VW chief 'not afraid' of 'Apple Car' entering the market

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 53
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 2,054member
    firelock said:
    ... is to have a breakthrough self-driving AI that is orders of magnitude better than what the other manufacturers offer,
    It's not the quality of AI that we should speak about. It's the six official levels of autonomy. Tesla is only at level 2. The chief researcher of IIHS says that "it's important to note that none of these vehicles is capable of driving safely on its own..."

    Three car companies are introducing level 3 cars in 2021: Daimler, Honda, & BMW. Note that Tesla isn't even listed there.

    Each of the six levels (five if you don't count level zero) is useful. I think it starts to get fairly helpful at level 3, where you could probably read a book while driving, but level 4 and up is required if you want to be able to be in the back seat while driving.

    In 2019 Tesla promised that they would have level 5 autonomy by the end of 2019. But they still aren't at level 3. I wish someone would hold Musk responsible for breaking this promise.
    No way I would get into a “Siri” car.
    chadbagPeza
  • Reply 42 of 53
    1348513485 Posts: 194member
    k2kw said:
    No way I would get into a “Siri” car.
    "...Sorry, I can't open the doors. Would you like to hear other Jim Morrison albums?"
    chadbagcrowley
  • Reply 43 of 53
    1348513485 Posts: 194member
    cloudguy said:
    dk49 said:
    Are saying that OEMs would boycott Apple just so that they can maintain their existing customers? Doesn't make sense! This is business, not a family show where companies care about each other. If any OEM sees money in doing business with Apple, they will do it! Sure, existing car manufacturers might not want to partner because that will dilute their brand image. Though I think someone will eventually do it. Automotive industry is a fierce industry, and not every car company is killing it. And even if no car manufacturer agrees to manufacture for Apple, contract manufacturers like Magna are always there.
    Not at all. 
    1. It would be collusion, which is very illegal.
    2. They wouldn't boycott Apple just to maintain their existing customers. They would avoid a business relationship that would provide all the benefits to Apple while practically none to the OEMs.

    I will state it again: the car industry is not the electronics industry. While the electronics manufacturing industry has shifted almost entirely to Asia, automobile companies still make most of their cars in their country of origin. That means profit margins, supply chains, economics, labor union issues, environmental regulation issues, local politics and even nationalism/national pride are totally different for the automobile industry than they are for the electronics one. Where it is easy to find a ton of foreign partners willing to put up with Apple's treatment in electronics - which often are only possible because the workers get very low wages AND the foreign partners get significant government subsidies - that doesn't happen in automotives. The only way to get automobile companies on board is to give them money. Lots of it. 

    Another thing: electronics companies are able to operate on low margins to make it up on volume. Remember: this was literally Apple's "defense" against Qualcomm ... we sell 200 million iPhones a year so you should be making plenty of money off us no matter what licensing rate we choose to pay you. Would even 1 million Apple Cars sell a year? Not every car company killing it ... that is all the more reason to avoid arrangements where you have to expend a ton of resources and effort in return for peanuts. As for contract manufacturers ... the issue is that none of them have the expertise required to help build an automonous electric car that is totally reliant on Apple hardware, software and services. You need to have SOME background in AVs, EVs and smart car platforms, including but not limited to some of your own products or patents in the area. Otherwise, Apple would wind up having to R&D, license and build everything from scratch, which would delay things by years and cost a ton of money. Apple was able to take the core of what they accomplished with the iPhone and reuse it for the iPad, Apple TV, Apple Watch and M1 Mac. Imagine how much time and money it would have taken if they had to do all those products separately. 

    Apple will eventually get this done but only when they realize that it is only going to happen when they come around to the carmakers' terms. Of course, when it happens they will spin it as "carmaker X knew that it was either get behind or get left behind" ... and you guys will believe that spin as always (and because the terms will be kept secret). 
    All your posts today are quite adamant, just not quite accurate.

    First, there would be no collusion.
    Second, There is virtually no business relationship in any field (big or small) in which one party cedes "all the benefits" to the other party.

    Your reasoning that Apple absolutely must have a "background in AVs, EVs, and smart car platforms" is flawed.  You hire expertise, and Apple has done that to the tune of thousands of personnel skilled in the industry. And a lack of background means, of course, that Rivian, Lucid and other EVs coming on the market are an illusion and can't be done. Also Tesla had nothing and a tiny amount of money compared to Apple and yet they are making cars.
    tmaychadbagPeza
  • Reply 44 of 53
    VW is on the steep end of the learning curve with user facing software but has developed a solid platform to build out an array of EVs and early reports show that they have done a good job.

    The I.D.3 was held up for launch to buy time to smooth out the software for the cabin. The I.D. 4 crossover will shortly be hitting the streets here in the US with other models to shortly follow.

    Do not forget that VW also owns Porsche and Audi who are both well on their way with EVs. I am sure that lessons learned at each part of VW will be shared with the other parts. No company has spent more on EV development in recent years that VW AG. I used to own ADRs for VW until it was withdrawn from the US markets and have followed them as a shareholder for many years.

    Finally, I would remind all that VW owns Electrify America which has built out a nationwide charging network and has built a similar network in Europe. Those stations will have charging capability for VW/Audi and Porsche quite comparable to the Supercharger network that Tesla has built. 
    https://www.electrifyamerica.com/locate-charger/
    tmay
  • Reply 45 of 53
    davgreg said:

    Finally, I would remind all that VW owns Electrify America which has built out a nationwide charging network and has built a similar network in Europe. Those stations will have charging capability for VW/Audi and Porsche quite comparable to the Supercharger network that Tesla has built. 
    https://www.electrifyamerica.com/locate-charger/
    You know why VW built Electrify America?  It was part of the settlement of diesel gate - they were required to.

    Electrify America is not only for VW BEVs - it's for any with a compatible charge port.  My Nissan Leaf works for both AC & DC based charging.
  • Reply 46 of 53
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 1,519member
    nicholfd said:
    davgreg said:

    Finally, I would remind all that VW owns Electrify America which has built out a nationwide charging network and has built a similar network in Europe. Those stations will have charging capability for VW/Audi and Porsche quite comparable to the Supercharger network that Tesla has built. 
    https://www.electrifyamerica.com/locate-charger/
    You know why VW built Electrify America?  It was part of the settlement of diesel gate - they were required to.

    Electrify America is not only for VW BEVs - it's for any with a compatible charge port.  My Nissan Leaf works for both AC & DC based charging.
    The reason why is not relevant to the fact they have it.   Yes it can be used by anyone with a compatible charge port but it was designed with their own cars in mind in terms of capability.   To make sure they have rapid high current available to the public not proprietary to Tesla. 
    tmay
  • Reply 47 of 53
    13485 said:
    k2kw said:
    No way I would get into a “Siri” car.
    "...Sorry, I can't open the doors. Would you like to hear other Jim Morrison albums?"
    Your joke was adorable. I won't knock it.
  • Reply 48 of 53
    In my opinion, Apple should focus on breaking through gravity & magnetism , the real deal for transportation & energy. There must be a formula to use Earth's & Sun gravity & magnetism to travel, linking our carbons , hydrogen ,plasma with Cosmic Energy & Matter with the help of the cosmic lubricant/glue that links it all.
    If you look at Elon Musk & his teams , they are just working on ways to break through gravity & magnetic fields , they even try photons !
    I hope Pr.Biden stays involved in Apple's evolution , keeping Private Data safe from the Evil Empire of Facebook. Every American should have a smartphone , a tablet & cheap data for Cyber training  , but it's near impossible to reach Biden, since now Twitter , YouTube, Reddit ,etc. are shadow banning everything & is very hard to reach the POTUS. Does he knows they are trying to corner him , disconnected ? 
    The talks between Elon Musk & Pr. Putin are very important, since Russia is very good with plasma & mechanical engines ,etc.
    Apple is ideally positioned to expand holograms & photons management , they got the hardware needed to start. In my opinion, holograms are the next frontier for entertainment , training & information.
  • Reply 49 of 53
    In my opinion, Apple should focus on breaking through gravity & magnetism , the real deal for transportation & energy. There must be a formula to use Earth's & Sun gravity & magnetism to travel, linking our carbons , hydrogen ,plasma with Cosmic Energy & Matter with the help of the cosmic lubricant/glue that links it all.
    If you look at Elon Musk & his teams , they are just working on ways to break through gravity & magnetic fields , they even try photons !
    I hope Pr.Biden stays involved in Apple's evolution , keeping Private Data safe from the Evil Empire of Facebook. Every American should have a smartphone , a tablet & cheap data for Cyber training  , but it's near impossible to reach Biden, since now Twitter , YouTube, Reddit ,etc. are shadow banning everything & is very hard to reach the POTUS. Does he knows they are trying to corner him , disconnected ? 
    The talks between Elon Musk & Pr. Putin are very important, since Russia is very good with plasma & mechanical engines ,etc.
    Apple is ideally positioned to expand holograms & photons management , they got the hardware needed to start. In my opinion, holograms are the next frontier for entertainment , training & information.
    Works cited:


    chadbagbeowulfschmidt
    iu.jpeg 40.9K
  • Reply 50 of 53
    VW died after the the various class actions for poor engineering and its not worried about apple making a car? VW has yet to respond to the Tesla threat shrinking their relevancy as a car maker. The contradiction of their lack of fear is entertaining. Relic soon.
    VW is doing very well and is replacing cars with combustible engines at lightning speed here in Europe. Also, Tesla's market share is dropping and Tesla is sure to feel the pressure from EVs by VW, MB, BMW, Renault and the PSA/FiatChrysler conglomerate, especially after tax credits will disappear. Tesla is expensive! And dont forget that there is a huge cultural element as well: most if not all of these companies have played an outsized role in re-establishing the European economy after WWII, and are generally trusted and well-liked over here. Big tech (unfortunately) is not, and that is going to be a problem.
  • Reply 51 of 53
    In my opinion ,Apple , VW, Tesla should focus on eVTOL cars ,taxis & vans, etc. and anti-collision software , which includes holograms . In my opinion Tesla.com & SpaceX.com are just doing that , gravity & magnetism management in their own amazing ways .In my opinion apple.com &  vw.com should focus on eVTOL like a laser , and Apple as well in holograms from smartwatches projectors , engineer's dreams since the 80's.
    GRAVITY has a counter force that provides management tools & that we must discover .
  • Reply 52 of 53
    PezaPeza Posts: 197member
    I’m really not surprised by his comments. Apple can’t touch them really, despite the silly comments made on here comparing them to Nokia... the car works is not the same as consumer electronics, it costs a lot of money at the end of the day... personally I find the idea of a self driving electric car from anyone to be duller then the dirtiest dishwater imaginable.
  • Reply 53 of 53
    PezaPeza Posts: 197member
    13485 said:
    cloudguy said:
    dk49 said:
    Are saying that OEMs would boycott Apple just so that they can maintain their existing customers? Doesn't make sense! This is business, not a family show where companies care about each other. If any OEM sees money in doing business with Apple, they will do it! Sure, existing car manufacturers might not want to partner because that will dilute their brand image. Though I think someone will eventually do it. Automotive industry is a fierce industry, and not every car company is killing it. And even if no car manufacturer agrees to manufacture for Apple, contract manufacturers like Magna are always there.
    Not at all. 
    1. It would be collusion, which is very illegal.
    2. They wouldn't boycott Apple just to maintain their existing customers. They would avoid a business relationship that would provide all the benefits to Apple while practically none to the OEMs.

    I will state it again: the car industry is not the electronics industry. While the electronics manufacturing industry has shifted almost entirely to Asia, automobile companies still make most of their cars in their country of origin. That means profit margins, supply chains, economics, labor union issues, environmental regulation issues, local politics and even nationalism/national pride are totally different for the automobile industry than they are for the electronics one. Where it is easy to find a ton of foreign partners willing to put up with Apple's treatment in electronics - which often are only possible because the workers get very low wages AND the foreign partners get significant government subsidies - that doesn't happen in automotives. The only way to get automobile companies on board is to give them money. Lots of it. 

    Another thing: electronics companies are able to operate on low margins to make it up on volume. Remember: this was literally Apple's "defense" against Qualcomm ... we sell 200 million iPhones a year so you should be making plenty of money off us no matter what licensing rate we choose to pay you. Would even 1 million Apple Cars sell a year? Not every car company killing it ... that is all the more reason to avoid arrangements where you have to expend a ton of resources and effort in return for peanuts. As for contract manufacturers ... the issue is that none of them have the expertise required to help build an automonous electric car that is totally reliant on Apple hardware, software and services. You need to have SOME background in AVs, EVs and smart car platforms, including but not limited to some of your own products or patents in the area. Otherwise, Apple would wind up having to R&D, license and build everything from scratch, which would delay things by years and cost a ton of money. Apple was able to take the core of what they accomplished with the iPhone and reuse it for the iPad, Apple TV, Apple Watch and M1 Mac. Imagine how much time and money it would have taken if they had to do all those products separately. 

    Apple will eventually get this done but only when they realize that it is only going to happen when they come around to the carmakers' terms. Of course, when it happens they will spin it as "carmaker X knew that it was either get behind or get left behind" ... and you guys will believe that spin as always (and because the terms will be kept secret). 
    All your posts today are quite adamant, just not quite accurate.

    First, there would be no collusion.
    Second, There is virtually no business relationship in any field (big or small) in which one party cedes "all the benefits" to the other party.

    Your reasoning that Apple absolutely must have a "background in AVs, EVs, and smart car platforms" is flawed.  You hire expertise, and Apple has done that to the tune of thousands of personnel skilled in the industry. And a lack of background means, of course, that Rivian, Lucid and other EVs coming on the market are an illusion and can't be done. Also Tesla had nothing and a tiny amount of money compared to Apple and yet they are making cars.
    To be fair to Tesla though, their quality isn’t the best, they also came up with the niche for sales by investing in the charging network and fast chargers, something no other brand has matched really. And it’s all exclusive to Tesla for now. They do need to improve their quality though for the price they charge. But a Tesla selling point is the range and ease of recharging it. Apple will have to be damn clever with a new gimmick to sell Apple cars, but personally I don’t think they will be doing that, they will hire them or something. Try to modernise transport by you not actually owning a car. You call for some self driving thing like a cab etc. However that also seems a bit too far off to be reality.
Sign In or Register to comment.