Apple has the 'key ingredients' needed to disrupt the car market, analysts say

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 33
    1348513485 Posts: 343member
    MplsP said:
    Apple obviously has a huge amount of experience with user interface and software design. What they don't have experience with is manufacturing things like cars. When you look at Tesla, that's been the big area they've struggle - getting an efficient manufacturing process down and Elon Musk has made this point himself. Part of the design process is designing something that not only works well, but is reliable and can be assembled consistently and inexpensively. Apple has manufacturing experience with iPhones, but cars are not phones, so that experience won't necessarily translate.

    The other issue is price. The car market is competitive and costly. Tesla did not post a profit until this year, and even their cheapest model (the base model 3) would be considered moderately priced at best. As others have mentioned, Apple's business model is to design a 'premium' product and price it accordingly. People are willing to pay a few hundred more for a quality computer that they know will work well and last. Convincing them to pay $10-20k more for a car when the competition is already priced at $50-100k is completely different proposition. 
    Experience comes from personnel. You hire personnel, and Apple has apparently already poached experienced people. Why do you think this is a barrier? Tesla didn't post a profit because Musk, although brilliant, is a temperamental flake, constantly interfering in the process, regardless of the cost of revisions or quality control. The stories of his former employees are eye opening.
    tmay
  • Reply 22 of 33
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,911member
    ...and just so people can see what 'the rest of the world' thinks of Apple, I saw this today on the car talk forum:

    https://community.cartalk.com/t/an-apple-self-driving-electric-car-by-2024/173539/6

    Not saying I agree with all the opinions expressed there, but it's a definite contrast to those on this site.
  • Reply 23 of 33
    davgreg said:
    The people who manufacture systems and components supply many makers and need lead time to be ready. Then there is the question of who would build it since Apple does not have a car plant. Apple does not make any of the hardware it sells and that would likely be the case in this arena.
    Apple could invest in or buy outright an electric car maker. There are a slew of such companies already operating in China. I don't understand why people insist Apple would only deal with the Big Three automakers in America. They don't make Macs, iPhones, iPads or anything else in the US. For that matter, Apple doesn't make anything at all. They contract with other companies. It would be business as usual for them to offshore such manufacturing.
    christopher126
  • Reply 24 of 33
    I would be interested to see what their spin on these vehicles will be. They have to lead with something. A break through battery innovation is one such way to establishing themselves as a contender in the BEV space. I think another differentiator will be the in car entertainment and infotainment system. 

    The biggest innovation that will make them a serious competitor in this space is price first, then range, and performance. If they nail price and produce a compelling vehicle that is cheaper than a Tesla Model 3 and equal in range and performance that they will wipe the floor with the competition. Especially the traditional auto OEM's. 

    However...

    I don't think these cars will be affordable (at first). If we know anything about apple, it is that their products do not tend to be cheap. 

    With regards to their self driving ambitions, 1) they JUST promoted the AI lead to head the Autonomous Driving program (this should have been done years ago), and 2) I am curious about what sensor suite they will be using on their vehicles. The current debate in the self driving world is the use of a vision (camera) based system verses LIDAR. Elon thinks LIDAR is a fools errand mainly due to the cost of LIDAR equipment ($250,000 units you see on top of Waymo vans and what not) and the fact that the current LIDAR strategy has these vehicles follow preplanned routes with millimetre accuracy (AKA not great at dealing with emergent and novel phenomena on the road - will just pull over if unsure what to do). Vision based uses much cheaper cameras and allowing advanced ML and neural networks to be trained and allow for full autonomous that can react and adapt as more drive data is acquired. 

    In the pursuit of autonomous driving, those with the most data will win. 

    1) Acquiring data by having an engineer spend his time in the cars manually collecting data is slow and inefficient. Additionally getting unique drive situations that will train your model with strange driving edge cases that cannot be simulated is difficult, if not impossible, to get using this data collection method.

    2) Companies (mainly Tesla) that are selling vehicles and collecting actual self driving data have a massive data advantage and it is not even close. Billions of miles of actual driver data training and improving the model and you pay nothing to get this as it comes from vehicles people have already purchased. 

    3) Given Apple's stance on privacy, I am curious how they will collect the driver data needed to have a compelling self driving solution. I feel this will put them at a considerable disadvantage.

    But Apple has a few aces up their sleeves. 

    1) Chip design for self driving. Tesla has one (which was designed by an ex A series apple engineer). Apple has the expertise and manufacturing experience to make this happen. A purpose designed chip for self driving.

    2) Amazing supply chain management.

    3) Very vertically integrated which will allow for better range/performance due to optimizations between software and hardware (battery management software, heat management, etc...) We have seen this in their mobile devices, and the best performing BEV company (Tesla) is also very vertically integrated which allows for much more rapid innovation and advancement vs traditional Auto. 

    4) A mountain of money to throw on any issue they encounter. They are well resourced to solve very tough problems in the BEV space. 





    Finally (sorry for the long read), I think Apple has us looking in the wrong direction. Perhaps they are looking to do something even more disruptive that simply a BEV. Perhaps they are looking at the future of transportation and see that car ownership will decline with the rise of autonomous driving platforms. Maybe they are working on driverless vehicles that we use when we need, and transport other people at other time when we are not using them. Kind of like the Tesla robotaxi network they keep speaking about. The cost of such a service would be another apple subscription that would include apple music, tv, news, arcade, fitness, AND transport. Ask Siri for a ride to the university and an autonomous vehicle picks you up and drops you at the front door.




    Anyways, take what I say with a grain of salt, but this is interesting to think about what they could be working on. 
    muthuk_vanalingamh2p
  • Reply 25 of 33
    svanstrom said:
    I'm curious how Apple is going to price this crazy thing though. If it's gonna be $600,000, I suspect it won't be quite as popular.
    That's honestly my number one interest in this whole thing; because of how it will show Apple's intent going forward…

    Looking at how Apple has priced things over the past 10+ years we've seen a more and more aggressive trend in Apple banking on people being willing to pay an ever increasing premium.

    Taking that, and combining it with all car rumours essentially placing the Apple Car in the regular car category (as compared with smaller city-vehicles, or even some type of no-license-required e-bike/car hybrid)… and it looks like an Apple Car would end up being even more of a luxury item than a Tesla.

    Can Apple really pull that off without it finally making users feel disconnected from the Apple brand?

    Will people really push themselves into adding yet another couple of hundred on top of what they paid for their last iPhone if they feel that Apple is moving this far out of their reach? And will they then still be into the sound equipment, and the tablets, and the computers, once they've started getting out of the Apple ecosystem?

    I just feel that if Apple screw up too badly, by getting lost in their own sense of how luxurious/important they are, they could sort of disenfranchise their customer base by releasing a luxury (in price) car.

    (If Apple on the other hand has feared that, and they have been looking more towards bike-friendly European cities than bigger-is-better US cars while developing next generation transportation… That could be fun.)
    Actually I see the opposite.  Sure they cash in on the early adopters and those that need (read as “want”) the cutting edge, but they also push their tech down.  Just look at the entry level iPad, iPhone, and Apple Watch.  Each one is arguably the best in its price class but never the cheapest, and each is nearly half the introductory price of its progenitor (adjusting for inflation).  The hypothetical Apple Car would presumably do the same.
    h2p
  • Reply 26 of 33

    Xed said:
    I think the thick, cold rolled steal is perfect for my business.
    I think the cold-rolled steal is what Musk would be getting away with.  But to each his own!
  • Reply 27 of 33

    MplsP said:
    Apple obviously has a huge amount of experience with user interface and software design. What they don't have experience with is manufacturing things like cars. When you look at Tesla, that's been the big area they've struggle - getting an efficient manufacturing process down and Elon Musk has made this point himself. Part of the design process is designing something that not only works well, but is reliable and can be assembled consistently and inexpensively. Apple has manufacturing experience with iPhones, but cars are not phones, so that experience won't necessarily translate.

    Both good points

    The other issue is price. The car market is competitive and costly. Tesla did not post a profit until this year, and even their cheapest model (the base model 3) would be considered moderately priced at best. As others have mentioned, Apple's business model is to design a 'premium' product and price it accordingly. People are willing to pay a few hundred more for a quality computer that they know will work well and last. Convincing them to pay $10-20k more for a car when the competition is already priced at $50-100k is completely different proposition. 

    Apples philosophy is to recognize processes that can use refining and design a product that seamlessly delivers a better user experience.  This is why they can get people to pay a premium for their devices.  Trying to guess where they are going based on what the current market is doing will only guide you astray.
    YP101 said:
    Well, Apple does not need to enter mass car market at the beginning. Start with reference car made like Sony did.
    I am not sure why people think Apple will compete with Tesla at this point.
    Apple just takes 100-500 orders only for high end customer like supercar maker. Cost will be start at $175,000+ with options will be sky is the limit.
    Which Sony failed to do so. Sony should talk Nissan to make 500 pre order only. 
    Apple has upper hand due to they have M1 or A14 chip.

    No.  Apple is not Gucci.  They will sell a premium product, but not baubles for the 1%.

    Apple can buy Lucid motor(if they failed) or other small electric auto company to hand made.
    Apple should control QC so tight, they do not have any issue like Tesla QC problem at the beginning(Not sure they still have issue or not.) will be big selling point.
    Total integration with Apple hardware and software.
    Main console should be 12.9' iPad Pro and 11' iPad pro for the passengers.

    The problem is, as explained by MplsP above, that QC begins and ends with product design.  Apple will need to partner with someone who can provide the experience of mechanical design/production in order to meet Apples standards.  Ever try to build something yourself (from scratch not a kit?). If you’re anything like me, the first couple tries were probably complete crap, only getting marginally better with practice.  That’s because I never took the time to become a craftsman in any specialty (well I got close in jewelry, but that’s it).  The same thing is true with hand built cars, unless you have craftsmen engineering and building the cars you get shoddy, ill fitting crap.  Some are willing to put up with that for exclusivity, but that’s not Apples MO.

    Apple car comes with free usage of Apple TV+, Music while in the car.(license bound to car account. Not normal Apple account.)
    Car key will be your iPhone's face id and main console panel also has face id that when driver side seat will recognize who seat on it and display presetting.
    For the internet, Apple can use Space X internet service as included for 2-3 years free. After that consumer pay if they keep the car longer then that.
    Yes.. Apple will do recycle program for own Apple car too.. For the environment.

    If Apple can  pull this off seamlessly then it will be big hit.
    Oh..  one more thing, by 2024 full auto drive should be normal feature.
    Who knows. Maybe Apple start own auto insurance for own car at the beginning.

    L5 or greater self driving cars are at least a decade away—what Tesla calls “full auto driving” isn’t even L3–and its accident records amply demonstrate this.



    h2p
  • Reply 28 of 33
    I find Tesla a bit Android-y. Having said that, I think Tesla is years ahead of other manufacturers. Mainly because they are so invested in software,  battery tech, charging stations and the like.

    Other marks seem woefully behind including BMW, Mercedes, VW, Toyota, Honda, and, of course, all the American manufacturers.
  • Reply 29 of 33
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    plype11 said:
    Why must we continue using this heinous rendering??
    Because it guarantees at least one comment on the story. 
  • Reply 30 of 33
  • Reply 31 of 33
    micklb74 said:
    Not sure Apple would want to get invested/stuck in yet another mainland China-heavy production chain.

    https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/20_1222_data-security-business-advisory.pdf 
  • Reply 32 of 33
    There is nothing about the construction of EV that is particularly unique or difficult.  As a reference, 30 years ago my friend, Robert, who has an engineering background, single handedly took out the ICE engine of a used MG convertible and placed a fleet of lead batteries to make a very functional, surprising quick EV (albeit quite heavy with only 15 mile range). If lithium batteries were readily available then, he would have built a very effective vehicle.  

    Since Tesla is using commoditized lithium cells made by Panasonic, others can make a similar product.  There are a number of start ups making a claim including Fisker, Rivian, Nikola, Faraday Future, Byton, Lucid, Lordstown.   Traditional car makers are slow to follow due to investments in ICE (innovators dilemma), but will be forced by environmental and policy regulations that are coming down (i.e. California zero emission mandate in 2035, British ICE ban in 2030, Europe ICE ban in 2025).   The MIH/Foxconn Alliance promises the "android system of EV industry," which basically means commoditization of all the pertain parts, which would help undermine Tesla's dominance so far.  An EV is battery, electric motor, suspension, body, electronics, interior, safety system, steering, seats and wheels--which is what Bob built by hand 30 years ago.  Tesla's advantage is large scale production which MIH alliance threatens.  

    MIH/Foxconn also announced they will commercialize solid state batteries in 2024.  With the promise of a solid state lithium battery with 2.5 energy density, we may be looking at lighter cars with twice the range and supercar performance.  When this all shakes out, Tesla will no longer be all the unique or special; certainly not in their crash prone autopilot technology (san Lidar) we hear about monthly in the news or their lack of QA with poor body panel fittings or loose seats.  

    Since these EV are more computer than vehicle, I would think Apple would have an interest in software (autopilot and operating system in the care) but not the hardware.  They would not want to have "android system of EV."

    edited December 2020 svanstromh2p
  • Reply 33 of 33
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,311member
    joguide said:
    There is nothing about the construction of EV that is particularly unique or difficult.  As a reference, 30 years ago my friend, Robert, who has an engineering background, single handedly took out the ICE engine of a used MG convertible and placed a fleet of lead batteries to make a very functional, surprising quick EV (albeit quite heavy with only 15 mile range). If lithium batteries were readily available then, he would have built a very effective vehicle.  

    Since Tesla is using commoditized lithium cells made by Panasonic, others can make a similar product.  There are a number of start ups making a claim including Fisker, Rivian, Nikola, Faraday Future, Byton, Lucid, Lordstown.   Traditional car makers are slow to follow due to investments in ICE (innovators dilemma), but will be forced by environmental and policy regulations that are coming down (i.e. California zero emission mandate in 2035, British ICE ban in 2030, Europe ICE ban in 2025).   The MIH/Foxconn Alliance promises the "android system of EV industry," which basically means commoditization of all the pertain parts, which would help undermine Tesla's dominance so far.  An EV is battery, electric motor, suspension, body, electronics, interior, safety system, steering, seats and wheels--which is what Bob built by hand 30 years ago.  Tesla's advantage is large scale production which MIH alliance threatens.  

    MIH/Foxconn also announced they will commercialize solid state batteries in 2024.  With the promise of a solid state lithium battery with 2.5 energy density, we may be looking at lighter cars with twice the range and supercar performance.  When this all shakes out, Tesla will no longer be all the unique or special; certainly not in their crash prone autopilot technology (san Lidar) we hear about monthly in the news or their lack of QA with poor body panel fittings or loose seats.  

    Since these EV are more computer than vehicle, I would think Apple would have an interest in software (autopilot and operating system in the care) but not the hardware.  They would not want to have "android system of EV."

    Yours is a very accurate take.
Sign In or Register to comment.