Steve Wozniak suggests Tesla, not Apple, will create the next successful tech moonshot

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 86
    baconstangbaconstang Posts: 495member
    Jet packs!   Definitely jet packs.

    Self driving jet packs.  (You really don't want to crash.)
    edited May 2017
  • Reply 62 of 86
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 859member
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    macxpress said:
    I'm actually not sure why people praise Tesla as much as they do...I mean yes, they're making fully electric cars with all of this technology but their quality is horrible! For some reason, it seems like people are oblivious to this. They think Tesla is this wonderful company who makes electric cars, not realizing that Tesla is making really bad quality cars.
    People love and cherish an idea, not so much of what is real. Sadly, that's the world we live in these days. Tesla is an idea: a futuristic high tech self driving car. People love that idea regardless of the crappy current real implementation. No doubt, giving it a few more years it will be better. That's why I prefer Apple's secrecy on their own smart car project.
    1) Tesla's cars are crap? Who makes a better EV? Who Who has better self-driving SW than Tesla?

    2) You're calling Tesla an idea and saying that you love Apple's secrecy. They have real products on the road. You think this is vaporware?

    You misunderstood my point.

    Obviously it's a real company with a real product. But where are the flying cars? Where are the promised 100% self driving cars? Where are the 5 minutes battery recharge speed car? These are what I called "ideas" that people love and expect from Tesla NOT the actual cars they are producing right now (tell me, what is the % of marketshare Tesla managed so far?). And these are what Woz expect from Tesla when he was talking about future. I don't think their cars are vapourware, my point is, people's opinion about them are over idealistic.
    edited May 2017
  • Reply 63 of 86
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,155member
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    macxpress said:
    I'm actually not sure why people praise Tesla as much as they do...I mean yes, they're making fully electric cars with all of this technology but their quality is horrible! For some reason, it seems like people are oblivious to this. They think Tesla is this wonderful company who makes electric cars, not realizing that Tesla is making really bad quality cars.
    People love and cherish an idea, not so much of what is real. Sadly, that's the world we live in these days. Tesla is an idea: a futuristic high tech self driving car. People love that idea regardless of the crappy current real implementation. No doubt, giving it a few more years it will be better. That's why I prefer Apple's secrecy on their own smart car project.
    1) Tesla's cars are crap? Who makes a better EV? Who Who has better self-driving SW than Tesla?

    2) You're calling Tesla an idea and saying that you love Apple's secrecy. They have real products on the road. You think this is vaporware?

    You misunderstood my point.

    Obviously it's a real company with a real product. But where are the flying cars? Where are the promised 100% self driving cars? Where are the 5 minutes battery recharge speed car? These are what I called "ideas" that people love and expect from Tesla NOT the actual cars they are producing right now (tell me, what is the % of marketshare Tesla managed so far?). And these are what Woz expect from Tesla when he was talking about future. I don't think their cars are vapourware, my point is, people's opinion about them are over idealistic.
    I missed where In the article Woz said that Tesla cars will be flying.
  • Reply 64 of 86
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 859member
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    macxpress said:
    I'm actually not sure why people praise Tesla as much as they do...I mean yes, they're making fully electric cars with all of this technology but their quality is horrible! For some reason, it seems like people are oblivious to this. They think Tesla is this wonderful company who makes electric cars, not realizing that Tesla is making really bad quality cars.
    People love and cherish an idea, not so much of what is real. Sadly, that's the world we live in these days. Tesla is an idea: a futuristic high tech self driving car. People love that idea regardless of the crappy current real implementation. No doubt, giving it a few more years it will be better. That's why I prefer Apple's secrecy on their own smart car project.
    1) Tesla's cars are crap? Who makes a better EV? Who Who has better self-driving SW than Tesla?

    2) You're calling Tesla an idea and saying that you love Apple's secrecy. They have real products on the road. You think this is vaporware?

    You misunderstood my point.

    Obviously it's a real company with a real product. But where are the flying cars? Where are the promised 100% self driving cars? Where are the 5 minutes battery recharge speed car? These are what I called "ideas" that people love and expect from Tesla NOT the actual cars they are producing right now (tell me, what is the % of marketshare Tesla managed so far?). And these are what Woz expect from Tesla when he was talking about future. I don't think their cars are vapourware, my point is, people's opinion about them are over idealistic.
    I missed where In the article Woz said that Tesla cars will be flying.
    He didn't, I did - I had to add that to illustrate my point so you could understand easily. Apparently I failed, if that's the only thing you pick up from the whole paragraph :disappointed: 

    edited May 2017 radarthekat
  • Reply 65 of 86
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,155member
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    macxpress said:
    I'm actually not sure why people praise Tesla as much as they do...I mean yes, they're making fully electric cars with all of this technology but their quality is horrible! For some reason, it seems like people are oblivious to this. They think Tesla is this wonderful company who makes electric cars, not realizing that Tesla is making really bad quality cars.
    People love and cherish an idea, not so much of what is real. Sadly, that's the world we live in these days. Tesla is an idea: a futuristic high tech self driving car. People love that idea regardless of the crappy current real implementation. No doubt, giving it a few more years it will be better. That's why I prefer Apple's secrecy on their own smart car project.
    1) Tesla's cars are crap? Who makes a better EV? Who Who has better self-driving SW than Tesla?

    2) You're calling Tesla an idea and saying that you love Apple's secrecy. They have real products on the road. You think this is vaporware?

    You misunderstood my point.

    Obviously it's a real company with a real product. But where are the flying cars? Where are the promised 100% self driving cars? Where are the 5 minutes battery recharge speed car? These are what I called "ideas" that people love and expect from Tesla NOT the actual cars they are producing right now (tell me, what is the % of marketshare Tesla managed so far?). And these are what Woz expect from Tesla when he was talking about future. I don't think their cars are vapourware, my point is, people's opinion about them are over idealistic.
    I missed where In the article Woz said that Tesla cars will be flying.
    He didn't, I did - it's a figure of speech to illustrate my point. Seems like you still confuse if that's the only thing you pick up from the whole paragraph :disappointed: 

    So you're claiming something is being said when and then when I point out that it wasn't mentioned you said that you're the one who's saying it. Instead of claiming that Tesla is only an "idea" where you then go to describe things that may or may not happen in the future as reasons why the company and their actual products aren't viable today, why not make reasonable statements instead of inventing crap that has barring on what Tesla is doing right now?
    edited May 2017
  • Reply 66 of 86
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 859member
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    macxpress said:
    I'm actually not sure why people praise Tesla as much as they do...I mean yes, they're making fully electric cars with all of this technology but their quality is horrible! For some reason, it seems like people are oblivious to this. They think Tesla is this wonderful company who makes electric cars, not realizing that Tesla is making really bad quality cars.
    People love and cherish an idea, not so much of what is real. Sadly, that's the world we live in these days. Tesla is an idea: a futuristic high tech self driving car. People love that idea regardless of the crappy current real implementation. No doubt, giving it a few more years it will be better. That's why I prefer Apple's secrecy on their own smart car project.
    1) Tesla's cars are crap? Who makes a better EV? Who Who has better self-driving SW than Tesla?

    2) You're calling Tesla an idea and saying that you love Apple's secrecy. They have real products on the road. You think this is vaporware?

    You misunderstood my point.

    Obviously it's a real company with a real product. But where are the flying cars? Where are the promised 100% self driving cars? Where are the 5 minutes battery recharge speed car? These are what I called "ideas" that people love and expect from Tesla NOT the actual cars they are producing right now (tell me, what is the % of marketshare Tesla managed so far?). And these are what Woz expect from Tesla when he was talking about future. I don't think their cars are vapourware, my point is, people's opinion about them are over idealistic.
    I missed where In the article Woz said that Tesla cars will be flying.
    He didn't, I did - it's a figure of speech to illustrate my point. Seems like you still confuse if that's the only thing you pick up from the whole paragraph :disappointed: 

    So you're claiming something is being said when and then when I point out that it wasn't mentioned you said that you're the one who's saying it. Instead of claiming that Tesla is only an "idea" where you then go to describe things that may or may not happen in the future as reasons why the company and their actual products aren't viable today, why not make reasonable statements instead of inventing crap that has barring on what Tesla is doing right now?
    Correction: an idea is not a claim in the first place. Please point the word "claim" from my post. Picking my words apart and choose your own conclusion does not make it true.

    I will say it again: Tesla is being over-idealist by people like Woz. 
    edited May 2017
  • Reply 67 of 86
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,155member
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    macxpress said:
    I'm actually not sure why people praise Tesla as much as they do...I mean yes, they're making fully electric cars with all of this technology but their quality is horrible! For some reason, it seems like people are oblivious to this. They think Tesla is this wonderful company who makes electric cars, not realizing that Tesla is making really bad quality cars.
    People love and cherish an idea, not so much of what is real. Sadly, that's the world we live in these days. Tesla is an idea: a futuristic high tech self driving car. People love that idea regardless of the crappy current real implementation. No doubt, giving it a few more years it will be better. That's why I prefer Apple's secrecy on their own smart car project.
    1) Tesla's cars are crap? Who makes a better EV? Who Who has better self-driving SW than Tesla?

    2) You're calling Tesla an idea and saying that you love Apple's secrecy. They have real products on the road. You think this is vaporware?

    You misunderstood my point.

    Obviously it's a real company with a real product. But where are the flying cars? Where are the promised 100% self driving cars? Where are the 5 minutes battery recharge speed car? These are what I called "ideas" that people love and expect from Tesla NOT the actual cars they are producing right now (tell me, what is the % of marketshare Tesla managed so far?). And these are what Woz expect from Tesla when he was talking about future. I don't think their cars are vapourware, my point is, people's opinion about them are over idealistic.
    I missed where In the article Woz said that Tesla cars will be flying.
    He didn't, I did - it's a figure of speech to illustrate my point. Seems like you still confuse if that's the only thing you pick up from the whole paragraph :disappointed: 

    So you're claiming something is being said when and then when I point out that it wasn't mentioned you said that you're the one who's saying it. Instead of claiming that Tesla is only an "idea" where you then go to describe things that may or may not happen in the future as reasons why the company and their actual products aren't viable today, why not make reasonable statements instead of inventing crap that has barring on what Tesla is doing right now?
    Correction: an idea is not a claim in the first place. Please point the word "claim" from my post. Picking my words apart and choose your own conclusion does not make it true.

    I will say it again: Tesla is being over-idealist by people like Woz. 
    Here's a complete sentence from you: "But where are the flying cars?"

    If you're asking about flying cars instead of looking at the reality of what they are doing now then you're the one that over-idealizing Tesla.
    edited May 2017
  • Reply 68 of 86
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 859member
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    macxpress said:
    I'm actually not sure why people praise Tesla as much as they do...I mean yes, they're making fully electric cars with all of this technology but their quality is horrible! For some reason, it seems like people are oblivious to this. They think Tesla is this wonderful company who makes electric cars, not realizing that Tesla is making really bad quality cars.
    People love and cherish an idea, not so much of what is real. Sadly, that's the world we live in these days. Tesla is an idea: a futuristic high tech self driving car. People love that idea regardless of the crappy current real implementation. No doubt, giving it a few more years it will be better. That's why I prefer Apple's secrecy on their own smart car project.
    1) Tesla's cars are crap? Who makes a better EV? Who Who has better self-driving SW than Tesla?

    2) You're calling Tesla an idea and saying that you love Apple's secrecy. They have real products on the road. You think this is vaporware?

    You misunderstood my point.

    Obviously it's a real company with a real product. But where are the flying cars? Where are the promised 100% self driving cars? Where are the 5 minutes battery recharge speed car? These are what I called "ideas" that people love and expect from Tesla NOT the actual cars they are producing right now (tell me, what is the % of marketshare Tesla managed so far?). And these are what Woz expect from Tesla when he was talking about future. I don't think their cars are vapourware, my point is, people's opinion about them are over idealistic.
    I missed where In the article Woz said that Tesla cars will be flying.
    He didn't, I did - it's a figure of speech to illustrate my point. Seems like you still confuse if that's the only thing you pick up from the whole paragraph :disappointed: 

    So you're claiming something is being said when and then when I point out that it wasn't mentioned you said that you're the one who's saying it. Instead of claiming that Tesla is only an "idea" where you then go to describe things that may or may not happen in the future as reasons why the company and their actual products aren't viable today, why not make reasonable statements instead of inventing crap that has barring on what Tesla is doing right now?
    Correction: an idea is not a claim in the first place. Please point the word "claim" from my post. Picking my words apart and choose your own conclusion does not make it true.

    I will say it again: Tesla is being over-idealist by people like Woz. 
    Here's a complete sentence from you: "But where are the flying cars?"

    If you're asking about flying cars instead of looking at the reality of what they are doing now then you're the one that over-idealizing Tesla.
    Because you only read one part of sentence?

    Here is the real complete sentence: "But where are the flying cars? These are what I called "ideas" that people love and expect from Tesla." Obviously by people I don't mean everybody. I hope I clear the misunderstanding now?
    edited May 2017
  • Reply 69 of 86
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,155member
    kevin kee said:
    Because you only read one part of sentence?

    Here is the real complete sentence: "But where are the flying cars? These are what I called "ideas" that people love and expect from Tesla." By people, I meant people like Woz. I hope I clear the misunderstanding now?
    Clearly I read your words and understood them as I took the time to ask where Woz has made such a statement about expecting a flying car idea from Tesla. You then said he didn't say it, that they were your words, and then you just admitted that Woz is expecting this idea from Tesla as you wrote, "By people, I meant people like Woz."

    If you really have a problem with farfetched ideas and unreasonable expectations than reading news about Apple rumours will be a nightmare. I doubt think there's another company on the planet where ridiculous expectations are so prominent, stupid, and constant.
    edited May 2017
  • Reply 70 of 86
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 859member
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    macxpress said:
    I'm actually not sure why people praise Tesla as much as they do...I mean yes, they're making fully electric cars with all of this technology but their quality is horrible! For some reason, it seems like people are oblivious to this. They think Tesla is this wonderful company who makes electric cars, not realizing that Tesla is making really bad quality cars.
    People love and cherish an idea, not so much of what is real. Sadly, that's the world we live in these days. Tesla is an idea: a futuristic high tech self driving car. People love that idea regardless of the crappy current real implementation. No doubt, giving it a few more years it will be better. That's why I prefer Apple's secrecy on their own smart car project.
    1) Tesla's cars are crap? Who makes a better EV? Who Who has better self-driving SW than Tesla?

    2) You're calling Tesla an idea and saying that you love Apple's secrecy. They have real products on the road. You think this is vaporware?

    You misunderstood my point.

    Obviously it's a real company with a real product. But where are the flying cars? Where are the promised 100% self driving cars? Where are the 5 minutes battery recharge speed car? These are what I called "ideas" that people love and expect from Tesla NOT the actual cars they are producing right now (tell me, what is the % of marketshare Tesla managed so far?). And these are what Woz expect from Tesla when he was talking about future. I don't think their cars are vapourware, my point is, people's opinion about them are over idealistic.
    I missed where In the article Woz said that Tesla cars will be flying.
    He didn't, I did - it's a figure of speech to illustrate my point. Seems like you still confuse if that's the only thing you pick up from the whole paragraph :disappointed: 

    So you're claiming something is being said when and then when I point out that it wasn't mentioned you said that you're the one who's saying it. Instead of claiming that Tesla is only an "idea" where you then go to describe things that may or may not happen in the future as reasons why the company and their actual products aren't viable today, why not make reasonable statements instead of inventing crap that has barring on what Tesla is doing right now?
    Correction: an idea is not a claim in the first place. Please point the word "claim" from my post. Picking my words apart and choose your own conclusion does not make it true.

    I will say it again: Tesla is being over-idealist by people like Woz. 
    Here's a complete sentence from you: "But where are the flying cars?"

    If you're asking about flying cars instead of looking at the reality of what they are doing now then you're the one that over-idealizing Tesla.
    Because you only read one part of sentence?

    Here is the real complete sentence: "But where are the flying cars? These are what I called "ideas" that people love and expect from Tesla." By people, I meant people like Woz. I hope I clear the misunderstanding now?
    Clearly I read your words and understood them as I took the time to ask where Woz has made such a statement about expecting a flying car idea from Tesla. You then said he didn't say it, that they were your words, and then you just admitted that Woz is expecting this idea from Tesla as you wrote, "By people, I meant people like Woz."
    My bad, I edited that out. Some people do think Tesla will invent flying car, it's may not be Woz although he do have some high expectation from Tesla because of 'high risk, young company" bias. Again, all of this high expectations is the result of over-idealising Tesla. Do they have the actual capabilities to realise such high expectation? Maybe yes, maybe not. But to dismiss Apple to have the same chance as Tesla to create the next successful tech milestone, although Tesla still yet to prove themselves, is the result of over-idealising Tesla.
    edited May 2017
  • Reply 71 of 86
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 859member
    Soli said:


    If you really have a problem with farfetched ideas and unreasonable expectations than reading news about Apple rumours will be a nightmare. I doubt think there's another company on the planet where ridiculous expectations are so prominent, stupid, and constant.
    I have no problem with farfetched ideas, I am not the one that trapped in the over-idealising such ideas. I have nothing personal against Mr Woz, although he gotta be careful to suggest anything publicly  because of his high profile status as Apple co-founder. So I disagree with him. I would, at the very least, say that Tesla has an equal chance to create the next successful tech milestone as any other big tech companies.
  • Reply 72 of 86
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,155member
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    If you really have a problem with farfetched ideas and unreasonable expectations than reading news about Apple rumours will be a nightmare. I doubt think there's another company on the planet where ridiculous expectations are so prominent, stupid, and constant.
    I have no problem with farfetched ideas, I am not the one that trapped in the over-idealising such ideas. I have nothing personal against Mr Woz, although he gotta be careful to suggest anything publicly  because of his high profile status as Apple co-founder. So I disagree with him. I would, at the very least, say that Tesla has an equal chance to create the next successful tech milestone as any other big tech companies.
    We both agree with disagreeing with Woz's statement.
  • Reply 73 of 86
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 859member
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Soli said:
    If you really have a problem with farfetched ideas and unreasonable expectations than reading news about Apple rumours will be a nightmare. I doubt think there's another company on the planet where ridiculous expectations are so prominent, stupid, and constant.
    I have no problem with farfetched ideas, I am not the one that trapped in the over-idealising such ideas. I have nothing personal against Mr Woz, although he gotta be careful to suggest anything publicly  because of his high profile status as Apple co-founder. So I disagree with him. I would, at the very least, say that Tesla has an equal chance to create the next successful tech milestone as any other big tech companies.
    We both agree with disagreeing with Woz's statement.
    Great :smile: 
  • Reply 74 of 86
    macarenamacarena Posts: 348member
    The pace of technological change has become so rapid, that anyone coming up with a new product today will find it quite difficult to make it a commercial success on the scale Apple pulled off. They will have very little head-start before others snap at the heels.

    Secondly, Apple has humongous advantages of scale, that give them edge in pretty much any business they choose to touch. Apple has advantages in areas like manufacturing processes, logistics, data center capacity, etc. that someone like a Tesla simply cannot replicate easily.

    Thirdly, the real big advances of the future will likely come about because of Apple's capacity to throw massive amounts of money at problems. Things like Cable TV industry, Banks, etc, have large entrenched players, and a new comer simply cannot hope to disrupt those massive businesses. But Apple has the capital and the credibility to actually attempt a disruption in those areas. Just because they haven't done so yet, doesn't mean anything.

    Fourthly, Apple has never bothered about being the first company to tackle a problem, They have taken on problems well after the pioneers, but provided better solutions that have then disrupted the market.

    Finally, the biggest threat to Apple has to be from Amazon, Google and to some extent Facebook - simply because of the fact that these companies have larger audiences than Apple locked into their ecosystems, and are also innovating rapidly. Tesla cannot hope to attain the level of eyeballs that these other companies have already got, even 20 years from today! Of these, Amazon and Facebook don't have the phenomenal financial muscle that is available with Apple and Google.

    Apple, at some point will need to extend its game, to cover areas where it will step on toes of Google and Facebook. And when they do that, it will not be easy for these companies to fight back. One needs to realize that there are certain natural weaknesses that Google and Facebook have - because of the inherent security and privacy concerns about these companies. Apple doesn't have even a fraction of those concerns - and if Apple offers a credible alternative, that by itself becomes a compelling reason for people to switch. It is not a question of if, but when, that happens. Even complex problems like Maps, and Cloud, Apple's persistence and ability to throw capital at the problem has made Apple's alternative as good as Google. They will surely do Search, Social Networking, etc at some point. I can also see iMessage becoming cross-platform at some point.
    edited May 2017 radarthekat
  • Reply 75 of 86
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 2,525moderator
    holyone said:
    I've posted my vision a number of times here, and why I think it requires a huge company like Apple to bring it to fruition.  If only Woz had real vision, or would stifle himself on topics he's given little thought to.

    Anyway, here it is again...

    The car of the future is already here.  It's called a Smartphone.  Think about it.  If you were to clear the slate, look at the modern world and ask yourself, how would I design a transportation system given existing and soon-to-come technologies, like autonomous driving, real-time availability scheduling. Route optimization, etc, no way you'd conclude there should be a car, or two, in every garage.  You'd create a technology/software infrastructure to allow individuals to call up the transportation they need (car, truck, van, etc) on-demand.  And it would show up wherever they are, or wherever they are going to be, when it's needed.  You'd be able to schedule transportation in advance, like the airport shuttles of yesteryear that you'd schedule a week in advance. Über pretty much killed that business, I expect.  

    Or schedule recurring transportation, such as to take the kids to soccer practice and back.  In this case the transportation technology system might suggest a shared van service, that knows the schedules for local after school sports practice and offers up and constructs pick-up and drop-off routes based upon participation; a regular route to gather up the kids and deliver them.  Accommodation for security will be considered when children are being transported without accompanying parents, such as real-time tracking and a constant open line of communication, both audio and video streaming from the vehicle to parent's smartphones. 

    The specific vehicle that arrives can be determined by number of passengers, whether you'll be transporting something large or just yourself, etc.  The notion of owning, maintaining, accommodating parking requirements of, insuring, etc, a personal vehicle, for many people, has already begun to feel like 'the old paridigm.'  

    To create this infrastructure, you need route optimization software, that incorporates the real-time whereabouts of all vehicles in a local fleet. You need scheduling software.  You need to deal with remaining charge/range of each vehicle out in service to know when a vehicle can accommodate an additional requested or scheduled route without running out of juice.  You need to accommodate stand-by, where the vehicle drops someone off at a location and is requested to stand-by for an indeterminate time while the person goes into a store or bank to run an errand.  In short, you need a very sophisticated set of interacting technologies to accommodate smooth operation of a transportation network that provides near immediate responsiveness to a population's constantly fluctuating needs.

    If I were Tim Cook, this is exactly the way I'd envision the future, and this is what I'd set out to create.  It's not so much about constructing vehicles yourself, but about getting sign-in from all vehicle manufacturers such that their vehicles can work within the envisioned transportation network.  And that means that people who do own vehicles could lend them into their local autonomous transportation fleet in order to earn money (this has already been suggested by Musk and makes sense for a maker of vehicles to accommodate, as it helps him sell more Teslas direct to consumers).  It means that new rental fleets will simply be staged in large metro areas, with one or more depots that the vehicles come back to for recharging, maintenance, cleaning, etc.  And that means that there's a path forward for the rental companies, because they already have staging areas for their existing fleets.  The big picture can be accommodated during a transition phase from the world we have today to a world where almost all transportation is shared and autonomous.  

    Extend this to trucking, inter-city bussing, etc, and the whole thing becomes a future that Apple could play a major role in developing.  Without ever producing, on their own, a single vehicle.

    Also key to this is that everything Apple needs to do to revolutionize transportation does not require Apple to do any work on autonomous driving, nor does Apple need to build a single vehicle model.  Nope, Apple will want to own the end user interaction used to summon and schedule transportation, and it'll want to own the route optimization algorithms and server side scheduling and dispatch.  And take a cut of every ride.  

    There will need to be some tech in each car to pick up the user interaction that began on a rider's smartphone or Watch, once the car arrives to pick up the rider.  The car will need a voice interface to interact with the rider.  The car will need to constantly ping its whereabouts to the dispatch and scheduling servers, along with its charge level, so that the dispatch system can determine its next pick up and determine when it needs to exit the active fleet and return to a nearby depot for recharging or maintenance.  The car will need to contain sensors, like internal cameras, to monitor for left-behind packages, spilled coffee, etc, and report appropriately to riders or to dispatch.  The car will need streaming audio/video capabilities to stream to parents when children are riding without adult accompaniment.  All of this can be designed as a set of interfaces that automakers can implement in order to be compatible with Apple's dispatch and routing servers, and the vehicles might also be required to utilize Apple's mapping infrastructure.  

    Once verified as able to serve a ride request, the car is handed details on the location of the rider, and the rider's destination, and it can then utilize its own autonomous driving capabilities to serve the request.  And all of this can integrate both driverless and human driven vehicles into the same service.  So as vehicles are developed that are licensed for autonomous operation, these can be added to an existing Uber-like fleet of human driven vehicles, both serving together to form a centrally requested and directed/dispatched swarm serving a metrolitan area.  Eventually, the human driven vehicles would all be replaced with autonomous vehicles, and the future will have arrived.  

    Though you raise great and wondrous points but this idea that people won't want to own cars in the futer is incomprehensible to me and is romanticizing the fun parts whilst ignoring the seriouse logistical problem that'll likely stop that notion in its tracks. Firstly there's this notion that autonomous cars will reduced traffic this is unlikely if you really think about what causes traffic, it's not that people are just terrible drivers and do stupid things on the road and creating congestion it's that every one leaves for work at the same time and return at the same time, if you work from nine to five you will need transportation every morning at about 08:00 to 08:30 depending on how far you live from where you work and againe at 18:00 and guess what so will 5 million other people who work from nine to five this means there will need to be five milion cars to drive all those people to work and bring them back and whilst those 5 million who are the highest capacity this sysystem is suposed to be at the most minimum able to satify are at work there will be millions of cars siting idly wating for peake demand to become needed again issentially changing noting. I just don't get it am I missing something ?  
    Adjusting work hours is easily done, and already well underway.  Also, not all people leaving work need to be met at their workplace by an individual car to shuttle them home or elsewhere.  Car pooling isn't a big thing today because individuals need to coordinate among themselves.  But an autonomous fleet of shuttles, that seat maybe 8 or 12, could automatically be dispatched to take riders to other vehicle stationing areas.  Wrap your head around this coolness... those stationing areas could be dynamically generated to match the specific destinations of those riding each day.  So you'd walk out of work and a shuttle might be just pulling up to take you and several other workers, a different group every day based upon when people happened to leave work out of your office.  You board the appropriate shuttle, as directed by your Apple Watch, and it chooses, automatically based upon who's aboard, where to most efficiently shuttle the group to one or more drop off points where it will have summoned individual cars to wait for its passengers.  Maybe six of you get off at a first staging area (your Apple Watch alerts you when it's your turn and directs you a few meters to you personal shuttle car for rest of your commute, and the rest remain aboard to continue on in car pool mode to a farther out drop off point.  This is the kind of thing technology could enable.  But it needs to be fairly centrally coordinated, to optimize and ensure minimum wait and transit times.  That's where a company with Apple's vision, resources and existing ecosystem could make a big difference.
  • Reply 76 of 86
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 2,525moderator
    holyone said:
    I've posted my vision a number of times here, and why I think it requires a huge company like Apple to bring it to fruition.  If only Woz had real vision, or would stifle himself on topics he's given little thought to.

    Anyway, here it is again...

    The car of the future is already here.  It's called a Smartphone.  Think about it.  If you were to clear the slate, look at the modern world and ask yourself, how would I design a transportation system given existing and soon-to-come technologies, like autonomous driving, real-time availability scheduling. Route optimization, etc, no way you'd conclude there should be a car, or two, in every garage.  You'd create a technology/software infrastructure to allow individuals to call up the transportation they need (car, truck, van, etc) on-demand.  And it would show up wherever they are, or wherever they are going to be, when it's needed.  You'd be able to schedule transportation in advance, like the airport shuttles of yesteryear that you'd schedule a week in advance. Über pretty much killed that business, I expect.  

    Or schedule recurring transportation, such as to take the kids to soccer practice and back.  In this case the transportation technology system might suggest a shared van service, that knows the schedules for local after school sports practice and offers up and constructs pick-up and drop-off routes based upon participation; a regular route to gather up the kids and deliver them.  Accommodation for security will be considered when children are being transported without accompanying parents, such as real-time tracking and a constant open line of communication, both audio and video streaming from the vehicle to parent's smartphones. 

    The specific vehicle that arrives can be determined by number of passengers, whether you'll be transporting something large or just yourself, etc.  The notion of owning, maintaining, accommodating parking requirements of, insuring, etc, a personal vehicle, for many people, has already begun to feel like 'the old paridigm.'  

    To create this infrastructure, you need route optimization software, that incorporates the real-time whereabouts of all vehicles in a local fleet. You need scheduling software.  You need to deal with remaining charge/range of each vehicle out in service to know when a vehicle can accommodate an additional requested or scheduled route without running out of juice.  You need to accommodate stand-by, where the vehicle drops someone off at a location and is requested to stand-by for an indeterminate time while the person goes into a store or bank to run an errand.  In short, you need a very sophisticated set of interacting technologies to accommodate smooth operation of a transportation network that provides near immediate responsiveness to a population's constantly fluctuating needs.

    If I were Tim Cook, this is exactly the way I'd envision the future, and this is what I'd set out to create.  It's not so much about constructing vehicles yourself, but about getting sign-in from all vehicle manufacturers such that their vehicles can work within the envisioned transportation network.  And that means that people who do own vehicles could lend them into their local autonomous transportation fleet in order to earn money (this has already been suggested by Musk and makes sense for a maker of vehicles to accommodate, as it helps him sell more Teslas direct to consumers).  It means that new rental fleets will simply be staged in large metro areas, with one or more depots that the vehicles come back to for recharging, maintenance, cleaning, etc.  And that means that there's a path forward for the rental companies, because they already have staging areas for their existing fleets.  The big picture can be accommodated during a transition phase from the world we have today to a world where almost all transportation is shared and autonomous.  

    Extend this to trucking, inter-city bussing, etc, and the whole thing becomes a future that Apple could play a major role in developing.  Without ever producing, on their own, a single vehicle.

    Also key to this is that everything Apple needs to do to revolutionize transportation does not require Apple to do any work on autonomous driving, nor does Apple need to build a single vehicle model.  Nope, Apple will want to own the end user interaction used to summon and schedule transportation, and it'll want to own the route optimization algorithms and server side scheduling and dispatch.  And take a cut of every ride.  

    There will need to be some tech in each car to pick up the user interaction that began on a rider's smartphone or Watch, once the car arrives to pick up the rider.  The car will need a voice interface to interact with the rider.  The car will need to constantly ping its whereabouts to the dispatch and scheduling servers, along with its charge level, so that the dispatch system can determine its next pick up and determine when it needs to exit the active fleet and return to a nearby depot for recharging or maintenance.  The car will need to contain sensors, like internal cameras, to monitor for left-behind packages, spilled coffee, etc, and report appropriately to riders or to dispatch.  The car will need streaming audio/video capabilities to stream to parents when children are riding without adult accompaniment.  All of this can be designed as a set of interfaces that automakers can implement in order to be compatible with Apple's dispatch and routing servers, and the vehicles might also be required to utilize Apple's mapping infrastructure.  

    Once verified as able to serve a ride request, the car is handed details on the location of the rider, and the rider's destination, and it can then utilize its own autonomous driving capabilities to serve the request.  And all of this can integrate both driverless and human driven vehicles into the same service.  So as vehicles are developed that are licensed for autonomous operation, these can be added to an existing Uber-like fleet of human driven vehicles, both serving together to form a centrally requested and directed/dispatched swarm serving a metrolitan area.  Eventually, the human driven vehicles would all be replaced with autonomous vehicles, and the future will have arrived.  

    Though you raise great and wondrous points but this idea that people won't want to own cars in the futer is incomprehensible to me and is romanticizing the fun parts whilst ignoring the seriouse logistical problem that'll likely stop that notion in its tracks. Firstly there's this notion that autonomous cars will reduced traffic this is unlikely if you really think about what causes traffic, it's not that people are just terrible drivers and do stupid things on the road and creating congestion it's that every one leaves for work at the same time and return at the same time, if you work from nine to five you will need transportation every morning at about 08:00 to 08:30 depending on how far you live from where you work and againe at 18:00 and guess what so will 5 million other people who work from nine to five this means there will need to be five milion cars to drive all those people to work and bring them back and whilst those 5 million who are the highest capacity this sysystem is suposed to be at the most minimum able to satify are at work there will be millions of cars siting idly wating for peake demand to become needed again issentially changing noting. I just don't get it am I missing something ?  
    Oh, and it's more a matter of autonomous cars reducing parking acreage in congested urban areas.  Acreage that could then be redeployed to better ends, like greenspace or productive business use.  Traffic might also be reduced through coordination among vehicles to prevent congestion by better and more fully utilizing all available streets, routing around accidents, construction, and other bottlenecks.  
    baconstang
  • Reply 77 of 86
    holyone said:
    I've posted my vision a number of times here, and why I think it requires a huge company like Apple to bring it to fruition.  If only Woz had real vision, or would stifle himself on topics he's given little thought to.

    Anyway, here it is again...

    The car of the future is already here.  It's called a Smartphone.  Think about it.  If you were to clear the slate, look at the modern world and ask yourself, how would I design a transportation system given existing and soon-to-come technologies, like autonomous driving, real-time availability scheduling. Route optimization, etc, no way you'd conclude there should be a car, or two, in every garage.  You'd create a technology/software infrastructure to allow individuals to call up the transportation they need (car, truck, van, etc) on-demand.  And it would show up wherever they are, or wherever they are going to be, when it's needed.  You'd be able to schedule transportation in advance, like the airport shuttles of yesteryear that you'd schedule a week in advance. Über pretty much killed that business, I expect.  

    Or schedule recurring transportation, such as to take the kids to soccer practice and back.  In this case the transportation technology system might suggest a shared van service, that knows the schedules for local after school sports practice and offers up and constructs pick-up and drop-off routes based upon participation; a regular route to gather up the kids and deliver them.  Accommodation for security will be considered when children are being transported without accompanying parents, such as real-time tracking and a constant open line of communication, both audio and video streaming from the vehicle to parent's smartphones. 

    The specific vehicle that arrives can be determined by number of passengers, whether you'll be transporting something large or just yourself, etc.  The notion of owning, maintaining, accommodating parking requirements of, insuring, etc, a personal vehicle, for many people, has already begun to feel like 'the old paridigm.'  

    To create this infrastructure, you need route optimization software, that incorporates the real-time whereabouts of all vehicles in a local fleet. You need scheduling software.  You need to deal with remaining charge/range of each vehicle out in service to know when a vehicle can accommodate an additional requested or scheduled route without running out of juice.  You need to accommodate stand-by, where the vehicle drops someone off at a location and is requested to stand-by for an indeterminate time while the person goes into a store or bank to run an errand.  In short, you need a very sophisticated set of interacting technologies to accommodate smooth operation of a transportation network that provides near immediate responsiveness to a population's constantly fluctuating needs.

    If I were Tim Cook, this is exactly the way I'd envision the future, and this is what I'd set out to create.  It's not so much about constructing vehicles yourself, but about getting sign-in from all vehicle manufacturers such that their vehicles can work within the envisioned transportation network.  And that means that people who do own vehicles could lend them into their local autonomous transportation fleet in order to earn money (this has already been suggested by Musk and makes sense for a maker of vehicles to accommodate, as it helps him sell more Teslas direct to consumers).  It means that new rental fleets will simply be staged in large metro areas, with one or more depots that the vehicles come back to for recharging, maintenance, cleaning, etc.  And that means that there's a path forward for the rental companies, because they already have staging areas for their existing fleets.  The big picture can be accommodated during a transition phase from the world we have today to a world where almost all transportation is shared and autonomous.  

    Extend this to trucking, inter-city bussing, etc, and the whole thing becomes a future that Apple could play a major role in developing.  Without ever producing, on their own, a single vehicle.

    Also key to this is that everything Apple needs to do to revolutionize transportation does not require Apple to do any work on autonomous driving, nor does Apple need to build a single vehicle model.  Nope, Apple will want to own the end user interaction used to summon and schedule transportation, and it'll want to own the route optimization algorithms and server side scheduling and dispatch.  And take a cut of every ride.  

    There will need to be some tech in each car to pick up the user interaction that began on a rider's smartphone or Watch, once the car arrives to pick up the rider.  The car will need a voice interface to interact with the rider.  The car will need to constantly ping its whereabouts to the dispatch and scheduling servers, along with its charge level, so that the dispatch system can determine its next pick up and determine when it needs to exit the active fleet and return to a nearby depot for recharging or maintenance.  The car will need to contain sensors, like internal cameras, to monitor for left-behind packages, spilled coffee, etc, and report appropriately to riders or to dispatch.  The car will need streaming audio/video capabilities to stream to parents when children are riding without adult accompaniment.  All of this can be designed as a set of interfaces that automakers can implement in order to be compatible with Apple's dispatch and routing servers, and the vehicles might also be required to utilize Apple's mapping infrastructure.  

    Once verified as able to serve a ride request, the car is handed details on the location of the rider, and the rider's destination, and it can then utilize its own autonomous driving capabilities to serve the request.  And all of this can integrate both driverless and human driven vehicles into the same service.  So as vehicles are developed that are licensed for autonomous operation, these can be added to an existing Uber-like fleet of human driven vehicles, both serving together to form a centrally requested and directed/dispatched swarm serving a metrolitan area.  Eventually, the human driven vehicles would all be replaced with autonomous vehicles, and the future will have arrived.  

    Though you raise great and wondrous points but this idea that people won't want to own cars in the futer is incomprehensible to me and is romanticizing the fun parts whilst ignoring the seriouse logistical problem that'll likely stop that notion in its tracks. Firstly there's this notion that autonomous cars will reduced traffic this is unlikely if you really think about what causes traffic, it's not that people are just terrible drivers and do stupid things on the road and creating congestion it's that every one leaves for work at the same time and return at the same time, if you work from nine to five you will need transportation every morning at about 08:00 to 08:30 depending on how far you live from where you work and againe at 18:00 and guess what so will 5 million other people who work from nine to five this means there will need to be five milion cars to drive all those people to work and bring them back and whilst those 5 million who are the highest capacity this sysystem is suposed to be at the most minimum able to satify are at work there will be millions of cars siting idly wating for peake demand to become needed again issentially changing noting. I just don't get it am I missing something ?  
    I'm worried about the same thing. There's a bottleneck down the road from me that causes a 10 minute bus ride to the subway to become 25 minutes some days. No amount of automation or connectedness will fix that. They can't widen the roads but there is more and more development out my way. Urban planning might help but I hold little hope for it. Autonomous cars might make things worse. I prefer reading a book on the bus than driving but if a car will pick me up at my house at a fair price, I might take that rather than the bus. One thing that might fix it is what Elon Musk has talked about - minibuses that have flexible routes so you get picked up and dropped off closer to  where you want to go - but again, that might get people out of traditional public transport and make the old routes even less used and therefore less frequent rather than getting people out of cars. Or his tunnels. Anyway, I work from how now though so traffic in the short term doesn't bother me much.
  • Reply 78 of 86
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 1,815member
    marty lk said:
    If Tesla can come up with breakthrough battery tech that allows electrons to flow as quickly as fluid and at the same volume, yeah, Tesla will be the next king of tech. The problem with electric vehicles right now isn't range, it's renewal. It takes way too long to recharge batteries. Less than 5 minutes to fill a tank of gas up. Over an hour to fully recharge a battery in a car. And here's another problem. Even if battery tech advances to 600 mile range with A/C and lights on, there's still this obstacle hindering them: run out of gas in a car and you can obtain a gas can full of fuel to get it going again. Run out of charge in an electric vehicle and you're stuck. Electric car makers need to also work on the electric equivalent of a 5 gallon gas can. [Just for information] I posted with two paragraphs, but the result shows one large paragraph. And this is a third paragraph. Maybe posting with an iPad isn't formatting correctly.
    Need some kind of Capacitor Battery to speed charging up.
  • Reply 79 of 86
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 1,873member
    I've posted my vision a number of times here, and why I think it requires a huge company like Apple to bring it to fruition.  If only Woz had real vision, or would stifle himself on topics he's given little thought to.

    Anyway, here it is again...

    The car of the future is already here.  It's called a Smartphone.  Think about it.  If you were to clear the slate, look at the modern world and ask yourself, how would I design a transportation system given existing and soon-to-come technologies, like autonomous driving, real-time availability scheduling. Route optimization, etc, no way you'd conclude there should be a car, or two, in every garage.  You'd create a technology/software infrastructure to allow individuals to call up the transportation they need (car, truck, van, etc) on-demand.  And it would show up wherever they are, or wherever they are going to be, when it's needed.  You'd be able to schedule transportation in advance, like the airport shuttles of yesteryear that you'd schedule a week in advance. Über pretty much killed that business, I expect.  

    Or schedule recurring transportation, such as to take the kids to soccer practice and back.  In this case the transportation technology system might suggest a shared van service, that knows the schedules for local after school sports practice and offers up and constructs pick-up and drop-off routes based upon participation; a regular route to gather up the kids and deliver them.  Accommodation for security will be considered when children are being transported without accompanying parents, such as real-time tracking and a constant open line of communication, both audio and video streaming from the vehicle to parent's smartphones. 

    The specific vehicle that arrives can be determined by number of passengers, whether you'll be transporting something large or just yourself, etc.  The notion of owning, maintaining, accommodating parking requirements of, insuring, etc, a personal vehicle, for many people, has already begun to feel like 'the old paridigm.'  

    To create this infrastructure, you need route optimization software, that incorporates the real-time whereabouts of all vehicles in a local fleet. You need scheduling software.  You need to deal with remaining charge/range of each vehicle out in service to know when a vehicle can accommodate an additional requested or scheduled route without running out of juice.  You need to accommodate stand-by, where the vehicle drops someone off at a location and is requested to stand-by for an indeterminate time while the person goes into a store or bank to run an errand.  In short, you need a very sophisticated set of interacting technologies to accommodate smooth operation of a transportation network that provides near immediate responsiveness to a population's constantly fluctuating needs.

    If I were Tim Cook, this is exactly the way I'd envision the future, and this is what I'd set out to create.  It's not so much about constructing vehicles yourself, but about getting sign-in from all vehicle manufacturers such that their vehicles can work within the envisioned transportation network.  And that means that people who do own vehicles could lend them into their local autonomous transportation fleet in order to earn money (this has already been suggested by Musk and makes sense for a maker of vehicles to accommodate, as it helps him sell more Teslas direct to consumers).  It means that new rental fleets will simply be staged in large metro areas, with one or more depots that the vehicles come back to for recharging, maintenance, cleaning, etc.  And that means that there's a path forward for the rental companies, because they already have staging areas for their existing fleets.  The big picture can be accommodated during a transition phase from the world we have today to a world where almost all transportation is shared and autonomous.  

    Extend this to trucking, inter-city bussing, etc, and the whole thing becomes a future that Apple could play a major role in developing.  Without ever producing, on their own, a single vehicle.

    Also key to this is that everything Apple needs to do to revolutionize transportation does not require Apple to do any work on autonomous driving, nor does Apple need to build a single vehicle model.  Nope, Apple will want to own the end user interaction used to summon and schedule transportation, and it'll want to own the route optimization algorithms and server side scheduling and dispatch.  And take a cut of every ride.  

    There will need to be some tech in each car to pick up the user interaction that began on a rider's smartphone or Watch, once the car arrives to pick up the rider.  The car will need a voice interface to interact with the rider.  The car will need to constantly ping its whereabouts to the dispatch and scheduling servers, along with its charge level, so that the dispatch system can determine its next pick up and determine when it needs to exit the active fleet and return to a nearby depot for recharging or maintenance.  The car will need to contain sensors, like internal cameras, to monitor for left-behind packages, spilled coffee, etc, and report appropriately to riders or to dispatch.  The car will need streaming audio/video capabilities to stream to parents when children are riding without adult accompaniment.  All of this can be designed as a set of interfaces that automakers can implement in order to be compatible with Apple's dispatch and routing servers, and the vehicles might also be required to utilize Apple's mapping infrastructure.  

    Once verified as able to serve a ride request, the car is handed details on the location of the rider, and the rider's destination, and it can then utilize its own autonomous driving capabilities to serve the request.  And all of this can integrate both driverless and human driven vehicles into the same service.  So as vehicles are developed that are licensed for autonomous operation, these can be added to an existing Uber-like fleet of human driven vehicles, both serving together to form a centrally requested and directed/dispatched swarm serving a metrolitan area.  Eventually, the human driven vehicles would all be replaced with autonomous vehicles, and the future will have arrived.  

    In other words, transportation as a service. I agree. In 20 years, people will own cars at about the same rate that they own horses -- not for transportation, but purely for entertainment. 

    Apple will probably make as much off of transportation as a service as they do off of the app store. 
  • Reply 80 of 86
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,026member
    k2kw said:
    gprovida said:
    Woz seems to be seduced by the buzz, but the Musk initiatives remain very problematic from a business perspective.  Yes exciting, but still problematic. 
    The Solar project is being driven poorly as one example. The first year Apple sales of electric cars will dwarf Tesla, and Musk knows it.
    I tend to think that Apple should next focus on a camera with either APS-C or Full Frame sensor that is fully automatic with iOS based operating system.
    It would fit in great with the Apple Watch when it gains Cell capability in a few years.
    Traditional cameras are slowly withering as a consumer product, too niche a future to attract Apple's interest.  
    edited May 2017
Sign In or Register to comment.