Apple loses Mac engineering chief, former Mercedes R&D exec Johann Jungwirth to Volkswagen

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 87
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by fallenjt View Post





    I would say it's about 5%. My BMW cars are around 3-4mph more than any GPS reference I used on freeways (60-70mph speeds).



    I have to say that every car I've owned in the last 20 years has been pretty much dead on with respect to the odometer. I test it on the freeway mile markers. It is affected by your tires though. As long as you have factory tires it should be extremely accurate. I have never compared the mph against a GPS.

  • Reply 62 of 87
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,453member
    mstone wrote: »

    I have to say that every car I've owned in the last 20 years has been pretty much dead on with respect to the odometer. I test it on the freeway mile markers. It is affected by your tires though. As long as you have factory tires it should be extremely accurate. I have never compared the mph against a GPS.
    Car speedometers are typically calibrated to read higher than actual speed if anything. Deviate from suggested tire size tho and as you suggested that may change.
  • Reply 63 of 87
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    Car speedometers are typically calibrated to read higher than actual speed if anything. Deviate from suggested tire size tho and as you suggested that may change.



    That's fine for speed, keeps you from speeding, but if the odometer was off, there would be tons of complaints. Either people renting a car or reselling their car with more miles than they actually drove or people contracting their own car and getting paid by the mile would be out money if it was under reported.

     

    Edit: I've just read now that there are instances of inaccurate odometers. 

     

    Edit2: The worst case I could find online was a 2006 Ford explorer at 3% over.

  • Reply 64 of 87
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by waterrockets View Post

     

     

    Litigation can be costly, but I'm not sure what the damages are for class action. Completed listings on ebay don't appear to be under-priced -- certainly not to the point of claiming damages. This will blow over and VW AG will be fine.

     

    Keep this in mind: we don't want to live in a world where VW goes down for evading emissions standards while GM gets a slap on the wrist for intentionally murdering 124 people.


    Current EBay prices don't tell us much, if anything (although I'd like to know how you estimated that they're not "under-priced.") -- no class action suits have been announced yet, nor any fines, or cost of fixes and as a result, the market has no information. 

     

    Let's check back in a few months, shall we?

     

    As to your second point, there's nothing to "keep in mind": the GM and VW cases are completely different for a whole host of reasons. It'd be a waste to time to get into why, but I think it should be quite obvious.

  • Reply 65 of 87
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by basjhj View Post



    I highly doubt VW will go bankrupt. Since a sizeable chunk of VW is owned by the state of Niedersachsen and the unions, it is more likely that the German taxpayer will jump in to save the company.


    This is a good point. The government might keep them alive, given VW's depth and breadth of presence in the Lower Saxony (and more generally, German) economy.

     

    However, the quid pro quo might be that Lower Saxony ends up owning a much larger share than 20% of the company. And they might have to sell of some smaller assets such as Porsche, Bentley, Bugati, Ducati, Lamborghini, etc. to raise cash. Perhaps even Audi, depending on the size of the liability.

  • Reply 66 of 87
    elrothelroth Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by chadbag View Post

     



    I suspect most car companies "cheat" when generating data for MPG etc. by running extra firm tires, removing all excess equipment (weight), etc.  

     

    None of the car companies are to be trusted.

     

    But my point was that the "gasoline" car cheats were/are something totally different.   So that someone does not misread what you wrote and think that their gasoline VW has "cheat" software or anything like that installed in it.




    You need to supply some evidence of that - it's the coward's way out to just say "everybody cheats."

  • Reply 67 of 87
    Apple is sending him in to make sure VW does not rebound from the scandal. Once his work is done Apple will hire him back and make him head of their new VW division.
  • Reply 68 of 87
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,979member
    chadbag wrote: »
    mr. me wrote: »
    I don't know that we have a substantive disagreement here. The important thing is not the method that Volkswagen used to cheat. The important thing is that Volkswagen cheated. The important thing about cheating on the gasoline test is that it shows that cheating at Volkswagen is not a one-off. It leads one to believe that cheating is part of the Volkswagen culture. If the company cheats on diesel and gasoline tests, then one would have to be careful that it would also cheat on tests of battery-powered cars, fuel cell powered cars, and even hamster-powered cars.


    The customer will have to ask: "Do I want to buy a vehicle from a company that I know is dishonest?" The prospective employee and the current employee alike will ask: "Do I want to work for company that I know is dishonest?" Some people are OK with dishonesty, but others care about their own reputations that the reputations of those with whom they do business.


    I suspect most car companies "cheat" when generating data for MPG etc. by running extra firm tires, removing all excess equipment (weight), etc.  

    None of the car companies are to be trusted.

    But my point was that the "gasoline" car cheats were/are something totally different.   So that someone does not misread what you wrote and think that their gasoline VW has "cheat" software or anything like that installed in it.

    The EPA has to sign off on the MPG claims made by an auto maker. They do their own testing and the results have to fall within a certain range.
  • Reply 69 of 87
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    I'm now waiting for an article that accuses Apple of falsifying emissions data for their rumored car project.

  • Reply 70 of 87
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

     

    This is a good point. The government might keep them alive, given VW's depth and breadth of presence in the Lower Saxony (and more generally, German) economy.

     

    However, the quid pro quo might be that Lower Saxony ends up owning a much larger share than 20% of the company. And they might have to sell of some smaller assets such as Porsche, Bentley, Bugati, Ducati, Lamborghini, etc. to raise cash. Perhaps even Audi, depending on the size of the liability.




    I agree, they may need to sell some or most of these assets. Since the Porsche family is heavily involved in VW these days, I doubt they will sell the Porsche division.

  • Reply 71 of 87

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

     

    Let's check back in a few months, shall we?

     


     

    Yep. My point was that doesn't appear that VWs suddenly started depreciating like Kias. 

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

     

    As to your second point, there's nothing to "keep in mind": the GM and VW cases are completely different for a whole host of reasons. It'd be a waste to time to get into why, but I think it should be quite obvious.


     

    Well, both intentionally deceived automotive regulating authorities as a point of business, and one produced pollution, and the other killed people.

  • Reply 72 of 87
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by waterrockets View Post

     

    Well, both intentionally deceived automotive regulating authorities as a point of business, and one produced pollution, and the other killed people.


    If I've missed a court ruling on GM's ignition switch issues, do let me know.

     

    Otherwise, stop making up stuff.

  • Reply 73 of 87
    sog35 wrote: »
    Flatout Apple needs to go private.  I'm sick of saying this over and over again but its the truth.  Till then Apple investors and employees are losing HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS in wealth.  Just so Wall Street can profit on the stock price going up and down.

    The irony is the cheaper the stock is the easier it is for Apple to go private. This doesn't hurt Apple as much as it actually hurts other investors.
  • Reply 74 of 87
    If I've missed a court ruling on GM's ignition switch issues, do let me know.

    Otherwise, stop making up stuff.

    There have been a couple... October:
    http://newyork.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/gm-fined-900-million-for-mishandling-of-gm-ignition-defect/

    This week:
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-BANKB-21495
  • Reply 75 of 87
    If I've missed a court ruling on GM's ignition switch issues, do let me know.

    Otherwise, stop making up stuff.

    There have been a couple... October:
    http://newyork.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/gm-fined-900-million-for-mishandling-of-gm-ignition-defect/

    This week:
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-BANKB-21495

    I guess you're having trouble understanding the phrase "court ruling". The first cite is regarding a fine (a small one at that) imposed by the US government. The second is a blog about a possible court ruling in the future that may or may not include punitive damages (assuming GM is found guilty, and loses on appeal).

    Try again.
  • Reply 76 of 87
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by chadbag View Post

     



    Yes, that is the end result.


     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by chadbag View Post

    When the cheat is ON, the emissions are also up.  The cheat turns off or reduces the efficiency of the the emissions controls, which increases emissions (the whole kerfluffle).  It also results in a high performing car that gets good gas mileage.

     

     

    I guess this truly is a difference in semantics.  All the news coverage I've seen refers to VW's programming in a "cheat" that senses when the car's being tested, and reduces emissions during that time.

     

     

    I also suspect you are getting better than the rated MPG.  It is like 30 city and 42/43 highway.  I routinely get 38-41 combined, and only about 1/2 that is highway - like driving.

     

    That's pretty much what i'm experiencing.  But it doesn't sit right, when I calculate and learn I've gotten 38-41, and the car's telling me I got 45.  Bad taste in the mouth, and all that.  Psychologically, I think it's a mistake--I'm of the under-promise and over-deliver school.  :-)


  • Reply 77 of 87
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post



    Try again.

     

    Will do, got my links mixed up: http://news.morningstar.com/all/dow-jones/us-markets/201511101482/ruling-could-expose-gm-to-punitive-damages.aspx

     

    "U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Robert E. Gerber on Monday said GM can face punitive damages to the extent lawsuits raise legal claims about knowledge and conduct at a new company created by the auto maker's 2009 government-brokered bankruptcy restructuring. GM had sought to block plaintiffs, including those suing for personal injury or wrongful death, from making punitive damages claims.<SNIP>

     

    A GM spokesman said the judge's ruling was limited to certain claims that plaintiffs hadn't yet established. The company disputed the suggestion the ruling was an outright victory for plaintiffs."

     

    The first link in my previous post is about a settlement with the justice department to avoid a ruling.

     

    Why are you trying so hard to hide the fact that GM intentionally hid reports and deceived authorities regarding a defect that was causing deaths? I didn't think that Apple owned GM, so they wouldn't be infallible around here.

  • Reply 78 of 87
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 1,080member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rtdunham View Post

     

     

    I guess this truly is a difference in semantics.  All the news coverage I've seen refers to VW's programming in a "cheat" that senses when the car's being tested, and reduces emissions during that time.

     

     

    That's pretty much what i'm experiencing.  But it doesn't sit right, when I calculate and learn I've gotten 38-41, and the car's telling me I got 45.  Bad taste in the mouth, and all that.  Psychologically, I think it's a mistake--I'm of the under-promise and over-deliver school.  :-)


     

    Well, the car is equipped with an emissions system, but the "normal" operation is to turn it off or lower its effectiveness during normal use, and only turn it on or put it at full effectiveness during the tests.  So the "defeat device", as the cheat is called by the EPA, is to turn off the emissions system during normal use, or to sense when it is in testing and to leave it on.   So yes, semantics.

     

    There are actually two average MPG figures in the car computer.   You'll notice in the display a little 1 or 2 superscript next to the number.  Hit the main button on your steering wheel controls on the right, when displaying the average MPG, and you will cycle through them both.  I don't remember the difference but the one labeled 1 I think is over a shorter period of time and has much wider swings in value to it, while the one labeled 2 seems to be more steady and I think is over a much longer period of time.  The car's operator manual says more about it IIRC.   You can reset the number by pushing and holding the main button on your right hand steering controls.

     

    I suspect if yours is showing 45 when you calculate 38-41. that you have the 1 value showing.   That one typically is much more divergent than the calculated as I think it is over a much less driving period/distance than you are probably calculating over.   The one marked 2 on my car is usually 1/2 to 2 mpg off of what I calculate, and again, that is probably not the exact same time period or distance that I am using in my calculations or that I calculated over.

  • Reply 79 of 87
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by waterrockets View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post



    Try again.

     

    Will do, got my links mixed up: http://news.morningstar.com/all/dow-jones/us-markets/201511101482/ruling-could-expose-gm-to-punitive-damages.aspx

     

    "U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Robert E. Gerber on Monday said GM can face punitive damages to the extent lawsuits raise legal claims about knowledge and conduct at a new company created by the auto maker's 2009 government-brokered bankruptcy restructuring. GM had sought to block plaintiffs, including those suing for personal injury or wrongful death, from making punitive damages claims.<SNIP>

     

    A GM spokesman said the judge's ruling was limited to certain claims that plaintiffs hadn't yet established. The company disputed the suggestion the ruling was an outright victory for plaintiffs."

     

    The first link in my previous post is about a settlement with the justice department to avoid a ruling.

     

    Why are you trying so hard to hide the fact that GM intentionally hid reports and deceived authorities regarding a defect that was causing deaths? I didn't think that Apple owned GM, so they wouldn't be infallible around here.


    First, the ruling you cite concerns a procedural matter. It's not a ruling on GM's guilt or culpability. Second, you're the one that made the claim about what courts have ruled about GM's culpability, or something to that effect. I was simply pointing out that there is no ruling on whether GM "internationally hid reports and deceived authorities regarding a defect causing deaths". That may well happen, but it has not happened yet. Third, I hold no brief for GM, and couldn't care less what happens to them. In fact, I was a GM shareholder, but I sold the stock when I read the news of the ignition deaths and injuries. I want nothing to do with the company. Fourth, I don't think Apple is infallible.

  • Reply 80 of 87
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

     

    First, the ruling you cite concerns a procedural matter. It's not a ruling on GM's guilt or culpability. Second, you're the one that made the claim about what courts have ruled about GM's culpability, or something to that effect. I was simply pointing out that there is no ruling on whether GM "internationally hid reports and deceived authorities regarding a defect causing deaths". That may well happen, but it has not happened yet. Third, I hold no brief for GM, and couldn't care less what happens to them. In fact, I was a GM shareholder, but I sold the stock when I read the news of the ignition deaths and injuries. I want nothing to do with the company. Fourth, I don't think Apple is infallible.


     

    That's a long way to to get to this: $900M for whatever you want to call the GM deaths, is a slap on the wrist compared to what the media is anticipating for VW for passing emission tests in a creative manner.

Sign In or Register to comment.