If Apple does enter this market, I hope it's with a new business model that completely disrupts the market. The popularity of leases and now Uber suggest to me that many people don't want to own a car. And the aspects of car ownership that people like -- personalization and convenience -- can be replicated without ownership.
As I've said before, I think Apple should offer transportation as a service, but far better than what Uber has done.
When I call an Apple Car from my iPhone, I want a comfortable, safe, personalized ride. My music and video, ready to play on the in-car entertainment system. I want flexibility to pick up friends, drop people off, make multiple stops, have the car wait while I run in to pick something up. No hassle, no constraints. Just a radically better experience.
I personally do not believe apple will make a car, i think their goal is the driving user experience and how people interact with the car. So they are looking to partner with some company who will allow them to control that experience. I do not believe they will take on the entire car design.
I believe history will prove you wrong.
i would say the over/under of being wrong is more likely I would be wrong. However, Apple building a car, we can discuss what build means in this case, but I think we will not see a car which all components in the car came from Cupertino. Yes, most car use many parts in common from a number of companies, but at the end of the day Apple would still have to work to design all the parts since they can not use other companies parts. Unless that company is using their own car design. So is Apple doing the Skin on the car and the user interaction experience or are they designing all aspect of the car including the suspension and other safety critical parts.
This is why all the rumors about Apple trying to partner with various car companies, they want someone else to "build" the car and Apple will overlay their value add.
If Apple does enter this market, I hope it's with a new business model that completely disrupts the market. The popularity of leases and now Uber suggest to me that many people don't want to own a car. And the aspects of car ownership that people like -- personalization and convenience -- can be replicated without ownership.
As I've said before, I think Apple should offer transportation as a service, but far better than what Uber has done.
When I call an Apple Car from my iPhone, I want a comfortable, safe, personalized ride. My music and video, ready to play on the in-car entertainment system. I want flexibility to pick up friends, drop people off, make multiple stops, have the car wait while I run in to pick something up. No hassle, no constraints. Just a radically better experience.
I think you make a good point, although I still think there are major issues. I think as soon as fully autonomous cars have a few accidents and people are hurt or killed, there's going to be tremendous backlash against them and because it's an easy win for politicians, they will be banned from certain localities and roads. And I have no doubt that if autonomous car services show up in major cities where traditional Taxi services or Uber/Lyft type services exist, those autonomous cars will be quickly violently destroyed by frustrated drivers. Do you really think the Teamsters union is going to permit autonomous trucks on the road? Anyone who believes they will is not living in the real world, IMO.
In addition, I'm not sure very many people really want an autonomous car. Autonomous cars won't drive over the speed limit or tailgate. I think the typical macho American driver (of any gender) won't want to give up that control and ability.
I think cars are going to be problematic for Apple because if the Apple car is going to be priced in high-end Tesla / Lucid territory, that's a small market and would STILL have a much smaller margin than Apple is used to. And while the article implies that Apple would sell services to make up the short margin, if I'm paying $60,000 far a car, I would expect the services would come with the car. And, there's far more competition than Apple experiences today and they all already have their dealer networks today in place. Also, there are certain states where manufacturers cannot own dealerships. I believe that's the case in New Jersey.
When you talk about a new business model, if the car is completely autonomous, what if it's a pay-as-you-go or subscription model where you don't own or lease a car at all. When you want a car, the car drives itself to your location, it preloads all the personalization based on your profile as you've suggested and when you're done, the car drives itself to the next customer or to some warehouse where the car is readied for the next person.
But there's another model that might work. Apple develops the battery technology, drive-train, controls and user-interface and establishes the charging network. They sell that to other car manufacturers rather than producing their own bodies. So basically, Apple provides the OS and associated hardware to everyone else. But again, that's becoming an OEM vendor and it's generally very short margin.
There's another issue and that's that in recent years, IMO Apple is not as customer service oriented as they once were. They are not going to be able to get away with not having full long-term warranties on their cars and people are not going to pay extra for Apple-Car Care within a typical 5-year warranty term. Does Apple really think they can sell Apple car buyers an Apple Care package and then they still have to pay extra for "incidents" like they do now? That will never fly. Will Apple make the cars like the computers and the phones where there's no ability for the end-user to replace or upgrade parts? How about filling fluids? Will one have to return to an Apple car dealer for such service? Etc.
If Apple does enter this market, I hope it's with a new business model that completely disrupts the market. The popularity of leases and now Uber suggest to me that many people don't want to own a car. And the aspects of car ownership that people like -- personalization and convenience -- can be replicated without ownership.
As I've said before, I think Apple should offer transportation as a service, but far better than what Uber has done.
When I call an Apple Car from my iPhone, I want a comfortable, safe, personalized ride. My music and video, ready to play on the in-car entertainment system. I want flexibility to pick up friends, drop people off, make multiple stops, have the car wait while I run in to pick something up. No hassle, no constraints. Just a radically better experience.
I personally do not believe apple will make a car, i think their goal is the driving user experience and how people interact with the car. So they are looking to partner with some company who will allow them to control that experience. I do not believe they will take on the entire car design.
I believe history will prove you wrong.
i would say the over/under of being wrong is more likely I would be wrong. However, Apple building a car, we can discuss what build means in this case, but I think we will not see a car which all components in the car came from Cupertino. Yes, most car use many parts in common from a number of companies, but at the end of the day Apple would still have to work to design all the parts since they can not use other companies parts. Unless that company is using their own car design. So is Apple doing the Skin on the car and the user interaction experience or are they designing all aspect of the car including the suspension and other safety critical parts.
This is why all the rumors about Apple trying to partner with various car companies, they want someone else to "build" the car and Apple will overlay their value add.
I quite agree: Apple has less reason to build their own cars than they do to (physically) build their own phones. Ain't gonna happen.
If Apple does enter this market, I hope it's with a new business model that completely disrupts the market. The popularity of leases and now Uber suggest to me that many people don't want to own a car. And the aspects of car ownership that people like -- personalization and convenience -- can be replicated without ownership.
As I've said before, I think Apple should offer transportation as a service, but far better than what Uber has done.
When I call an Apple Car from my iPhone, I want a comfortable, safe, personalized ride. My music and video, ready to play on the in-car entertainment system. I want flexibility to pick up friends, drop people off, make multiple stops, have the car wait while I run in to pick something up. No hassle, no constraints. Just a radically better experience.
I think you make a good point, although I still think there are major issues. I think as soon as fully autonomous cars have a few accidents and people are hurt or killed, there's going to be tremendous backlash against them and because it's an easy win for politicians, they will be banned from certain localities and roads. And I have no doubt that if autonomous car services show up in major cities where traditional Taxi services or Uber/Lyft type services exist, those autonomous cars will be quickly violently destroyed by frustrated drivers. Do you really think the Teamsters union is going to permit autonomous trucks on the road? Anyone who believes they will is not living in the real world, IMO.
In addition, I'm not sure very many people really want an autonomous car. Autonomous cars won't drive over the speed limit or tailgate. I think the typical macho American driver (of any gender) won't want to give up that control and ability. .....
Good arguments.
I think the buggy whip industry made equally good arguments.
But, I agree that the U.S. will likely tail behind much of the world both in the manufacture and implementation of modern vehicles. The "Detroit Iron" mentality will act like an anchor. But, there is another aspect that, because of Tesla, people are missing: High Tech EVs are not the same as self-driving. They are only thought of together because of Tesla. But you can make any internal combustion engined car self driving as easily as an EV -- and vice-versa. Conversely, high performance internal combustion engines simply can't keep up with high performance EVs -- so the tailgater will likely be embarrassed -- and they hate that.*
* It brings back memories of Mazda's Wankel engine: Once you got it up over about 40 mph that thing would scream. I was out of town and rented one. It was in a junky, crappy looking compact Mazda (something a grandma would drive). As I was merging onto a freeway in Indianapolis a Chevelle 396 tried to pass me -- that crappy little Mazda just blew his doors off! It made him look like he was standing still.
If Apple does enter this market, I hope it's with a new business model that completely disrupts the market. The popularity of leases and now Uber suggest to me that many people don't want to own a car. And the aspects of car ownership that people like -- personalization and convenience -- can be replicated without ownership.
As I've said before, I think Apple should offer transportation as a service, but far better than what Uber has done.
When I call an Apple Car from my iPhone, I want a comfortable, safe, personalized ride. My music and video, ready to play on the in-car entertainment system. I want flexibility to pick up friends, drop people off, make multiple stops, have the car wait while I run in to pick something up. No hassle, no constraints. Just a radically better experience.
I think you make a good point, although I still think there are major issues. I think as soon as fully autonomous cars have a few accidents and people are hurt or killed, there's going to be tremendous backlash against them and because it's an easy win for politicians, they will be banned from certain localities and roads. And I have no doubt that if autonomous car services show up in major cities where traditional Taxi services or Uber/Lyft type services exist, those autonomous cars will be quickly violently destroyed by frustrated drivers. Do you really think the Teamsters union is going to permit autonomous trucks on the road? Anyone who believes they will is not living in the real world, IMO.
In addition, I'm not sure very many people really want an autonomous car. Autonomous cars won't drive over the speed limit or tailgate. I think the typical macho American driver (of any gender) won't want to give up that control and ability.
I think cars are going to be problematic for Apple because if the Apple car is going to be priced in high-end Tesla / Lucid territory, that's a small market and would STILL have a much smaller margin than Apple is used to. And while the article implies that Apple would sell services to make up the short margin, if I'm paying $60,000 far a car, I would expect the services would come with the car. And, there's far more competition than Apple experiences today and they all already have their dealer networks today in place. Also, there are certain states where manufacturers cannot own dealerships. I believe that's the case in New Jersey.
When you talk about a new business model, if the car is completely autonomous, what if it's a pay-as-you-go or subscription model where you don't own or lease a car at all. When you want a car, the car drives itself to your location, it preloads all the personalization based on your profile as you've suggested and when you're done, the car drives itself to the next customer or to some warehouse where the car is readied for the next person.
But there's another model that might work. Apple develops the battery technology, drive-train, controls and user-interface and establishes the charging network. They sell that to other car manufacturers rather than producing their own bodies. So basically, Apple provides the OS and associated hardware to everyone else. But again, that's becoming an OEM vendor and it's generally very short margin.
There's another issue and that's that in recent years, IMO Apple is not as customer service oriented as they once were. They are not going to be able to get away with not having full long-term warranties on their cars and people are not going to pay extra for Apple-Car Care within a typical 5-year warranty term. Does Apple really think they can sell Apple car buyers an Apple Care package and then they still have to pay extra for "incidents" like they do now? That will never fly. Will Apple make the cars like the computers and the phones where there's no ability for the end-user to replace or upgrade parts? How about filling fluids? Will one have to return to an Apple car dealer for such service? Etc.
You make a number of interesting points.
First, and I have been saying this since the whole autonomous driving came about. Before I will let a car drive me I want to know the car's prime directive. Meaning does the car hit the deer and kill it or the tree and kill me. Any driver who really drives their car make hard decisions when they find themselves in a life or death situation and most time that decision to preserve their own life. Yes there a number of people who serve to miss the dog or cat or squirrel and hit the tree and cause more damage than if they just hit the animal. I think we would all agree if you knew the would hit the tree ahead of time you would think twice about getting into a car with them. Everyone is enamorized with a car driving itself very few think about who they are going to call when the self driving car kills something. I will concede once everything is self driving the likelihood of an event like this will decrease, but no algorithm can foresee people doing stupid things or a deer leaping from woods or the patch of black ice on the road.
You do not have to worry about the teamsters more trucks today are driven by non-union then union drivers, it like 60 non-union to 40 union.
The other thing, why does a car need to have entertainment system, when you drive you are supposed to drive not be messing around with other things in the car. If more people focused their attention on the road there would be less accidents and no need for cars to drive us. Prior to cell phone, the 3 top reason why someone was distracting while drive and had an accident was yelling at their kids, playing with the radio and eating while driving. We never trying to outlaw allowing you to drive your kids in the car, or have all radio's removed or shut down all restaurant drive, but they felt the need to ban the cell phone but create car interiors which are more distracting to drive.
I do agree there is a move to stop personal ownership of vehicle, it will going to more of pay as you go or time/ownership sharing. I believe this is happening for a number of reason, one car are becoming complicated and becoming costly to repair and maintain unless you know how to work on cars. Fewer and fewer people are willing to learn, most people are becoming too lazy. It is easier, but more costly to let others do things for you. We will have society of people who only exist to wait on and service other people. Just look at what happen in Calif, they voted to remove the law that forces gig workers to be employed by the gig company. Why did this happen, people obviously did not care enough about the gig workers who are under paid and barely make a living in a high cost of living state. They did understand if the gig companies shut down and they would be forced to do things for themselves again. They care more about what it meant to themselves than the people who provided the services to them.
Comments
This is why all the rumors about Apple trying to partner with various car companies, they want someone else to "build" the car and Apple will overlay their value add.
In addition, I'm not sure very many people really want an autonomous car. Autonomous cars won't drive over the speed limit or tailgate. I think the typical macho American driver (of any gender) won't want to give up that control and ability.
I think cars are going to be problematic for Apple because if the Apple car is going to be priced in high-end Tesla / Lucid territory, that's a small market and would STILL have a much smaller margin than Apple is used to. And while the article implies that Apple would sell services to make up the short margin, if I'm paying $60,000 far a car, I would expect the services would come with the car. And, there's far more competition than Apple experiences today and they all already have their dealer networks today in place. Also, there are certain states where manufacturers cannot own dealerships. I believe that's the case in New Jersey.
When you talk about a new business model, if the car is completely autonomous, what if it's a pay-as-you-go or subscription model where you don't own or lease a car at all. When you want a car, the car drives itself to your location, it preloads all the personalization based on your profile as you've suggested and when you're done, the car drives itself to the next customer or to some warehouse where the car is readied for the next person.
But there's another model that might work. Apple develops the battery technology, drive-train, controls and user-interface and establishes the charging network. They sell that to other car manufacturers rather than producing their own bodies. So basically, Apple provides the OS and associated hardware to everyone else. But again, that's becoming an OEM vendor and it's generally very short margin.
There's another issue and that's that in recent years, IMO Apple is not as customer service oriented as they once were. They are not going to be able to get away with not having full long-term warranties on their cars and people are not going to pay extra for Apple-Car Care within a typical 5-year warranty term. Does Apple really think they can sell Apple car buyers an Apple Care package and then they still have to pay extra for "incidents" like they do now? That will never fly. Will Apple make the cars like the computers and the phones where there's no ability for the end-user to replace or upgrade parts? How about filling fluids? Will one have to return to an Apple car dealer for such service? Etc.
I quite agree: Apple has less reason to build their own cars than they do to (physically) build their own phones. Ain't gonna happen.
First, and I have been saying this since the whole autonomous driving came about. Before I will let a car drive me I want to know the car's prime directive. Meaning does the car hit the deer and kill it or the tree and kill me. Any driver who really drives their car make hard decisions when they find themselves in a life or death situation and most time that decision to preserve their own life. Yes there a number of people who serve to miss the dog or cat or squirrel and hit the tree and cause more damage than if they just hit the animal. I think we would all agree if you knew the would hit the tree ahead of time you would think twice about getting into a car with them. Everyone is enamorized with a car driving itself very few think about who they are going to call when the self driving car kills something. I will concede once everything is self driving the likelihood of an event like this will decrease, but no algorithm can foresee people doing stupid things or a deer leaping from woods or the patch of black ice on the road.
You do not have to worry about the teamsters more trucks today are driven by non-union then union drivers, it like 60 non-union to 40 union.
The other thing, why does a car need to have entertainment system, when you drive you are supposed to drive not be messing around with other things in the car. If more people focused their attention on the road there would be less accidents and no need for cars to drive us. Prior to cell phone, the 3 top reason why someone was distracting while drive and had an accident was yelling at their kids, playing with the radio and eating while driving. We never trying to outlaw allowing you to drive your kids in the car, or have all radio's removed or shut down all restaurant drive, but they felt the need to ban the cell phone but create car interiors which are more distracting to drive.
I do agree there is a move to stop personal ownership of vehicle, it will going to more of pay as you go or time/ownership sharing. I believe this is happening for a number of reason, one car are becoming complicated and becoming costly to repair and maintain unless you know how to work on cars. Fewer and fewer people are willing to learn, most people are becoming too lazy. It is easier, but more costly to let others do things for you. We will have society of people who only exist to wait on and service other people. Just look at what happen in Calif, they voted to remove the law that forces gig workers to be employed by the gig company. Why did this happen, people obviously did not care enough about the gig workers who are under paid and barely make a living in a high cost of living state. They did understand if the gig companies shut down and they would be forced to do things for themselves again. They care more about what it meant to themselves than the people who provided the services to them.