Apple R&D Reveals a Pivot Is Coming • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple R&D Reveals a Pivot Is Coming

#251

Post by mcphage » Thu, May 12, 2016, 6:40 PM UTC

eric_h wrote: post #211

mcphage wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't understand the confusion on what Apple's next big thing is, they've laid it out time and again. [...] It's the same thing OpenAI, HARC, and other groups are working on: creating revolutionary intelligent assistants and possibly achieving strong AI. I hope so, but given they released Siri in 2011, and only minimally improved on it since, it doesn't look like they're giving the field much attention. It doesn'…

> given they released Siri in 2011, and only minimally improved on it since It's quite possible that their iterative loop on Siri and Siri-like experiments simply doesn't include the general populace. Apple does not have much of a history of touting beta software and using their customers as guinea pigs, but internally they definitely do.

It's definitely possible, but I'm not sure why they wouldn't? The data from millions of users from all over the country / world would be a lot better than a small number of users in a single place. And they still push it as a sales feature, so showing real improvement over time sounds like something they would want.

Still, I hope you're right; I do agree that it's a big part of the future, and seeing it flounder is frustrating.

Re: Apple R&D Reveals a Pivot Is Coming

#252

Post by jdmichal » Thu, May 12, 2016, 6:55 PM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #170

simonh wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the phone industry just didn't think it possible that real ground breaking innovation in their industry was at all possible. They imagined a phone must have a physical keyboard, couldn't run a decent web browser and Microsoft was already selling the best mobile OS it was possible to make. It wasn't that they doubted Apple's commitment, they just didn't have the imagination. To be fair to them, Apple timed thi…

I don't think anyone didn't think it was possible. Back in '99 I was working on a tablet w/built in phone, and Ericsson had their ScreenPhone around the same time. Both where "tethered" to a base station at home (ours used a custom extension to DECT), I believe, but the intent was always to add proper mobile support. In fact, when I was first sold on the concept, the guy who started the company talked me through how…

> ... while everyone else were thinking like geeks willing to sacrifice usability for a "imagine if.." ideal of devices that were ultimately quite unfulfilling.

As someone who was there on the consumer side, with an HTC Wizard bought in 2006 -- the year before the iPhone was released -- I completely agree with this. I did make the sacrifice of usability, because having the Internet accessible everywhere on a touchscreen was awesome. I didn't understand the iPhone either. From the perspective of the hackfest that was Windows Mobile 5/6, I saw a very limited and locked down device.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_Wizard

Re: Apple R&D Reveals a Pivot Is Coming

#253

Post by scarface74 » Thu, May 12, 2016, 7:16 PM UTC

obsurveyor wrote: post #215

dpcx wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla also doesn't have quite the clout that Apple does. Apple could literally bully their way in to the self-sales car market...

They'd still be facing the same dealer and local legislative roadblocks that Tesla has been triggering states to create or enforce since they started and they can't just bully through that. It will require lobbying, time and possibly new legislation, none of which is fast. Having Tesla front-run a lot of this stuff is pretty smart if they are intending to go that route though.

Imagine the Apple talking point. "We want to sell you this car but government protectionist regulation won't allow us". And they do that in every state, starting with the most wealthy, most liberal states and move slowly to the less affluent states. Apple has a lot more die-hard fans than Tesla. Just compare the number of people who have Apple products compared to Teslas. y

Re: Apple R&D Reveals a Pivot Is Coming

#254

Post by mosdave » Thu, May 12, 2016, 7:25 PM UTC

givinguflac wrote: post #167

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cars are a terrible industry to get into. Building cars is massively capital and plant intensive, heavily dependent on supply chain logistics, and the market is already extremely competitive. The entire industry is well on its way to switching to electric and/or self-driving. Selling cars requires a huge dealer network rollout with huge up-front costs for training and spares. Doing it DIY would be insanely expensive,…

Pretty much everything you just said could have car replaced by the word phone, and you'd sound just like MS BB or Nokia in 2007. "Clever internals but crappy ux" describes pretty much every car ever. Regarding dealerships, ever heard of Tesla? It's definitely possible to diy, and Tesla has nothing compared to Apple's resources.

> "Clever internals but crappy ux" describes pretty much every car ever.

My '69 Chevelle disagrees.

Re: Apple R&D Reveals a Pivot Is Coming

#255

Post by WalterSear » Thu, May 12, 2016, 7:28 PM UTC

WalterSear wrote: post #227

potatolicious wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like OP understands this - the questions is that why do any of that when the younger generation is rapidly urbanizing, in which case "order a car on your phone, wait 10 minutes" seems silly compared to "walk out front door, onto train, be at destination even sooner". The self-driving utopia is primarily a suburban-centric dream, in many European cities (and a small handful of American ones) it's likely to be l…

City subways systems take decades to build. Public transport is a shambles outside high density cities, and in many of those. Here in SF, it takes me an hour to get downtown by bus or subway, and 10-15 minutes by bus.

EDIT: that should be 10-15 minutes by car.

Re: Apple R&D Reveals a Pivot Is Coming

#256

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, May 12, 2016, 7:30 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #176

forgetsusername wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Regarding dealerships, ever heard of Tesla? Tesla is trying this model, but I don't know whether anyone can makes claims as to its success yet. Right now they're pretty low volume and are losing lots of money. Maybe the no dealer model scales, maybe it doesn't.

Tesla has 325,000+ pre-orders for the model 3 a 35,000$ car. For comparison Acura only sold 167,843 units in 2014 and they have some models for ~10,000$ less.* And they have an extensive dealer network. Honda their parent brand sells well under 2 million cars a year and is a major automaker. *List price on a new ILX is 27,990 but this assumes people are paying sticker price.

Acura is the luxury mark of Honda; it doesn't need to operate at a scale that would make it viable as an independent business.

Re: Apple R&D Reveals a Pivot Is Coming

#257

Post by neo2006 » Thu, May 12, 2016, 8:37 PM UTC

ZenoArrow wrote: post #218

neo2006 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I was calling naive is the fact of seeing innovation and creating products as the same thing, it's not.

In that case, you misread what I said. I stated it was possible to monetise the research results. In other words, you can take what you find in the lab and find ways to sell this knowledge. It doesn't matter whether that's through licensing or physical products.

I fully understood what you said, but my point is that usually apple take a known idea or product and try to integrate it in a product with a new level of usability and some new original features but they never create new product based on a complete new technology in a new market. The innovation in Apple had been always incremental in opposition to the example you gave (Bell Lab) and I don't see them changing that.

Apple will probably try to get into car market but in an incremental way, probably by teaming up with some car constructor and doing some part of the car (AI, media...). it make much sense then waking up one morning and revealing a brand new car in a brand new market for them and try to sell it (with all the costs and the risks it comes with).

Re: Apple R&D Reveals a Pivot Is Coming

#258

Post by ZenoArrow » Thu, May 12, 2016, 8:48 PM UTC

neo2006 wrote: post #257

ZenoArrow wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that case, you misread what I said. I stated it was possible to monetise the research results. In other words, you can take what you find in the lab and find ways to sell this knowledge. It doesn't matter whether that's through licensing or physical products.

I fully understood what you said, but my point is that usually apple take a known idea or product and try to integrate it in a product with a new level of usability and some new original features but they never create new product based on a complete new technology in a new market. The innovation in Apple had been always incremental in opposition to the example you gave (Bell Lab) and I don't see them changing that. A…

> "in opposition to the example you gave (Bell Lab)"

I never mentioned Bell Labs once.

As for Apple's record on innovation, I would argue that the Newton could be seen as an innovative product that was a pioneer in its field. Furthermore, most innovation is a refinement on what has come before, that is not a mark of failure for an R&D department.

Re: Apple R&D Reveals a Pivot Is Coming

#259

Post by wwweston » Thu, May 12, 2016, 9:02 PM UTC

baron816 wrote: post #200

I don't like the idea of Apple (or even Google for that matter) making cars. It seems like such a weird space for a company that makes consumer electronics parts to move into. It would be almost as weird as them starting to build houses. And I don't want to buy all my stuff from one company. Either way, I'm skeptical that any company is going to make huge, monopolistic profits from selling autonomous cars. It's somet…

> A better fit (although much, much, much harder to achieve) for Apple would be a real robot/android.

Either autonomous vehicle is a real robot (and not a bad place to start, given that moving things around is a great task for a robot), or I'm not sure the word has a lot of meaning.

It isn't approaching an android until it's something like KITT, but that's something else.

Re: Apple R&D Reveals a Pivot Is Coming

#260

Post by woodpanel » Thu, May 12, 2016, 11:39 PM UTC

The author is correct that Apple is haunted by the iPhone's success. My 2 cents:

1) The car business delivers lower margins than the iPhone. Even if you compare them to those of premium car companies (like Range Rover, Audi, Mercedes, BMW or Lexus).

2) The iPhone didn't had comparable brands to compete against, when it entered the phone market. It came with a hefty price tag. A sum that was never even considered mass-marketable before. The iPhone created the premium sector for phones. It raised the share of income people considered plausible for cellphones.

The author is also right in that apple is very good at applying their business model to new markets. But

3) to become premium in the car business either means

- lowering their margins

- producing cars that aim at a smaller/niche market (Porsche to Ferrari/McLaren),

- lowering the costs of the supply chain currently in use by other premium car makers.

The last one would be doable, certaintly by Apple. Certaintly with EVs. But I doubt it would be doable without any information leak other than this article.

4) More plausable for apple's margin territory would be an attempt at the user interface of cars. Like appleTv is for television sets or the healthKit-API.

The problem with cars is not the getting-from-a-to-b-part, not the status-part or the comfortable-interior-part. The problem with cars is the user interface-part, it's the outdated-touchscreens-part or the connecting-and-charging-and-holding-your-phone-part. It's the car's software that sucks. And for some that sucking software includes the driving-yourself-part. Reaching out to current premium car-makers also points into this UI/API-direction.

5) Also there are a lot of lower hanging fruits out there, easier to tackle than building a premium car. Like VR or building physical television sets, home automation, healthcare - or wait, software.