Apple reportedly in talks with multiple Japanese automakers over 'Apple Car'

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 49
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    sirdir said:
    The Japanese believe in H2, I don’t see a bright future fit them 

    That's Toyota.   Not the "the Japanese"  But, none of the Japanese auto companies are leading in EVs.
  • Reply 22 of 49
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    davgreg said:
    Nobody truly has any idea what they have planned excepting those directly involved, but going into cars looks like a bag of hurt.

    1- There is a vast amount of overcapacity in the car/truck business and  many/most existing makers are the recipients of considerable subsidy or tax advantage in their home countries. Anything that impacts that is a political third rail. There will be a shakeout in the business, but governments will fight tooth and nail to keep incumbents in the game. Government Motors and Chrysler are US examples of that.


    That's a good point -- and that overcapacity will be getting worse as EVs replace those old ICs the factories are setup for.  
    If nothing else, aside from being very, very different, EVs require far fewer parts.   Thousands of fewer parts. 
    So those old factories setup for old technology will face a double whammy!

    As for government subsidies, (and "government motors") that was a bail out from 12 years ago when some fool crashed the economy.

    But subsidies continue to be alive and well -- they just go to the fossil fuel industries who want to see those old, outdated, ICs continue to bellow carbon into the air.  But, that corporate welfare will soon be going away -- so they'll have to exist on their own merits.   More than likely they will suffer the same fate coal did when it ran up against cheaper, cleaner, more efficient natural gas.

    h2p
  • Reply 23 of 49
    1348513485 Posts: 345member
    davgreg said:
    Nobody truly has any idea what they have planned excepting those directly involved, but going into cars looks like a bag of hurt.

    1- There is a vast amount of overcapacity in the car/truck business and  many/most existing makers are the recipients of considerable subsidy or tax advantage in their home countries. Anything that impacts that is a political third rail. There will be a shakeout in the business, but governments will fight tooth and nail to keep incumbents in the game. Government Motors and Chrysler are US examples of that.

    2- These days many carmakers outsource considerable portions of the design to component suppliers, giving guidance but letting them handle the guts of a door assembly or such things. I am not sure the anal retentive control freaks of Apple are willing to do that with the supplier firms and going it alone greatly complicates the process.

    3- The manufacturing process and supply chain involved in making cars and trucks is not something an outsider just jumps into and does well. Tesla started with a legacy GM/Toyota plan in California, hired experienced Auto industry people and and still struggled mightily with production bottlenecks and quality.

    The weak point among legacy manufacturers is software and user interface. That is where Apple has a natural competency and partnering with an existing player like Volkswagen would make sense. The new VW ID 3 and 4 are very well done but they are still working the kinks out of the software and responsiveness of the interface.
    Re 1:  Do you think that the US government would/is trying to prevent Tesla from entering the market because they are taking sales away from GM and FCA? Did they stop BMW, Honda, Toyota, Hyundai/Kia, VW etc. from building and selling their cars here? No.

    Re 2:  Oversight of steel, aluminum, fiberglass, whatever fabrication requires onsite management and/or regular onsite or offsite inspection. It's no different than any other industry. You hire expertise if you don't already have it.

    Re 3:  "No computer company is just going to jump into the phone business...(paraphrasing). Tesla had, and has, quality problems because Musk is a flake, altho brilliant to be sure, and the pressure he applies to production causes shortcuts to be taken. Hi did hire automotive people but he wouldn't leave them alone.

    VW won't partner with Apple because they want to do it their way. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 49
    Thinking out loud: 
    iPhone = computer in your pocket
    EV = computer on wheels
    Therefore, building an EV is more complex than building computers. 

    As a shareholder, I believe having others build the EV for Apple is a better business model, more cost effective than building a factory, hire personnel, and build it themselves. In addition, Apple don’t have to deal with unions that wrecked the US auto industries. Outsourcing production is not without challenges and risks; however, those challenges and risks are outweighed by the benefits.

    In addition, there are so many people criticizing Apples rumored plan. My question is, are these people actually managed a multi-trillion company? Have they actually run a business that have done better than Apple? Have they accomplished a profit level that Apple consistently achieved? If they have, why are they wasting time in this forum?
    byronllolliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 49
    Remember when all the rumourmongers were just as positive that Apple would buy BeOS for their operating system as they are now that the-too-chatty-for-Apple Hyundai will be Apple's car partner.

    Think Apple and VW Group instead.
    n2itivguywatto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 49
    JFC_PAJFC_PA Posts: 932member
    For fun I’d like to see Ford and Apple fo it. An enterprise vehicle is an interesting route, totally devoid of glamor which is an interesting debut choice. 

    ETA: Gah, Ford just announced a tech partnership with Google. No thanks. 
    edited February 2021 watto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 49
    I find the concept of a self driving car to be fascinating. Driving a car involves many areas of awareness dealing with split second decisions. Imagine pulling up to a busy uncontrolled intersection and wanting to turn onto the far-most lane of cross traffic. This is not an easy task. Imagine the complexity of an algorithm to solve this problem. The situation is unique every time. The cross traffic will have varying rates of acceleration and deceleration. How could an algorithm know if one of the cars in cross traffic slows down a bit, flashes their lights indicating that they are being polite and allowing you to enter traffic.

    If Apple or anyone else can pull this off in a reliable safe manner it is a feat beyond my comprehension. No matter who is actually assembling the car. 
    cg27byronllolliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 49
    flydogflydog Posts: 1,123member
    Wiseman said:
    M68000 said:
    Imagine trying to build a car but have to rely on somebody else to do it.  The challenges with knowing what is going on and controlling things.  All the levels of managers and their own ideas of what should be done.  There was a recent article,  I think about Hyundai,  that said their execs are not sure about such a thing.  After all,  who could blame them,  they have their own company with their own plans. Would it just be easier for Apple to build manufacturing plants from the ground up? I mean after all,  it seems every quarterly and yearly financial report is another “record breaking” event and Apple seems to have boatloads of money.  One of the real questions of course is who would buy an Apple car?  just because Apple is great at selling hundreds of millions of iPhones ,  that does not mean those customers want or need an Apple car.
    I would say a new phone with billion small components and new functions once a year is much harder to build than a car
    Not true. 
    cg27
  • Reply 29 of 49
    h2ph2p Posts: 329member
    MplsP said:
    Finally, does apple realize that ‘right to repair’ already exists in the automotive world?
    Excellent point, MplsP. Fulfillment of Warranty considerations points to Apple working with a car company having a network of dealers. Also 'right to repair' is Not going away, Apple, so I would be shocked if they thought otherwise. To combat this fact, at first, could be setting commercial vehicle so that purchasers make money from the use of an Apple Car.

    An 'Apple Car Care+' subscription would simplify maintenance/warranty requirements. Strike a deal with supercharger networks. (Consider articles like this one [US charging networks]: https://www.myev.com/research/comparisons/comparing-public-electric-vehicle-charging-networks)

    Also the big oil companies are increasingly adopting the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" attitude.



    n2itivguy
  • Reply 30 of 49
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,567member
    ireland said:
    mattinoz said:
    What stops them having multiple models each made by a different group?

    Apple Car Mini (2 + 2ish people) , Apple Car (5 people) & Apple Car Max (7 people)

    Well apart from the trade dress issues of Apple car mini.
    They won’t be able to use the name “mini” for starters.
    Correct. Unless Apple buys or licenses the name. I would note that before Apple introduced the iPhone, there already was a telephone product called "iPhone".
    lolliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 49
    entropysentropys Posts: 4,162member
    sirdir said:
    The Japanese believe in H2, I don’t see a bright future fit them 

    That's Toyota.   Not the "the Japanese"  But, none of the Japanese auto companies are leading in EVs.
    Hyundai, a Korean company, is also into H2 fuel cells.
    there is too much religious fever in future car power options these days. Most car companies not run by Californian hippies will happily sell you whatever car you want, with any engine enough of us want, within the confines of government regulation and subsidy.
    Fuel cells are a valid option that solve the range anxiety and recharge time issues for EVs in a way that the incremental advances in battery tech within the limitations of metallurgy probably never will. Unless someone discovers vibranium I suppose.
    EVs for urban runabouts; fuel cells for long distance; ICE for heavy transport. And the boundaries between them quite blurred to reflect the myriad mix of use cases people have and the reality a family does not have a fleet of cars and must choose the one that fits most of their needs as flexibly as possible.
    edited February 2021 watto_cobra
  • Reply 32 of 49
    XedXed Posts: 2,533member
    ireland said:
    mattinoz said:
    What stops them having multiple models each made by a different group?

    Apple Car Mini (2 + 2ish people) , Apple Car (5 people) & Apple Car Max (7 people)

    Well apart from the trade dress issues of Apple car mini.
    They won’t be able to use the name “mini” for starters.
    Correct. Unless Apple buys or licenses the name. I would note that before Apple introduced the iPhone, there already was a telephone product called "iPhone".
    I'm not expecting Apple to follow their CE device naming schemes for automobiles.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 33 of 49
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    13485 said:
    davgreg said:
    Nobody truly has any idea what they have planned excepting those directly involved, but going into cars looks like a bag of hurt.

    1- There is a vast amount of overcapacity in the car/truck business and  many/most existing makers are the recipients of considerable subsidy or tax advantage in their home countries. Anything that impacts that is a political third rail. There will be a shakeout in the business, but governments will fight tooth and nail to keep incumbents in the game. Government Motors and Chrysler are US examples of that.

    2- These days many carmakers outsource considerable portions of the design to component suppliers, giving guidance but letting them handle the guts of a door assembly or such things. I am not sure the anal retentive control freaks of Apple are willing to do that with the supplier firms and going it alone greatly complicates the process.

    3- The manufacturing process and supply chain involved in making cars and trucks is not something an outsider just jumps into and does well. Tesla started with a legacy GM/Toyota plan in California, hired experienced Auto industry people and and still struggled mightily with production bottlenecks and quality.

    The weak point among legacy manufacturers is software and user interface. That is where Apple has a natural competency and partnering with an existing player like Volkswagen would make sense. The new VW ID 3 and 4 are very well done but they are still working the kinks out of the software and responsiveness of the interface.
    ...
    Re 3:  "No computer company is just going to jump into the phone business...(paraphrasing). Tesla had, and has, quality problems because Musk is a flake, altho brilliant to be sure, and the pressure he applies to production causes shortcuts to be taken. Hi did hire automotive people but he wouldn't leave them alone.

    ...

    ...and now Musk is light years ahead of not only every other U.S. auto manufacturer -- but while he was at it, he left Boeing in the dust too while he created Neuralink and the Boring Company.

    We need a lot more flakes just like him!
    byronln2itivguy
  • Reply 34 of 49
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,567member
    Apple is skating to where the puck will be.
    Yes, and that's why I speculate (wildly?) that Apple is going to replace the standard Lithium Batteries with Hydrogen Fuel Cells. In ten years it's expected by most pundits that 10% of the battery market will be hydrogen fuel cells. Who will be the first to do go there? Maybe Apple. This is truly "skating to where the puck will be."

    Let's agree, both battery technologies (LB and HFC) use electricity as their source of power, and in some places like Germany and Hawaii, most of the power comes from coal or other carbon-powered generators such as oil or natural gas. So electric cars end up using whatever the energy source is for the power grid (especially if they are manufactured in Germany which uses dirty power in its manufacturing process for clean cars!) So in that sense even Tesla vehicles generate tons of CO2 if you get your car's power (or the power from the manufacturing facility which manufactures or assembles your car) from electricity which comes from coal. 

    Here's what I like most about HFC: it takes the same amount of time to fuel up a hydrogen fuel cell car as it takes to fuel a gas powered car. This alone might tempt me to go electric.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/neilwinton/2020/04/26/could-hydrogen-fuel-cells-revive-threaten-battery-technology-in-cars/ <-- lots of info

    Five years ago Elon Musk gave several reasons why HFC was "silly" for cars in a video you can find on Youtube called "Elon Musk on Hydrogen Fuel Cells". That video doesn't strike me as truly honest for several reasons, one reason he gave was that "hydrogen isn't a source of energy, it's an energy storage mechanism" which is exactly true for Lithium Batteries used by Tesla. So he gets four Pinocchio's for that. Does he think we're all idiots? His main criticism was that using them was only 50% as efficient as Lithium batteries. Fair enough. But HFCs still can use clean energy as their power source, unlike fossil fuels, so what does it matter if you use "twice as much clean energy"? It's still clean. Especially if it's generated locally from solar panels on your roof. And when you balance the fact that using Lithium is extremely harmful on the earth in terms of mining and pollution, maybe HFCs are already as clean as Lithium. And it will only get better as we invent better and safer ways to store hydrogen.

    Here's a pretty decent, recent video about the issues:

    <--

    I expect this post will be wildly divisive, and I'm not in the mood to respond to everyone's attacks on this post. All I'm trying to say here is that using HFCs is "skating to where the puck will be."
    n2itivguyJaphey
  • Reply 35 of 49
    A real breakthrough would be if Apple could incorporate solar cells into the exterior body and the car is self charging.
    n2itivguywatto_cobra
  • Reply 36 of 49
    jdwjdw Posts: 1,332member
    Very, very good news indeed.  All the recent news about KIA and Hyundai had me worried. Not only would a Japanese auto maker tie-up better ensure success in the world's third largest economy, but it also raises the bar in terms of overall quality AND it potentially brings another 100% electric car player into a market utter devoid of them.  I only see Tesla cars rarely in central Japan where I live.  Hybrids are everywhere, and I look forward to seeing them replaced with something vastly better.  
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 37 of 49
    XedXed Posts: 2,533member
    MisterKit said:
    A real breakthrough would be if Apple could incorporate solar cells into the exterior body and the car is self charging.
    This has been done already. While I like the idea I think we're a long ways off from this being viable in terms of value and usefulness.

    The Hyundai Sonata can give you a couple miles per day, but that of course means it's in direct, strong sunlight. It's not nothing, but it's close to it.

    The Tesla CyberTruck is said to allow a maximum of 15 miles per day with what is clearly a much larger area for a solar roof and possible better solar panel tech than what is offered on the Sonata. This could be enough for many commuters, but that also would require direct, intense sunlight. I wonder how much energy it takes to cool down the interior when you get in v just parking in the shade.

    That said, I'd certainly like to see advance to all the top-mounted body panels in autos.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 38 of 49
    mattinoz said:
    What stops them having multiple models each made by a different group?

    Apple Car Mini (2 + 2ish people) , Apple Car (5 people) & Apple Car Max (7 people)

    Well apart from the trade dress issues of Apple car mini.
    The CarMin, Car and CarMax ™ 😉
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 39 of 49
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    MplsP said:
    From all the other rumors that have been circulating, I thought Apple had already written a check to Kia and the cars were coming off the line later this year?

    As some people here seem to get while others are oblivious, cars are not phones. @cg27 is right - a car has thousands of moving parts exposed to the environment. The only moving part in an iphone is the switch. You wouldn’t expect Ford or Toyota to march in and make a great smart phone, why do we expect Apple to march in and make a great car? Ostensibly, that is exactly why Apple would partner with a car company. Apple could focus on the tech and interface and leave the manufacturing tech to the car company. 

    Design is important, too. Not the Jonny Ive design, but designing the components so they can be efficiently and reliably assembled. Apple has experience designing phones that Foxconn can assemble, not cars that an assembly line can assemble.

    Finally, does apple realize that ‘right to repair’ already exists in the automotive world?
    Well, that won’t apply if they’re not actually selling you a car, will it?

    And I have “right to repair” on my Prius, but if I get it fixed at an unauthorised bodge shop the warranty is invalidated. 

    This is probably why Apple won’t be selling cars to the masses. The last thing they want is to be involved in a lawsuit involving multiple deaths because some idiot let his mate “tune up” the car. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 40 of 49
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    entropys said:
    sirdir said:
    The Japanese believe in H2, I don’t see a bright future fit them 

    That's Toyota.   Not the "the Japanese"  But, none of the Japanese auto companies are leading in EVs.
    Hyundai, a Korean company, is also into H2 fuel cells.
    there is too much religious fever in future car power options these days. Most car companies not run by Californian hippies will happily sell you whatever car you want, with any engine enough of us want, within the confines of government regulation and subsidy.
    Fuel cells are a valid option that solve the range anxiety and recharge time issues for EVs in a way that the incremental advances in battery tech within the limitations of metallurgy probably never will. Unless someone discovers vibranium I suppose.
    EVs for urban runabouts; fuel cells for long distance; ICE for heavy transport. And the boundaries between them quite blurred to reflect the myriad mix of use cases people have and the reality a family does not have a fleet of cars and must choose the one that fits most of their needs as flexibly as possible.

    Hydrogen fuel cells do well from a pollution / climate change perspective.   But they bring their own problems to the table. 

    Autos are not simply an individual choice but a societal choice because, to be viable, society has to support them.   And, right now, that choice is pointing towards EVs.
    edited February 2021
Sign In or Register to comment.