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

Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

mondaynote.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 407 posts

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#141

Post by scarface74 »

packetlost wrote: post #82
babypuncher wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the point of CarPlay and Android Auto to make this possible, without needing to actually replace hardware? The idea is to make it so the hardware in your car is just a dumb terminal that doesn't ever need to be upgraded. Your infotainment system gets upgraded every time you get a new phone or iOS/Android upgrade.

Sort of, but they don't let you control things like... climate control, etc.. There's no real reason those APIs can't/don't exist as long as they have proper safety mechanisms in place.

Isn’t that the purpose of Android Automative - not to be confused with Android Auto?

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#142

Post by scarface74 »

rootusrootus wrote: post #66
paxys wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest reason that cars have horrible UX is that consumers don't care about it. No one is buying one for how good the speedometer looks. Give me a good performance and MPG. Make the components last long and be serviceable. Make it look good on the outside. Put advanced safety features. Perform well in crash tests. A hundred more of these and maybe the car will be worth buying. People here are delusional when the…

> People here are delusional when they go oh, Apple can make a better Carplay integration and easily outsell Ford and Tesla OTOH, why do most people buy a Tesla right now? "How good the speedometer looks" is a pretty good description. Performance is good, reliability awful, UI usability awful unless you like fancy computer graphics. As a car, a Model 3/Y has a lot of compromises and lacks many features other cars hav…

I specifically don’t want a Tesla because of the shitty infotainment system and lack of support for AirPlay.

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#143

Post by MDWolinski »

usefulcat wrote: post #85
fdye wrote: post #26

So I've always wondered if Apple actually building a 'car' was ever really the goal. It seems like a skunkworks where they try crazy things and then incorporate into Carplay. Future seems to be ever expanding Carplay support. I use it and probably would not buy another car that did not have it integrated. I imagine car manufacturers are somewhat tired of always building HUDs and in vehicle control systems. So gradual…

I dunno, a billion dollars a year (for 8 years) for CarPlay skunkworks seems like a bit much even for Apple..

Let's take a look at it. I'm sure Apple is getting paid in some way for CarPlay integration. Now if the next generation has higher level of integration that car manufacturers use it instead of their own built software, there's certainly money flowing to Apple.

So, let's say that Honda starts integrating it into their vehicles. In 2020, 1.3mm vehicles. Of course, initially, not every car Honda sells will have CarPlay installed, but a few years out, let's assume every vehicle does.

If Apple got 2% of the selling price of the vehicle. Across all Honda models, the starting MSRP averages out to about $32,091. So, on average, Apple would get $641 per vehicle sold. Over the course of a year (if every vehicle sold with it), just from Honda, Apple would get $833mm. Add in a few more larger manufacturers and it's not a bad investment.

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#144

Post by scarface74 »

treis wrote: post #97
ARandumGuy wrote: post #8

A full Apple Car has always seemed unrealistic to me. Cars are a fundamentally different industry then consumer electronics and software. Apple would be starting from scratch, and facing a lot of entrenched competition with huge budgets and infrastructure. And for what? What could Apple do that GM, Toyota, or Tesla couldn't? Maybe a better UX for the dashboard. And while many car UXs are absolutely terrible, improvin…

I think it's looking at Tesla's 875 billion dollar market cap and saying "I can do that". Which I think they can. They'll sell a ton of cars on brand alone so long as they don't mess it up. It's kind of an interesting dichotomy. You can look at Toyota, GM, Tesla, etc. and say why would Apple be interested in those profits. But then you look at Tesla's market cap and then it's obvious why Apple would want some of that…

Tesla is basically an overrated meme stick by any reasonable valuation.

Apple isn’t going to get that type of added market cap based on adding an addition $3 billion in net profit (what Tesla made)

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#145

Post by jononomo »

SoftTalker wrote: post #25

I don't even think about buying cars less than 10 years old or so. I have actually had better luck doing this than when I used to buy cars new or nearly-new. It weeds out the lemons and the owners who don't take care of their cars. Let someone else take the depreciation and find out how they hold up in the long term. Does Apple have any history of supporting its hardware for that long?

I have a 2009 Toyota Prius and it has never once had a mechanical problem. Literally the only issue it has ever had is an inaccurate tire pressure indicator light on the dashboard.

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#146

Post by dmonitor »

johannes1234321 wrote: post #119
fdye wrote: post #26

So I've always wondered if Apple actually building a 'car' was ever really the goal. It seems like a skunkworks where they try crazy things and then incorporate into Carplay. Future seems to be ever expanding Carplay support. I use it and probably would not buy another car that did not have it integrated. I imagine car manufacturers are somewhat tired of always building HUDs and in vehicle control systems. So gradual…

> imagine car manufacturers are somewhat tired of always building HUDs and in vehicle control systems. So gradually standardizing on a way to take all the displays/touchscreens in a vehicle and let them be run by Carplay seems like the future. What is then remaining as distinctive feature of a car vendor? The design? With their custom entertainment system they can confront they driver with their own brand identity an…

You say that as if it were a bad thing. I'd rather a good entertainment system than the shite that Toyota puts the bare minimum effort into.

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#147

Post by pulvinar »

gatonegro wrote: post #42
lucasmullens wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The latest iPhone reversed course on the disposability piece a little bit, making it arguably the most repairable iPhone ever.

Yes, and then went and serialised the parts.

That's to make the phones less of a theft target (for parting out). It's a tradeoff, but one most people prefer.

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#148

Post by gatonegro »

pulvinar wrote: post #147
gatonegro wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and then went and serialised the parts.

That's to make the phones less of a theft target (for parting out). It's a tradeoff, but one most people prefer.

If the manufacturer makes parts easily available, wouldn't the incentive to steal devices to sell for parts more or less disappear? Same thing with counterfeit parts. The market for stolen/fake parts exists because OEM parts are essentially impossible to acquire legally.

Serialisation is simply another way for Apple to maintain control. You can now repair a device, but only with Apple's blessing and knowledge. The privacy/safety stories they sell are just that.

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#149

Post by pGuitar »

aetherane wrote: post #125

I don't get why Apple's user experience keeps being repeated as "second to none". It really depends on what you are doing and used to. I personally find Android easier to use than iOS, but maybe I would feel differently if I haven't been using it for a while.

Apple always had anti-consumer rules for their products... not sure why it finally took off.

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#150

Post by bumby »

drewzero1 wrote: post #134
SoftTalker wrote: post #25

I don't even think about buying cars less than 10 years old or so. I have actually had better luck doing this than when I used to buy cars new or nearly-new. It weeds out the lemons and the owners who don't take care of their cars. Let someone else take the depreciation and find out how they hold up in the long term. Does Apple have any history of supporting its hardware for that long?

This is something that really worries me about current automotive trends. Carmakers tend to assume a 10-year lifespan for their vehicles, though last I saw the average age of cars on the road in the US is slightly higher than that[0]. My current car is approaching 30 and I'm planning to replace it with something closer to 10-15 in the near future, old enough to avoid touchscreens and new enough to not be destroyed by…

I forgot where it was exactly, but I remember a discussion on a podcast about how auto manufacturers deliberately price their replacement electronics to force planned obsolescence. The example brought up was an SUV that has a large display that controls everything from HVAC to the radio. The screen had an expected service life of something like 7 years, but a replacement price of something like $7k. The thought was that when people are faced with a price tag like that on a depreciated asset, they'll be more likely to trade it in for a new model.

Maybe I'm just a curmudgeon but that would all but guarantee my new model wasn't bought from the same manufacturer.

Post reply on HN