We asked industry experts about where the automotive industry is headed. Keep reading to get their thoughts on the Apple Car, and the future of cars in general.
Larry Burns
Former GM vice president of research and development and head of strategic planning, and current adviser to several companies shaping the future of mobility.
The word “and” is more important when it comes to the future than the word “or.” Mobility is transforming because connected and driverless and shared and tailored and electrical vehicles are converging to provide better mobility experiences at significantly lower consumer and societal cost. A combination of new technology and innovative business models is driving this change. Both a new age of the automobile and a new age of mobility are rapidly emerging where people will personally own and share driverless vehicles.
Over the years I’ve seen Apple’s strong tendency to change the design language of the incumbent solutions. For example, the iPhone dramatically changed the design language of the BlackBerry. I am speculating that Apple is not just seeking to make a better Tesla, but aiming to change the design language of automobiles based on what is now technically possible.
Read more about our exclusive take on the Apple Car:
- Apple Car Exclusive: Experts Look at What Could Be a Game-Changer
- Want to Enter the Auto Industry? Lie Down Until the Feeling Passes
- 13 Coolest Features of Our Apple Car
- But Will You Love It?
- Beyond Apple Car: Can BMW Out-Tech, Out-Style, Out-Think Silicon Valley?
It will likely be electrically driven, it will eventually be driverless, and it will probably entail both personal ownership and sharing. Think Uber without drivers and vehicles tailored to the types of trips people typically make, not the extreme trips we rarely make.
These are rich companies with great talent, and they’re proven. I think it’s going to be a great race.
Auto companies are good at what they do, and I don’t think we ought to jump to the conclusion that they’re out of the game by any means. But do they need to step up their pace on Level 4 autonomous? Absolutely.
Google had the foresight to hire 15 scientists and engineers from several of the DARPA Urban Challenge teams. Then last year, Uber hired numerous experts from Carnegie Mellon University. Why didn’t an auto company do this instead of two technology companies? That worries me on behalf of the OEMs because there are only so many people who can do this well. I think we’re within a three- to five-year window when commercial Level 4 autonomy—a car that doesn’t have a steering wheel—will be proven to the world.
In the past seven years, new car efficiency in the U.S. has gone up at about 0.6 mpg per year. To get to a 54.5 mpg CAFE by 2025, fuel economy must improve almost three times that rate for 10 years. OEMs risk using all their resources to meet fuel economy and emission regulations to preserve legacy cars and trucks while competing with companies such as Apple, Tesla, Uber, and Google, which are developing transformational technology, business models, and designs. This is a big challenge for automakers.
Encouraging signs for the OEMs include Ford’s 25 Learning Projects and Smart Mobility Division, GM’s investment in Lyft, an impressive Chevrolet Bolt with 200-mile EV range, and Toyota spending a billion dollars over five years at its recently announced Toyota Research Institute (analogous to Xerox’s famous PARC in Palo Alto).
Are Apple, Google, Uber, and Tesla intimidating competitors? Absolutely. These are rich companies with great talent, and they’re proven. I think it’s going to be a great race.
Chris Borroni-Bird
Qualcomm vice president of strategic development, former GM director of advanced technology vehicle concepts and EN-V program
What any company in this space is trying to do is come up with something that’s compelling in terms of design and user experience; an example is the integration of the smartphone ecosystem, the Apple Store. That was a differentiator in that space. The rest of the vehicle is going to be, I shouldn’t say commoditized, but it’s not going to be the prime differentiator. However, the ability to provide an extremely comfortable ride and avoid bumps so people can read without getting motion sickness is going to become more useful. At the moment, though, there is a constraint on the number of software engineers. That might lead car companies to pool resources.
In the future, there may be a tendency for vehicles to be leased due to cybersecurity. It’s one thing to do regular software updates, but at some point, the hardware may be a limiting factor. As attacks get more sophisticated, I think the OEMs might have an interest in the vehicle coming back so they can upgrade it. It may be less risky to just lease them.
I’d also mention that wireless EV charging is a natural fit with automated parking and shared mobility—no need to plug in and fewer cords in public parking spots. When charged it can move aside to let another vehicle charge, so the same charging pad would have close to 100 percent utilization, saving substantial infrastructure cost. Today, a charged EV can be parked for days at the airport, which is very inefficient.
John Krafcik
CEO of Google Self-Driving Cars, former director of TrueCar, former president of Hyundai Motor America
Our focus is full autonomy with no driver intervention or monitoring required. This will benefit the most people, and there’s no confusion about whether the computer or the human is in control. It avoids the problem inherent with any dynamic handoff.
There’s much to do to improve automotive safety. Over 1.2 million people die on the world’s roadways every year. That’s like a 737 falling from the sky every hour of every day. Based on U.S. statistics, over 90 percent of the time, driver error is responsible. Ultimately, I think there will be a greater mix of how people want to get around.
There’s much to do to improve safety. Over 1.2 million people die on the world’s roadways every year.
But we’re not looking to manufacture cars at scale. Getting 1,500 kilograms of steel, aluminum, carbon fiber, plastic, and rubber to perform robustly in temperatures from minus 40 degrees C to 60 C at speeds up to 200 kilometers per hour or more—while delivering zero tailpipe emissions and a 500-km range—is insanely difficult. Automakers have both the experience and smarts to do this well.
Apple Car design by Garrett DeBry, digital model by Roman Mistluk, and digital rendering by Mind Over Eye.
The post Industry Insiders Opine on the Apple Car appeared first on Motor Trend.
Agya Club Indonesia
