Discussion
AlexIT said:
I don't mind the design, however what is the point of such a shape for a car which will drive most of the time below 40 mph? It looks just a waste of space: an i3-ish design would surely provide more room in less space, no?
I did wonder myself but there is no need for a bonnet as such and maybe the design allows better camera coverage especially down the windscreen line to the front bumper. Clearly a lot of thought has been put into this and maybe it might come to fruition, but still a long way to go.
Waymo just got approval to go public in San Francisco and a couple of the surrounding areas. But its still only a limited service with a limited number of cars. We will have to see how it works when the great unwashed start to use the service, but I see it as mainstream for the moment. The Waymo service is geo-locked and they are not allowed to go to the airport for example - one area in which they would be ideal. So lets see how this all pans out.
Self driving taxis might be the goal, but I still dont quite see the benefit yet. The days of the terrible condition taxi thats full of smoke and falling apart are long gone in most cities. And with fixed price trips from the airport for example, I dont see them going away any time soon.
Waymo just got approval to go public in San Francisco and a couple of the surrounding areas. But its still only a limited service with a limited number of cars. We will have to see how it works when the great unwashed start to use the service, but I see it as mainstream for the moment. The Waymo service is geo-locked and they are not allowed to go to the airport for example - one area in which they would be ideal. So lets see how this all pans out.
Self driving taxis might be the goal, but I still dont quite see the benefit yet. The days of the terrible condition taxi thats full of smoke and falling apart are long gone in most cities. And with fixed price trips from the airport for example, I dont see them going away any time soon.
off_again said:
Clearly a lot of thought has been put into this and maybe it might come to fruition, but still a long way to go.
That's my thinking to. The "problem" has already been cracked by Waymo and others, so what does this bring to the table? Why it is it special?And as the end consumer... what benefit do these really have? Uber has already appified ordering. It needs some sort of USP apart from novelty factor to make it widespread.
And then there's the "do we really want it widespread" argument, cities in the UK are trying to reduce cars, not have them do twice as many journeys.
I'm not really sure how these are transformative, unless they literally drop the price through the floor.
phil4 said:
off_again said:
Clearly a lot of thought has been put into this and maybe it might come to fruition, but still a long way to go.
That's my thinking to. The "problem" has already been cracked by Waymo and others, so what does this bring to the table? Why it is it special?And as the end consumer... what benefit do these really have? Uber has already appified ordering. It needs some sort of USP apart from novelty factor to make it widespread.
And then there's the "do we really want it widespread" argument, cities in the UK are trying to reduce cars, not have them do twice as many journeys.
I'm not really sure how these are transformative, unless they literally drop the price through the floor.
Verne want to own the whole thing - from the app to the vehicle and all steps in between. This is where they believe they can drive the most profit from. But what happened to being the best at what you do? Tesla, Rivian and now GM with the whole Carplay / Android Auto thing - why? Not getting it. Because they want to 'own' the experience and not allow anyone else into it!
If you know how to build innovative cars, why not just focus on that? Be the best at what you do. Like you mentioned, Uber has the brand, Lyft is the competitor and then there are regional competitors. You want to launch a brand new app, ride hailing and self-driving car too? Weird.
And yes, it has been researched pretty heavily and self-driving cars arent going to solve the traffic issues, and in many places it will make it worse. Exactly how will these self-driving cars get between rides? How many people will they actually carry (Verne is 2 and at least the Waymo Jag's can carry 3!)? Nah, its going to add to the problem in reality and ends up just being a service for those who can afford it.
off_again said:
You raise an interesting point here - and its something we see in so many different areas - ownership of the whole experience...
Verne want to own the whole thing - from the app to the vehicle and all steps in between. This is where they believe they can drive the most profit from. But what happened to being the best at what you do? Tesla, Rivian and now GM with the whole Carplay / Android Auto thing - why? Not getting it. Because they want to 'own' the experience and not allow anyone else into it!
If you know how to build innovative cars, why not just focus on that? Be the best at what you do. Like you mentioned, Uber has the brand, Lyft is the competitor and then there are regional competitors. You want to launch a brand new app, ride hailing and self-driving car too? Weird.
And yes, it has been researched pretty heavily and self-driving cars arent going to solve the traffic issues, and in many places it will make it worse. Exactly how will these self-driving cars get between rides? How many people will they actually carry (Verne is 2 and at least the Waymo Jag's can carry 3!)? Nah, its going to add to the problem in reality and ends up just being a service for those who can afford it.
Verne do own the whole thing (Mate Rimac). It is a very entrepreneurial approachVerne want to own the whole thing - from the app to the vehicle and all steps in between. This is where they believe they can drive the most profit from. But what happened to being the best at what you do? Tesla, Rivian and now GM with the whole Carplay / Android Auto thing - why? Not getting it. Because they want to 'own' the experience and not allow anyone else into it!
If you know how to build innovative cars, why not just focus on that? Be the best at what you do. Like you mentioned, Uber has the brand, Lyft is the competitor and then there are regional competitors. You want to launch a brand new app, ride hailing and self-driving car too? Weird.
And yes, it has been researched pretty heavily and self-driving cars arent going to solve the traffic issues, and in many places it will make it worse. Exactly how will these self-driving cars get between rides? How many people will they actually carry (Verne is 2 and at least the Waymo Jag's can carry 3!)? Nah, its going to add to the problem in reality and ends up just being a service for those who can afford it.
Most taxi journeys within a city are for one or two people so why cater for the fringe cases? Their business model makes perfect sense as it takes a holistic approach as it integrates the servicing, cleaning and recharging. They say each vehicle will be available for greater than 23 out if 24 hours. This enterprise is not intended to reduce overall traffic levels just replace driven cabs with superior driverless ones. The best bit is if people misbehave / make a mess inside they will be charged so helping to keep the internal environment attractive for customers. Apparently the cost will be the same as a normal cab ride and the wait times will be very similar. It will be interesting to see them arrive in the U.K. in a couple of years time.
I really like the Camera and LiDAR approach to navigation and safety as dual systems give redundancy and better safety.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff