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

211–220 of 407 posts

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#211

Post by agitator »

dylan604 wrote: post #70
duped wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That terrifies me

You are not alone. I like the idea that gauges are connected directly to the thing they are measuring. However, I may be disconnected from modern reality in that what might look like a "traditional" gauge might already be connected to the car's computer rather than direct measuring. I'm just not a grease monkey to know the inner workings.

Yeah nothing in the UI is connected directly to a sensor these days. The UI is just a display for relevant data on the CAN bus.

Sensors have redundancies and detections in both sensing and communications so that the receiving end knows when there is an issue and doesn't display false information, resulting in an error code being thrown and displaying a "check engine light".

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#212

Post by smm11 »

robotcapital wrote: post #184
cercatrova wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who buys cars for their HUD? I buy cars for their performance, miles per gallon (or electric equivalent), brand value, etc.

Another anecdote, but this is exactly how I chose my last car. I went to CarMax, filtered by CarPlay integration, and then chose from what was available. In fact, the lack of CarPlay integration is one of the main reasons I didn't consider a Tesla at the time. From basic things like a snappy interface and keeping my podcasts in sync, to suggesting the destination based on the recent maps search I did from my phone on…

Today I learned that people pick a car based on how well it integrates with a cell phone.

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#213

Post by VBprogrammer »

restore_creole_ wrote: post #151
VBprogrammer wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With multiple battery and drive unit replacements we may as well call it Triggers Tesla! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

It is normal for a car with that many miles to need to have some replacement parts. There are users who have reported going over 500,000 km on original battery (20% degradation). https://twitter.com/IovePianoBlack/status/155158555774626201...

There is a big difference between some replacement parts and having all of the major components replaced multiple times.

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#214

Post by ptmcc »

cercatrova wrote: post #128
johannes1234321 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Who buys cars for their HUD? I buy cars for their performance, miles per gallon (or electric equivalent), brand value, etc.

Cabin usability and ergonomics are a huge selling point. CarPlay & HUDs are just one piece of that, but it a critical piece of the overall usability experience.

Getting into a car that has a pre-CarPlay infotainment system feels like stepping back decades in time even though the car may only be a few years old. Slow, unresponsive, buggy, and just extremely unpleasant and unnatural to use.

IMO, cars that predate screen-based infotainment systems have aged far better than pre-CarPlay systems. OEMs are just disastrously bad and behind the times at building a quality infotainment system. Mirroring the smartphone that everyone already has is a fantastic solution.

It's a very good thing that CarPlay shifts so much of the responsibility out of the car and into the smartphone, something that is much more easily and frequently upgraded.

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#215

Post by norin »

boxed wrote: post #163
pGuitar wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Besides them inventing the modern smart phone and revolutionizing an industry? What did the romans ever do for US? :P

they gave us Nokia

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#216

Post by norin »

boxed wrote: post #163
pGuitar wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Besides them inventing the modern smart phone and revolutionizing an industry? What did the romans ever do for US? :P

Nokia?

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#218

Post by beloch »

The iBug will probably be good for some people but horrible for others.

"It just works" is a fine motto, but a lie. Devices often need intervention to work properly or to work at all. Laptops and phones generally require a lot less intervention than cars. Some of us are happy to outsource that labour to others. Some of us are fascinated with how things work and prefer to at least try fixing things ourselves. I have learned from personal experience that Apple is outright hostile to the latter form of folk.

I fully expect an Apple car will have all manner of non-standard screws, fasteners, and parts. It will be technically possible for third party mechanics to deal with, but letting one breathe on your iBug will void the warranty. Just opening the hood will, no doubt, require special tools and break multiple tamper-proof warranty-voiding seals.

If you're happy taking your iBug into an Apple store every time you hear a new noise, you'll be fine with an iBug. If you're the sort who wants to pop the hood and try to track down the problem yourself, then beware!

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#219

Post by Rebelgecko »

hindsightbias wrote: post #136
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…

> functionality everyone wants Depressing if manufacturers and users want more chip/software dependencies after the last two years of supply chain fun.

For better or for worse (IMO mostly better), users care more about features than the tech that goes into making those features work

Re: Apple Car: Bad Idea After All

#220

Post by tiffanyh »

I think did an "Apple TV" to their car efforts.

Originally, Apple desired to make the Apple TV (hardware) the complete replacement for all your TV viewing needs. And for all the streaming services to just be dumb content pipes connected through a common / consistent Apple TV (app/software) UI.

Then Apple realized the Netflix's of the world are not going to give up the user experience, let alone the direct relationship with the user.

So Apple then pivots by making Apple TV just the platform for some other company to deliver their stream service through (like the Apple CarPlay).

They then refine their strategy to come around to realizing, they need to make their own content (the new Apple CarPlay HUD / instrumentation).

Post reply on HN