Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Confirms Interest in Autonomous Cars in Letter to Federal Regulators

This is more for show to prop up their stock than reality because they can't even get a simple emoji toolbar to function correctly. And, it sounds like they want to steal other companies' research instead of using their abundance of cash hidden offshore to do the research themselves.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BruceEBonus
maflynn said:
Not for nothing, but I can see that comment being levied against apple back when they rolled out the iPod. While I do question Apple's focus and direction, I applaud them for looking at different markets to innovate in.
Click to expand...
I'm saving my applause for when they once again start releasing hardware / software that actually works and I really want to buy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BruceEBonus and Huck
They may announce a product-not necessarily an entire 'Apple Car', maybe just a partnership with an existing manufacturer- but it will probably take 5-10 years from the 'release date' before something is actually available. Even if EVERYTHING in software is rock solid and all of the hardware has built in redundancy for safety, when someone gets hurt or killed using or by one of these things there will be messy lawsuits. This problem isn't Apple specific, Tesla, GM, Ford and everyone else developing autonomous cars will want to know what the legal rules and liabilities really are, and how blame can be assigned to someone other than themselves.

Other than 'test vehicles' that the government allows exemptions for I don't think autonomous cars are in a 5 - 7 year time frame for public availability. It's not the technology or software, it the legalities.
 
I'm just picturing a sleek aluminum design with a giant glowing Apple logo on the hood, blinding you at night. Then all the windows made out of Corning Gorilla Glass. That way if you go off the road into the water. Your windows will be too tough to ever break and allow you to escape.
 
I'll never trust a 'smart' car driven by Ive & Cook's Apple. It'll always ask me money for every new road sign and only go straight becuse it's simpler :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huck
a smart car is just more technology that can be hacked...

Somthing no public wants as definded for "safe driving" how can a smart car be safe if it can't protect itself?
 
apolloa said:
I guess we will know wether people want driverless cars in the next ten years. I don't, well not all the time. I'm not sure if I want to be on the roads with the majority driven by humans and the minority's controlled by a computer. If a computer car hits you who's liable?
Click to expand...

I've been thinking about this a lot recently, because autonomous vehicles are clearly coming and this is a thing that will need to be sorted out.

The 'driver' being liable makes no sense, as this would suggest the driver needs to be in overall control and, if that's the case, why not just drive the car yourself?

So I think there'll be a flat-rate annual insurance for autonomous cars that will just pay out when the autonomous car is found liable.
 
maflynn said:
Not for nothing, but I can see that comment being levied against apple back when they rolled out the iPod. While I do question Apple's focus and direction, I applaud them for looking at different markets to innovate in.
Click to expand...
But not while their newest release of core products are having issues all over the place, right?
 
Mildredop said:
So I think there'll be a flat-rate annual insurance for autonomous cars that will just pay out when the autonomous car is found liable.
Click to expand...

So we go from 'driver at fault' to 'car at fault'


I didn't do it. The car did. Less accidents, but that's on the condition it can spot everthing, which it cannot as yet
 
Tech198 said:
So we go from 'driver at fault' to 'car at fault'


I didn't do it. The car did. Less accidents, but that's on the condition it can spot everthing, which it cannot as yet
Click to expand...

If we're going to go from person driving the car to computer driving the car, then yes, the computer (or the manufacturer of the car) would be at fault in the event of an accident.
 
jdillings said:
2DZ6qNt.jpg
Click to expand...
incandescents?
petroleums?
only a 10 point digital interface?

puhhhhh-leeeeeeeeze...
[doublepost=1480895978][/doublepost]
mdriftmeyer said:
Find a new hobby. Venting on Macrumors about your favorite company not reflecting your priorities is sad.
Click to expand...
if *MY FAVORITE" anything isn't going the direction *I* want...it quickly becomes something in the rear-view mirror...
 
I've never really liked Siri until yesterday. Now I hate it. I was going to visit a friend yesterday at his new house and was looking for a grocery store to pick up snacks. "Find the nearest grocery store." Walmart Superstore 7 miles away. 30 seconds later, I pass by an Albertsons. Siri, you suck.

Update: Apple issued a statement to Financial Times confirming the letter and Apple's interest in helping to define rules for self-driving vehicles.

Article Link: Apple Confirms Interest in Autonomous Cars in Letter to Federal Regulators[/QUOTE]
 
I actually think that an Apple Car will be great, and I believe it will boost Apple even more.


However, I can't stop thinking about some comical aspects of it: Will it be the thinnest car ever? Will they prioritize weight over performance?

"To make it this thin but still giving you 100 km of driving joy, we had to downsize the engine a little. It's called iEngine, and it gives you 2 horse powers for regular use. If you need, you can boost it to 10 hp's during 10 seconds. It's great. It's the thinnest car ever built."

(Yes, I am extremely tired of Apple prioritizing weight and thinness over performance.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back