Self-driving machine learning at core of Apple's car ambitions, declares Tim Cook in inter...

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 46
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,757member
    gatorguy said:
    I think Tim just confirmed that Apple WILL be building their own "people's car". They have committed thousands of people and untold amounts of money to this and they'll want to own the whole experience. It may end up being called GoPod instead of Apple Car, but I think they may make versions for rent, a la a self-driving taxi and high-end versions to buy, but they'll all be capable of completely autonomous driving.
    We have no idea if they've committed thousands of people do we? Heck, if you're depending on rumor wasn't there one where Apple was re-thinking the car thing and considering a different direction from actually building their own car? Wasn't there another that Apple was laying off engineers working on a supposed Apple car because it just wasn't panning out? Far too many rumors to get any idea on what the status is today. 
    Well, it wouldn't make sense for Apple to attempt to license their "artificial intelligence for cars" to manufacturers because nearly every manufacturer is already associated with their own R&D programs to have the same sort of thing implemented within 5-7 years. Apple will make their own end-to-end experience.
    Would it make sense to partner with an existing car manufacturer instead of trying to work from scratch? That seems to be what at least one other major company working in the space is doing. 
    edited June 2017
  • Reply 22 of 46
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    I think Tim just confirmed that Apple WILL be building their own "people's car". They have committed thousands of people and untold amounts of money to this and they'll want to own the whole experience. It may end up being called GoPod instead of Apple Car, but I think they may make versions for rent, a la a self-driving taxi and high-end versions to buy, but they'll all be capable of completely autonomous driving.
    We have no idea if they've committed thousands of people do we? Heck, if you're depending on rumor wasn't there one where Apple was re-thinking the car thing and considering a different direction from actually building their own car? Wasn't there another that Apple was laying off engineers working on a supposed Apple car because it just wasn't panning out? Far too many rumors to get any idea on what the status is today. 
    Well, it wouldn't make sense for Apple to attempt to license their "artificial intelligence for cars" to manufacturers because nearly every manufacturer is already associated with their own R&D programs to have the same sort of thing implemented within 5-7 years. Apple will make their own end-to-end experience.
    Would it make sense to partner with an existing car manufacturer instead of trying to work from scratch? 
    We don't know that they're not doing this already. And if they've partnered with a non-Chinese partner, I think they'd be able to keep development details under wraps for a lot longer.
    edited June 2017 palomine
  • Reply 23 of 46
    irelandireland Posts: 17,794member
    gatorguy said:
    I think Tim just confirmed that Apple WILL be building their own "people's car". They have committed thousands of people and untold amounts of money to this and they'll want to own the whole experience. It may end up being called GoPod instead of Apple Car, but I think they may make versions for rent, a la a self-driving taxi and high-end versions to buy, but they'll all be capable of completely autonomous driving.
    We have no idea if they've committed thousands of people do we? Heck, if you're depending on rumor wasn't there one where Apple was re-thinking the car thing and considering a different direction from actually building their own car? Wasn't there another that Apple was laying off engineers working on a supposed Apple car because it just wasn't panning out? Far too many rumors to get any idea on what the status is today. 
    Well, it wouldn't make sense for Apple to attempt to license their "artificial intelligence for cars" to manufacturers because nearly every manufacturer is already associated with their own R&D programs to have the same sort of thing implemented within 5-7 years. Apple will make their own end-to-end experience.
    Very short sighted that other followers of Apple don’t see this.
    fastasleepSpamSandwich
  • Reply 24 of 46
    farmboyfarmboy Posts: 152member
    I'm still disappointed that they're not building a car, my naiveté and enthusiasm overriding my skepticism. So now, I don't see what Apple is going to bring to the party, being late and there being dozens of serious competitors with head starts in autonomous guidance. I know Apple has pulled off come-from-behind victories before, but I can't imagine them doing something in AI so completely different and so advanced that car makers will abandon their own efforts or those of the early birds and hand a big win (and check) to Apple.

    They didn't even hit a home run with Car Play--and that's an easy one.  I'm sure it's my own failure of imagination or business acumen, but I don't see the path forward here.

    Or...are they really building a car and this is just to throw us off the scent? Nah.
  • Reply 25 of 46
    irelandireland Posts: 17,794member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    I think Tim just confirmed that Apple WILL be building their own "people's car". They have committed thousands of people and untold amounts of money to this and they'll want to own the whole experience. It may end up being called GoPod instead of Apple Car, but I think they may make versions for rent, a la a self-driving taxi and high-end versions to buy, but they'll all be capable of completely autonomous driving.
    We have no idea if they've committed thousands of people do we? Heck, if you're depending on rumor wasn't there one where Apple was re-thinking the car thing and considering a different direction from actually building their own car? Wasn't there another that Apple was laying off engineers working on a supposed Apple car because it just wasn't panning out? Far too many rumors to get any idea on what the status is today. 
    Well, it wouldn't make sense for Apple to attempt to license their "artificial intelligence for cars" to manufacturers because nearly every manufacturer is already associated with their own R&D programs to have the same sort of thing implemented within 5-7 years. Apple will make their own end-to-end experience.
    Would it make sense to partner with an existing car manufacturer instead of trying to work from scratch? 
    We don't know that they're not doing this already. And if they've partnered with a non-Chinese partner, I think they'd be able to keep development details under wraps for a lot longer.
    I suspect they partner with an existing car manufacturer, but the maker plays purely a contract manufacturer role. Mind you, these future cars will be so different who knows.
    edited June 2017 SpamSandwich
  • Reply 26 of 46
    irelandireland Posts: 17,794member
    farmboy said:
    I'm still disappointed that they're not building a car
    I’d bet they are.
    edited June 2017 SpamSandwich
  • Reply 27 of 46
    farmboyfarmboy Posts: 152member
    ireland said:
    farmboy said:
    I'm still disappointed that they're not building a car
    I’d bet they are.
    From your lips to Steve's ears. Deus meus, ex toto corde poenitet me ...
  • Reply 28 of 46
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,035member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    I think Tim just confirmed that Apple WILL be building their own "people's car". They have committed thousands of people and untold amounts of money to this and they'll want to own the whole experience. It may end up being called GoPod instead of Apple Car, but I think they may make versions for rent, a la a self-driving taxi and high-end versions to buy, but they'll all be capable of completely autonomous driving.
    We have no idea if they've committed thousands of people do we? Heck, if you're depending on rumor wasn't there one where Apple was re-thinking the car thing and considering a different direction from actually building their own car? Wasn't there another that Apple was laying off engineers working on a supposed Apple car because it just wasn't panning out? Far too many rumors to get any idea on what the status is today. 
    Well, it wouldn't make sense for Apple to attempt to license their "artificial intelligence for cars" to manufacturers because nearly every manufacturer is already associated with their own R&D programs to have the same sort of thing implemented within 5-7 years. Apple will make their own end-to-end experience.
    Would it make sense to partner with an existing car manufacturer instead of trying to work from scratch? That seems to be what at least one other major company working in the space is doing. 
    I'd say that all avenues make sense with the known variables. Apple clearly has to choose a path (or paths), but from out vantage point I can make arguments for pretty much every statement I've read on this forum about Apple will do.
  • Reply 29 of 46
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,757member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    I think Tim just confirmed that Apple WILL be building their own "people's car". They have committed thousands of people and untold amounts of money to this and they'll want to own the whole experience. It may end up being called GoPod instead of Apple Car, but I think they may make versions for rent, a la a self-driving taxi and high-end versions to buy, but they'll all be capable of completely autonomous driving.
    We have no idea if they've committed thousands of people do we? Heck, if you're depending on rumor wasn't there one where Apple was re-thinking the car thing and considering a different direction from actually building their own car? Wasn't there another that Apple was laying off engineers working on a supposed Apple car because it just wasn't panning out? Far too many rumors to get any idea on what the status is today. 
    Well, it wouldn't make sense for Apple to attempt to license their "artificial intelligence for cars" to manufacturers because nearly every manufacturer is already associated with their own R&D programs to have the same sort of thing implemented within 5-7 years. Apple will make their own end-to-end experience.
    Would it make sense to partner with an existing car manufacturer instead of trying to work from scratch? 
    We don't know that they're not doing this already. And if they've partnered with a non-Chinese partner, I think they'd be able to keep development details under wraps for a lot longer.
    Spot on sir.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 30 of 46
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,541member
    farmboy said:
    I'm still disappointed that they're not building a car, my naiveté and enthusiasm overriding my skepticism. So now, I don't see what Apple is going to bring to the party, being late and there being dozens of serious competitors with head starts in autonomous guidance. I know Apple has pulled off come-from-behind victories before, but I can't imagine them doing something in AI so completely different and so advanced that car makers will abandon their own efforts or those of the early birds and hand a big win (and check) to Apple.

    They didn't even hit a home run with Car Play--and that's an easy one.  I'm sure it's my own failure of imagination or business acumen, but I don't see the path forward here.

    Or...are they really building a car and this is just to throw us off the scent? Nah.
    I wouldn't take forum speculation as fact.  No one that "knows" is talking about what Apple's plans really are.  My "bet" (if only can have one) is that Apple plans on making an Apple branded car - whether by themselves or in a partnership.  This doesn't mean they can't sell such a car (or variant) to a ride sharing service, but I do not believe Apple plans to build its own ride-sharing service.

    CarPlay is the best example of why selling the a software platform or specific autonomous functionality is not the path they would take.  The final product and user experience are beholden to another.

    Apple has indeed been "late to the party" with just about every product they have launched in the last 20 years.  It isn't just a few.  

    I believe the "hype" around truly autonomous capabilities is off by many years.  If you read the tech media headlines, you would believe that no one will be buying cars in 5 years and the world will shift overnight to transportation as a service (all electric of course).  That isn't going to happen.  Getting autonomous systems to be 99.999% reliable in a very broad set of geographies, traffic, and weather conditions is going to take more than a couple of years.  Many people (the broader American public) are nervous about self-driving cards.  Many will prefer for years to want to drive their own.  Ride-hailing services are great for eating into, and expanding, the taxi market, but that is a long way from replacing ownership if cars.  Outside of the dense metro cores, ownership of cars will continue for decades.  Where will all of the electricity come from.   We could go on for hours.
    tmay
  • Reply 31 of 46
    The “Apple Car” would be FAR too expensive...
    especially to be replaced every 1-3 years.

    Ride sharing IS the future, people. That is undeniable.
    Most of us buy a car, make payments, hold full-coverage insurance, purchase petrol, pay for new tires, oil changes & other maintenance, etc.
    Yet, these cars are driven perhaps 1 hr/day; for the other 23 hrs, they are sitting parked in our driveway, at work, in a store parking lot, etc.

    WHAT A WASTE!!!!!

    What if that ENTIRE time, that car was off helping other people get where they needed to go?? And you didn’t need to pay insurance, gas, or maintenance.... and you didn’t care if Apple would hypothetically charge $40k for one, or $140k for one- because only an idiot would buy a car, when it is SO much simpler, cheaper, & more convenient to simply have the service.

    Running a service like this would allow Apple to EASILY make an roi off an Apple Car, without having to sell a single one!
  • Reply 32 of 46
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,094member
    blastdoor said:
    wigby said:
    blastdoor said:
    I called it a long time ago. It's transportation as a service, delivered by your iPhone. Nobody will own an Apple car. 
    Except for the people that buy one.

    Autonomous transportation services will be a commodity in five years time. Every single company and their mothers are working on it now so why would Apple get into that only? It's no different than the smart phone market. Everyone makes their own phone but how many companies make both the hardware and the software?

    Apple will never be content (nor make the margins they are used to) in just making software for any vertical.
    On some level I have to respect the willingness to double down on a bad prediction. 

    I think wigby misunderstood your prediction, so let me see if I got it right.  You're predicting that Apple will MAKE Apple Cars but won't SELL them.  The product will be transportation, not cars.  Personally, I think that that's unlikely, but I like it better than the idea that Apple will just sell software to car makers.  That seems like a losing proposition and unlike anything Apple has done before.  I agree with Soli on this one: if there is a play here it's Apple making the car itself.
    Yeah, that's exactly what I had predicted previously. The product will be transportation, not cars. 

    Previously I had believed Apple would make the car (or rather, the car would be designed by Apple in California, and made in various places by whomever), and I still hope that they do. But I can see how this will be difficult to figure out and Apple might end up with a business model here that looks pretty different from what they've done before. 

    Some Apple fans become pretty rigid and narrow in their view of what Apple can do or will do. Fortunately Apple does not suffer from that ailment. Apple has actually shown a lot of flexibility over the years and a willingness to try new things. One big example is iTunes for Windows. Another big example is the business model innovation with the iPhone -- Apple started off trying to sell the iPhone at a full retail price, but quickly switched to carrier contracts and, later, long term payment plans. In many ways, most people more or less lease, rather than straight up buy, an iPhone. 

    One thing to keep in mind is that even if Apple never builds or even designs a car, that doesn't mean that they will "just sell software to car makers". An autonomous driving system is an entire computer -- silicon, sensors, and software. Apple has great software and a great SOC team. I think Apple's comparative advantage in autonomous driving systems (aka car computers) could be the integration of the software and silicon. Right now you've got Nvidia repackaging their GPUs for self-driving car systems, relying on others to provide the software. That's kind of a hack. My guess is that Apple ends up making an autonomous driving system in which the software and silicon are more intimately linked than anything we've ever seen before, and that there will further be a pretty strong link between individual driving computers and Apple's larger ecosystem. What we think of as the car is really just a case for this computer that Apple will make. Does it matter if Apple makes the case? Probably not too much. 




    randominternetperson
  • Reply 33 of 46
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    There's another angle to this story which will doubtlessly come into play once autonomous vehicles are coming into the market with regularity (possibly as early as 1-2 years from now), and it's the political angle. 

    I've no doubt that Congress will start to demand that these new cars must be able to communicate with each other, to help create safer "smart highways" and so the onboard controlling software will need to have a Federally mandated minimum of features and sensor connections in order to be given an "autonomous vehicle" stamp of approval. 

    Once that happens, all that will matter for the passengers will be the quality of their experience with the vehicle itself and the added "services" provided by the software to make their driving experiences more pleasant or productive. Apple owning the entire top-to-bottom experience will ensure that passengers have access to entertainment and productivity or if they want to sleep instead, a smooth, soundproof, luxurious ride.
  • Reply 34 of 46
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,146member
    There's another angle to this story which will doubtlessly come into play once autonomous vehicles are coming into the market with regularity (possibly as early as 1-2 years from now), and it's the political angle. 

    I've no doubt that Congress will start to demand that these new cars must be able to communicate with each other, to help create safer "smart highways" and so the onboard controlling software will need to have a Federally mandated minimum of features and sensor connections in order to be given an "autonomous vehicle" stamp of approval. 

    Once that happens, all that will matter for the passengers will be the quality of their experience with the vehicle itself and the added "services" provided by the software to make their driving experiences more pleasant or productive. Apple owning the entire top-to-bottom experience will ensure that passengers have access to entertainment and productivity or if they want to sleep instead, a smooth, soundproof, luxurious ride.
    Think a packet network hybridized with a mesh network of identifiable vehicles. At the least, a "classic" non autonomous vehicle would need to communicate to the mesh network the equivalent of a graded value from skull and crossbones to World Rally Car to cover the occupant's skill set combined with the vehicle's capabilities.
  • Reply 35 of 46
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    tmay said:
    There's another angle to this story which will doubtlessly come into play once autonomous vehicles are coming into the market with regularity (possibly as early as 1-2 years from now), and it's the political angle. 

    I've no doubt that Congress will start to demand that these new cars must be able to communicate with each other, to help create safer "smart highways" and so the onboard controlling software will need to have a Federally mandated minimum of features and sensor connections in order to be given an "autonomous vehicle" stamp of approval. 

    Once that happens, all that will matter for the passengers will be the quality of their experience with the vehicle itself and the added "services" provided by the software to make their driving experiences more pleasant or productive. Apple owning the entire top-to-bottom experience will ensure that passengers have access to entertainment and productivity or if they want to sleep instead, a smooth, soundproof, luxurious ride.
    Think a packet network hybridized with a mesh network of identifiable vehicles. At the least, a "classic" non autonomous vehicle would need to communicate to the mesh network the equivalent of a graded value from skull and crossbones to World Rally Car to cover the occupant's skill set combined with the vehicle's capabilities.
    I think it'll only take 1-2 years once autonomous vehicles are on the road until lawmakers notice a significant drop in collisions and subsequently insurance companies will skyrocket the rates of car insurance on all cars which do not have these safety features. It may eventually become completely cost prohibitive for people to travel the roads without an autonomous system. I suspect motorcyclists may also become subject to some degree of automation.
    edited June 2017
  • Reply 36 of 46
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,146member
    tmay said:
    There's another angle to this story which will doubtlessly come into play once autonomous vehicles are coming into the market with regularity (possibly as early as 1-2 years from now), and it's the political angle. 

    I've no doubt that Congress will start to demand that these new cars must be able to communicate with each other, to help create safer "smart highways" and so the onboard controlling software will need to have a Federally mandated minimum of features and sensor connections in order to be given an "autonomous vehicle" stamp of approval. 

    Once that happens, all that will matter for the passengers will be the quality of their experience with the vehicle itself and the added "services" provided by the software to make their driving experiences more pleasant or productive. Apple owning the entire top-to-bottom experience will ensure that passengers have access to entertainment and productivity or if they want to sleep instead, a smooth, soundproof, luxurious ride.
    Think a packet network hybridized with a mesh network of identifiable vehicles. At the least, a "classic" non autonomous vehicle would need to communicate to the mesh network the equivalent of a graded value from skull and crossbones to World Rally Car to cover the occupant's skill set combined with the vehicle's capabilities.
    I think it'll only take 1-2 years once autonomous vehicles are on the road until lawmakers notice a significant drop in collisions and subsequently insurance companies will skyrocket the rates of car insurance on all cars which do not have these safety features. It may eventually become completely cost prohibitive for people to travel the roads without an autonomous system. I suspect motorcyclists may also become subject to some degree of automation.
    Not a chance that transition will happen in 1-2 years.

    The transition will require the smart and autonomous vehicles to identify and avoid, for the most part, legacy vehicles. I think that there will, at some point, a mandatory requirement for a transponder in a legacy vehicle, After that, long after that, there may be a point in time when legacy vehicles will be banned entirely if they are not retrofitted with autonomous capability.

    As for insurance, I expect that rates will be adjusted, though in fact, accidents should decrease given that remaining drivers will need to be more highly qualified to drive legacy vehicles. Expect a three strikes, you're out, program for drivers at fault in accidents.

    Currently, 253 million vehicles are on U.S. roads, and the average age is around 11.4 years. Tesla is barely at 100,000 units a year, and none of those are fully autonomous today.
    edited June 2017
  • Reply 37 of 46
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    There's another angle to this story which will doubtlessly come into play once autonomous vehicles are coming into the market with regularity (possibly as early as 1-2 years from now), and it's the political angle. 

    I've no doubt that Congress will start to demand that these new cars must be able to communicate with each other, to help create safer "smart highways" and so the onboard controlling software will need to have a Federally mandated minimum of features and sensor connections in order to be given an "autonomous vehicle" stamp of approval. 

    Once that happens, all that will matter for the passengers will be the quality of their experience with the vehicle itself and the added "services" provided by the software to make their driving experiences more pleasant or productive. Apple owning the entire top-to-bottom experience will ensure that passengers have access to entertainment and productivity or if they want to sleep instead, a smooth, soundproof, luxurious ride.
    Think a packet network hybridized with a mesh network of identifiable vehicles. At the least, a "classic" non autonomous vehicle would need to communicate to the mesh network the equivalent of a graded value from skull and crossbones to World Rally Car to cover the occupant's skill set combined with the vehicle's capabilities.
    I think it'll only take 1-2 years once autonomous vehicles are on the road until lawmakers notice a significant drop in collisions and subsequently insurance companies will skyrocket the rates of car insurance on all cars which do not have these safety features. It may eventually become completely cost prohibitive for people to travel the roads without an autonomous system. I suspect motorcyclists may also become subject to some degree of automation.
    Not a chance that transition will happen in 1-2 years.

    The transition will require the smart and autonomous vehicles to identify and avoid, for the most part, legacy vehicles. I think that there will, at some point, a mandatory requirement for a transponder in a legacy vehicle, After that, long after that, there may be a point in time when legacy vehicles will be banned entirely if they are not retrofitted with autonomous capability.

    As for insurance, I expect that rates will be adjusted, though in fact, accidents should decrease given that remaining drivers will need to be more highly qualified to drive legacy vehicles. Expect a three strikes, you're out, program for drivers at fault in accidents.

    Currently, 253 million vehicles are on U.S. roads, and the average age is around 11.4 years. Tesla is barely at 100,000 units a year, and none of those are fully autonomous today.
    One to two years once autonomous vehicles are on the road in numbers contributing to statistics proving significant reductions in the rate of accidents. Because I think it'll be immediately noticeable.
    edited June 2017
  • Reply 38 of 46
    The “Apple Car” would be FAR too expensive...
    especially to be replaced every 1-3 years.

    Ride sharing IS the future, people. That is undeniable.
    Most of us buy a car, make payments, hold full-coverage insurance, purchase petrol, pay for new tires, oil changes & other maintenance, etc.
    Yet, these cars are driven perhaps 1 hr/day; for the other 23 hrs, they are sitting parked in our driveway, at work, in a store parking lot, etc.

    WHAT A WASTE!!!!!

    What if that ENTIRE time, that car was off helping other people get where they needed to go?? And you didn’t need to pay insurance, gas, or maintenance.... and you didn’t care if Apple would hypothetically charge $40k for one, or $140k for one- because only an idiot would buy a car, when it is SO much simpler, cheaper, & more convenient to simply have the service.

    Running a service like this would allow Apple to EASILY make an roi off an Apple Car, without having to sell a single one!
    You assume that the lifespan of a car is measured in hours or years, when in fact it is measured in miles.  A car that drives 100,000 miles over 20 years is no less efficient than a car that is worn out after 100,000 miles in 2 years.
  • Reply 39 of 46

    There's another angle to this story which will doubtlessly come into play once autonomous vehicles are coming into the market with regularity (possibly as early as 1-2 years from now), and it's the political angle. 

    I've no doubt that Congress will start to demand that these new cars must be able to communicate with each other, to help create safer "smart highways" and so the onboard controlling software will need to have a Federally mandated minimum of features and sensor connections in order to be given an "autonomous vehicle" stamp of approval. 

    Once that happens, all that will matter for the passengers will be the quality of their experience with the vehicle itself and the added "services" provided by the software to make their driving experiences more pleasant or productive. Apple owning the entire top-to-bottom experience will ensure that passengers have access to entertainment and productivity or if they want to sleep instead, a smooth, soundproof, luxurious ride.
    Personally I have doubts about any prediction of what Congress will do on any topic.  
  • Reply 40 of 46
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    He dropped enough hints. It might be an A.I.-powered electric-car ride hailing service that you can ask Siri to order, and you pay for it using Apple Pay  ;)
    Car nothing. It's a self-flying drone taxi service.


Sign In or Register to comment.