If this was about a different company, Samsung for instance, you might say they let others do the really tough, time-consuming groundwork. Once the path is cleared they come in with their own product.
That might be a valid comment if Apple's 'late to the game' entries were indeed using the concepts of those that "do the really tough, time-consuming groundwork". Instead they break the mold and go in directions no one ever thought of ... then Apple is copied.
Check out cell phones before and after iPhone of you need a memory jog, especially your beloved Samsungs' offerings.
You are glossing over one minor detail - there were mobile phones, the development of which Apple had absolutely nothing to do with. Apple don't hold a single patent essential to how mobile phones operate. Others did all the really tough ground breaking work - making phones work and small enough to fit in a pocket. Apple slapped an elegant UI and a much more advanced OS on a phone, both of which were very good ideas, but relied on and were based upon an enormous body of work done by others.
Same with cars. Do you think an Apple car will levitate and be powered by rainbows?
It finally dawned on me why liquid metal is so important to Apple. I always asked what use it would have in making computers. It probably does some, but that is not the real reason why Apple invested in this technology. Car parts.
I think this car has been a long time coming.
If Apple had invested in LM with the foresight you claim, their license would have been for more than just consumer electronics uses. They clearly weren't thinking of cars at the time.
Where do you get service for an eletric car? (Tesla, Volt, Leaf, etc)
Do you need to get it from the original manufacturer, or does "Joe's Auto Shop" down the road have people, equipment, and parts to service these next-generation cars? Does this imply that Apple will need to create a set of Apple Auto Service Stations across all the geographies where they sell cars?
That's precisely the point, you don't need service with an electric car (compared to an ICE car). Amost all parts that can (and do) break down with your ICE car are non existent or show reduced wear and tear. Batteries are guaranteed by the manufacturer (8 to 10 years or so) and serviced at your home or you get a replacement car until it's repaired. Other fixes are OTA (in Tesla's case) and are completely hassle free.
Try to get rid of the ICE mindset of repairs, oil, money, petrol, repairs, oil, visits to Joe's Auto Shop, breakdowns, repairs, money, oil, petrol station (again), etc. etc.
Exaggeration. The hardest working and fastest wearing components in a modern car are related to the suspension, brakes tires and battery. My Honda is 11 years old and the only parts that have failed/worn are the battery, tires, one steering rod ball joint, brake pads and brake pistons and seals. The only one of those an electric car might be lighter on are the pads, due to regenerative brakes, and the battery.
An electric car doesn't require oil changes and air filters to be replaced so it certainly wins there.
A liquid metal car will shatter on impact, I don't think that's a good property for a car.
Are you certain about that? Is is my understanding that liquid metal has greater impact resistance. Also, the above comment refers to components, not an entire car.
Components are fine I guess, but the exterior certainly isn't, liquid metal is glass like and has a high scratch resistance as such, but also shares the brittle nature of it.
Are you certain about that? Is is my understanding that liquid metal has greater impact resistance. Also, the above comment refers to components, not an entire car.
Components are fine I guess, but the exterior certainly isn't, liquid metal is glass like and has a high scratch resistance as such, but also shares the brittle nature of it.
Automobiles need crumple zones. Often the sheet metal body itself is utilized for this purpose. In fiberglass and carbon fiber vehicles such as the Corvette and BMW i3, they use structural components under the body to transfer energy in vectors away from the cabin. Some of you may have seen cars with third party CF hood or trunks. This not such a good idea from a safety perspective because CF is not going to provide the same level of energy absorption as the original metal components.
At any rate, LM would be a poor material choice for the body of a car in my opinion and as others have noted Apple only licensed LM for CE use.
Whatever direction Apple takes the company you can be sure they'll do the best job they can do.
I beg to differ: The mag safe power cable on my MBPR is of unacceptably low quality.
Apple is not known for their high quality cables. I have seen the insulation fray near the plug in a few cases, personally only on an old 30 pin iPad plug but there are many similar accounts online. I have never had any problem with my MagSafe cables though.
Comments
Same with cars. Do you think an Apple car will levitate and be powered by rainbows?
An electric car doesn't require oil changes and air filters to be replaced so it certainly wins there.
At any rate, LM would be a poor material choice for the body of a car in my opinion and as others have noted Apple only licensed LM for CE use.