Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Scales Back Its Ambitions for a Self-Driving Car

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 434 posts

Re: Apple Scales Back Its Ambitions for a Self-Driving Car

#181

Post by IBM »

dilemma wrote: post #175
IBM wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like John Gruber has confirmed what I suspected. https://daringfireball.net/2017/08/titan_nyt

Looks like he didn't confirm anything at all.

>“Shelved” is an accurate word, but I think many people have interpreted it as meaning that Apple has given up on designing its own vehicles. My understanding is that it’s more like “Let’s get the autonomous shit down first, and worry about designing vehicles to put it in after that.” Eat the steak one bite at a time rather than all at once.

Re: Apple Scales Back Its Ambitions for a Self-Driving Car

#182

Post by iiiggglll »

> Even though Apple had not ironed out many of the basics, like how the autonomous systems would work, a team had already started working on an operating system software called CarOS. There was fierce debate about whether it should be programmed using Swift, Apple’s own programming language, or the industry standard, C++.

Wow. Few things guarantee success like starting off a project with a good old-fashioned language flamewar!

Re: Apple Scales Back Its Ambitions for a Self-Driving Car

#183

Post by wodenokoto »

icpmacdo wrote: post #110
timdorr wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds a lot like The Homer to me: http://simpsons.wikia.com/wiki/The_Homer

The Simpsons episode about self driving trucks was really before it's time too

So much that it felt unrealistic and silly even for the Simpson!

Crazy how a re-watch wouldn't be a look at far fetched science fiction.

Re: Apple Scales Back Its Ambitions for a Self-Driving Car

#184

Post by technimad »

trapperkeeper74 wrote: post #122
ctdonath wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over the decades I've noticed how businesses need to recognize and focus on their core competencies - if they don't, they die. Everything must feed that core, and undue distractions are lethal. Occasionally there's a need to pivot , which is deliberately stepping from one competency to another, but that is rare and difficult. Apple's core is to build small computers; everything else they do (music, video, cloud servi…

When companies focus on just one thing in a vertical, they're incredibly vulnerable. Samsung does lots of things fairly well, with some hiccups, well beyond just personal electronics and home appliances. It's diversification. EDIT: Samsung does all sorts of things including ship-building, life insurance, construction and advertising. For example, Apple MacBook Pros have become uncool, expensive, unrepairable and impr…

I mostly agree with this post but the more I type on my new MBP keyboard the more I love it. Was skeptical at first, made a lot of noise, felt weird, but this flipped pretty fast to big appreciation.

Re: Apple Scales Back Its Ambitions for a Self-Driving Car

#185

Post by colechristensen »

mypalmike wrote: post #171
colechristensen wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon sells retail themed logistics. Apple sells consumer computing themed user experience.

What does Yamaha sell?

Nothing, business. It's a conglomerate. A business that's function is running businesses. A Yamaha piano has nothing at all to do with a Yamaha motorcycle exactly opposite to how all of Amazon's services are related and intertwined.

Re: Apple Scales Back Its Ambitions for a Self-Driving Car

#186

Post by erikpukinskis »

josteink wrote: post #162
hallmark wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have the iPhone because Apple was so ambitious. Imagine if they had just partnered with existing phone manufacturers rather than trying to build a magic touch slate. Wait, we do know what would have happened - the Motorola ROKR, which everyone should be forgiven for forgetting.

> We have the iPhone because Apple was so ambitious. When you say that, you conventiently forget that Apple re -invented the smartphone. It was an proven thing, which already sold in spades in the tech/enterprise market. They took something which existed and was awkward to use, and re-did the UI layer of the whole thing. They refined something else which was already proven. They didn't invent something original from…

There is no such thing as a UI layer. UI and function are inextricably linked.

For example, see iPhone's voicemail. Or the touch screen. Or the app store. None of those things could have been executed by UI teams at any other device manufacturer at the time.

Re: Apple Scales Back Its Ambitions for a Self-Driving Car

#188

Post by timcederman »

iiiggglll wrote: post #182

> Even though Apple had not ironed out many of the basics, like how the autonomous systems would work, a team had already started working on an operating system software called CarOS. There was fierce debate about whether it should be programmed using Swift, Apple’s own programming language, or the industry standard, C++. Wow. Few things guarantee success like starting off a project with a good old-fashioned language…

Same type of conflict happened with iOS. http://appleinsider.com/articles/17/01/11/video-shows-early-...

Re: Apple Scales Back Its Ambitions for a Self-Driving Car

#189

Post by drewrv »

MichaelApproved wrote: post #99
senatorobama wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They probably realized that designing a safe (to their standards) self-driving car is equivalent to strong AI.

I think we will need roads designed for autonomous cars, to make them truly safe and autonomous. They'll need sensors and digital markers to augment the visual markers. Otherwise, conditions like snow or rain would make it too difficult to work.

This should be a big part of the conversation around self driving cars. If we added some basic markers and beacons to our roads we could have self driving cars a lot sooner. Start with the interstates, we'll save a ton of lives and bring down the cost of shipping.

Re: Apple Scales Back Its Ambitions for a Self-Driving Car

#190

Post by hueving »

icanhackit wrote: post #160
semi-extrinsic wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> pretty much all mechanical systems bar the electric motors and braking systems ... and the shocks and dampers and steering and servos and diffs and transfer boxes and electronic stability systems and dozens of sensors regularly exposed to harsh conditions and lights and crumple zones and doors and windows and air bags and seat belts and seats and air conditioning and ... Elon Musk said something very true about the…

You make a good point but my question still stands, why couldn't they design it in California and outsource manufacturing to Hon Hai/Foxconn the way they do with their phones? Unlike Tesla, sourcing the parts wouldn't be Apple's problem.

Because outsourcing car manufacturing doesn't make much sense. The transportation costs eat up most of the savings. That's why Toyotas, Volkswagons, etc sold in the US are made in the US.

One shipping container holds 60,000 iphones. One shipping container holds one car.

Post reply on HN