We get it. I'm sure you love driving your Tesla so you're very defensive. That doesn't stop reality.Yeah because news are always 100% true, right?
Check this CNBC article that blames Tesla for a Supercharger
Tesla Supercharger catches fire at a Wawa store in New Jersey
Wawa says Tesla is investigating the cause of the fire.www.cnbc.com
and then check this article:
Tesla supercharger ruled out as cause of N.J. fire
A local fire official said a blaze near a Wawa convenience store originated from an on-site transformer that sends power from the electric utility's line to the charging stations.www.autonews.com
"No vehicles were involved; it wasn't the charging stations at all"
CNBC has yet to correct/update their article.
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.
Nissan Denies Reports of Apple Car Partnership Discussions
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
says the person that jumped in the conversation the moment I mentioned Tesla shorts.
nothing to say about CNBC's blatant lie about Tesla? cool, we're done. 👋
Hi folks,
I just came back from the future and I can tell to you that Apple will buy a controlling stake in Mazda Motor Corporation, in Japan.
So, the Apple Car will be based in a Mazda design and tech.
Mark my words.
I just came back from the future and I can tell to you that Apple will buy a controlling stake in Mazda Motor Corporation, in Japan.
So, the Apple Car will be based in a Mazda design and tech.
Mark my words.
Who cares about CNBC? I’m talking about actual customers complaining about Tesla build quality. And you’re missing the entire point because you’re so quick to defend Elon. Your news network examples make my point for me. Apple doesn’t want to have anything to do with Tesla and Musk. He’s a lightning rod for PR nightmares that Apple’s brand has been trying to avoid so why would they ever want to partner?
Apple will wait until a car manufacturer who has experience with EV starts hemorrhaging money big time to the point where they are going under then Apple will step in an offer them a deal to make their cars. Apple gets the cheap deal they always wanted in building their cars and the car manufacturer gets to stay in business.
- This is a fair point, but instead of piling more and more people onto a private company’s proprietary connector, we should instead be focussing on further expanding EV infrastructure that is CCS/CHAdeMO (in the case of Nissan) compliant. Having a robust Tesla Supercharger network and a non-robust network for any other charging standards is quite the definition of a monopoly, at least in my mind. And yes, I know Tesla has said they will openly let other manufacturers use their charging ecosystem. But are other automakers really going to want to give some form of financial assistance to what is ultimately, no matter how friendly they may be in product sharing, still a competitor at the end of the day? I think not.
- This is also a great point, but I don’t think Apple would use Tesla’s software for anything. This is Apple we’re talking about. I could be wrong, but they don’t exactly have a track record to back up the possibility of *them* working within *someone else’s* software, rather it’s usually the opposite.
- Do they, though? They tout it for the Mac Pro and that’s (AFAIK) it.
- Because if a company is buying carbon credits, even though that doesn’t make them carbon-neutral in a literal sense, it does make them carbon-neutral in a legal and “on paper” sense - at least in the US. Apple touts their eco-friendliness and desire to have long-lasting products yet solders everything under the sun, makes end-user servicing virtually impossible, and even goes to lengths such as restricting ICs and chips from being available third hand from manufacturers such as Texas Instruments. Repair folks like Louis Rossman have essentially had to go dumpster diving and scavenge chips off of logic boards from recycled/disposed Macs manyatime. To think Apple would really go out of their way for true carbon-neutrality versus meeting the requirements on paper in the US is… well, I find it hard.
Case in point: They claim all stores run on renewable energy. Where I live in Ohio, there isn’t renewable energy.. but I subscribed to wind energy. The grid has no way to sort the energy by production method. So the power I’m actually getting is more than likely coal generated. But my electric utility buys “certificates” from the wind company (in Texas!) to “offset” that coal. So no, none of the Apple Stores in my city are really renewables-powered. But they are “on paper”.
Simply use an adapter. I use an adapter for my Tesla when I charge at non-Tesla stalls.
Some parties have already contacted Tesla to be able to use the Supercharger for their own vehicles.
Tesla Superchargers already open to other electric cars - electrive.com
Tesla has often offered to open its Supercharger network to other manufacturers in recent years if they’d contribute to the costs. Tesla CEO Elon Musk has now
www.electrive.com
I don't think Tesla would force their software onto Apple. Tesla would be happy to build cars according to Apple's wants. Tesla has advertised that manufacturing expertise is one of their products they're offering. If they forced Tesla software and design onto the products they're manufacturing to others, that wouldn't make that much sense.
Sure they have. Since 2013
That's completely off topic.
Sure. Apple buys Renewable Energy Certificates too. Compare that to Samsung who doesn't do that for their stores and therefore Samsung is able to offer a lower cost phone to customers, putting Apple at a disadvantage for caring about the environment.
I'm NOT really sure what Apple does will make ANY difference.
Lexus will announce the IS 500 F Sport ANY day now, with the same Engine from their LS sedan !
And will follow that up almost immediately with a Naturally Aspirated 5.0L V8 version of their IS sedan !
BWM decided to go ugly, Mercedes decided to go 4-cylinder with their entire Next-Gen C Class sedan family !
I'll bet Lexus said, when they got early wind of ALL that, now is our chance to reclaim what we experienced back in 1989 & the early 1990s !
And, IMO, if they execute well, they will Kick Butt.
A NA 5.0L V8 IS Sedan in CY2021 is a Dream Come True to many who are really into cars !
It will sell better than ANY EV !
400 HP @ 6250 RPM
400 lb-ft @ 2750-4500 RPM
Curb Weight = ~3700 lbs
550 highway miles @ 90 MPH on a single tank of gas !
That's enough for Silicon Valley to San Diego, OR vice-versa, without Stopping !
Lexus will announce the IS 500 F Sport ANY day now, with the same Engine from their LS sedan !
And will follow that up almost immediately with a Naturally Aspirated 5.0L V8 version of their IS sedan !
BWM decided to go ugly, Mercedes decided to go 4-cylinder with their entire Next-Gen C Class sedan family !
I'll bet Lexus said, when they got early wind of ALL that, now is our chance to reclaim what we experienced back in 1989 & the early 1990s !
And, IMO, if they execute well, they will Kick Butt.
A NA 5.0L V8 IS Sedan in CY2021 is a Dream Come True to many who are really into cars !
It will sell better than ANY EV !
400 HP @ 6250 RPM
400 lb-ft @ 2750-4500 RPM
Curb Weight = ~3700 lbs
550 highway miles @ 90 MPH on a single tank of gas !
That's enough for Silicon Valley to San Diego, OR vice-versa, without Stopping !
Last edited:
Tesla losing $ on car sales...
www.cnn.com
Tesla's dirty little secret: Its net profit doesn't come from selling cars
Tesla posted its first full year of net income in 2020 -- but not because of sales to its customers.
This tweet perhaps sums up Apple's game plan the best.
Apple is one of those rare companies who get both tech and design (other companies tend to be experts in one area but not the other). I wouldn't write them out of anything, not least because of their ability to leverage their dominant market share in smartphones in adjacent industries (and the car is arguably the ultimate in smartphone accessories).
But do they have to make a whole car to get their tech in use?
I see where some are asking what can Apple bring to the table in terms of the driving experience. We know they can make an impact in the infotainment side, but without level 5 autonomy how is the car going to drive.
Basically, the idea is that full autonomy will allow Apple to rethink aspects of the car (such as doing away with the steering wheel). In this regard, yes, Apple will need to find a car company willing to think outside the box and be willing to manufacture the cars according to Apple’s specs.
I also believe that Apple continues to be underestimated in the autonomy area because they don’t talk about their progress in public, unlike other companies who seize every opportunity to toot their own horns.
What these car companies have to fear is that they very likely won’t have the core competencies to excel in an industry that is truly overtaken by software. Apple has the potential to add a ton of chaos to the auto industry – even going so far as to redefine the car. And when that happens, these companies won’t have a legitimate answer.
But in the end, you just need one car company to agree to work with Apple at first (pretty much like how AT&T partnered with Apple on the iphone), and the rest will eventually follow as well.
Honda or Toyota. The two companies have proven they can build a range of highly reliable quality cars.
Apple is expected to partner with a third-party car maker to build its rumored self-driving car with reports surfacing in January suggesting that Apple was eyeing Hyundai to be the official partner for Apple Car. Subsequent reports suggest Apple is actively pursuing all of its options and talking to a number of different manufacturers.
In the latest round of speculation, Apple reportedly approached Nissan in the last few months about a potential partnership for a self-driving car, according to a paywalled Financial Times report. The report states that negotiations between the two companies were "brief" and that discussions did not make their way to higher executive or leadership levels in either company due to disagreements over the specifics of the Apple Car.
It's worth noting that an older report by Nikkei Asia cited Nissan as one of at least six Japanese automakers that Apple is eyeing for the Apple Car. The report didn't, however, provide specific details as to the progress of any talks, or if Apple is ultimately siding with one carmaker over the others.
Nissan and Apple reportedly clashed over how a partnership would actually play out. Nissan reportedly was concerned that a deal with Apple would downgrade Nissan to simply a "hardware supplier." The Apple Car is expected to be fully branded by Apple, including Apple software and design. While Apple holds the in-house ability to design its own software and hardware, it's not positioned to build the actual hardware at a mass scale, which is why a partnership is considered to be a hallmark of the project itself.
During an earnings presentation, Nissan's COO Ashwani Gupta stated that Nissan is open to partnerships, but only if the opposite party adapts to Nissan's services, not vice versa. The COO said that Nissan has its own customer base to satisfy and that it will not "change the way" it makes cars.
Earlier in the year following reports of a potential tie-up with Apple, Hyundai's shares surged by more than 25% but remained volatile after negotiations came to a standstill. Attempting to avoid from a similar scenario, Nissan quickly and unequivocally confirmed in a statement that it's "not in talks" with Apple but remains open to working with other companies.
Apple remains a tightly secretive company that rarely confirms the existence of unreleased products and projects. The statement by Hyundai earlier in the year confirming it's in negotiations with the tech giant undoubtedly upset Apple executives as it was seen as a confirmation that Apple is pursuing a partnership for a potential self-driving car. The statement was quickly reworded to remove mention of Apple, and soon after, talks between the two came to a screeching halt.
Despite the plentiful number of reports about Apple's self-driving car, sources suggest that we won't be seeing it on the road until at least 2026. Bloomberg reports that the Apple Car is "nowhere near production stage," and that a release is at least half a decade away. Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo, one of the most reputable analysts for Apple, still believes that despite Hyundai's mishap, Apple will ultimately side with the carmaker as the official partner for its self-driving car ambitions.
Article Link: Nissan Denies Reports of Apple Car Partnership Discussions
One of the two make more sense than any other company if Apple cares about long term quality, and Apple have shown that is a priority.
Why should people have to use adapters? That’s added complexity, cost, and an additional point of failure.Simply use an adapter. I use an adapter for my Tesla when I charge at non-Tesla stalls.
Some parties have already contacted Tesla to be able to use the Supercharger for their own vehicles.
Tesla Superchargers already open to other electric cars - electrive.com
Tesla has often offered to open its Supercharger network to other manufacturers in recent years if they’d contribute to the costs. Tesla CEO Elon Musk has now
I don't think Tesla would force their software onto Apple. Tesla would be happy to build cars according to Apple's wants. Tesla has advertised that manufacturing expertise is one of their products they're offering. If they forced Tesla software and design onto the products they're manufacturing to others, that wouldn't make that much sense.
Sure they have. Since 2013
That's completely off topic.
Sure. Apple buys Renewable Energy Certificates too. Compare that to Samsung who doesn't do that for their stores and therefore Samsung is able to offer a lower cost phone to customers, putting Apple at a disadvantage for caring about the environment.
Sure, some companies have contacted Tesla. I didn’t say it wouldn’t happen at all. Rather that your large OEMs aren’t going to want to financially boost their competitor unless the market case is even better for them directly.
My comments about Made in the USA were referring to products outside of Mac Pro. Beyond Mac Pro, they don’t tout USA production for anything. And the Mac Pro is a niche market product.
Bringing up Apple’s deliberate attempts to send product to landfill/end of life unnecessarily — which is bad for the environment — while putting on a façade that “oh man, we care more about Mother Earth than any other company!” is anything but off topic. It’s pandering at best.
Apple buying Renewable Energy Certificates is, again, pandering at best. They’re still using carbon-producing electric sources because the grid does not separate by generation method. They’re just simply buying documents that say “we paid a company to generate an equal amount of electric with carbon-neutral methods”, that is NOT the same as eliminating the carbon-producing electric in the first place because carbon pollutants are still being pumped into the atmosphere.
Last edited:
Going back and reinstalling tens of thousands of Superchargers in North America just so that Tesla can accommodate non-Tesla vehicles makes 0 sense. Tesla would rather spend those millions of dollars building out new stalls considering some stations still have long lines during the holidays. Not to mention, you have to ask several hundred thousand USA Tesla owners today to use an adapter should Superchargers switch over to the standardized plug.
Regarding cost: how do you know the Supercharger plug isn't cheaper to make than the CHAdeMO? Could it not be that designing in a CHAdeMO port on the Tesla vehicle is more costly than their proprietary plug? Why should Tesla vehicles be more costly to accommodate non-Tesla vehicles?
Tesla spent millions of dollars building out the network. They have the right to dictate how they should operate their network. If people outside of Tesla want access to the #1 charging network, they can shell out $90 for an adapter.
The current situation is that many customers won't buy a non-Tesla EV because it doesn't have access to the Supercharger network. I can point you to a video where MKBHD said he wants a Porsche Taycan over a Model S, but because Taycan doesn't have access to the Supercharger network, he's not buying it. I'm willing to bet this is much more common than you think.
I don't think you can say for sure that large OEMs won't make a deal with Tesla unless it doesn't financially boost Tesla. If they saw Tesla's EV lead lengthen and/or if their market research shows Supercharger is a big want for their customers, then it's possible large OEMs will eventually make a deal.
Even if Apple only sold 100 Mac Pros, it doesn't change the fact that Apple has been touting it to millions of their customers for several years. That's their stance which supports my point that Tesla can be an attractive partner because they make their cars in USA and Apple can get brownie PR points for it. Apple absolutely cares about their public image which gives another reason why Apple could possibly go with Tesla.
Landfill? You can recycle any Apple product. Apple's partner will ship a prepaid box to you for free if you want to request it. I can recycle one of my iPod nanos today if I wanted to. Of course, not all the materials gets re-used but surely the products don't go straight to the landfill.
And considering that Apple supports iPhones for 5+ years, that immediately proves your statement "send product to end of life unnecessarily" as false. Apple could simply say "ok 4 years of support is all you get which is still 1-2 years more than you would get from Android" but they don't do that.
It's not Apple's job to upgrade the utility company's infrastructure. That's the utility company's job. Until then, they'll buy the certs which most of other PC manufacturers don't do (and they don't even have as many stores as Apple). That puts Apple at a disadvantage since they have to charge their customers more to pay for these certificates while someone like Dell can sell a comparatively same performing computer at a substantial discount.
1. That's pretty low torque for such a heavy vehicle.
2. That's a REALLY heavy vehicle.Why so heavy? That's going to negatively affect handling and acceleration.
3. Who drives over 6 hours at 90 MPH without stopping? No one legally (in the US).
The anti-EV comments always fall into these categories:
* It doesn't charge fast enough. Most of the time, you charge overnight at home like your phone does. Fast chargers are improving all the time. It takes my car (Kia Niro EV) ~20 minutes to charge from 20% to 80%. Perfect for a quick stop on a long trip.
* I need to go 999999 miles on a single charge! No you don't. Unless you're filling up pee bottles in your car while you drive, you need to stop.
* I live in an apartment/condo/under a bridge: I can't charge at home. Okay, but how often do you need to charge? My EV, for example, goes 239 miles on a single charge (a LOT more with just city driving). A short stop at a fast charger may take care of your charging needs for a week.
* I live in the middle of nowhere. Okay, there's a valid complaint. Sell some of your cache of guns and move back to civilization.
* EVs are too expensive. They still are a bit, but when you take into account nearly zero maintenance and much less expensive fuel costs, you end up ahead.
* EVs aren't as good for the environment as they say. Peer reviewed-study after study says that's wrong. Additionally, as more renewables are added to the grid, EVs get cleaner. Gas cars get dirtier over time as parts wear out, catalytic converters lose effectiveness, etc.
* I don't like electric cars. Okay... try driving one sometime. I've been driving EVs for almost 8 years now and every person I've let drive my cars loves them.
* They're too slow. C'mon. My car does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds. Put it in sport and turn off traction control and it spins the tires for hundreds of feet continuously. Not bad for a "grocery getter" Kia.
* I like the sound of V8s. It's nice, but it's a callback to an older time. My wife hated when I would jump on my Mazda 3. She hated the noise. She doesn't mind when I jump on the Kia unless I'm going too fast. The lack of noise is nice. You can have a conversation at a normal volume. You can appreciate music playing better. It's not like you're listening to the engine to shift at the right RPMs.
* Screw the environment! Um, okay boomer. If having cleaner air and fewer deaths related to air pollution makes me a commie, leftist, Marxist... then I'm okay with that.
