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

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

#551

Post by bigtones » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:41 AM UTC

01100011 wrote: post #456

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…

This comment implicitly rests on the fallacy, learned the hard way by Tesla, that making electric vehicles is just like making any other electronic thing. When is the last time an electronic mfg had to deal with a billion dollar lawsuit because they didn't follow industry best practices for design like Toyota did after the acceleration scandal? Does Apple have experience with the NHTSB or other relevant regulatory ag…

Apple has been on the receiving end of literally dozens of billion dollar lawsuits from many many companies. They battle lawsuits every day for IP infringement, to trade craft, to patents - and have over 200 in-house lawyers.

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

#552

Post by briandw » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:43 AM UTC

m-ee wrote: post #382

foxtr0t wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I've worked with ex Apple supply chain people, and they were very used to operating at massive scale and the leverage that came with it. This led to some some unhappy suppliers some of which walked because they felt we were being too demanding. I don't want to overgeneralize, some of the issue was likely the culture of this particular team, but I could definitely see growing pains as they move into a new vertical wit…

Same here. I have vivid memories of the supply chain guy yelling into the phone, and this gem of a quote. "What's my target price? It's zero, now what can you do for me?!"

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

#553

Post by pruthvishetty » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:46 AM UTC

It would be great for Tesla's mission if a company like Apple becomes a player in this space. We definitely need more manufacturers. But just based on the incremental engineering expertise Tesla has acquired over the years in manufacturing - especially now with the diecast, the data the hundreds and thousands of Tesla cars are capturing everyday, the increasingly vertical integration of their process, a decision maker like Musk, and most importantly, Apple's history with Project Titan (which I happen to know something about), I'm not too optimistic of much happening in this direction. There is still nothing out there to indicate Apple can handle it when the rubber hits the road at 80 mph. One area where I am slightly optimistic about Apple doing something potentially significant is in the battery space, in which case, it would compete with the likes of QuantumScape, and not Tesla, per se.

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

#554

Post by kllrnohj » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:51 AM UTC

jbullock35 wrote: post #354

baybal2 wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they didn't. Iphone 1 was far from a commercial success. 3GS was the first one that approached the cult status. It tool them 4 generations to get there, and a lot of money.

> Iphone 1 was far from a commercial success. I don't think that's true. For example, less than a year after its release, the iPhone accounted for 28% of smartphones sold in the U.S. (and presumably for a greater percentage of smartphone-sale revenue): see https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2008/02/iphone-owns-28-perce... . And half a year after that, the news was better still: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2008/10/ap…

To put that 10 million sales in 2008 into context, the Motorola Razr sold 140 million devices over a 4 year period ending in 2007.

So... by & large nobody had an iPhone or smartphone. They all had Razrs (or other feature-phones) instead.

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

#555

Post by WalterBright » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:53 AM UTC

ogre_codes wrote: post #486

WalterBright wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A touch screen requires looking at it, buttons do not. That is a fundamental difference, and I don't want a UI I have to look at while driving. I don't want a UI with modes on the touchscreen. More of needing to concentrate on the cursed screen instead of driving. Lastly, every touchscreen UI is fatally attracted to icons instead of words so I have to pull over and consult the 500 page manual to see what the wretched…

> A touch screen requires looking at it, buttons do not. While there are things on my car I use instinctively without looking—wipers/ lights come to mind—there are plenty of other pieces which are frustratingly difficult to find in the dark. Turning on the window defroster when the window starts to fog up at night comes to mind. Likewise many of the climate control nobs. While they do have nice physical manifestation…

These problems have long been solved. Then, 20 years ago, it was all forgotten.

Behold my 1989 Bronco II:

    ----------[++]-----------------------------------
    MAX A/C   PANEL  PNL/FLR  FLOOR  FLR/DEF  DEFROST

    -----------------[++]----------------------------
    COOL                                         WARM

    OFF * * * HI

    PUSH FOR A/C

It has two sliders with positions as labeled above, then a rotating knob with 5 detented positions for the fan, and the label PUSH FOR A/C. The COOL to WARM slider is also color coded blue fading to red.

Turning on the headlights lights the display.

No manual is needed to fully operate it. I never even had the manual for that car. The knob and sliders are trivial, tactile, and visual. There are no modes.

It's near perfection in user interface design.

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

#556

Post by silentsea90 » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:53 AM UTC

yazaddaruvala wrote: post #500

silentsea90 wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think car makers will give up the space to Apple OS so easily? Android if anything is more conducive to using in a car setting, but I suspect that car makers would want to keep their OS/marketplace profits for themselves

When it comes to cars, TSLA is following AAPLs iPhone story and they are around 2011. Note: cars have a longer shelf life. 20 years vs 6 years for phones. And typical turnaround is more like 10 years vs 3 years. Apple and Android dominated the phone industry in a decade. TSLA and “the second OS/UX” will dominate that industry in 30 years. Everyone now understands that Tesla will not just be another competitor in the…

I suspect it'll more likely be android than apple to balance Tesla, given their cross hardware open source credentials.

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

#557

Post by gfxgirl » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:54 AM UTC

I can hardly wait when apple charges any store you travel to via an Apple car 30% because you're "Apple's customers"

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

#558

Post by kllrnohj » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:57 AM UTC

fiddlerwoaroof wrote: post #240

treis wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but Apple had a revolutionary new product. They weren't that great at the nuts and bolts of making a phone, but it didn't matter because the concept of the iPhone was so much better than any phone out there. What is Apple going to bring to the car to match that?

I’ll just say that the main benefit of a Tesla, besides driving and handling really nicely is that the electronics are actually good: it’s entertainment system isn’t a hacky afterthought; also, just plugging into the supercharger and walking away makes the whole “messing with payment methods” paradigm of gas stations seem obsolete.

> it’s entertainment system isn’t a hacky afterthought

It's about as hacky an afterthought as you can possibly get, though? It's a giant tablet on a stand. Effective, yes, but also definitely a hacky afterthought, too. There's no attempt of any kind to integrate it into the lines or flow of the rest of the vehicle. And they still can't be bothered to put some basic physical switchgear in the thing. There's nothing tactile about it, nothing that feels premium or well-designed.

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

#559

Post by foxtr0t » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:59 AM UTC

Dylan16807 wrote: post #549

foxtr0t wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially hilarious given I left the "lights" bullet (with zero explanation as the last item) as fool's bait. It was gloriously taken.

Joke's on them, I was only acting dumb! Seriously, you putting a bullet point with no explanation, and got an equally terse rebuttal. You didn't "win" that.

Let me help you. I offered "Lights" as a design requirement unique to vehicles with respect to phones. Without any explanation it leaves the door open to a surface level counter point "Phones also have lights" that requires a functioning brain and the most basic level of reasoning. Lights on modern vehicles (high beams, low beams, DRLs, blinkers, brake lights) are certainly not simple components, especially those on vehicles sold in the EU where the regulatory body has taken up new technology much faster than in the US. This wasn't a dumb point, cell phone lighting requirements are child's play compared with the requirements of a vehicle lighting. It is 100% valid, but was also placed as bait as explained above. Make sense?

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

#560

Post by nwienert » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 5:01 AM UTC

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #542

nwienert wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't reddit, don't just make assertions. Give it an honest try.

Serious double-standard going on here. If you make assertions without evidence, i can refute them without evidence. In particular, you assert that: 1 - phone is more complex than a car 2 - if phones is more complex than a car, then the organisation that produced it can produce a car. You have provided nothing to back them up. I am in particular disagreeing with the second one.

Ok, name something more complex than a CPU to manufacture on a car?

Making the leap from "Apple makes many complex hardware parts" to they can make a car is a smaller leap than the opposite - Tesla literally didn't exist and made a car, so to assert Apple somehow couldn't is... weird.

Things Apple builds already that are in cars: custom glass, speakers, lights, complex aluminum frames, computers, cameras, knobs/dials, batteries, screens, wheels, fans, materials from leather to rubber to plastic, memory foam...