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

Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 699 posts

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#291

Post by TheDong »

africanboy wrote: post #215
light_hue_1 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I simply don’t want to talk to electronics. The privacy implications alone scare me away. No thanks. I think you should consider the tradeoffs here. Practical safety on the road today, where I don't die because I'm fiddling with buttons, trumps theoretical unmeasurable fearmongering about vague privacy concerns. The reality is that if Tesla were to record every command I ever give the car and post them online again…

Practical safety is a car that slows down when I'm moving too fast toward an obstacle because I am distracted. Talking to electronics does not increase practical safety.

Safety is multi-faceted.

Yes, a car that can slow down to avoid collisions is a form of safety. Seatbelts are another form. A car that does various things to avoid driver distraction is another form of safety. Just because you can think of a more immediate safety system does not make other increases to safety in some way "not practical" or "not real increases".

There are many things, small and large, that go into practical safety of a car

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#292

Post by daniellarusso »

abhinavsharma wrote: post #21

This is starting to make increasingly more sense even though Apple making a car seemed laughable a few years ago. Apple is fundamentally now a company that can move immense amounts of capital into new industries with the underlying ethos of user experience. Apple Card was perhaps a dipping of the toes moment. In theory, Tesla shouldn't be worth what it is because the tech behind it is increasingly getting commoditize…

Tesla has the patents.

Every other manufacturer will be licensing Tesla’s IP, IMHO.

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#293

Post by EduardoBautista »

root_axis wrote: post #256
Drdrdrq wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And? Are you saying that Apple couldn't build rockets?

Why would you think Apple is capable of building rockets? They have essentially zero aerospace expertise and that type of engineering is not at all in their DNA. Sure, they have billions of dollars to burn so it's within the realm of possibility, but it would be a very inefficient use of their cash.

Well, Elon Musk didn't have aerospace experience expertise either.

Neither did Jeff Bezos.

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#294

Post by baybal2 »

nkingsy wrote: post #46

From what I understand, lithium iron is actually less power dense than the latest lithium ion, but it can handle more charge cycles and it’s less volatile nature allows manufacturers to break away from the commoditized cells paradigm. It’s not considered a good choice for eg ebikes because of the density issue.

Yep, but, big, big but: you can make bigger cells out of it.

In comparison Tesla S carries huge amount of dead weight in 18650 casings, redundant conductors, electrodes, and battery module casings.

BYD Han has very big cells, and single simple module body, and actually beats Tesla on whole battery energy density.

Try to do it with cobalt base cathodes, they will shred themselves with internal expansion after a few charge cycles.

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#295

Post by janmo »

I've read about rumors stating they could already launch their apple car in September 2021. I wouldn't be surprised if this happens. Apple has always been very secretive and the iPhone came as a surprise to many.

If they rely on a third party for the manufacturing there are no reasons this would take that long. We have seen recently how quickly this can happen with the M1 chip.

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#296

Post by volta87 »

christophilus wrote: post #285

If I was an Apple shareholder (I guess I am, indirectly through Berkshire), this would piss me off. Apple is in a very good business. Cars are a terrible business. Just compare Apple’s margins to any car company. Also, it’s really hard to move into a business that is widely outside your core competency. It can be done, but the effort is huge, and I suspect the median track record is poor.

Same thought.

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#297

Post by tboughen »

treis wrote: post #184
0xEFF wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm also not sure what Apple's edge here is. At this point all I really want out of an entertainment center is a screen for my phone to plug into. Apple has been doing CarPlay for years. If they do at least as well with the rest of the interior they’ll have an edge over most luxury cars today.

That's my point. They can improve the car experience through Carplay and the iPhone. There's no point in manufacturing the entire car. And ultimately buttons and entertainment centers only move the needle for relatively comparable cars. Apple would first have to get as good at Toyota et al at building the rest of the car before a better UX can win.

If Apple are going for a luxury EV, then they ‘only’ have to get better than Tesla. I hear Tesla still don’t have build quality sorted, and issues can take months to get fixed.

I imagine more practically minded luxury car buyers would jump at an Apple car that met Tesla on the performance front and exceeded them on the ease of ownership.

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#298

Post by vkou »

finnh wrote: post #43
abhinavsharma wrote: post #21

This is starting to make increasingly more sense even though Apple making a car seemed laughable a few years ago. Apple is fundamentally now a company that can move immense amounts of capital into new industries with the underlying ethos of user experience. Apple Card was perhaps a dipping of the toes moment. In theory, Tesla shouldn't be worth what it is because the tech behind it is increasingly getting commoditize…

> Apple is fundamentally now a company that can move immense amounts of capital into new industries with the underlying ethos of user experience. Also: insane supply-chain management chops, a skill that is more and more transferable - especially for electric cars.

I don't think you can supply-chain-manage your way into making cars. The hard part of manufacturing automobiles isn't design, it's manufacturing. You can't just pay some third party contractor to spin up a car factory that does 90% of the work for you, like you can with electronics.

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#299

Post by natch »

foxtr0t wrote: post #251
finnh wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple is fundamentally now a company that can move immense amounts of capital into new industries with the underlying ethos of user experience. Also: insane supply-chain management chops, a skill that is more and more transferable - especially for electric cars.

Despite becoming more similar in recent years, the cell phone supply chain is still very different than the automotive supply chain. The number of parts/unit differs by an order of magnitude and so does the size and weight, not to mention manufacturing techniques and materials. These are capabilities, not so much skills, and they aren't as transferable as you may think. For instance, logistically things are very diff…

The engine of my electric car has one moving part. One. Made in house from raw materials. Rolls of steel, copper, and aluminum. It’s also considered a single part for manufacturing and servicing purposes. So not simply one moving part. One part, period.

>The number of parts/unit differs by an order of magnitude

>car companies often rely on hundreds of suppliers

See above. You must be thinking of ICE cars.

>aren’t as transferable as you may think

Other than pulling a few things off the shelf like tires, windshields, and wheels (and more; those are just a few examples) the manufacturer of my car stated from scratch. Prodigiously hard for sure but Apple is good at hard.

>will last 100k miles

Try one million.

>will take years

Again Apple excels at this.

The real problem for Apple is having Tesla as a competitor. They are used to competing with Google, but it’s easy to compete with lame. Tesla is not lame, by a long stretch.

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#300

Post by rconti »

haberman wrote: post #146
modeless wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Having one display off to the side, without buttons, that does everything is an awful experience in a car I have to strongly disagree with this. The touchscreen is great for the vast majority of things it replaces. The only physical controls I ever miss are for temperature (which is a very minor complaint) and windshield wipers (though I would also accept auto wipers that actually work). I do think the UI smoothnes…

Somewhat ironically, the physical controls for the turns signals are by far the worst part of the whole Tesla UI. I've had my Model 3 for over two years now, and I still cannot reliably cancel a turn signal, or "soft push" the signal so it only blinks 3 times. It's infuriating to inadvertently signal left, then right, then left again, as you frantically try to just cancel the turn signal. I'm broadcasting confusion a…

BMW did this, too, starting with the E90 3 series, if I remember correctly. It's awful, because in almost every car I drive, and especially in BMWs (E92 and the E70 X5 I own now), the steering wheel blocks the top of the speedometer and the turn signals entirely. The "modern" turn signal sounds are too soft to be heard over music, and the switch itself is stateless. I think BMW finally gave up on it for their newer models, but I'm not positive on this.

Both the Tesla and the X5 annoy me when I can't tell the state of the switch by feel. Which is funny, because, IMO, BMW has some of the best-feeling and best-weighted stalks in the business. It sounds silly, but I positively LOVE the way engagement on the steering wheels stalks feel on my X5, and every other BMW I've owned or driven.

Post reply on HN