Nokia and Motorola have been making cell phones for decades, as have many other companies. It is, frankly, quite silly to think that Apple could just jump into such a competitive and complex business and achieve greater efficiencies than companies that have been refining their design and manufacturing processes for decades.
... and the prices of Nokia and Motorola phones at the time the first iPhone was introduced.
Now apply that $$$ ratio to cars.
Unless, of course, the Apple Car is only meant for wealthier people.
Apple only enters markets where it believes it can provide a superior customer experience.
Atonomous vehicles are going to be expensive.
99% of people won’t be able to afford them.
Today, 54 percent of the world’s population lives in urban areas.
By 2050 66 percent of the world’s population will live in urban areas.
The reason the sources say Apple is working on an autonomous minivan is because it is not intended to be a consumer product in the sense that you won't be buying one.
Sources also say that Apple is focusing on the software side of things.
Apple isn’t just working on building an autonomous vehicle.
Apple is also developing the backend system to manage a fleet of them.
Apple will sell the ?Taxi and Cloud dispatcher to cities.
The superior user experience is using your phone to hail a cab and get to your destination safely and efficiently. You tell the cloud dispatcher aka. Siri where you want to go and when. Siri will find the best ?Taxi in the fleet to pick you up. The cloud dispatcher will find a vehicle with passengers who have destinations along your route. You can also tell the cloud dispatcher you need to get there in a hurry and she will be able to give you priority service for a slightly higher fare. Over time the cloud dispatcher will learn commuting patterns and will have vehicles in areas where they are needed before they are needed.
The reason the sources say Apple is working on an autonomous minivan is because it is not intended to be a consumer product in the sense that you won't be buying one.
They are saying that because they have seen pictures of a minivan and their limited brains can't see why the minivan was a great choice for the gear on top, the gear inside, and generally overall decent ride at a low cost.
%u201CWe%u2019ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone (car?). PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They%u2019re not going to just walk in.%u201D
And not for private ownership. Odds are an urban ride share vehicle. The numbers showing younger people's disinterest in owning a private car will play right into this. You use Apple Pay to sign up for an AppleCar you pick up on an as needed basis from a charging station just like all the bike share systems.
So not a competition with existing car manufacturers, a replacement concept for a specific usage group: urban residents. Expanding the shared-use vehicle structure. Plus being electric there's a move at reducing city air pollution.
The target being that 79% of the American population that, even in 2000, lived in urban areas.
Ok, this is the first intelligent thing I've seen written about an Apple car. Apple's strength lies in looking at existing products, identifying their shortcomings, and overcoming them. The biggest shortcomings for a car are depreciation, maintenance, and in an urban environment, parking. An expansion on the zip car idea is right up Apple's alley.
Ok, this is the first intelligent thing I've seen written about an Apple car. Apple's strength lies in looking at existing products, identifying their shortcomings, and overcoming them. The biggest shortcomings for a car are depreciation, maintenance, and in an urban environment, parking. An expansion on the zip car idea is right up Apple's alley.
This also fits Mercedes statements at CES. They envision urban areas that eventually ONLY allow autonomous vehicles.
They also own Car2Go, who will surely be out of the gate early on this concept.
Apple only enters markets where it believes it can provide a superior customer experience. Atonomous vehicles are going to be expensive. 99% of people won’t be able to afford them. Today, 54 percent of the world’s population lives in urban areas. By 2050 66 percent of the world’s population will live in urban areas. The reason the sources say Apple is working on an autonomous minivan is because it is not intended to be a consumer product in the sense that you won't be buying one. Sources also say that Apple is focusing on the software side of things. Apple isn’t just working on building an autonomous vehicle. Apple is also developing the backend system to manage a fleet of them. Apple will sell the ?Taxi and Cloud dispatcher to cities. The superior user experience is using your phone to hail a cab and get to your destination safely and efficiently. You tell the cloud dispatcher aka. Siri where you want to go and when. Siri will find the best ?Taxi in the fleet to pick you up. The cloud dispatcher will find a vehicle with passengers who have destinations along your route. You can also tell the cloud dispatcher you need to get there in a hurry and she will be able to give you priority service for a slightly higher fare. Over time the cloud dispatcher will learn commuting patterns and will have vehicles in areas where they are needed before they are needed.
By 2050, we'll be about 5 years post-Singularity and we'll all be doing the bidding of our artificial intelligentce overlords.
Apple only enters markets where it believes it can provide a superior customer experience. Atonomous vehicles are going to be expensive. 99% of people won’t be able to afford them. Today, 54 percent of the world’s population lives in urban areas. By 2050 66 percent of the world’s population will live in urban areas. The reason the sources say Apple is working on an autonomous minivan is because it is not intended to be a consumer product in the sense that you won't be buying one. Sources also say that Apple is focusing on the software side of things. Apple isn’t just working on building an autonomous vehicle. Apple is also developing the backend system to manage a fleet of them. Apple will sell the ?Taxi and Cloud dispatcher to cities. The superior user experience is using your phone to hail a cab and get to your destination safely and efficiently. You tell the cloud dispatcher aka. Siri where you want to go and when. Siri will find the best ?Taxi in the fleet to pick you up. The cloud dispatcher will find a vehicle with passengers who have destinations along your route. You can also tell the cloud dispatcher you need to get there in a hurry and she will be able to give you priority service for a slightly higher fare. Over time the cloud dispatcher will learn commuting patterns and will have vehicles in areas where they are needed before they are needed.
By 2050, we'll be about 5 years post-Singularity and we'll all be doing the bidding of our artificial intelligentce overlords.
I go to Monterey often. It's beautiful land. The solar farm is somewhere outside of Monterey, most likely where it won't be seen by the general public, but essentially clearing out whatever is there to put up hundreds of acres of solar panels is terrible. I flat-out hate the idea. Sure, we're not burning coal, or natural gas to power whatever datacenters Apple wants to run, we're consuming one valuable resource to offset another.
I'll be flamed for it, but we need better energy infrastructure instead of these giant solar farms and wind farms, and whatever else. We in America just happen to be fortunate to have a lot of available land, but I don't thing projects like these would be so easily done in smaller countries in Europe.
Bring in modern nuclear energy. I'm a firm believer in it. I have discussions with friends that were nuclear engineers aboard Navy submarines. The tech is there, but the political nonsense is inhibiting us from it.
Odds are huge it's "replacing" a rutabaga field. Same siting needs, sunlight. Monterey county is a big place... and it's looking like it's almost due south of Coalinga
I go to Monterey often. It's beautiful land. The solar farm is somewhere outside of Monterey, most likely where it won't be seen by the general public, but essentially clearing out whatever is there to put up hundreds of acres of solar panels is terrible. I flat-out hate the idea. Sure, we're not burning coal, or natural gas to power whatever datacenters Apple wants to run, we're consuming one valuable resource to offset another.
I'll be flamed for it, but we need better energy infrastructure instead of these giant solar farms and wind farms, and whatever else. We in America just happen to be fortunate to have a lot of available land, but I don't thing projects like these would be so easily done in smaller countries in Europe.
Bring in modern nuclear energy. I'm a firm believer in it. I have discussions with friends that were nuclear engineers aboard Navy submarines. The tech is there, but the political nonsense is inhibiting us from it.
I totally agree nuclear needs to be in our future, and I'm frustrated by the politics of it.
That said, coal is certainly no better for the land than solar. This American hole used to be a hill:
Comments
The full codename is "Titan Uranus". A nice little dig at what Tesla will be feeling if Apple do release a car.
That's great.
Wasn't there an Apple product code-named "Carl Sagan"? Until he found out and got mad a Apple?
Edit: Here's the story. I had forgotten about the details.
Nokia and Motorola have been making cell phones for decades, as have many other companies. It is, frankly, quite silly to think that Apple could just jump into such a competitive and complex business and achieve greater efficiencies than companies that have been refining their design and manufacturing processes for decades.
... and the prices of Nokia and Motorola phones at the time the first iPhone was introduced.
Now apply that $$$ ratio to cars.
Unless, of course, the Apple Car is only meant for wealthier people.
Just put Campus 2 up on stilts and call it a day.
Lol.. Love it... I want one !
Steve Jobs sold his VW MINIBUS ( hippie bus) to fund the start up of Apple !
I think I now know what Marc Newson is working on.
We hope not.
They are saying that because they have seen pictures of a minivan and their limited brains can't see why the minivan was a great choice for the gear on top, the gear inside, and generally overall decent ride at a low cost.
%u201CWe%u2019ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone (car?). PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They%u2019re not going to just walk in.%u201D
- 2006-11-16 Palm CEO, Ed Colligan
I thought it was Free Willy.
Go figure.
And not for private ownership. Odds are an urban ride share vehicle. The numbers showing younger people's disinterest in owning a private car will play right into this. You use Apple Pay to sign up for an AppleCar you pick up on an as needed basis from a charging station just like all the bike share systems.
So not a competition with existing car manufacturers, a replacement concept for a specific usage group: urban residents. Expanding the shared-use vehicle structure. Plus being electric there's a move at reducing city air pollution.
The target being that 79% of the American population that, even in 2000, lived in urban areas.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/census_issues/
Ok, this is the first intelligent thing I've seen written about an Apple car. Apple's strength lies in looking at existing products, identifying their shortcomings, and overcoming them. The biggest shortcomings for a car are depreciation, maintenance, and in an urban environment, parking. An expansion on the zip car idea is right up Apple's alley.
Ok, this is the first intelligent thing I've seen written about an Apple car. Apple's strength lies in looking at existing products, identifying their shortcomings, and overcoming them. The biggest shortcomings for a car are depreciation, maintenance, and in an urban environment, parking. An expansion on the zip car idea is right up Apple's alley.
This also fits Mercedes statements at CES. They envision urban areas that eventually ONLY allow autonomous vehicles.
They also own Car2Go, who will surely be out of the gate early on this concept.
By 2050, we'll be about 5 years post-Singularity and we'll all be doing the bidding of our artificial intelligentce overlords.
I think you've been reading too many comics.
I was joking about serving the new overlords, however the Singularity part is right on schedule. In about 4 years, we'll see how many of Kurzweil's predictions stand.
I go to Monterey often. It's beautiful land. The solar farm is somewhere outside of Monterey, most likely where it won't be seen by the general public, but essentially clearing out whatever is there to put up hundreds of acres of solar panels is terrible. I flat-out hate the idea. Sure, we're not burning coal, or natural gas to power whatever datacenters Apple wants to run, we're consuming one valuable resource to offset another.
I'll be flamed for it, but we need better energy infrastructure instead of these giant solar farms and wind farms, and whatever else. We in America just happen to be fortunate to have a lot of available land, but I don't thing projects like these would be so easily done in smaller countries in Europe.
Bring in modern nuclear energy. I'm a firm believer in it. I have discussions with friends that were nuclear engineers aboard Navy submarines. The tech is there, but the political nonsense is inhibiting us from it.
Odds are huge it's "replacing" a rutabaga field. Same siting needs, sunlight. Monterey county is a big place... and it's looking like it's almost due south of Coalinga
http://www.mercurynews.com/portlet/article/html/imageDisplay.jsp?contentItemRelationshipId=6592934
FYI Using Apple Maps and searching for "California Flats, CA" nails the location down. A 149 mile drive from Monterey proper...
I go to Monterey often. It's beautiful land. The solar farm is somewhere outside of Monterey, most likely where it won't be seen by the general public, but essentially clearing out whatever is there to put up hundreds of acres of solar panels is terrible. I flat-out hate the idea. Sure, we're not burning coal, or natural gas to power whatever datacenters Apple wants to run, we're consuming one valuable resource to offset another.
I'll be flamed for it, but we need better energy infrastructure instead of these giant solar farms and wind farms, and whatever else. We in America just happen to be fortunate to have a lot of available land, but I don't thing projects like these would be so easily done in smaller countries in Europe.
Bring in modern nuclear energy. I'm a firm believer in it. I have discussions with friends that were nuclear engineers aboard Navy submarines. The tech is there, but the political nonsense is inhibiting us from it.
I totally agree nuclear needs to be in our future, and I'm frustrated by the politics of it.
That said, coal is certainly no better for the land than solar. This American hole used to be a hill: