Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Hyundai Executives Said to Be 'Divided' Over Prospect of Apple Car Partnership
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yea, Musk is not the kind of guy to taake a back seat to anyone and Apple is a control freak. Hard to see it work unless Apple had bought it a while back.
OTOH, Apple doesn't really need Tesla, they've done a lot of R&D on cars according to reports, have bought some companies with interesting tech, and can buy other to fill gaps as needed; as well as hire engineers ti fill gaps or move into different aareas. They also have the engineers with technical know how to complement a car manufacturer; Hyundai, despit eteh nay sayers, is actually a pretty good fit.
My biggest hope for all you, future/Apple, CCS users is that Apple is able to improve on it in a way to really match the Tesla experience. I take no joy (okay a small amount) in reading stories in my area's Electric Car FB group of folks trying to drive to Tennesse using the CCS network and having all sorts of issues along the way.
Yeah building the car is probably easy, but there is a reason (in the US) Tesla still sells the most EV's.
A standardized, reliable, efficent and fast charging network that provides coverage comparable to gas stations will be needed for EVs to truly take off; even if an EV can go without charging for 90% of an owners travel needs, the perception they could get stuck somewhere with no way to recharge will be a hurdle to purchasing.
Last edited:
Buyer perception needs to be addressed. Sadly the dealerships are not doing a good job of it (gee I wonder why).
Right now, there is no difference to a dealership between selling an ICE on the lot or an EV; and they probably have a lot more ICE vehicles than EVs. The eMustang seems to be a hit according to people I have spoken with, and dealers will sell what is hot; but supplies are limited. I think the EV trucks will be popular because they are used in a different manner. A tradesperson with one may drive a lot during the day but can recharge at night so as long as it last through the workday they're fine. If the operating costs are lower it makes economic sense to buy one if the price is the same as an ICE truck. Most EVs other than the eMustang and trucks are just plain boring designs and simply do not excite, IMHO. Why push one, unless you're getting a huge holdback, when selling something else is easier?
As for Tesla, my experience is they are selling cool and not addressing a buyers concerns over a purchase.
Personally, I think it will take gas stations to add EV charging as part of the solution to increasing EV adoption. Gas stations are familiar, readily available and offer a sense of security you might not get with a charging station located in some less accessible location. Who wants to sit in a remote spot charging at midnight 2am vs. popping into a well lit gas station?
EVs clearly are the future, and can offer perfromance for gear heads and reliable transportation for other. As a gear head, however, I wonder how the tight integration of software and hardware will impact modifying the vehicle. As software uses more data from components it will be harder to do even simple swaps; the coding scene is likely to be more prominent in the future. Of course, as more cars call home and manufacturers deliver updates OTA; changing the software will be a race between manufacturers locking it down and coders finding hacks. I doubt Apple will open up their software to mods, even through an approved store, due to potential legal liabilities. We code see the point where the simple act of adding a feature such as auto folding mirrors by changing the build order electronically bricks your car.
Last edited:
I think gas stations should add charging stations, I also think that we have to do something about demand charges (electricity rates). As far as I can tell no one is really making much money on vehicle charging because commercial demand charges (in the US) are really high. I saw EA was addling battery storage at some sites to try to help alleviate it, but that is also pretty expensive.
,
Supplying highly flammable liquid - old world "car charging"0 requires a few more centralised retail points. Electricity is pretty much much anywhere, so logical locations and density of electricity charging stations don’t fully match what was needed for old world fuelling systems.
They will, but of course many gas stations will - slowly - disappear.
Supplying highly flammable liquid - old world "car charging"0 requires a few more centralised retail points. Electricity is pretty much much anywhere, so logical locations and density of electricity charging stations don’t fully match what was needed for old world fuelling systems.
I think you address those issues through station design and the rate structure. You can spec a station to supply X vehicles per hour. Then you use a batteries to clip the demand during times of high demand in the system, and use periods of low demand to recharge the batteries. Solar cells add an additional design feature to limit demand, and as their output capacity increases and they are designed in from the start they could also address those issues.
As a result, at 6-7 pm when air conditioners start to kick-in in the summer, a gas station would be using batteries and solar to limit their demand on the system; and at night when the peak subsides it recharges the batteries from the grid for the next peak. The utility could control when the batteries are supplying power to maintain grid stability; or even use the batteries /solar from multiple stations to supply the grid in the event of an unforeseen need for the power.
Which leads into the rate structure. Rates could be structured to pay a station for battery use and lower prices for helping to level demand by reducing it during peaks and raising it in lower periods so utilities need to load cycle plants less. Electricity could even be sold on the futures like market to secure a fixed price for the next periods use, much as gasoline is for some industries.
No doubt, but I can see them repurposed.
True, and no doubt you'll see more of the mall / business / workplace chargers cropping up; but there are other factors at play. A mall does that to bring in customers, as would a restaurant, store, etc. They may not want random cars charging, even if they are paying, and not coming in. It means their customers are unhappy they can't charge and the store is not getting traffic from the station. There's a reason gas stations were called filling stations; they are fit for the purpose of providing energy to continue on a trip. That purpose can continue whether it's gas, electricity, or material for Mr. Fusion.
It doesn't require behavioral changes, which are hard to get people to make, and simply continues the paradigm of stopping to reload your vehicles energy source. A driver feels comfortable standing next to their vehicle at a filling station, using it as a rest break, etc. It also doesn't require rethinking city road layouts, use patterns, etc.
IMHO, one of the ways to hasten the switch to EVs is to make ownership as familiar as possible so people don't have to rethink how they use a car.
I didn't know that but I have noticed Kia's designs are getting better and better! I often think if you showed someone a debadged modern Kia they'd guess a more luxurious car.
I guess it depends on how you define reliable. Out the gate, they're fine. It's rare to have a 15+ year old Hyundai on the road still. Not so rare with some other brands.
Compare this to most apple products. It's not rare for them to vastly outlast their competition. And they're largely considered a premium brand in their market category. Hyundai seems to fall flat in both regards.
Last edited:
To me it seems like Kia is going the toy car route when it comes to designs.
Kia's designs are the reason why I jumped ship to another brand a couple of years ago, and no, it wasn't to Dodge... But you have to admit the Challenger, Charger, and Durango look way better than anything Kia designs. Mazdas, Chevys, and Fords look way better too.
Opinions about design is a funny thing; what some people really like others find ugly. Personally, I think the Stinger and Telluride are quite nice; and find BMW's new giant grills hideous, In the end, it all comes down to personal taste, tehre is no right or wrong except maybe the Matador, and what market the car manufacturer is focusing on to drive sales. YMMV.
It will be interesting to see how Apple designs the car and what market they go after.
69Mustang, you really think that the engineers and manufacturers working in Asia are going to have NOT A SINGLE INPUT on how this car is designed/constructed, don't be naive. Hyundai consistently pales in comparison to Toyota and Subaru.
When you frame your response so narrowly that only the answer you want can be given, it's not really a response. More of rhetorical question. So no, I don't think that NOT A SINGLE INPUT... bruh, c'mon. The premise itself is silly. Nor did my quote imply that I did. Based on rumors, I'm right in my opinion. Apple want's a contract manufacturer, not a partner. Evidence of that can be seen in the rumors that Apple is talking to Japanese manufacturers to source some of the parts I claimed Apple wants Hyundai/Kia to assemble.
Really not sure what metric you're using to claim Hyundai pales in comparison to Toyota and Subaru. Customer satisfaction and industry surveys say otherwise. To be fair, that's anecdotal evidence at best which should be grain of salt and all, but absent evidence to the contrary, I'mma say your opinion seems a little dated.
Whoever apple chooses as the manufacturer will have little more input than Foxconn has over how iphones are designed. Which is to say, almost none.
I’d be nervous too considering they’ve been on a roll and don’t need an unexperienced partner adding risk to their operations. Especially one as anticompetitive as apple