My opinion: Tesla is (or at least could be) a great company that could change the world in ways not dissimilar to Apple -- and even on a larger scale, big-picture-wise -- but Musk is starting to believe his own hype, and turn into a Trumpian self-deluded figure. I sincerely hope he snaps back from it, but at the moment I'm sure he is behaving privately a lot like Jobs was at his worst, and I'm sure what we're seeing right now is the result of an internal morale problem.
This isn't a zero-sum game, and for Apple to win Tesla does not have to lose. But I sincerely hope that Apple makes no moves to partner with or invest in Tesla, because the place seems to be a bit of a train wreck right now. Let it sort out its own issues.
Tesla needs their equivalent of Lee Iacocca. Musk should be “fired”/relieved of duty and replaced with a competent manager capable of organizing and delegating responsibility at the place, without attempting to reinvent their cars or processes every week. Musk is distracted to the point of near insanity.
My opinion: Tesla is (or at least could be) a great company that could change the world in ways not dissimilar to Apple -- and even on a larger scale, big-picture-wise -- but Musk is starting to believe his own hype, and turn into a Trumpian self-deluded figure. I sincerely hope he snaps back from it, but at the moment I'm sure he is behaving privately a lot like Jobs was at his worst, and I'm sure what we're seeing right now is the result of an internal morale problem.
This isn't a zero-sum game, and for Apple to win Tesla does not have to lose. But I sincerely hope that Apple makes no moves to partner with or invest in Tesla, because the place seems to be a bit of a train wreck right now. Let it sort out its own issues.
Tesla needs their equivalent of Lee Iacocca. Musk should be “fired”/relieved of duty and replaced with a competent manager capable of organizing and delegating responsibility at the place, without attempting to reinvent their cars or processes every week. Musk is distracted to the point of near insanity.
Given without Musk there would be no Tesla and remember no Space-X, so IMHO that's a bit harsh. He probably does need some very capable help at the top for sure.
My opinion: Tesla is (or at least could be) a great company that could change the world in ways not dissimilar to Apple -- and even on a larger scale, big-picture-wise -- but Musk is starting to believe his own hype, and turn into a Trumpian self-deluded figure. I sincerely hope he snaps back from it, but at the moment I'm sure he is behaving privately a lot like Jobs was at his worst, and I'm sure what we're seeing right now is the result of an internal morale problem.
This isn't a zero-sum game, and for Apple to win Tesla does not have to lose. But I sincerely hope that Apple makes no moves to partner with or invest in Tesla, because the place seems to be a bit of a train wreck right now. Let it sort out its own issues.
Tesla needs their equivalent of Lee Iacocca. Musk should be “fired”/relieved of duty and replaced with a competent manager capable of organizing and delegating responsibility at the place, without attempting to reinvent their cars or processes every week. Musk is distracted to the point of near insanity.
Given without Musk there would be no Tesla and remember no Space-X, so IMHO that's a bit harsh. He probably does need some very capable help at the top for sure.
He could be fired and replaced as CEO and still be the majority shareholder. His inability to turn a profit at any of his ventures is an existential problem which must be solved. I don’t think he’ll ever solve it.
My opinion: Tesla is (or at least could be) a great company that could change the world in ways not dissimilar to Apple -- and even on a larger scale, big-picture-wise -- but Musk is starting to believe his own hype, and turn into a Trumpian self-deluded figure. I sincerely hope he snaps back from it, but at the moment I'm sure he is behaving privately a lot like Jobs was at his worst, and I'm sure what we're seeing right now is the result of an internal morale problem.
This isn't a zero-sum game, and for Apple to win Tesla does not have to lose. But I sincerely hope that Apple makes no moves to partner with or invest in Tesla, because the place seems to be a bit of a train wreck right now. Let it sort out its own issues.
I don't think Tesla is nearly as great as many people think. Working in the automotive industry I don't see a single bit of technology at Tesla that every other major automaker doesn't already have access too.
GM (the company stereotyped to be run by dumb ole 'muricans) developed a superior self-driving system and launched it out-of-the-blue (instead of releasing multiple half-finished versions and then updating it - like Tesla). They also decided to make the Bolt, and despite having started on it years after Tesla started the Model 3 they were able to ramp up and produce the Bolt sooner than Tesla.
As soon as the market is ready for widespread adoption of electric cars (which appears to be coming fairly soon) the other automakers will steamroll over Tesla. They'll have the advantage of decades of experience in mass producing vehicles and will be cranking out countless new models of electric vehicles that span every price range and market so quickly Musks head will spin clean off.
My opinion: Tesla is (or at least could be) a great company that could change the world in ways not dissimilar to Apple -- and even on a larger scale, big-picture-wise -- but Musk is starting to believe his own hype, and turn into a Trumpian self-deluded figure. I sincerely hope he snaps back from it, but at the moment I'm sure he is behaving privately a lot like Jobs was at his worst, and I'm sure what we're seeing right now is the result of an internal morale problem.
This isn't a zero-sum game, and for Apple to win Tesla does not have to lose. But I sincerely hope that Apple makes no moves to partner with or invest in Tesla, because the place seems to be a bit of a train wreck right now. Let it sort out its own issues.
I don't think Tesla is nearly as great as many people think. Working in the automotive industry I don't see a single bit of technology at Tesla that every other major automaker doesn't already have access too.
GM (the company stereotyped to be run by dumb ole 'muricans) developed a superior self-driving system and launched it out-of-the-blue (instead of releasing multiple half-finished versions and then updating it - like Tesla). They also decided to make the Bolt, and despite having started on it years after Tesla started the Model 3 they were able to ramp up and produce the Bolt sooner than Tesla.
As soon as the market is ready for widespread adoption of electric cars (which appears to be coming fairly soon) the other automakers will steamroll over Tesla. They'll have the advantage of decades of experience in mass producing vehicles and will be cranking out countless new models of electric vehicles that span every price range and market so quickly Musks head will spin clean off.
When range, weight and recharging time issues are solved, electric vehicles will supplant other types of fuel vehicles. It’s not clear any of these things are solvable since they’ve been problems from the beginning of batteries.
My opinion: Tesla is (or at least could be) a great company that could change the world in ways not dissimilar to Apple -- and even on a larger scale, big-picture-wise -- but Musk is starting to believe his own hype, and turn into a Trumpian self-deluded figure. I sincerely hope he snaps back from it, but at the moment I'm sure he is behaving privately a lot like Jobs was at his worst, and I'm sure what we're seeing right now is the result of an internal morale problem.
This isn't a zero-sum game, and for Apple to win Tesla does not have to lose. But I sincerely hope that Apple makes no moves to partner with or invest in Tesla, because the place seems to be a bit of a train wreck right now. Let it sort out its own issues.
I don't think Tesla is nearly as great as many people think. Working in the automotive industry I don't see a single bit of technology at Tesla that every other major automaker doesn't already have access too.
GM (the company stereotyped to be run by dumb ole 'muricans) developed a superior self-driving system and launched it out-of-the-blue (instead of releasing multiple half-finished versions and then updating it - like Tesla). They also decided to make the Bolt, and despite having started on it years after Tesla started the Model 3 they were able to ramp up and produce the Bolt sooner than Tesla.
As soon as the market is ready for widespread adoption of electric cars (which appears to be coming fairly soon) the other automakers will steamroll over Tesla. They'll have the advantage of decades of experience in mass producing vehicles and will be cranking out countless new models of electric vehicles that span every price range and market so quickly Musks head will spin clean off.
Agreed. I've worked closely with technical people from GM and have had some minor interaction with Tesla people as well. GM is certainly not in a technologically or human capital skills disadvantaged position versus Tesla. They also aren't young and hip with an attention starved, brash leader either. Young startups often get too much credit and the benefit of the doubt because they aren't yet dealing with the thorny issues that can slog down the established players, like massive pension burdens, labor relations, long and unpredictable supply chains, invasive politicians, trade disputes, and the universal progress killer in every engineering endeavor - legacy service and support. Established companies are often undervalued and under-appreciated because they've learned how to make the incredibly difficult appear routine and mundane. Most any person who has never been in a modern automotive assembly plant would be totally blown away with the orchestration of humans and automation involved. They routinely make something that is incredibly complex very controllable at huge scale and volume and with a degree of precision and repeatability unheard of a decade ago. Established companies like GM (and Ford, Fiat-Chrysler, Daimler AG, Toyota, Honda, etc.) have been doing for decades what Tesla is still learning how to do the hard way. Many people are still quite infatuated with Tesla and its sexy products, but this infatuation will not last if Tesla doesn't figure how to do the greasy, mundane, unflattering, behind-the-scenes grunt work, and amazing industrial engineering required to produce highly complex products at-scale and on-budget. If they're looking to play in the big leagues (as opposed to being a boutique operation) they have to step up their game behind the sexy products.
My opinion: Tesla is (or at least could be) a great company that could change the world in ways not dissimilar to Apple -- and even on a larger scale, big-picture-wise -- but Musk is starting to believe his own hype, and turn into a Trumpian self-deluded figure. I sincerely hope he snaps back from it, but at the moment I'm sure he is behaving privately a lot like Jobs was at his worst, and I'm sure what we're seeing right now is the result of an internal morale problem.
This isn't a zero-sum game, and for Apple to win Tesla does not have to lose. But I sincerely hope that Apple makes no moves to partner with or invest in Tesla, because the place seems to be a bit of a train wreck right now. Let it sort out its own issues.
I don't think Tesla is nearly as great as many people think. Working in the automotive industry I don't see a single bit of technology at Tesla that every other major automaker doesn't already have access too.
GM (the company stereotyped to be run by dumb ole 'muricans) developed a superior self-driving system and launched it out-of-the-blue (instead of releasing multiple half-finished versions and then updating it - like Tesla). They also decided to make the Bolt, and despite having started on it years after Tesla started the Model 3 they were able to ramp up and produce the Bolt sooner than Tesla.
As soon as the market is ready for widespread adoption of electric cars (which appears to be coming fairly soon) the other automakers will steamroll over Tesla. They'll have the advantage of decades of experience in mass producing vehicles and will be cranking out countless new models of electric vehicles that span every price range and market so quickly Musks head will spin clean off.
Agreed. I've worked closely with technical people from GM and have had some minor interaction with Tesla people as well. GM is certainly not in a technologically or human capital skills disadvantaged position versus Tesla. They also aren't young and hip with an attention starved, brash leader either. Young startups often get too much credit and the benefit of the doubt because they aren't yet dealing with the thorny issues that can slog down the established players, like massive pension burdens, labor relations, long and unpredictable supply chains, invasive politicians, trade disputes, and the universal progress killer in every engineering endeavor - legacy service and support. Established companies are often undervalued and under-appreciated because they've learned how to make the incredibly difficult appear routine and mundane. Most any person who has never been in a modern automotive assembly plant would be totally blown away with the orchestration of humans and automation involved. They routinely make something that is incredibly complex very controllable at huge scale and volume and with a degree of precision and repeatability unheard of a decade ago. Established companies like GM (and Ford, Fiat-Chrysler, Daimler AG, Toyota, Honda, etc.) have been doing for decades what Tesla is still learning how to do the hard way. Many people are still quite infatuated with Tesla and its sexy products, but this infatuation will not last if Tesla doesn't figure how to do the greasy, mundane, unflattering, behind-the-scenes grunt work, and amazing industrial engineering required to produce highly complex products at-scale and on-budget. If they're looking to play in the big leagues (as opposed to being a boutique operation) they have to step up their game behind the sexy products.
From where I'm standing, Tesla would be better served by a new CEO, one better suited to solving their existing problems than seemingly bent on creating new problems for the company.
iqatedo said: The discussion has veered a little. Still, in response to your comment, those models that apparently work best using retrospective data to produce outputs modelling today's climate, are those that predict the worst outcomes for the future:
A huge problem with models is the reluctance of climate scientists to present the worst-case scenarios, which it seems in the end, might be the most accurate.
Yeah, a bit OT, but certainly related given Tesla's statement.
Here's my problem with it: "The paper, published on Wednesday in Nature, found that global temperatures could rise nearly 5 °C by the end of the century under the the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s steepest prediction for greenhouse-gas concentrations."
They are saying they think the worst inputs are the most accurate, but that hasn't proven to be true so far. And, the range for the radiative forcing input is pretty broad. In other words, if it is near the lower end of the range, we're talking about a very slight amount of warming. If it's at the extreme end, then yeah, we are facing some problems. The actual data is much closer to that lower end, currently. Whether that's due to the increase fighting against a trend to head into another ice-age, or some shorter-term trend, etc. I don't think we know.
BUT... when I see how anyone not agreeing with the hysteria being excluded from the discussion, or how the MSM handles things (i.e.: every weather event we don't like is AGW caused... or fish flopping in the Florida streets are AGW... local flooding is AGW... etc. it gets a bit hard to believe them for anything related to it).
I'd like to go with the best science on this, but we're not getting it due to the process and politics. It makes sense there would be some AGW... the question is the amount and how we should react. That puts me in that supposed 97% along with the climate scientists, btw.
This isn't a zero-sum game, and for Apple to win Tesla does not have to lose. But I sincerely hope that Apple makes no moves to partner with or invest in Tesla, because the place seems to be a bit of a train wreck right now. Let it sort out its own issues.
Yeah, I agree here. There is plenty of room for Tesla, other car companies, and Apple to be in the game. That said, I think the window is closing on Tesla if they don't get their act together. The 'traditional' car makers aren't too far behind anymore. And yes, it sure seems like they've got some issues to sort through.
I'm impressed by the sheer performance of Tesla vehicles. But aside from that, I'm not convinced that when I do switch to an electric car someday, it will be a Tesla.
iqatedo said: Which of those many physicists and engineers would have thought landing and re-using components was a good (achievable) idea, let alone had such experience? So much of what SpaceX is doing is new and groundbreaking. A whole lot.
The same could be said of the generic drone you can buy at the local drug store. The technology for doing that kind of thing has come a long way in the last few years, and wasn't really feasible when those physicists and engineers probably worked at NASA. It isn't so much that NASA couldn't do it, but now SpaceX can, but a matter of timing... well, and that NASA had diverted like half their budget into studying climate-science instead of space matters.
tmay said: ... and it isn't like their isn't anyone else out there doing innovation in Space and Aviation;
(Interestingly, they are actually how I ran across the CAD/3D solids app I used in my design work in the late '90s. Scaled Composites was at the EAA convention in Oshkosh, WI and I learned they were using Ashlar Vellum (which runs on Macs). I needed an app that was more in the 3D solids area and called them. They put me on the phone with Tim Olsen, who is a CAD pioneer out of Lockheed and such. He told me he could put me on a beta program for a new app they had coming, Vellum Solids.... which became Xeon, Argon, Cobalt, etc. After Tim left Ashlar, he started CSi, and now is with PunchCAD working on ViaCAD and SharkCAD, etc. Many of the UI improvements some of the other big-name CAD systems now use were licensed from Tim's technology innovations. Small world. )
SpamSandwich said: Tesla needs their equivalent of Lee Iacocca. Musk should be “fired”/relieved of duty and replaced with a competent manager capable of organizing and delegating responsibility at the place, without attempting to reinvent their cars or processes every week. Musk is distracted to the point of near insanity.
Given without Musk there would be no Tesla and remember no Space-X, so IMHO that's a bit harsh. He probably does need some very capable help at the top for sure.
While a bit more extreme, doesn't this debate seem a bit like Apple/Jobs? I think Jobs was a more competent leader than Musk, but if they really got rid of him, a similar fate would await Tesla. They need a CEO and then Musk... but often people like Musk can't handle that in the ego department. Ego kills a lot of really great projects.
SpamSandwich said: When range, weight and recharging time issues are solved, electric vehicles will supplant other types of fuel vehicles. It’s not clear any of these things are solvable since they’ve been problems from the beginning of batteries.
I think they probably are... but you hit the nail on the head. There is no grand conspiracy holding back electric cars. They just haven't even been the realm of semi-practicality until quite recently, due to technical limitations.
dewme said: Agreed. I've worked closely with technical people from GM and have had some minor interaction with Tesla people as well. GM is certainly not in a technologically or human capital skills disadvantaged position versus Tesla. They also aren't young and hip with an attention starved, brash leader either. Young startups often get too much credit and the benefit of the doubt because they aren't yet dealing with the thorny issues that can slog down the established players, like massive pension burdens, labor relations, long and unpredictable supply chains, invasive politicians, trade disputes, and the universal progress killer in every engineering endeavor - legacy service and support. Established companies are often undervalued and under-appreciated because they've learned how to make the incredibly difficult appear routine and mundane. Most any person who has never been in a modern automotive assembly plant would be totally blown away with the orchestration of humans and automation involved. They routinely make something that is incredibly complex very controllable at huge scale and volume and with a degree of precision and repeatability unheard of a decade ago. Established companies like GM (and Ford, Fiat-Chrysler, Daimler AG, Toyota, Honda, etc.) have been doing for decades what Tesla is still learning how to do the hard way. Many people are still quite infatuated with Tesla and its sexy products, but this infatuation will not last if Tesla doesn't figure how to do the greasy, mundane, unflattering, behind-the-scenes grunt work, and amazing industrial engineering required to produce highly complex products at-scale and on-budget. If they're looking to play in the big leagues (as opposed to being a boutique operation) they have to step up their game behind the sexy products.
Yep, and Apple would be facing most of that stuff too.
Musk is way over this head at Tesla. This is a surprise as SpaceX is a very successful venture. I'm surprised Musk is not leading Tesla as competently as he has SpaceX.
Musk's admission that he is sleeping in his office at Tesla is an admission of failure -- it's certainly nothing to brag about.
SpaceX full of ex-NASA engineers and scientists already know how to launch, design, assemble, test and produce a viable product for Space lifting. Tesla is a different beast.
Which of those many physicists and engineers would have thought landing and re-using components was a good (achievable) idea, let alone had such experience? So much of what SpaceX is doing is new and groundbreaking. A whole lot.
STS (Space Shuttle) was designed for partial reuse 1981
McDonnell Douglas DC-X and DC-XA was a program for a returning a launch vehicle and landing it upright for complete reuse.
Elon should get credit for ambition, as should Bezos, Paul Allen, Richard Branson, Burt Rutan, and many, many, others, but most of what Space X has done to date is based on previous NASA and industry work, and it isn't like their isn't anyone else out there doing innovation in Space and Aviation;
None of your examples come close to matching what SpaceX has achieved. The STS programme was insanely expensive to maintain (and still threw away large components), DC-X failed in areas that SpaceX has succeeded in (COPV tanks I recall as a result of brittling), stratolaunch - so what, Blue Origin - low energy at low altitude (even if at the Karmen line), Virgin Galactic - ultra-low energy at low altitude, ULA - hahaha.
People pan Elon and SpaceX but no one can match them - now or for a time to come.
iqatedo said: The discussion has veered a little. Still, in response to your comment, those models that apparently work best using retrospective data to produce outputs modelling today's climate, are those that predict the worst outcomes for the future:
A huge problem with models is the reluctance of climate scientists to present the worst-case scenarios, which it seems in the end, might be the most accurate.
Yeah, a bit OT, but certainly related given Tesla's statement.
Here's my problem with it: "The paper, published on Wednesday in Nature, found that global temperatures could rise nearly 5 °C by the end of the century under the the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s steepest prediction for greenhouse-gas concentrations."
They are saying they think the worst inputs are the most accurate, but that hasn't proven to be true so far. And, the range for the radiative forcing input is pretty broad. In other words, if it is near the lower end of the range, we're talking about a very slight amount of warming. If it's at the extreme end, then yeah, we are facing some problems. The actual data is much closer to that lower end, currently. Whether that's due to the increase fighting against a trend to head into another ice-age, or some shorter-term trend, etc. I don't think we know.
BUT... when I see how anyone not agreeing with the hysteria being excluded from the discussion, or how the MSM handles things (i.e.: every weather event we don't like is AGW caused... or fish flopping in the Florida streets are AGW... local flooding is AGW... etc. it gets a bit hard to believe them for anything related to it).
I'd like to go with the best science on this, but we're not getting it due to the process and politics. It makes sense there would be some AGW... the question is the amount and how we should react. That puts me in that supposed 97% along with the climate scientists, btw.
This isn't a zero-sum game, and for Apple to win Tesla does not have to lose. But I sincerely hope that Apple makes no moves to partner with or invest in Tesla, because the place seems to be a bit of a train wreck right now. Let it sort out its own issues.
Yeah, I agree here. There is plenty of room for Tesla, other car companies, and Apple to be in the game. That said, I think the window is closing on Tesla if they don't get their act together. The 'traditional' car makers aren't too far behind anymore. And yes, it sure seems like they've got some issues to sort through.
I'm impressed by the sheer performance of Tesla vehicles. But aside from that, I'm not convinced that when I do switch to an electric car someday, it will be a Tesla.
iqatedo said: Which of those many physicists and engineers would have thought landing and re-using components was a good (achievable) idea, let alone had such experience? So much of what SpaceX is doing is new and groundbreaking. A whole lot.
The same could be said of the generic drone you can buy at the local drug store. The technology for doing that kind of thing has come a long way in the last few years, and wasn't really feasible when those physicists and engineers probably worked at NASA. It isn't so much that NASA couldn't do it, but now SpaceX can, but a matter of timing... well, and that NASA had diverted like half their budget into studying climate-science instead of space matters.
tmay said: ... and it isn't like their isn't anyone else out there doing innovation in Space and Aviation;
(Interestingly, they are actually how I ran across the CAD/3D solids app I used in my design work in the late '90s. Scaled Composites was at the EAA convention in Oshkosh, WI and I learned they were using Ashlar Vellum (which runs on Macs). I needed an app that was more in the 3D solids area and called them. They put me on the phone with Tim Olsen, who is a CAD pioneer out of Lockheed and such. He told me he could put me on a beta program for a new app they had coming, Vellum Solids.... which became Xeon, Argon, Cobalt, etc. After Tim left Ashlar, he started CSi, and now is with PunchCAD working on ViaCAD and SharkCAD, etc. Many of the UI improvements some of the other big-name CAD systems now use were licensed from Tim's technology innovations. Small world. )
SpamSandwich said: Tesla needs their equivalent of Lee Iacocca. Musk should be “fired”/relieved of duty and replaced with a competent manager capable of organizing and delegating responsibility at the place, without attempting to reinvent their cars or processes every week. Musk is distracted to the point of near insanity.
Given without Musk there would be no Tesla and remember no Space-X, so IMHO that's a bit harsh. He probably does need some very capable help at the top for sure.
While a bit more extreme, doesn't this debate seem a bit like Apple/Jobs? I think Jobs was a more competent leader than Musk, but if they really got rid of him, a similar fate would await Tesla. They need a CEO and then Musk... but often people like Musk can't handle that in the ego department. Ego kills a lot of really great projects.
SpamSandwich said: When range, weight and recharging time issues are solved, electric vehicles will supplant other types of fuel vehicles. It’s not clear any of these things are solvable since they’ve been problems from the beginning of batteries.
I think they probably are... but you hit the nail on the head. There is no grand conspiracy holding back electric cars. They just haven't even been the realm of semi-practicality until quite recently, due to technical limitations.
dewme said: Agreed. I've worked closely with technical people from GM and have had some minor interaction with Tesla people as well. GM is certainly not in a technologically or human capital skills disadvantaged position versus Tesla. They also aren't young and hip with an attention starved, brash leader either. Young startups often get too much credit and the benefit of the doubt because they aren't yet dealing with the thorny issues that can slog down the established players, like massive pension burdens, labor relations, long and unpredictable supply chains, invasive politicians, trade disputes, and the universal progress killer in every engineering endeavor - legacy service and support. Established companies are often undervalued and under-appreciated because they've learned how to make the incredibly difficult appear routine and mundane. Most any person who has never been in a modern automotive assembly plant would be totally blown away with the orchestration of humans and automation involved. They routinely make something that is incredibly complex very controllable at huge scale and volume and with a degree of precision and repeatability unheard of a decade ago. Established companies like GM (and Ford, Fiat-Chrysler, Daimler AG, Toyota, Honda, etc.) have been doing for decades what Tesla is still learning how to do the hard way. Many people are still quite infatuated with Tesla and its sexy products, but this infatuation will not last if Tesla doesn't figure how to do the greasy, mundane, unflattering, behind-the-scenes grunt work, and amazing industrial engineering required to produce highly complex products at-scale and on-budget. If they're looking to play in the big leagues (as opposed to being a boutique operation) they have to step up their game behind the sexy products.
Yep, and Apple would be facing most of that stuff too.
I didn't forget about Scaled Composites, but I should have noted them aside from "Burt Rutan". Heck, does anybody not use them at some point?
Also, thanks for the note about those CAD applications. I used them all at some point on my Mac's, (I even had MiniCAD, later VectorWorks, and MacDraft, which still exists!). Vellum/Cobalt and PunchCAD/SharkCAD were easily my favorites for knocking out new designs. I use to spend a lot of time on the PunchCAD forums, years ago, where Tim often laid out the improvements and the roadmap.
I feel bad about moving away from those, and on to ProE, later SolidWorks, and now Inventor HSM, but my days are spent machining, and Inventor HSM was easily the most cost effective option at the time.
Now I tell everybody to use Fusion 360, which I also have (the Ultimate version) as part of my bundle. Works well on the Mac, and even supports the Space Mouse models from 3D Connexion.
I think Tesla will actually be bigger than Apple in the long run. Just as Apple reinvented the phone with the iPhone, Telsa is reinventing the automobile, but people spend a lot more on their car than their phone.
tmay said: I didn't forget about Scaled Composites, but I should have noted them aside from "Burt Rutan". Heck, does anybody not use them at some point?
Also, thanks for the note about those CAD applications. I used them all at some point on my Mac's, (I even had MiniCAD, later VectorWorks, and MacDraft, which still exists!). Vellum/Cobalt and PunchCAD/SharkCAD were easily my favorites for knocking out new designs. I use to spend a lot of time on the PunchCAD forums, years ago, where Tim often laid out the improvements and the roadmap.
I feel bad about moving away from those, and on to ProE, later SolidWorks, and now Inventor HSM, but my days are spent machining, and Inventor HSM was easily the most cost effective option at the time.
Now I tell everybody to use Fusion 360, which I also have (the Ultimate version) as part of my bundle. Works well on the Mac, and even supports the Space Mouse models from 3D Connexion.
Oh wow, cool. I haven't been around (CAD/3D) much in the last decade or so. I'm kind of burned out on IT, though, so I'm seriously thinking about going back that direction.
I'll have to check out Fusion 360, as an Autodesk product. It seems kind of like the whole Photoshop vs Pixelmator thing (or other various such apps) where maybe one prefers a particular non-Adobe app, but when it comes to getting a job, you kind of need the Adobe experience. I'm also an old Electric Image user (3D animation/rendering) but am not going to probably find any companies with that on the job description.
Tim is awesome, though. I was lucky enough to spend a bit of time with him when he had a booth in San Francisco at MacWorld years ago. (And, thinking back, once I realized who he was... it was particularly amazing that he was the one Ashlar put me on the phone with to discuss our 3D CAD needs for the project I was working on.)
I think Tesla will actually be bigger than Apple in the long run. Just as Apple reinvented the phone with the iPhone, Telsa is reinventing the automobile, but people spend a lot more on their car than their phone.
Keep in mind that Apple has more money in spare change than Tesla may ever earn in their existence.
My opinion: Tesla is (or at least could be) a great company that could change the world in ways not dissimilar to Apple -- and even on a larger scale, big-picture-wise -- but Musk is starting to believe his own hype, and turn into a Trumpian self-deluded figure. I sincerely hope he snaps back from it, but at the moment I'm sure he is behaving privately a lot like Jobs was at his worst, and I'm sure what we're seeing right now is the result of an internal morale problem.
This isn't a zero-sum game, and for Apple to win Tesla does not have to lose. But I sincerely hope that Apple makes no moves to partner with or invest in Tesla, because the place seems to be a bit of a train wreck right now. Let it sort out its own issues.
The place is train wreck right now? Stop talking out of your ass, dude!
My opinion: Tesla is (or at least could be) a great company that could change the world in ways not dissimilar to Apple -- and even on a larger scale, big-picture-wise -- but Musk is starting to believe his own hype, and turn into a Trumpian self-deluded figure. I sincerely hope he snaps back from it, but at the moment I'm sure he is behaving privately a lot like Jobs was at his worst, and I'm sure what we're seeing right now is the result of an internal morale problem.
This isn't a zero-sum game, and for Apple to win Tesla does not have to lose. But I sincerely hope that Apple makes no moves to partner with or invest in Tesla, because the place seems to be a bit of a train wreck right now. Let it sort out its own issues.
Tesla needs their equivalent of Lee Iacocca. Musk should be “fired”/relieved of duty and replaced with a competent manager capable of organizing and delegating responsibility at the place, without attempting to reinvent their cars or processes every week. Musk is distracted to the point of near insanity.
Just like Apple fired Job before? Luckily, you don’t run a company because the company will be gone in a year! Musk has been the only visionary man since Steve Job!
SpamSandwich said: Tesla needs their equivalent of Lee Iacocca. Musk should be “fired”/relieved of duty and replaced with a competent manager capable of organizing and delegating responsibility at the place, without attempting to reinvent their cars or processes every week. Musk is distracted to the point of near insanity.
Just like Apple fired Job before? Luckily, you don’t run a company because the company will be gone in a year! Musk has been the only visionary man since Steve Job!
There needs to be a proper mixture of vision and business sense, though. Vision alone, or even a revolutionary product, can easily fail.
I think Tesla will actually be bigger than Apple in the long run. Just as Apple reinvented the phone with the iPhone, Telsa is reinventing the automobile, but people spend a lot more on their car than their phone.
Keep in mind that Apple has more money in spare change than Tesla may ever earn in their existence.
Having better technology than the other guy is more important than having more money.
I think Tesla will actually be bigger than Apple in the long run. Just as Apple reinvented the phone with the iPhone, Telsa is reinventing the automobile, but people spend a lot more on their car than their phone.
Keep in mind that Apple has more money in spare change than Tesla may ever earn in their existence.
Having better technology than the other guy is more important than having more money.
Which would be great for Tesla, if they did have better technology, but the fact is, they don't.
Worst case, Chapter 11; Tesla's cash burn and legal jeopardy are driving that. Poor quality out of the factory, requiring field rework, is a huge cash burn. Sales have peaked.
Best case, Elon will be sidelined by the Board of Directors.
I think Tesla will actually be bigger than Apple in the long run. Just as Apple reinvented the phone with the iPhone, Telsa is reinventing the automobile, but people spend a lot more on their car than their phone.
Keep in mind that Apple has more money in spare change than Tesla may ever earn in their existence.
Having better technology than the other guy is more important than having more money.
Better technology can always be bought or invented.
Comments
I don't think Tesla is nearly as great as many people think. Working in the automotive industry I don't see a single bit of technology at Tesla that every other major automaker doesn't already have access too.
GM (the company stereotyped to be run by dumb ole 'muricans) developed a superior self-driving system and launched it out-of-the-blue (instead of releasing multiple half-finished versions and then updating it - like Tesla). They also decided to make the Bolt, and despite having started on it years after Tesla started the Model 3 they were able to ramp up and produce the Bolt sooner than Tesla.
As soon as the market is ready for widespread adoption of electric cars (which appears to be coming fairly soon) the other automakers will steamroll over Tesla. They'll have the advantage of decades of experience in mass producing vehicles and will be cranking out countless new models of electric vehicles that span every price range and market so quickly Musks head will spin clean off.
Here's my problem with it:
"The paper, published on Wednesday in Nature, found that global temperatures could rise nearly 5 °C by the end of the century under the the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s steepest prediction for greenhouse-gas concentrations."
They are saying they think the worst inputs are the most accurate, but that hasn't proven to be true so far. And, the range for the radiative forcing input is pretty broad. In other words, if it is near the lower end of the range, we're talking about a very slight amount of warming. If it's at the extreme end, then yeah, we are facing some problems. The actual data is much closer to that lower end, currently. Whether that's due to the increase fighting against a trend to head into another ice-age, or some shorter-term trend, etc. I don't think we know.
BUT... when I see how anyone not agreeing with the hysteria being excluded from the discussion, or how the MSM handles things (i.e.: every weather event we don't like is AGW caused... or fish flopping in the Florida streets are AGW... local flooding is AGW... etc. it gets a bit hard to believe them for anything related to it).
I'd like to go with the best science on this, but we're not getting it due to the process and politics. It makes sense there would be some AGW... the question is the amount and how we should react. That puts me in that supposed 97% along with the climate scientists, btw.
Yeah, I agree here. There is plenty of room for Tesla, other car companies, and Apple to be in the game. That said, I think the window is closing on Tesla if they don't get their act together. The 'traditional' car makers aren't too far behind anymore. And yes, it sure seems like they've got some issues to sort through.
I'm impressed by the sheer performance of Tesla vehicles. But aside from that, I'm not convinced that when I do switch to an electric car someday, it will be a Tesla.
The same could be said of the generic drone you can buy at the local drug store. The technology for doing that kind of thing has come a long way in the last few years, and wasn't really feasible when those physicists and engineers probably worked at NASA. It isn't so much that NASA couldn't do it, but now SpaceX can, but a matter of timing... well, and that NASA had diverted like half their budget into studying climate-science instead of space matters.
Don't forget:
https://www.scaled.com
(Interestingly, they are actually how I ran across the CAD/3D solids app I used in my design work in the late '90s. Scaled Composites was at the EAA convention in Oshkosh, WI and I learned they were using Ashlar Vellum (which runs on Macs). I needed an app that was more in the 3D solids area and called them. They put me on the phone with Tim Olsen, who is a CAD pioneer out of Lockheed and such. He told me he could put me on a beta program for a new app they had coming, Vellum Solids.... which became Xeon, Argon, Cobalt, etc. After Tim left Ashlar, he started CSi, and now is with PunchCAD working on ViaCAD and SharkCAD, etc. Many of the UI improvements some of the other big-name CAD systems now use were licensed from Tim's technology innovations. Small world.
While a bit more extreme, doesn't this debate seem a bit like Apple/Jobs? I think Jobs was a more competent leader than Musk, but if they really got rid of him, a similar fate would await Tesla. They need a CEO and then Musk... but often people like Musk can't handle that in the ego department. Ego kills a lot of really great projects.
I think they probably are... but you hit the nail on the head. There is no grand conspiracy holding back electric cars. They just haven't even been the realm of semi-practicality until quite recently, due to technical limitations.
Yep, and Apple would be facing most of that stuff too.
People pan Elon and SpaceX but no one can match them - now or for a time to come.
Also, thanks for the note about those CAD applications. I used them all at some point on my Mac's, (I even had MiniCAD, later VectorWorks, and MacDraft, which still exists!). Vellum/Cobalt and PunchCAD/SharkCAD were easily my favorites for knocking out new designs. I use to spend a lot of time on the PunchCAD forums, years ago, where Tim often laid out the improvements and the roadmap.
I feel bad about moving away from those, and on to ProE, later SolidWorks, and now Inventor HSM, but my days are spent machining, and Inventor HSM was easily the most cost effective option at the time.
Now I tell everybody to use Fusion 360, which I also have (the Ultimate version) as part of my bundle. Works well on the Mac, and even supports the Space Mouse models from 3D Connexion.
I'll have to check out Fusion 360, as an Autodesk product. It seems kind of like the whole Photoshop vs Pixelmator thing (or other various such apps) where maybe one prefers a particular non-Adobe app, but when it comes to getting a job, you kind of need the Adobe experience. I'm also an old Electric Image user (3D animation/rendering) but am not going to probably find any companies with that on the job description.
Tim is awesome, though. I was lucky enough to spend a bit of time with him when he had a booth in San Francisco at MacWorld years ago. (And, thinking back, once I realized who he was... it was particularly amazing that he was the one Ashlar put me on the phone with to discuss our 3D CAD needs for the project I was working on.)
Worst case, Chapter 11; Tesla's cash burn and legal jeopardy are driving that. Poor quality out of the factory, requiring field rework, is a huge cash burn. Sales have peaked.
Best case, Elon will be sidelined by the Board of Directors.