Apple has target ship date of 2019 for electric car project, but it won't be self driving - report

1234689

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 166
    dasanman69 wrote: »

    Strike 2. Of course nobody comes to this site for its humor, but that doesn't mean it has to be void of it.

    'Strike 2'? Groan....

    Pretty much most of your posts here are not much more than snarky crap. Except when you're trolling...

    Says the king of snarky posts.
  • Reply 102 of 166
    dtrace wrote: »
    [m

    But do you remember the first Apple TV?  It was a dog...

    Huh!? I do, and it was an outstanding and innovative product. There was nothing much like it, and it was followed up with a whole slew of cheap -- and I mean cheap, including Roku, Google, and Amazon -- imitators.

    If anything, it's that the subsequent versions (i.e., the post-1.0 versions) did not offer all that much more except for a reduction in size.
  • Reply 103 of 166
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Says the king of snarky posts.

    Why, thank you for noticing! I do enjoy being snarky to the trolly types here.
  • Reply 104 of 166
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,922member
    dtrace wrote: »
    I'd be willing to call it a success if apple were willing to call it a product rather than a "hobby."  But do you remember the first Apple TV?  It was a dog, it was not a success, which is why Apple re-engineered it.  If market share is pointless...why do you bother pointing out that it was allegedly 1st in '13 and '14?  My point is that Apple TV wasn't even worth buying until rev 3 of the 'hobby', this pattern has existed throughout Apple's history...so why rush out and buy a rev 1 car?

    But honestly, some people here will line up to throw their money at literally anything Apple makes, and I laugh at that.

    Just because YOU don't see a need for it doesn't mean it's a failure. I didn't have a need for the iPhone before the 4S so those phones are failures. /s
  • Reply 105 of 166
    It better have an optical port...
  • Reply 106 of 166
    wigbywigby Posts: 692member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post

     

    I agree.  The whole self-driving car concept is not something to be taken lightly. Bringing them to the market will not only be fraught with danger (for companies and the public), but it will take place over a very, very long timeframe.  Think about how many cars there are in just the U.S., and how many roads, and intersections and bridges and tunnels and so on.  Then think about all the humans in normal cars interacting with all that infrastructure, sometimes in stupid and uninformed ways.  Throwing self-driving cars into that mix is going to be a witches brew of liability, fear, and chaos.  It will take decades before any meaningful number of cars are driving autonomously in the US.  We first might see roads and highways specifically designated for these cars to keep them separated from the masses and to help the public get used to them.  Any company planning to make a push in this area better be capable of serious long term planning and strategy.  Including pushing lots of money to lobbyists.


    It's not as if those using self-driving cars will be forced into them. There will be early adopters in the next few years and as soon as they are street legal, self-driving car use will grow but they will be hybrids for decades so humans can take control at anytime or all the time. Then as driving statistics are released, people will see that the self-driving cars in fact cause less accidents and are safer for the roads and their owners. Even if there are deadly accidents involving self-driving cars, they will never be able to prove it was the failure of the cars. Everyone will assume it's human error even if everyone doesn't trust self-driving cars.

  • Reply 107 of 166
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post





    Huh!? I do, and it was an outstanding and innovative product. There was nothing much like it, and it was followed up with a whole slew of cheap -- and I mean cheap, including Roku, Google, and Amazon -- imitators.



    If anything, it's that the subsequent versions (i.e., the post-1.0 versions) did not offer all that much more except for a reduction in size.

     

    Well, now those cheap imitations are leading the market.  Why are people here so quick to equate an expensive product with a high quality one? Those people are called easy money by marketing folks.  I'm not saying Apple's car couldn't be a success, but the probability of rev 1 being flawless are not good.  It would be foolish to buy rev 1 because rev 2, or 3, will have more of the kinks worked out.  And to those who think the Apple Watch is a phenomenal success, that's exactly what a lot of critical reviewers are saying about it.  Not that it's bad, just wait for the next one which will surely be better.  Sometimes Apple doesn't knock it out of the park on the first try, in fact they often don't.  Cars are very different from iPhones and laptops, you put your self at risk by basically beta testing Apple's rev 1.  A Leaf, or Tesla, or many other EVs out there (sog35 posted a sweet looking Benz BTW) that would make a smarter purchase right now, especially since all this talk of an apple car is still a rumor.

  • Reply 108 of 166
    The worst thing about the "Apple is building a car" rumor is that Samsung will rush something out the doort that will be so bad Apple will need to work hard to reestablish credibility in the market.
  • Reply 109 of 166
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dtrace View Post

     

     

    Well, now those cheap imitations are leading the market.  Why are people here so quick to equate an expensive product with a high quality one? Those people are called easy money by marketing folks.  I'm not saying Apple's car couldn't be a success, but the probability of rev 1 being flawless are not good.  It would be foolish to buy rev 1 because rev 2, or 3, will have more of the kinks worked out.  And to those who think the Apple Watch is a phenomenal success, that's exactly what a lot of critical reviewers are saying about it.  Not that it's bad, just wait for the next one which will surely be better.  Sometimes Apple doesn't knock it out of the park on the first try, in fact they often don't.  Cars are very different from iPhones and laptops, you put your self at risk by basically beta testing Apple's rev 1.  A Leaf, or Tesla, or many other EVs out there (sog35 posted a sweet looking Benz BTW) that would make a smarter purchase right now, especially since all this talk of an apple car is still a rumor.

     


     

    You act like cars today don't suck. They're all terrible and completely lack innovation. Cars today are the smartphones from 2005 and the cable boxes that we still have. Car companies are lazy and need more disruption than just Tesla. They will get their asses handed to them not just by Apple but Google and few car companies smart enough to partner with the right tech companies like Uber.

     

    As far as safety, the only beta testing is done by crash test dummies and safety inspections. We will not be in any danger because we are still years away from self driving cars so the only danger is breaking down and being stranded. Of course that will happen but you know what, I commute from NJ and NY everyday and see a few breakdowns every single day. This is truly dangerous because of rubbernecking idiots and crappy cars that cannot communicate. Most of these people already have iPhones but they just don't have a vehicle (pun intended) to network and avoid or traffic and accidents. A truly connected car (self-driving or not) promises to be a better driving experience, much safer and more efficient than my Prius.

  • Reply 110 of 166
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wigby View Post

     



    You act like cars today don't suck. They're all terrible and completely lack innovation. Cars today are the smartphones from 2005 and the cable boxes that we still have. Car companies are lazy and need more disruption than just Tesla. They will get their asses handed to them not just by Apple but Google and few car companies smart enough to partner with the right tech companies like Uber.

     

    As far as safety, the only beta testing is done by crash test dummies and safety inspections. We will not be in any danger because we are still years away from self driving cars so the only danger is breaking down and being stranded. Of course that will happen but you know what, I commute from NJ and NY everyday and see a few breakdowns every single day. This is truly dangerous because of rubbernecking idiots and crappy cars that cannot communicate. Most of these people already have iPhones but they just don't have a vehicle (pun intended) to network and avoid or traffic and accidents. A truly connected car (self-driving or not) promises to be a better driving experience, much safer and more efficient than my Prius.


     

    I absolutely agree that cars today do suck and that more than Tesla is needed.  I'm not crapping on Apple for (supposedly) getting into cars, I'm just being sensible and saying let the rich, or the risk takers buy rev 1.  Cars should have had many technologies long before now, and many aren't even here yet.  Hybrids were long overdue when the first Prius came out in like 1997.  Adaptive cruise control (which would help with the rubber neckers) should have been standard equipment years ago.  I think the only car maker who cares at all about safety is Volvo, and definitely not as much as they used to.  Self driving cars are a monumental leap, and I'm OK with that being baked slowly to get it right.  No fault on Apple for not making a self driving car, that's a case where the technology really isn't quite here yet, but it will be soon enough.

     

    But why do cars suck?  Because they are designed to sell to people who like image, style over substance, flash over functionality.  Do we need a car with 700hp?  Do we need an SUV so large it could double as a log cabin?  Car makers are tasked with making cars people will buy, and people generally still tend to want this kind of garbage.  A society full of EVs rather than gasoline cars would do wonders for the environment and society...but the majority still wants loud, dumb, flashy cars.  That's why I don't like the attitude I'm seeing here of buying Apple things simply because they're expensive.  It's just more of that stupid, materialistic consumerism flash.  I would love it it Apple came out with a $30,000 EV that was modest yet highly useful, that had enough technology to truly set it apart and challenge Tesla, let alone GM or Toyota.  But based on the overwhelmingly negative feedback I'm getting on this thread, I'm gonna guess the Apple car will be something like a solid gold BMW i3...fugly, not a game changer at all, designed to impress rather than improve anything, and with a user experience not unlike iOS 7 - a frustrating disaster.  BUT IT COMES IN GOLD!!!!! /s

  • Reply 111 of 166

    I love driving. I'm not exactly all for self driving cars, and who knows if Apple's stab at the automobile will self-driving (I doubt it), but as I was dropping off one of my cars at the repair shop tonight, a cop pulled up behind us, and on the way home, it dawned on me. The greatest benefit self-driving cars will provide to society as I now see it, is not safety, is not efficiency, is not convenience, no, it's none of that. The greatest benefit will be that cops will have to find SOMETHING ELSE TO DO, other than pull people over for traffic violations. You know what I say? Bring it. Go fight real crime, piggies.

  • Reply 112 of 166
    docno42 wrote: »
    bdkennedy wrote: »
    It's time to retire the Apple garage pic.

    Naw - it's great at pointing out the humor-impaired.

    I don't come to this site for its humor. Do you?

    I didn't turn on the Republican debates for its humor... but enjoyed the entertainment none-the-less.
  • Reply 113 of 166
    solipsismy wrote: »
    I try my best, as do many others, but no one beats GTR when it comes to making the funny. I miss his jokes.

    Where is GTR these days?
  • Reply 114 of 166
    Seriously, I don't need a self-driving car, but one that would watch out for me while I drove would be most appreciated.

    A second, better set of eyes watching around the driver would lower the accident rate and save lives. In addition, there are all sorts of sensors that could aid the drivers in a number of ways to make driving less stressful and improve the experience while making it safer.

    Apple has shown in several products that they have the ability to create amazing yet simple sensors and feedback devices that could be implanted throughout the car frame to improve the experience for the driver and passengers while improving safety.

    Think about it. What more is missing from an enjoyable driving experience?
  • Reply 115 of 166
    mr omr o Posts: 1,046member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Serendip View Post



    OK.. now this makes more sense.



    I never understood why so many people thought Apple was going after a self driving car. Apple refines preexisting technologies. They take something tried over and over again (and failed miserably) by others and make it easy, smooth, and slick (and successful). They're more an user interface company then a tech company in my opinion.



    They're not going to stick their neck out and be first for something as potentially disastrous as a self driving car. I foresee some very large lawsuits as more and more cars attempt self driving and fail. Even if a real person would have crashed anyways.. there will be lawsuits because nobody thinks they're a bad driver (even though they are).



    I really don't think Apple will put out a product and face the consequences of people dying from it. Just defending the lawsuits will hurt the company's image right or wrong.



    If Apple doesn't develop a self driving car, than Google will. Such is the game.

     

    It'd be foolish of Apple to play by the rules of the traditional car manufacturers. They'd be up against BMW, Porsche and Audi, to name a few. Those brands have a monoply on the 'Driving' experience. Well, 'Time' is more precious to me than the pleasure of working your car, hence my preference for the Self Driving Future.



    Remember Apple's mantra? It is "Think Different". It is not "Think Differently". "Self Driving Cars" are the only disruptive force in the Future of Mobility. I do not understand Apple's eagerness to join the Electric Evolution. They can afford to play the waiting game. Like they did with the iPhone.



     

  • Reply 116 of 166
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mr O View Post

     



    If Apple doesn't develop a self driving car, than Google will. Such is the game.

     

    It'd be foolish of Apple to play by the rules of the traditional car manufacturers. They'd be up against BMW, Porsche and Audi, to name a few. Those brands have a monoply on the 'Driving' experience. Well, 'Time' is more precious to me than the pleasure of working your car, hence my preference for the Self Driving Future.



    Remember Apple's mantra? It is "Think Different". It is not "Think Differently". "Self Driving Cars" are the only disruptive force in the Future of Mobility. I do not understand Apple's eagerness to join the Electric Evolution. They can afford to play the waiting game. Like they did with the iPhone.



     


    Shipping is a feature.

  • Reply 117 of 166
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by cali View Post



    (Not saying THIS report is true but) I called this last week.



    Apple will most likely not offer an autonomous car day one. That's nuts. It's a lot safer to offer an electric vehicle with hundreds of sensors and compile all this data on a server back at the lab to better understand driving, mapping, roads, elevation and accidents etc.



    I'd say after 2-10 years they'll have enough data to develop a near flawless vehicle. I'd say 2 years later at the LEAST. Then there's all the old farts in congress who would have to allow new laws and the outdated road tech currently in use(traffic lights, construction/light up/road signs, lanes) that may or may need updating.

    What surprises me is that the current car manufacturers, who already sell MILLIONS of cars every year, do not equip them with cameras and sensors to gather all this data now. VW is pre-destined for this.

  • Reply 118 of 166
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wigby View Post

     



    You act like cars today don't suck. They're all terrible and completely lack innovation. Cars today are the smartphones from 2005 and the cable boxes that we still have. Car companies are lazy and need more disruption than just Tesla. They will get their asses handed to them not just by Apple but Google and few car companies smart enough to partner with the right tech companies like Uber.

     

    As far as safety, the only beta testing is done by crash test dummies and safety inspections. We will not be in any danger because we are still years away from self driving cars so the only danger is breaking down and being stranded. Of course that will happen but you know what, I commute from NJ and NY everyday and see a few breakdowns every single day. This is truly dangerous because of rubbernecking idiots and crappy cars that cannot communicate. Most of these people already have iPhones but they just don't have a vehicle (pun intended) to network and avoid or traffic and accidents. A truly connected car (self-driving or not) promises to be a better driving experience, much safer and more efficient than my Prius.


    What exactly is it about cars today that sucks?

     

    They are incredibly safe, having many passive (seat belts, airbags, crumple zones), as well as active (ABS, ASS, emergency breaking) safety features. They also consume less and less petrol (and EV will become de- facto standard by 2025); have a very smooth ride, quick acceleration, stable cornering, and are easy to drive. 

     

    What sucks is the attitude of people who get sucked into believing they need a new car every 4 years. The car manufacturers did an incredible job making people believe that they should spend £ 800 per month (depreciation, petrol, insurance, servicing, etc) to get from A to B in something as expensive as possible. Hence over-sized SUV, low car sharing rates, new safety equipment only found on luxury models before they go mainstream. People always find a way to show off, it would have been better if they stuck to jewels rather than cars with their high externality cost.

  • Reply 119 of 166
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cornchip View Post

     

    I love driving. I'm not exactly all for self driving cars, and who knows if Apple's stab at the automobile will self-driving (I doubt it), but as I was dropping off one of my cars at the repair shop tonight, a cop pulled up behind us, and on the way home, it dawned on me. The greatest benefit self-driving cars will provide to society as I now see it, is not safety, is not efficiency, is not convenience, no, it's none of that. The greatest benefit will be that cops will have to find SOMETHING ELSE TO DO, other than pull people over for traffic violations. You know what I say? Bring it. Go fight real crime, piggies.


    The reason that cops in the US conduct so much traffic and speeding checks and stop you (rather than just taking a picture when speeding) is to condition the population to be constantly in fear of the police. It is a means of psychological subjugation.

  • Reply 120 of 166
    mr omr o Posts: 1,046member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sflagel View Post

     

    What exactly is it about cars today that sucks?

     

    They are incredibly safe, having many passive (seat belts, airbags, crumple zones), as well as active (ABS, ASS, emergency breaking) safety features. They also consume less and less petrol (and EV will become de- facto standard by 2025); have a very smooth ride, quick acceleration, stable cornering, and are easy to drive. What exactly sucks about them?




    The main issue is that you still have to drive/operate them.

     

    It seems trivial, but just ask those mothers that have to leave work early to pick up their kids from school.

Sign In or Register to comment.