3 ms·

What’s the advantage of owning the full stack? Some margin on the base machine? Is that that huge a factor?

by tene80i 2y ago

erikerikson 2y ago
Ask Apple?
- ra7 2y ago
  Apple doesn’t own any factories to make their hardware. Their vertical integration goes as far as hardware design and software. Pretty much exactly what companies like Waymo are trying to do.
  - erikerikson 2y ago
    It's fair to say that Tesla's vertical integration is even deeper. Might Microsoft Windows or Google Android be a better example than Apple? Does Waymo actually specify the entire vehicle (i.e. have it's own engine design) or just the systems added to the vehicle?
    - ra7 2y ago
      Indeed, Windows or Android are a better example than Apple. Waymo only designs the systems added to the vehicle, but they do have input over some parts of the vehicle design. Geely (Zeekr) is building a purpose-built robotaxi for them that's based on their SEA-M platform, but with Waymo customizations. I'm not sure Tesla level vertical integration is really necessary.
- tene80i 2y ago
  But the point there is that by controlling the stack Apple can improve the overall UX, from encryption to battery life or what have you. What’s the equivalent in self-driving cars? Better handling?
  - erikerikson 2y ago
    Perhaps. More broadly, reduced constraints. Written differently, being able to choose the layer at which you solve the problem. An example of this is that in robotics, the ability to properly insert a piston into an engine block without damage to the piston or block was an unsolved problem for some time in robotics. Doing so using machine vision and robotics control theory required engineering constraints that resulted in a too slow and expensive a mechanism for mechanized assembly lines. Because of the total control of the assembly line, this problem was solved in the physical space through a reactive physical assembly using two connected planes (I'm sorry but I'm having a hell of a time tracking down a reference) rather than in software.

What’s the advantage of owning the full stack? Some margin on the base machine? Is that that huge a factor?

erikerikson 2y ago

Ask Apple?

ra7 2y ago
Apple doesn’t own any factories to make their hardware. Their vertical integration goes as far as hardware design and software. Pretty much exactly what companies like Waymo are trying to do.
- erikerikson 2y ago
  It's fair to say that Tesla's vertical integration is even deeper. Might Microsoft Windows or Google Android be a better example than Apple? Does Waymo actually specify the entire vehicle (i.e. have it's own engine design) or just the systems added to the vehicle?
  - ra7 2y ago
    Indeed, Windows or Android are a better example than Apple. Waymo only designs the systems added to the vehicle, but they do have input over some parts of the vehicle design. Geely (Zeekr) is building a purpose-built robotaxi for them that's based on their SEA-M platform, but with Waymo customizations. I'm not sure Tesla level vertical integration is really necessary.
tene80i 2y ago
But the point there is that by controlling the stack Apple can improve the overall UX, from encryption to battery life or what have you. What’s the equivalent in self-driving cars? Better handling?
- erikerikson 2y ago
  Perhaps. More broadly, reduced constraints. Written differently, being able to choose the layer at which you solve the problem. An example of this is that in robotics, the ability to properly insert a piston into an engine block without damage to the piston or block was an unsolved problem for some time in robotics. Doing so using machine vision and robotics control theory required engineering constraints that resulted in a too slow and expensive a mechanism for mechanized assembly lines. Because of the total control of the assembly line, this problem was solved in the physical space through a reactive physical assembly using two connected planes (I'm sorry but I'm having a hell of a time tracking down a reference) rather than in software.