ago
    Curious about this too. I have a 3.5 year old Toyota Highlander. No issues with Bluetooth, ever.
rootusrootus 7y ago
I think it is very tempting for software guys to think that software will indeed eat the world. Fundamentally, until we reach actual self-driving cars (which I believe to be far enough away that it does not merit much discussion of the current car market), cars need to drive first, software second. Given the shit show that is software updates on my workstation, I'm pretty sure I don't ever want my car to be that focused on software. There is something to be said for being careful -- I think the legacy manufacturers ought to embrace over-the-air updates because that just makes sense, but I hope they think more like aviation (but not Boeing ;-)) than silicon valley when they plan their release schedule.
- pwinnski 7y ago
  I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not even talking about the full-self-driving pipe dream. In general, despite real technological shortcomings, the iPhone approach to software beat out approaches of Nokia, Motorola, et al. It's easy to see how a software-focused company--maybe Tesla, maybe not--could do the same with the existing car companies. For a tiny example of how I'm thinking: Apple introduced CarPlay, and it took years for car companies to be ready on their end. Super-long lead times seem like a good idea when you're talking about airline safety, but for bluetooth audio? For touch-screen user interface stuff? Think about how much iOS and Android have changed just in the last five years, and think about having everything delayed by five years because "we're a car company, not a computer company." I don't just mean everything that happened in 2012 happens in 2017 instead, I mean that the first release is delayed by five years, which means that it isn't until that release hits the market that developers can see what direction to go in based on user feedback, and then there's another five years before that hits the market, and then competitors are also doing things, but it's another five years before that has any effect, and so on. I'm as terrified as anyone ought to be about the idea that Tesla can over-the-air release a regression that drives someone into a concrete barrier it used to navigate properly, but the details of Tesla aside, the whole idea of focusing on software seems like a good move, and I think the car industry will (much more slowly) follow the phone industry overall pattern.
- pbreit 7y ago
  This mentality is exactly the reason a new entrant was able to find huge sales success in an extremely difficult and expensive industry.
nicoburns 7y ago
> Apple had all sorts of problems in 2007 However, Apple was profitable in 2007, which is a pretty significant difference...
- TomMarius 7y ago
  Well Apple was not founded just a few years before they released iPhone
  - nicoburns 7y ago
    Right, but the fact that Tesla is not an established company is precisely why some people think they might fail.
    - TomMarius 7y ago
      Why do you use a completely unrelated argument then?
SideburnsOfDoom 7y ago
> software will eat this part of the world too. Hardware, specifically batteries and electric motors, seem just as fundamental to motor cars.
maxerickson 7y ago
I wonder if software is a bigger deal for neutered communications devices than for polished transportation devices though. (I get that calling vehicles polished is contrary to complaints about the radio, but they do a decent job at the main thing they do)
bdcravens 7y ago
In 2007, Apple had just released the iPhone. Tesla has been producing cars for over ten years at this point.
yters 7y ago
Hopefully better software than this: https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughMuskSpam/comments/99sbwa/former_tesla_programmers_anecdotes_about_problems/ https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughMuskSpam/comments/99sbwa/form...
asdkhadsj 7y ago
> and every day I get into my car and watch the onboard computer struggle to handle bluetooth properly. I hate "me too" posts, but this gives me so much rage that I can't help it. My car has a touch screen interface and I am puzzled why car manufacturers even bother. Who thinks the interface they made is even remotely good. It actively degrades the otherwise fine experience of my car. It is ugly, poorly made, and fails at even basic functionality. I am truly puzzled why these car manufacturers released such terrible user facing features. Maybe it's better these days (my car is ~5 years old), but it's just impressively bad in my car at least.
- tashoecraft 7y ago
  It's not any better. This past year I've driven something like 2 dozen rentals from a variety of manufactures, they all suck. The only saving grace is sometimes I can use CarPlay and I'm much happier for it. The fact that I have to struggle to adjust the climate control while driving to click through their terrible interface is just insane.
- MS90 7y ago
  I agree with you on the touch screen interfaces, especially considering how long people keep their vehicles nowadays. I have had my Tacoma for 11 years. Had I gotten one with some sort of touchscreen or other display interface, it would seem like utter dog shit now using a touchscreen and computer system from 2008. That's the first thing I think about when I see new cars with their fancy displays. How will this look and perform in five years? In ten?
  - maxxxxx 7y ago
    “That's the first thing I think about when I see new cars with their fancy displays. How will this look and perform in five years? In ten?” I wonder about the same. I think there is a good chance that cars will go the way of the computer where it’s almost inconceivable to use something that’s ten years old. So people may buy cars every five years and used cars will be recycled instead of being sold as used cars.
- paranoidrobot 7y ago
MarkMc 7y ago
The iPhone has a user interface and a very strong network effect - more users means more apps, which means more users. Self-driving software is fundamentally different. A self-driving Tesla would have no significant UI or network effect, so users could easily switch and Tesla won't have a durable competitive advantage. As soon as there are two robo-taxi services, people will simply choose whichever one is cheaper. It will be a commodity service similar to air travel.
- natch 7y ago
  We'll see about that. With frequent software updates, you don't really know what Teslas on the road today will be doing 6, 12, 18, 24 months from now.
  - hef19898 7y ago
    Which, one could argue, opens up a new front for Tesla on configuration management. This is bad enough for hardware and poses already a problem regarding spare parts. Add the additional layer of software that might or might not work with a certain hardware config and this problem increases exponentially. I'd live to see the Tesla announcement that from today on they will focus exclusively on X because of Y and the measureable and benefits will A, B and C til date D. But all we get is "full self-driving next year" and "fleet of autonomous robo-taxis".
    - natch 7y ago
      Mentioning configuration management, that's something Apple is really good at... it will be fascinating to see what comes out of their efforts eventually. I almost prefer their approach of keeping things under wraps until they are ready, rather than pre-teasing stuff that might happen later than predicted. To be fair to Tesla, they are not saying we will have full self driving next year... it is Elon making a prediction, not a promise, and he couched it many ways. Full self driving for Tesla development cars, basically, and robo-taxis possibly by the end of next year, with safety drivers, if you listen to what he said in response to an audience question... so his actual statements are pretty far removed from what you have dressed up as "quotes" right there.
saturdaysaint 7y ago
Not sure what you're talking about in terms of Apple's 2007 problems. They were highly profitable, had successfully migrated their computers to Intel chips (an incredibly thorny technical platform hurdle) and the iPod was a global cultural phenomenon that never faced a true competitor. All of their products were arguably best of breed. Apple stores were already the centerpiece of most upscale American malls. They were firing on all cylinders.
- pwinnski 7y ago
  Specifically with the original iPhone: no 3G, no MMS, semi-frequent crashes. I owned an original iPhone in 2007, so clearly the problems weren't enough to deter me, but it wasn't a perfect device. It was, however, in an entirely different conceptual category from its competitors. The same could be said of Tesla, I guess, but I'm still very much a skeptic on Tesla. My point is just that being in a different conceptual category is a huge advantage. Perhaps Tesla will capitalize on that and come out on top (as Apple did), or perhaps it will be some other company (as Google did with Android), but I think it will happen.
dfilppi 7y ago
I'm still puzzled by the meat being transported along packed freeways every day. Other than the segments of the economy that require face to face interaction, it is stupid, wasteful, dangerous and destructive.
- la_barba 7y ago
  What is your alternative that the world can switch to without an enormous cost? Utopias are fun to think about, but I am skeptical if flawed humans could ever produce one.

mbesto 7y ago

> Apple had all sorts of problems in 2007 This analog is disingenuous. - Selling a $1k phone or a $2k computer is very different from selling a $80k luxury car - A smartphone is a full fledge computer, which is a massive change from a dumb-phone (which capabilities were limited to calling and SMS). An electric car has the same features as a gas car, with the exception that its drive chain has a different source of power. - Apple was an established business for 30 years before 2007, and navigated a software/hardware development environment (90's) that was very immature prior. > software will eat this part of the world too. Yet we're talking about a company that sells a big hunk of steel. The quote "software is eating the world" has to do with the replacement of human beings by software, not with "shiny new thing that still needs to be powered by energy". PS - Tesla's fully autonomous (Level 5) solution is unproven. Until then, let's take the "software is eating the world" talk out the question.

neuronic 7y ago
Let's make two points clear: Point 1) Tesla does not have SAE Level 5. It is an absolutely ridiculous claim. At most Level 3, but the SAE levels are kind of fuzzy between 2 and 3, so you could even argue level 2. [1] Tesla Autopilot cannot and will not be able to deal with ALL situations that can possibly occur - which would be SAE Level 5. They are spouting marketing bullshit in face of their poor quarterly results. Most engineers in the space will agree that level 4 will be the highest level reached for decades - if ever. Showing an Autopilot in heavily trained-for area during perfect weather and road conditions with infinite retries for getting the video right means nothing. This has to be viewed separate from some real progress and contributions that Tesla has made in the space. However, that doesn't mean they get to throw around the "Level 5" term yet. And they likely won't within the next decades. Level 5 is a whole other beast than Level 4 and nobody is even remotely close to get there. Point 2) Have you ever sat in a modern car beyond 1995? They ARE computers. And in most recent years, user access is widened. 10 years ago an onboard computer would calculate your air-fuel mix and you wouldn't ever interact directly with it. Today there are huge and ever growing interfaces and you can use voice control to make your car perform certain tasks. So yes, software is eating up the industry. Doesn't mean the steel hunks disappear. [1] https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2013/12/sae-levels-driving-automation https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2013/12/sae-levels-drivin...
- natch 7y ago
  >Tesla does not have SAE Level 5. It is an absolutely ridiculous claim. Where did you see Tesla make the claim that they have SAE Level 5?
  - neuronic 7y ago
    I took it from my predecessor. Have not seen it from Tesla, but saw level 4 from Audi. It’s all bullshit PR talk.
mcguire 7y ago
There's more to your second point: aren't smartphones still a computer connected to an almost-completely separate cell phone? Haven't the phone producers repeatedly had problems with things like antenna placement and design? Google has repeatedly released their own physical phone, but it's never gotten much market traction.
dexen 7y ago
>A smartphone is a full fledge computer, which is a massive change from a dumb-phone (which capabilities were limited to calling and SMS). I'm sorry, but this is the very blindness the old smartphone manufacturers exhibited. Nokia, Sony-Ericsson, RIM, they all had well-established offerings of smartphones with the on-paper capabilities matching, or rivaling, that of iPhone. Unified messaging, camera, keyboard, handwritten recognition, web browser, you name it. Even apps ecosystems. All good, right? And yet the iPhone won via software. And via the hype. And via the app store in the longer run. And via tight integration with other Apple offering in the longer run. And via upmarket, "cool" brand. The customers were sold "the experience of future, today". Cringe? Sure, but it worked. >An electric car has the same features as a gas car, with the exception that its drive chain has a different source of power. Wrong, very very wrong. A gasoline car is goods sold via dealership network at about zero margins, with the tacit understanding the customer will be back frequently to change oil & filter & timing belt, service the engine (almost every new generation of ICE comes with serious deficiencies), upgrade firmware, and all the jazz. The money for the dealership is in the servicing, not in the initial sale. An electric car is, for better or worse, mostly absent those services. You rotate tires, replace brake pads & shock absorbers once every several years, and that's that. Any money to be made is in the charging network, if at all. There is a dual shift - software/perception/hype, and also the business model. The traditional vendors have already mostly figured out how to put electricity in cars (if at low efficiency); but they desperately need to un-learn how to sell cars via the legacy business model. Right now they aren't ready to ditch the dealerships, while at the same time they want to sell ever more of the dealership un-friendly electrics. Talk about stuck between rock and hard place.
- throwayEngineer 7y ago
  >A gasoline car is goods sold via dealership network at about zero margins Citation needed.
  - dumbfounder 7y ago
    https://www.autonews.com/article/20171019/RETAIL/171019631/nada-data-shows-dealer-profits-eroding https://www.autonews.com/article/20171019/RETAIL/171019631/n... shows gross margins in 2017 at 5.9% This quora answer claims net margins at 1-2% back in 2013 (a lifetime ago) but there is no citation: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-profit-margin-of-a-new-car-dealer-Does-the-percentage-vary-between-normal-and-luxury-cars https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-profit-margin-of-a-new-car...
cptskippy 7y ago
> The quote "software is eating the world" has to do with the replacement of human beings No, it was made by Marc Andreessen in reference to how software companies were taking over. It had nothing to do with replacement of humans. https://a16z.com/2011/08/20/why-software-is-eating-the-world/ https://a16z.com/2011/08/20/why-software-is-eating-the-world... The OP's comments are spot on IMO. Tesla is presenting a new model for automobiles where your car isn't outdated every year by a new trim design or every 5-7 years by a generational uplift. Instead your car evolves as you own it and enhancements are made incrementally both to the software and hardware rather than being held back for annual or generational releases. In the less than 6 months I've had my Tesla Model 3 it has had software updates to: - improve braking performance - increase surpercharger performance - increase power output, speed, and acceleration - increase range - enhanced automatic electronic braking - enhanced lane departure warnings - add dashcam recording capabilities - add deterrence, video monitoring, and logging security features - add climate control management for pets With a traditional car company all of those things would be added incrementally in subsequent years or not at all. *edited for clarity.
- hef19898 7y ago
  Or, especially the first one, would already have been there from the very beginning. But I see the advantage of Tesla's approach. On the other hand I can sign up with our family Peugeot for regular updates for free for, it was, 2 years or so. Not over the air the registration is a pain. But it's not that it isn't there.
  - cptskippy 7y ago
    On the flip side, my Nissan's connectivity module was 2G based and deprecated by the carrier shortly after the car was built. Nissan offered a free upgrade and I was eligible but I only knew about it because I'd read something on a forum referencing a service bulletin that I never received despite being the registered owner of the vehicle. The excuse being that the bulletin must have been lost in the mail.
  - cowmix 7y ago
    No. That braking problem would have plagued ANY car manufacture. The only difference it there would have been a mad rush of people setting up service appointments at dealerships all over the country to get it fix -- costing time and money for everyone involved. Tesla did OTA updates, no fuss. My Chevy Volt has had two software updates in the past 6 years.. not user noticeable improvements. I love my car but the car I was sold in 2013 is the same (problems and all) car I have now. My friends who have had their TM3s for over a year have drastically improved cars in almost every aspect.

bcatanzaro 7y ago

This is all true. But. My Model S has a worse Bluetooth implementation than my Chevy Volt did. Tesla’s software is objectively pretty terrible. Sometimes my center console reboots randomly while I’m driving, which means I lose all audio, and the climate control shuts completely off for several minutes. Tesla has not yet achieved Apple quality polish on their software.

goshx 7y ago
Model S from what year? I have not experienced this with my Model 3.
- bcatanzaro 7y ago
  2017 P100DL Voice recognition just doesn’t work, period. Often I have to hold my phone to my ear for a call because the audio doesn’t come out over the speakers. It’s random, though - Bluetooth sometimes works great. I love the car because it’s fast and electric. But the software sucks. I was expecting better.
  - goshx 7y ago
    That's odd. Have you taken it for service with Tesla?
  - isalmon 7y ago
    I have 2018 P100D - never had these problems. I'd take it to a service - might be a quick fix.
leesec 7y ago
I have a model 3 and the Blutooth seems about average. All the rest of the software seems way better than any other car I've ever been in though. Wonder what your complaints are?
- jvagner 7y ago
  Curious about this too. I have a 3.5 year old Toyota Highlander. No issues with Bluetooth, ever.

rootusrootus 7y ago

I think it is very tempting for software guys to think that software will indeed eat the world. Fundamentally, until we reach actual self-driving cars (which I believe to be far enough away that it does not merit much discussion of the current car market), cars need to drive first, software second. Given the shit show that is software updates on my workstation, I'm pretty sure I don't ever want my car to be that focused on software. There is something to be said for being careful -- I think the legacy manufacturers ought to embrace over-the-air updates because that just makes sense, but I hope they think more like aviation (but not Boeing ;-)) than silicon valley when they plan their release schedule.

pwinnski 7y ago
I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not even talking about the full-self-driving pipe dream. In general, despite real technological shortcomings, the iPhone approach to software beat out approaches of Nokia, Motorola, et al. It's easy to see how a software-focused company--maybe Tesla, maybe not--could do the same with the existing car companies. For a tiny example of how I'm thinking: Apple introduced CarPlay, and it took years for car companies to be ready on their end. Super-long lead times seem like a good idea when you're talking about airline safety, but for bluetooth audio? For touch-screen user interface stuff? Think about how much iOS and Android have changed just in the last five years, and think about having everything delayed by five years because "we're a car company, not a computer company." I don't just mean everything that happened in 2012 happens in 2017 instead, I mean that the first release is delayed by five years, which means that it isn't until that release hits the market that developers can see what direction to go in based on user feedback, and then there's another five years before that hits the market, and then competitors are also doing things, but it's another five years before that has any effect, and so on. I'm as terrified as anyone ought to be about the idea that Tesla can over-the-air release a regression that drives someone into a concrete barrier it used to navigate properly, but the details of Tesla aside, the whole idea of focusing on software seems like a good move, and I think the car industry will (much more slowly) follow the phone industry overall pattern.
pbreit 7y ago
This mentality is exactly the reason a new entrant was able to find huge sales success in an extremely difficult and expensive industry.

nicoburns 7y ago

> Apple had all sorts of problems in 2007 However, Apple was profitable in 2007, which is a pretty significant difference...

TomMarius 7y ago
Well Apple was not founded just a few years before they released iPhone
- nicoburns 7y ago
  Right, but the fact that Tesla is not an established company is precisely why some people think they might fail.
  - TomMarius 7y ago
    Why do you use a completely unrelated argument then?

SideburnsOfDoom 7y ago

> software will eat this part of the world too. Hardware, specifically batteries and electric motors, seem just as fundamental to motor cars.

maxerickson 7y ago

I wonder if software is a bigger deal for neutered communications devices than for polished transportation devices though. (I get that calling vehicles polished is contrary to complaints about the radio, but they do a decent job at the main thing they do)

bdcravens 7y ago

In 2007, Apple had just released the iPhone. Tesla has been producing cars for over ten years at this point.

yters 7y ago

Hopefully better software than this: https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughMuskSpam/comments/99sbwa/former_tesla_programmers_anecdotes_about_problems/ https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughMuskSpam/comments/99sbwa/form...

asdkhadsj 7y ago

> and every day I get into my car and watch the onboard computer struggle to handle bluetooth properly. I hate "me too" posts, but this gives me so much rage that I can't help it. My car has a touch screen interface and I am puzzled why car manufacturers even bother. Who thinks the interface they made is even remotely good. It actively degrades the otherwise fine experience of my car. It is ugly, poorly made, and fails at even basic functionality. I am truly puzzled why these car manufacturers released such terrible user facing features. Maybe it's better these days (my car is ~5 years old), but it's just impressively bad in my car at least.

tashoecraft 7y ago
It's not any better. This past year I've driven something like 2 dozen rentals from a variety of manufactures, they all suck. The only saving grace is sometimes I can use CarPlay and I'm much happier for it. The fact that I have to struggle to adjust the climate control while driving to click through their terrible interface is just insane.
MS90 7y ago
I agree with you on the touch screen interfaces, especially considering how long people keep their vehicles nowadays. I have had my Tacoma for 11 years. Had I gotten one with some sort of touchscreen or other display interface, it would seem like utter dog shit now using a touchscreen and computer system from 2008. That's the first thing I think about when I see new cars with their fancy displays. How will this look and perform in five years? In ten?
- maxxxxx 7y ago
  “That's the first thing I think about when I see new cars with their fancy displays. How will this look and perform in five years? In ten?” I wonder about the same. I think there is a good chance that cars will go the way of the computer where it’s almost inconceivable to use something that’s ten years old. So people may buy cars every five years and used cars will be recycled instead of being sold as used cars.
paranoidrobot 7y ago

MarkMc 7y ago

The iPhone has a user interface and a very strong network effect - more users means more apps, which means more users. Self-driving software is fundamentally different. A self-driving Tesla would have no significant UI or network effect, so users could easily switch and Tesla won't have a durable competitive advantage. As soon as there are two robo-taxi services, people will simply choose whichever one is cheaper. It will be a commodity service similar to air travel.

natch 7y ago
We'll see about that. With frequent software updates, you don't really know what Teslas on the road today will be doing 6, 12, 18, 24 months from now.
- hef19898 7y ago
  Which, one could argue, opens up a new front for Tesla on configuration management. This is bad enough for hardware and poses already a problem regarding spare parts. Add the additional layer of software that might or might not work with a certain hardware config and this problem increases exponentially. I'd live to see the Tesla announcement that from today on they will focus exclusively on X because of Y and the measureable and benefits will A, B and C til date D. But all we get is "full self-driving next year" and "fleet of autonomous robo-taxis".
  - natch 7y ago
    Mentioning configuration management, that's something Apple is really good at... it will be fascinating to see what comes out of their efforts eventually. I almost prefer their approach of keeping things under wraps until they are ready, rather than pre-teasing stuff that might happen later than predicted. To be fair to Tesla, they are not saying we will have full self driving next year... it is Elon making a prediction, not a promise, and he couched it many ways. Full self driving for Tesla development cars, basically, and robo-taxis possibly by the end of next year, with safety drivers, if you listen to what he said in response to an audience question... so his actual statements are pretty far removed from what you have dressed up as "quotes" right there.

saturdaysaint 7y ago

Not sure what you're talking about in terms of Apple's 2007 problems. They were highly profitable, had successfully migrated their computers to Intel chips (an incredibly thorny technical platform hurdle) and the iPod was a global cultural phenomenon that never faced a true competitor. All of their products were arguably best of breed. Apple stores were already the centerpiece of most upscale American malls. They were firing on all cylinders.

pwinnski 7y ago
Specifically with the original iPhone: no 3G, no MMS, semi-frequent crashes. I owned an original iPhone in 2007, so clearly the problems weren't enough to deter me, but it wasn't a perfect device. It was, however, in an entirely different conceptual category from its competitors. The same could be said of Tesla, I guess, but I'm still very much a skeptic on Tesla. My point is just that being in a different conceptual category is a huge advantage. Perhaps Tesla will capitalize on that and come out on top (as Apple did), or perhaps it will be some other company (as Google did with Android), but I think it will happen.

dfilppi 7y ago

I'm still puzzled by the meat being transported along packed freeways every day. Other than the segments of the economy that require face to face interaction, it is stupid, wasteful, dangerous and destructive.

la_barba 7y ago
What is your alternative that the world can switch to without an enormous cost? Utopias are fun to think about, but I am skeptical if flawed humans could ever produce one.