30 ms·
Apple dials back car's self-driving features and delays launch to 2028
- rony989 3y ago[dead]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- kogus 3y agoI once again am reminded of this bet: https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-2030-self-driving-car-bet/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-2030-self-driving-car-bet/
- Alupis 3y agoIt's really interesting to see Carmack take such risky positions, such as betting FSD Level 5 by 2030 along with his all-in bet on VR. The VR thing didn't go nearly as well as he had hoped... and I suspect, like VR, the FSD thing will also not come to fruition due to it's grossly underestimated difficulty.
- bombcar 3y agoCarmack is not a poor man, so a $10k bet or two (for charity, mind you) is more of a friendly wager than a make/break gamble. And he's clearly been optimistic most his life, and it's paid off a number of times. And self-driving has progressed further and faster than I have thought it would, though I don't think we'll get Level 5 by 2030.
- Alupis 3y ago> Carmack is not a poor man, so a $10k bet or two (for charity, mind you) is more of a friendly wager than a make/break gamble. The point was he seems to consistently grossly underestimate the difficulty of problems outside of his domain expertise.
- ephemeral-life 3y agoThe two examples were self driving and VR. > The point was he seems to consistently grossly underestimate the difficulty of problems outside of his domain expertise. Carmack made 3d games and game engines. I don't think VR was outside his domain of expertise. And for the self driving one, that bet is still on
- bombcar 3y agoHe also tried (is trying?) rockets.
- __d 3y agoTried, (more or less) failed, and gave up (because it was costing too much, basically). Search for "Armadillo Aerospace".
- paulproteus 3y agoPersonally I think VR is outside the domain of expertise of 3D games and game engines. To think that VR is within that domain is exactly the error -- VR as an overall product requires different consumer behavior than buying a game for a PC you already have. It requires buying a new kind of device or buying into a whole new form of interaction. It requires remembering to use that device and think about what games you have for it. It requires engineers to ship high FPS and low lag to prevent nausea to a degree unheard of for PC gaming. Facebook's VR plan seems to hinge on being "even more ubiquitous than mobile" <https://officechai.com/learn/mark-zuckerbergs-email-explaining-facebooks-vr-strategy/ https://officechai.com/learn/mark-zuckerbergs-email-explaini...>, which is a level of constant use that 3D games don't really have. I am not a VR or 3D game expert, but even I can list other key differences. I bet you can too if you try. I think those are reasons to think VR is not really the same domain. I am curious what you think.
- emmo 3y agoWith the amount of time he's put into VR over the last decade I think it's fair to say he's as much an expert as anyone else at this point.
- canes123456 3y agoI am a self driving skeptic but seems like a good bet for Carmack. I would expect Waymo to open up to consumers before 2030 in SF, even if more expensive and take way longer than a normal car. It could be little more than a tech demo and he would still win the bet.
- fragmede 3y agoWaymo's already open in SF and Phoenix, with LA and San Antonio to come, and it's only 2024. There's a wait-list you have to join, but anyone can download the app and get in line.
- aantix 3y agoWhy is Waymo so slow to roll out? Pick an optimal path for each metro, only operate on good weather days, roll out nationally.
- dzdt 3y agoThe major companies that have tried to go faster than Waymo have been destroyed by safety incidents (Uber, Cruise). Waymo's caution may be well-warrented.
- aantix 3y agoDestroyed seems a bit harsh. Tesla is moving forward. FSD12 appears to be a major advancement. https://twitter.com/WholeMarsBlog/status/1750448446790922634 https://twitter.com/WholeMarsBlog/status/1750448446790922634
- nemothekid 3y ago>Why is Waymo so slow to roll out? Ignoring the safety path, this other issue just scale. Manufacturing the cars would be a big problem. Getting a ton of them on the road is another. I wonder if all those sensors that the car uses could ramp up to a national level in a year. I've been in the Waymo beta for a couple months now. At peak times, it's more expensive and slower than an Uber simply because there aren't enough cars on the road.
- xnx 3y agoWhat does "everywhere in all conditions" mean for level 5? Across a flooded road? Through 8" of snow? Up "The Chute" in Sand Hollow?
- xattt 3y agoStandard roads are probably the intent. Being pedantic is just moving goalposts.
- wredue 3y agoThe problem is that freezing rain caused Portland to come to a standstill, but in Canada, that’s just an annoying day with elevated rates of accidents. In Texas, a light breeze takes out the entire state, whereas in Canada, most of our workforce is expected to at try to continue working after a 20 inch snow dump the night before. I hope you can see how there’s reason to being pedantic. If level 5 is all conditions human drivers do regularly for day to day activities, 2030 is an idiotic bet and anyone not living in a bubble could see that.
- nonameiguess 3y agoDid you typo "light freeze?" Texas does terribly with ice but it is regularly windy as hell here, among the windiest of all US states. Even when a tornado tore up three miles of North Dallas a few years ago, it didn't take out even the local traffic, let alone the whole state.
- rob74 3y agoThere's an additional aspect however: on days with e.g. freezing rain, human drivers might risk it, but companies like Waymo will probably decide to play it safe and not let their taxis run, because they know how much bad publicity an accident would be...
- crazygringo 3y agoA lot of that doesn't have anything to do with cars or drivers, but is rather about city infrastructure. Does the city own a fleet of snowplows? Does it keep massive stores of road salt available? Do schools and offices even have heating systems at all? On the other hand, driving carefully on snow and ice is a skill in itself that has to be learned. And in snowy places I do know people who simply don't drive in some conditions because they're well aware they don't have those skills, even growing up there -- while others enjoy the challenge. So that part is a fair question of which humans we're talking about when we talk about human-level driving skill.
- llsf 3y agoDo we know where officially Waymo is on the SAE J3016 scale ? I used Waymo in San Francisco, and to my not-expert eye, it did perform very well already.
- ralph84 3y agoWaymo is level 4. SAE calls out “local driverless taxi” as an example of level 4. https://www.sae.org/blog/sae-j3016-update https://www.sae.org/blog/sae-j3016-update
- paxys 3y ago"Against" is a pretty clear winner at this point. The chances of a level 5 self driving car being available for purchase in the next six years are ~0.
- tobinfricke 3y agoIt doesn't say "available for purchase." It says "will be commercially available for passenger use in major cities." Waymo is already there, in at least 2 cities but not all weather conditions. Expanding to 10 cities and all weather conditions in the next 6 years sounds more than plausible. I had sided with Atwood (skeptic) but now it seems like Carmack "has already won".
- paxys 3y agoWaymo is level 3 at best. It is active in 1 flat city right now (and partially in another), and needs frequent interruption from remote drivers to get it out of hairy situations. You really think it will be fully rolled out in the 10 most populous cities in America in the next 6 years? You really think it'll work without any human interaction (local or remote)? This thing won't last 5 minutes in NYC or Philadelphia .
- triceratops 3y agoSF is a flat city?
- adastra22 3y ago
- wredue 3y agoJohn Carmack pandering to buzzword communities to try to stay relevant? Yeah. That sounds right.
- spankalee 3y ago"For" is a pretty clear winner at this point. Waymo is already at level 4 at least on surface streets, and they claim 99.4% uptime in rain, high winds, and thunderstorms during last winter. [1] They're testing highway service in Phoenix now. There might be a debate about the word "all" for the distinction between levels 4 and 5, but Waymo has six years to erase that doubt. [1]: https://waymo.com/blog/2023/08/the-waymo-drivers-rapid-learning-curve/#:~:text=Some%20of%20our%20key%20areas,a%20range%20of%20weather%20conditions https://waymo.com/blog/2023/08/the-waymo-drivers-rapid-learn....
- onlyrealcuzzo 3y agoWaymo is not going to be working everywhere in the US in all conditions by 2030 (and it doesn't need to, either). AFAIK, that's what L5 means.
- spankalee 3y agoThe bet is to be available is one of the top 10 US cities.
- huytersd 3y agoIt will be in major cities and that’s what the bet is.
- oatmeal1 3y agoThe bet requires the cars to be SAE level 5 autonomous. You wouldn't notice the difference as a passenger between level 4 used in appropriate conditions, and level 5 car. But the bet does require the car to be level 5 nonetheless.
- snowwrestler 3y agoIs anyone at Level 5, though? At all? In even a prototype?
- huytersd 3y ago
- kevinqi 3y ago"No" seems easy to say right now, but technology is accelerating at a breakneck pace. If AGI can happen within a decade, I reckon 2030 self driving is not a crazy bet at all.
- wrs 3y agohttps://archive.is/fm7jf https://archive.is/fm7jf
- dom96 3y agohttps://archive.ph/fm7jf https://archive.ph/fm7jf
- airstrike 3y agocan't pass that captcha
- skyyler 3y agoIf you're using firefox, whitelist the archive URL in your DNS-over-HTTPS settings. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-dns-over-https https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-dns-over-https
- jessriedel 3y agoIt's result of a technical fight between the archive website and some hosting services, discussed a few times in other HN threads. Here's the Wayback Machine version which may work. https://web.archive.org/web/20240123184535/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-23/apple-car-ev-set-to-debut-in-2028-with-limited-autonomous-driving https://web.archive.org/web/20240123184535/https://www.bloom...
- eps 3y ago"Failed to render the article" after a 5 second pause.
- iwontberude 3y agoWhen I last posted a Wayback Machine archive URL I was downvoted considerably. Any idea why?
- jessriedel 3y agoNope :/
- justinclift 3y agoWas it a full capture of the page? Sometimes the various archive places gets it wrong, with the page not being the full content.
- losvedir 3y agoIt's interesting they're willing to push back the release so much, not falling to the sunk cost fallacy. A lemon would be a reputation hit. That's kind of why I'm pretty interested in the Vision Pro, another product in secret-ish development for a decade. They wouldn't have greenlit it if it didn't show potential right? It's interesting to think about what must be going on behind the scenes on products like this, deciding if they're ready to see the light of day.
- rconti 3y agoMaybe continuing the project and pushing back the date rather than cancelling it is falling to the sunk cost fallacy. Or, maybe they truly believe this is the right market for them to enter. (or, don't have any better ideas about how to spend the cash and find future growth).
- matsemann 3y ago> not falling to the sunk cost fallacy Or it's the opposite? It's a dead end, but they will keep pouring money into it since they've "already invested so much".
- droopyEyelids 3y agoIt's interesting how, from my average man perspective, it's impossible to say whether a company operating at the scale of Apple is or is not victim to the sunk cost fallacy. On one hand, a push to deliver can be leadership setting a sink-or-swim deadline to avoid sunk costs. On the other hand, maybe they've already gone too far down a dead end. I think it has to be tricky because a tech company that does manufacturing at Apple's scale is kind of obligated to explore these possibilities. But how can you or I calculate what constraints should be in place so exploration can be effective while avoiding waste?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- airstrike 3y agoI don't think the two products demand an equal level of commitment. Car manufacturing is notoriously hard and low margins, with very complex supply-chain and scale requirements that could make a bad bet tragically costly both financially and to their reputation, as you said. Consider also that there are no Level 3 cars out today (IIRC Mercedes-Benz recently got permission for the first such car), so launching a Level 5 seems virtually impossible. On the other hand, VR devices do exist and, even if they don't quite perform to people's expectations, releasing a marginally superior product isn't too far-fetched.
- MichaelMug 3y agoIs car manufacturing a high margin business? If not then I doubt Apple is working on bringing a car to market.
- layer8 3y agoFor luxury cars it is. Apple would position themselves in that direction. That being said, I’m surprised they are still seriously on it, given how the prospect of general-purpose FSD has largely fizzled out.
- jldugger 3y agoIs it? Wikipedia[1] puts Porshe's Operating margins at loosely 16%. Which isn't bad for auto probably but isn't great for tech.
- gen220 3y agoFWIW, Porsche has trended more into the premium market lately than the luxury market, in a bid to pursue more growth at the expense of profit margin. Gross and operating margins are pretty high in the luxury car industry, on par with iPhones. Personally, I don't think Apple would release a luxury car. I think it's more likely to partner with manufacturers of premium cars. It might be useful to make a small number of cars within Apple, to align on their north star vision for design, to lobby manufacturers in that direction, and to build up internal knowledge of the market they'd be selling into. But you're right, the margins on manufacturing and selling the whole vehicle would be a poor allocation of capital.
- perlgeek 3y agoBut if Apple makes a car, is it more in the premium or in the luxury market? It seems to me that most of the bestselling Apple products are more premium than luxury, why would it be different with cars? And if not, why would they profit from margins that are usually associated with luxury cars?
- 3y ago
- xnx 3y agoI'm not sure what Apple would bring to cars. Waymo is almost uncatchably far ahead in self-driving. Tesla has already brought minimalism to cars, and will probably have an affordable car with mass appeal by 2028 if BYD doesn't get there first. Apple might be better off making a luxury fifth wheel.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- dataking 3y agoApple vision pro integration ;-)
- dmoy 3y ago> if BYD doesn't get there first I mean, BYD is already there. It's mostly a question of tariffs vs subsidies at a geopolitical level now.
- bobthepanda 3y agoBYD is also subject to C-NCAP safety standards, not NCAP, which is much less stringent. Does BYD make an NCAP compliant car?
- pi-e-sigma 3y agoBYD sells in Europe. How would they be able to do it without meeting the Euro-NCAP standards which are actually higher than global NCAP?
- cpursley 3y ago100% this. I don't think Americans in general are aware of what the current state of Chinese cars (EV and gas) is like right now since they're not in our market. It's worth checking out some YouTube videos, this guys channel is pretty good for Chinese EVs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmQPwlHixWo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmQPwlHixWo
- CharlesW 3y agoOne fun aspect of Apple's moon shots is tracing back tech dependencies, which they often ship earlier permutations of for years in mainstream products (see: M1). In the case of Apple Car that will include computational image capture¹, sensor fusion², lidar³, and now the R1 SPU (Sensor Processing Unit) used in Apple Vision. What else? ¹ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/01/shot-on-iphone-12-portraits-cityscapes-the-night-sky-and-more/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/01/shot-on-iphone-12-por... ² https://developer.apple.com/documentation/coremotion/cmmotionmanager https://developer.apple.com/documentation/coremotion/cmmotio... ³ https://www.apple.com/pl/newsroom/2020/03/apple-unveils-new-ipad-pro-with-lidar-scanner-and-trackpad-support-in-ipados/ https://www.apple.com/pl/newsroom/2020/03/apple-unveils-new-...
- RicoElectrico 3y agoI think you meant iterations, not permutations.
- xattt 3y agoWhy not both? It’s iterative improvement, but also combining bits and pieces.
- SnazzyJeff 3y ago[dead]
- reikonomusha 3y agoPedantically, a permutation is a rearrangement of a given set of pieces. (Mathematically, any bijection between a set and itself.)
- ducttapecrown 3y agoNormal language and mathematical definitions are often orthogonal!
- mlyle 3y ago
- HumblyTossed 3y agoI seriously doubt Apple is working on an actual car. More likely, they're working on car tech and that's all - trying to make OTS tech so companies that actually manufacture cars don't have to. Imagine 30% of every car sold - 15% if they can sell subs to the consumer.
- _s 3y agoThis is my take as well. CarPlay takes in a bunch of input from various sensors / cameras in a car and gives back “drive” or cruise control commands that are at level 3+. Replaces the existing software for both the infotainment system and “cruise” control.
- troupo 3y agoYou don't want your phone driving your car at any circumstances.
- luckydata 3y agoIt is totally what they are doing. The guts are probably going to be an automotive hardened version of an iphone / ipad and will have a bunch of connections to get sensors wired to it. Their competition for this product is Bosch.
- radicaldreamer 3y agoApple cares about the end-to-end user experience too much to do this. Likely the car will have Apple's software sauce and design, be branded an Apple vehicle but be manufactured by BMW, VW group, or a Chinese manufacturer (Volvo/Polestar etc.)
- HumblyTossed 3y agoApple is probably dictating how the end user experience is supposed to be. That's probably why GM said f* off Apple.
- patwolf 3y ago
- tobinfricke 3y ago"downgraded to Level 2+ autonomy" "The car will use what is known as a Level 2+ system, the people said. That’s a downgrade from previously planned Level 4 technology — and, before that, even more ambitious aims for a Level 5 system." Wow, what? Level 2 is "lane centering and adaptive cruise control." Those are standard features these days. "After the initial car debuts, Apple hopes to release an upgraded system later that supports Level 4 autonomy and additional regions." Oh like Tesla and "Full Self Driving"?
- unregistereddev 3y agoI do not know why you are being downvoted. I agree that level 2 autonomy is not cutting edge - it is an option level for nearly every car manufacturer.
- TillE 3y agoUnlike Tesla, they'd definitely ship with LIDAR sensors. Honestly, lowering the bar makes me think that they're actually serious about this, they want to make an Apple Car even if it can't hit their original goals.
- forbiddenvoid 3y agoSeems odd to me that Apple would invest in developing a car instead of just focusing on the in-vehicle interface device. Then again, Apple has a long history of wanting absolute control over form factor, so they might believe their better served building the whole car than just one device that's used in it.
- nomel 3y agoI assume many of these seemingly odd efforts by big companies are to help fill their patent portfolio.
- forbiddenvoid 3y agoThat is also a very reasonable hypothesis. It would be interesting to know the economics in this case, if that turned out to be true. Spinning up an entire automotive engineering R&D division seems like a very expensive way to generate patents.
- nomel 3y ago> Spinning up an entire automotive engineering R&D division seems like a very expensive way to generate patents. What's the alternative? Real patents usually come from real work, rather than thought experiments.
- supportengineer 3y agoIt would be the one car with privacy protections
- skybrian 3y agoOr maybe "without privacy problems," the way the industry is going?
- kjkjadksj 3y agoYep because them and their ilk created the issue now you need to buy their solution. Meanwhile your bog standard no frills 2010s era car would be like a hardened CIA ghost vehicle in comparison to anything offered from an american tech company, even a model pitched specifically for privacy.
- dpflan 3y agoWhat if Apple helped to make trains/consumer rail?
- __d 3y agoI think that would be a mistake: for Apple, for passengers, and for governments. Superficially, sure, it'd be nice to have nicely designed, well-integrated, privacy-respecting public transport. But Apple is a very individual-focused company, and likes to control the experience of their users. That seems like it would be very difficult for rail transport. It'd be nice to see some Apple-like qualities in public transport though, for sure.
- dpflan 3y agoKind of sounds like an enterprise deal and Apple can keep selling hardware/services to funded governments and corporations?
- purpleblue 3y agoI recently met someone who worked at a pretty senior level on self-driving cars at one of the main companies pursuing it. After working there a couple of years he decided it's never going to happen to he switched to another company doing entirely different things.
- samwillis 3y agoApple don't release new products until their angle on it is ready to corner the market. They are rarely first, often late, but almost always unique in quality and finish. When they do launch the car, it's not just going to be a swanky thing to compete with BMW with a bunch of flashy touch UIs and half baked self driving. It's going to be something that is a step change, something so far ahead of the competition they will be years ahead. If they have deciding to delay till '28 that suggests it's both not ready, but maybe the market isn't either. If self driving is the head line feature, they will want it to actually be so far ahead of the competition it will appear like magic. If there is truth to the article (I suspect the delay is real, un-convinced on the reasons suggested) then I don't think the will release one at all.
- jgalt212 3y ago> Apple don't release new products until their angle on it is ready to corner the market. Like the Vision Pro?
- audunw 3y agoI would say they generally set up to corner the market in 2-3 generations. First iPhone, first iPod.. didn't quite take over the market, but it was a quick path from there to being dominating 3 iterations down the line. I don't think this is realistic for cars though. It doesn't feel like a good idea to me, but who knows..
- iamjake648 3y agoYeah I think this holds true there as well. It's a small, niche market, but it's hard to argue what they are doing isn't leaps and bounds ahead of anything from Meta (Ignoring the price differences).
- bmitc 3y ago> It's going to be something that is a step change, something so far ahead of the competition it will push them to be years ahead. This is comedic writing.
- bmitc 3y agoSelf-driving cars is one of the biggest boondoggles of all time. How much money, time, effort, amd resources have been spent on this? And yet, there's barely anything to show and the end goal is still not even clear.
- kjkjadksj 3y agoThe goal was never a tangible product but a marketable investment opportunity. You can tell this is how it is because the latter went exceedingly well and there is still no product because there was never supposed to be a product. If it was about the product it would be done by now.
- bmitc 3y agoI agree, and this also applies to basically every venture capitalist backed venture these days. They are effectively pump and dump schemes.
- iknowstuff 3y agoI literally took a waymo this morning. What are you talking about
- kjkjadksj 3y agoWaymo is about as solid a business as a dime a dozen escooter company that came and went. Ill say its real when it rolls outside test markets.
- iknowstuff 3y agoI guess I don’t really disagree. I happen to think Tesla will be the first company to offer autonomous ride share profitably.
- ibero 3y agomy personal belief is that driverless car hype was the by-product of the "gig economy"/uber success story. and in that march for IPO, uber had to address its largest problem re: scalability-- human drivers. this issue of scaling drivers was seen as the achilles heel of its technology play. as a result they went deep into investing into the idea of driverless car technology, more for show than in reality. yes, hundreds of millions (billions overall) where dumped into this sector but it was really motivated by the incentive to keep a valuation high. this "driverless" story picked up steam because it resonated with a lot of tech companies, similarly looking to move the needle in their valuations. for big giant tech companies this was alluring as there aren't that many single plays or markets you can do to move the company share price. so here came in google, head first, and apple still tentatively. and then crucially, for established dinosaurs like Ford or GM, the opportunity to create tech valuations for themselves similarly appeared. so they jumped in. all in all, we are still feeling the after effects of this uber story play out, with dwindling returns and ever reducing pile of money behind it.
- w0mbat 3y agoApple should buy one of the local EV companies like Lucid or Rivian, it would save them years of R&D on the hardware, give them valuable automotive guidance on the software and how things work in the car world. Lucid's software R&D is run by many ex-Apple people. Also, I don't think self-driving is a must-have feature and I speak as the driver of a Tesla with full-self-driving. It's just not that useful. Traffic-aware safety features are more valuable and easier to achieve.
- jim0266 3y agoAlso have FSD, driving it since 2021 as part of the first big wave pushed to general users. I see V12 as make or break for FSD. It's not worth $12k or $200 a month today. My problem with FSD today is the robotic nature of the driving. It's still too jerky. If V12 with end-to-end use of neural nets is the way forward, and early reports seem to show a step change, FSD on city streets can something that's better and safer than driving manually while feeling human like. Then FSD is really useful. The NHTSA enforced stop sign rules are a killer however.
- ibbih 3y agolol that's not real self driving. waymo is very useful.
- summerlight 3y agoI still don't understand what's the game that Apple is trying to play here. Manufacturing a car is completely a different business to small digital devices and the existing players are not willing to play nicely with Apple so they need to bootstrap everything from scratch, similar to Tesla. In this context, 2028 is still an extremely aggressive goal even for Apple and I won't be surprised if it's delayed to 2035 or something. Tesla had the advantage of being the first mover in the EV market and Waymo has the most advanced autonomous driving technologies. I don't see any competitive edges Apple has against them.
- lawxls 3y agoApple has a fruit logo
- supafastcoder 3y agoBack in 2018, when Tesla was still worth $55B and Apple had more than $100B in the bank, they could've acquired Tesla in an all cash deal, but for some reason didn't. I think they would've made a great match.
- selectodude 3y agoBecause Tesla was, is, and will continue to be overvalued as a car company. Why pay the “tech premium” for a manufacturing firm when you already have all of those core competencies in house?
- smoldesu 3y agoI agree with you, but Tesla did get things in gear fast enough to ship cars, early. If Apple's car ships in 2028 (and that's optimistic), then they'll be 20 years late to Tesla's party. The early mover advantage is worth something, not what investors value it at but still a hefty sum.
- selectodude 3y agoApple could spin up a joint venture with, say, Rivian or even Ford for 1/10th of that tomorrow. I’ll be honest, I think the whole Apple car thing is a pipe dream. Apple doesn’t have some sort of magic that is two decades beyond anybody else driving in circles underneath their weird spaceship campus. If they have their own full self driving, it doesn’t matter who assembles the car. They can sell the tech to everybody.
- ingenieroariel 3y agoApple having so much cash perhaps the business model is to lease them?
- Animats 3y agoApple may be the way Chinese manufacturers get into the US market. Apple will make a lot of noise about their car being a US product, but it will really be made by BYD and Foxconn in Guangdong.
- floxy 3y agoMaybe final assembly in Mexico? (for USMCA reasons) https://www.theyucatantimes.com/2023/09/byd-is-considering-building-a-manufacturing-plant-in-mexico/ https://www.theyucatantimes.com/2023/09/byd-is-considering-b...
- jcutrell 3y agoReduce scope AND push out a deadline. Congrats to the product managers on that one I guess - you did the impossible.
- spike021 3y agoI'm frequently nearby the Apple Infinity Loop. A couple years ago I constantly saw the Apple Lexus cars with the radar (?) and other equipment driving around the neighborhood every day. These days I very rarely see them. Maybe once or twice in the past few months. Definitely feels like they've dialed back quite a bit.
- jeffreygoesto 3y agoKifer Four
- madeofpalk 3y agoIt seems like every three months the Apple Car project gets rebooted. I doubt this will ever ship.
- oxqbldpxo 3y agoVision Pro, Department of Education, Department of Defense... Parks & Recreation???
- Geee 3y agoI still refuse to believe that they're actually working on a car. I think they're making a humanoid robot. It makes some sense that the car project is a cover for it. 2028 sounds about right, although a bit late. I've been saying this for years but let's see what happens.
- cdolan 3y agoCould explain why this makes sense? Genuinely interested Edit: I can infer the utility of humanoid robots. I mean what about the project leaks or other datapoints lead you to believe this has been humanoid robots all along?
- Geee 3y agoThey're quite similar projects from software / AI standpoint. Anyone who is hired for autonomous cars can be assigned on a robot team. An autonomous car is also kind of a robot. Aside from this, I just think that a humanoid robot is a product that Apple is destined to make. A car doesn't make sense to me.
- AlotOfReading 3y agoYou don't put out job postings requiring ISO 26262 experience for co-bots. There are other, better standards to list instead.
- jmbwell 3y agoI agree almost completely, though I don’t know whether a humanoid robot is it or not. Maybe the car is a car. But I’m thinking “car” could be something we might find hard to imagine.
- tomcam 3y agoAn article with nothing but anonymous sources that links to at least two other articles with nothing but anonymous sources. This used to be called gossip and would have merited a single sentence but not in the news section.
- jpalomaki 3y agoInstead of building the whole car, they could do what they are doing with AppleTV. With AppleTV Apple lets others take care of the bulky (and probably low margin) hardware and focus on the content and intelligence. For me the TV is now just a dumb screen, everything comes from the AppleTV.
- moondev 3y agoCan't have the Apple car shipping before the Apple 5g modem.
- whatever1 3y agoI think the conversation misses the fact that Apple has become a world leader in logistics and manufacturing scaling. They literally ramp up production in less than a year and producing 100's of millions of new widgets that they distribute internationally and they successfully make sure that they get depleted by September each year. (You never find old apple inventory). These are competitive advantages that apply to the car industry as well.
- seanmcdirmid 3y agoThey heavily rely on Chinese and other Asian partners for that. While that is great for the tech stack, the tariffs involved make it not likely that they will make their car in China, and will have to work with existing automotive supply chains far away from the centers they are currently leveraging. Their experience still counts, but the advantage isn't as overwhelming as if they were producing another iWidget.