Apple Met With California DMV to Review Autonomous Vehicle Regulations

[ChrisA]

I'm waiting on these manufacturers to run tests here in the northeast. Rain, sleet, ice, piles of snow. And not mention pothole season after winter, where some roads here have more craters than the moon.

Show me these self driving cars navigating all that, then I will be throughly impressed.

OK, One of the DARPA Challenges was to have to cars driving on dirt roads or more like "trails" out in the dessert. This pretty much is like your "craters of the Moon" as these "roads" were only suitable for 4x4 off road vehicles. Then more recently Google said they have driven over one and a half MILLION miles on real streets.

But road conditions is one thing these cars don't handle well. But still it is only 2015, give then time.

 

[GadgetDon]

Cars are about perfect for apple's upgrade cycles, most of them get small updates every year and then every 3-5 years get a bigger one. That would match perfectly with the timing of updates that Apple likes to do.

I don't mean Apple's upgrade, I mean customers upgrading. On average, iPhone owners upgrade every two years. Apple Car owners will own theirs for half a decade or more. Lots of reasons for that, one is that a new iPhone is $600-$1000, new Apple Cars will be a hundred times that or more.

And one of the reasons iPhone owners upgrade is for new functionalities that make it better at the stuff it does. Drive safely autonomously is kind of a binary thing, works or doesn't - and imagine the reaction if Apple has a safer version of carOS but it only works on new Apple Cars so the owners of the old Apple Cars are left vulnerable.

OK, maybe not every business has to be a iPhone levels - but investors expect them to be, and when people aren't buying new ones at the same rate, aren't getting the same margins, etc., it's going to hammer the stock (and yes that matters).

 

[0007776]

I don't mean Apple's upgrade, I mean customers upgrading. On average, iPhone owners upgrade every two years. Apple Car owners will own theirs for half a decade or more. Lots of reasons for that, one is that a new iPhone is $600-$1000, new Apple Cars will be a hundred times that or more.

Ok, I see what you are talking about. Although if you aren't having to pay attention to driving then there are all sorts of electronics you could add in so if Apple makes some of the in car entertainment modular they might be able to sell upgrade to those parts regularly.

 

[Zippitydont]

Problem is, there are Public Streets and there are Public Streets.

You can't launch anything to the mass public market, when it's only safe on certain types of streets with certain levels of traffic and congestion in certain scenarios.

Like making a parachute and works brilliant as long as the wind direction and speed is ok, and the temperate is not too bad either.

Put it this way:

If Today, there were no tech problems, or AI problems.
100% reliable, could be fitted into every Car, Truck, Van, Lorry, Train etc etc, TODAY.

There would still be MASSIVE real life and social problems with them.
I'd think it would take a generation or two of humans to get that part out of the way.
You'd need to be born into a world where computers drove cars for it to be totally acceptable to many.

Also we need to come up with some rules.

For starters how about this rule, which is basic, simple, but pretty dam important:

You buy a car, it has a computer brain, which your life is depending on.
What's it's main priorities when it comes to an accident?

To protect YOU the occupant at all costs, or to protect the general public and you are expendable.
Will it mow into a load of children waiting outside the school, maiming and perhaps killing some, to avoid you having a head on collision with a lorry that would probably kill you?
What's going to be more important?

Google cars are driving all over Calif. on all types of (paved) roads.

 

[thekeyring]

It's easy to say this until you get a phone call from the police telling you your young wife and 2 children are dead because your new car veered off into the path of the lorry, does not seem to be any reason at the moment for the accident, it may be a "software glitch" in the latest iCarOS.
Apple are working on the latest iCarOS which should help, but of course all software has bugs that can surface at times, and you clicked "OK" in the user agreement that you would not hold Apple legally liable for any accidents before you started using the car.

You lost your family due to a bug, no one can be held to blame. Never mind.

Everyone going to be happy with this scenario ?

Very good point.

 

[Wallabe]

So who here is going to buy a case for their Apple car?

Hopefully it will come with a built-in bumper.

 

[AppleColorado]

Tesla vehicles currently connect to wifi at home and 3g AT&T cellular elsewhere. Last month there was an over the air update for Tesla containing upgrades and of course some bug fixes. Volkswagen wishes they had this capability right about now. An Apple car would pretty much have to be the same characteristics. Tesla has an onboard Linux computer that is rebootable while driving without affecting any crucial systems. If you can imagine it, we as humans can persist toward it! I appreciate the thought and foresight of Apple engineers when they develop things. They truly are out there to design better things for humans and not just chasing the dollar (ahem... volkswagen). Look at the clean lines of a Tesla versus even high end Italian cars not to mention something from the big three. Ever tried to wax something from the big three? There are more seams, nooks and crannies to watch out for and dig the wax out. I saw the new California T Ferrari. Nice car, butI would not want to wax that. If there are not clean lines, then it is not as areodynamic as it could be. Tesla is the most areodynamic car of any car that has ever been sold in the history of cars, including race cars. Ask Mrs Munter, as she drives both.

Based on historical comments especially by Sir Ive, Apple has been working on a method of transportation for at least 5-7 years now. Apple just added 1200 more employees to project Titan which may increase the due date to 2019 according to speculators. Yea, there are huge barriers to entering the vehicle market, but it can be done. Look at Hundai, Kia, Fisker (which is back in business as of this year), and of course Tesla. Tesla nearly went out of business but ended up being the first to repay their government loan back in full. There is too much profit and opportunity for it to be left to the big three. Technology/innovation will always prevail over muscle. Early military history is a perfect example of this. The US weapons were much more precise than their cold war opponents who compensated with raw explosive power. Remember when intermittent wipers was such a huge selling point in traditional cars? That was the new big feature! In my opinion, hybrid cars should have been in the market at least 50 years ago. Mr Musk has already succeeded in changing the world which was his number one lifetime goal regardless of Tesla/SpaceEx or the hyper loop's future.

Apple met with Tesla several years ago. Rumors circled about Apple buying Tesla. Perhaps they were exploring. Regardless, Musk wasn't looking to sell out.

The fewer people Apple brings on board from the traditional vehicle manufacturers, the better. Remember when Saturn was moved to Tennessee in hopes to escape all the bureaucracy of Detroit? They ended up bringing it with them. Now Saturn is no different sans geographic location.


Brodie, Apple maps is just fine in the U.S. and as all fluid mapping systems, it is getting better all the time. I have used it in rural parts of the country such as Wyoming, as well as urban areas such as Los Angeles. I wish Apple would buy Waze, for the traffic rerouting ability but I don't see that happening.

 

[Piggie]

So who here is going to buy a case for their Apple car?

Hopefully it will come with a built-in bumper.

Will the size of the typical American, and Apple's obsession with the thinness of it's devices, this can only end in disaster!

 

[Wallabe]

Will the size of the typical American, and Apple's obsession with the thinness of it's devices, this can only end in disaster!

If Apple needs design inspirations, they should look at the Italians. There's nothing wrong with making the car thinner and smaller. Good thing can come from that, like the diagonal suspension systems (http://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/track-tests/2012-lamborghini-aventador-suspension-walkaround.html), lowering the center of gravity and the suspension works better than regular vertical ones. Apple took a clunky fingerprint reader and downsize it into a tiny chip that sits just under the iPhone's home button. The iPhone has generations of engineering and re-engineering. Today's car could use some of that, especially the outdated gas-combustion technology.

Maybe they will make a basic version inspired by BMW i3, and a more super car version, something along the Superveloce Aventador. I'm sure Apple could beat their designs and performance if they put their heart and soul into building a car the same way they did with the iPhones. Look how far we've gotten right before the iPhone came into existence (2007) and now (2015). It's basically going from a Camry (basic flip/bar phone, Blackberry at best) to today's Lamborghini (iPhone 6s and high end Android phones) and is generally affordable to the mass.

Until then, I'll enjoy the Italian's for now.

[Large image warning 3000 x 2000]

 

[Piggie]

If Apple needs design inspirations, they should look at the Italians. There's nothing wrong with making the car thinner and smaller. Good thing can come from that, like the diagonal suspension systems (http://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/track-tests/2012-lamborghini-aventador-suspension-walkaround.html), lowering the center of gravity and the suspension works better than regular vertical ones.

See, this is the mistake people make and Apple's Trick.

Apple does not make high end products, they make MASS Market, general consumer products, and market them as high end products.
They make make one or two of them as like marker pieces, but their money comes from lowish end mass market sell by the millions to everyone products.

 

[Wallabe]

See, this is the mistake people make and Apple's Trick.

Apple does not make high end products, they make MASS Market, general consumer products, and market them as high end products.
They make make one or two of them as like marker pieces, but their money comes from lowish end mass market sell by the millions to everyone products.

Even if it's mass produced, it's still highly desirable. I'd give Apple the benefit of the doubt and let them experiment with it. They will make mistakes, just as with their previous products, but that's how they learn.

I could name a more exclusive phone, such as the Nokia Vertu. But who the heck is going to buy one of those? A dedicated button to call a concierge just so they can book you tickets to an event somewhere? On the iPhone, just go to ticketmaster.com, check the schedule, read the reviews, and make a more informed decision. It's at the point now even if iPhone users looks at the Vertu, they'll say "So what?"

I have the same attitude about some of car's technology. About 15 years ago, GPS was invented for the car, it costs $2,000 to have one of those, and you need to update it yearly to get the most updated map data. It's the same today. I just test drove a Honda 2016 for fun and the salesman said the GPS package is $2,000 (still). My iPhone can get the latest map data every time I use it. I don't care for the GPS package, whether it's in a Honda or a Ferrari, it's a waste of money!

The car technology (and especially the oil industry) are run by old men. They want to maintain the status quo. Anything that upsets the market, they are scared to death about how will their next billion will come from.

 

[Piggie]

Oh I agree, let's shake it up.
Trouble is companies don't want to.

If people are selling $1 items for $50 and you come along new to market.
Whilst you might like to shake things up, if the public are dumb enough to pay $50 for the $1 item, why would you, as a business want to come in and sell them for $10 when you are throwing away $40 potential profit?

 

[Wallabe]

Oh I agree, let's shake it up.
Trouble is companies don't want to.

If people are selling $1 items for $50 and you come along new to market.
Whilst you might like to shake things up, if the public are dumb enough to pay $50 for the $1 item, why would you, as a business want to come in and sell them for $10 when you are throwing away $40 potential profit?

Some are doing just that. Buy a company that makes pills, increase each pill from $13.50 to $750. 5,500% increase. Profit.