News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by msoad on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:07AM (#34260591)
I have a Tesla and I also hold a short position on TSLA. My Tesla is a great car. The best car that I've ever driven but I'm not sure if it has anything that other car manufacturers can't replicate. I think Apple can make an even better car than Tesla if they build the hardware and software like their phones and computers.

The idea that Autopilot has some magic sauce that nobody else can replicate is laughable.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by Cthulhu_ on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:42AM (#34261258)
That's just it. I see it as follows. Back in the 2000s, the iPhone came out. Especially with the 3G, it was miles ahead of the competition, and it took Android manufacturers five years to catch up and overtake it.

I believe Tesla holds - or, held - a similar position. They had a head start in many areas, but they could not keep it up.

One big difference is quality; Apple phones have great build quality, always have - although they had issues with bending and holding the phone a certain way iirc. Nothing like that in recent years though. But Teslas are known for poor build quality, mainly in the bodywork - expensive construction methods, poor and inconsistent spacings, etc.

Tesla hasn't innovated in recent years. Their last 'big' one was announcing the semi, cybertruck and a new Roadster, but it went radio silent for all of those for years after the announcement until recently when they finally started delivering the first semis.

Apple on the other hand has consistently released a new phone every year since the iphone 1, and more models and innovation to boot.

Tesla had so much money but they don't seem to have invested it efficiently. They also failed to advance their self-driving much further, which seemed to be the USP they were pushing for for a while.

Its owner messing around with the stock price by announcing a privatization, then buying Twitter on what seemed like a whim was another big issue of course. He lost a lot of credibility over the years.

I think Tesla will pivot from a car manufacturer to a battery manufacturer, and that its long-term strategy is its Turbocharger network. Electric cars are here to stay, and whoever owns the charger network now will benefit for a long, long time - like the oil industry has for a hundred years on fuel.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by helen___keller on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:53AM (#34261507)
> Its owner messing around with the stock price by announcing a privatization, then buying Twitter on what seemed like a whim was another big issue of course. He lost a lot of credibility over the years.

I think this counts for more than people realize. Similar with Facebook/Zuckerberg and Amazon/Bezos. The most effective founder CEO, in my opinion, for a large company is one that stays generally unknown to the public.

Tesla went from cool (I personally thought a Tesla was much more desirable than a traditional luxury car like a lambo) to kinda cringe, in large part because Elon Musk is broadcasting cringe on the daily to anybody who will listen.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by fallingknife on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:36AM (#34262392)
How many people are listening, though? And how many who are care enough to change a car purchasing decision? I think the answer is probably very few. I never hear anyone bring it up IRL.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by JumpinJack_Cash on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:09AM (#34261877)
> > Especially with the 3G, it was miles ahead of the competition

Pocket PC was a thing and it was great.

We have come so far in human progress that nobody invents something that is ‘miles ahead’ of everyone else.

What people do is they manufacture a narrative which purports such claims and shove it down people’s throats.

That is even more true in a sector which is almost 200 years old such as automotive.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by myko on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:08PM (#34263914)
> I think Tesla will pivot from a car manufacturer to a battery manufacturer

Tesla buys their batteries, though. They could/should sell the motors perhaps?

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by wazoox on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:35AM (#34261113)
Actually after having tested a couple of other cars, for instance the Renault Megane, the BMW i4 and the Mercedes EQE have better enhanced drive assistance than Tesla. For instance:

* when in full-auto on a single lane road, when there's an exit on the right the Tesla 3 almost always slightly swerve towards the exit before coming back in its lane. None of the Megane, the EQE or the BMW i4 do that.

* To overtake a slower vehicle, the Megane and i4 are better : simply push the left blinker, then the car switch lanes and accelerates BEFORE having entirely switched lane, like a human driver would do.

* The mapping and charge planning on the BMW and particularly the EQE/EQS are arguably slightly superior now to Tesla (though Tesla is still a bit easier). Renault is very close, and Kia/Hyundai isn't far behind either.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by BadOakOx on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:50AM (#34261429)
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by wazoox on Thursday January 05, 2023 @05:14PM (#34267623)
Wow that's a hell of a failure from Tesla. And the 3 others (Audi, BMW, Ford) just did fine.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by fowkswe on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:53AM (#34261483)
> * To overtake a slower vehicle, the Megane and i4 are better : simply push the left blinker, then the car switch lanes and accelerates BEFORE having entirely switched lane, like a human driver would do.

Teslas do this in FSD mode.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by chrisandchris on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:36PM (#34263408)
My 2015 Seat did that too with cruise control enabled (well, minus sone stuff that is self-driving), but he did accelerate with cruise control enabled and auto-keep-distance).

No need to buy a $x FSD Tesla to get some extra.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by kwhitefoot on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:10PM (#34263951)
My 2015 Model S does this, has done for a long time. No need for FSD, just Autosteer.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by wazoox on Thursday January 05, 2023 @04:58PM (#34267414)
In Europe nobody ever buys FSD because the gimmicks are disabled for security reason (no remote summoning, no automatic parking). If that's the only feature that 7000€ buys...
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by usrusr on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:54AM (#34261526)
> * when in full-auto on a single lane road, when there's an exit on the right the Tesla 3 almost always slightly swerve towards the exit before coming back in its lane. None of the Megane, the EQE or the BMW i4 do that.

A minor nuisance. Unless you happen to be at the ready attentively double-checking whatever the assistance is doing - then it must be infuriatingly annoying! Guess what you're supposed to be doing, all the time...

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by shadowgovt on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:03AM (#34261736)
Someone tried to sell me a Tesla, and had me take it out on the highway to try Autopilot. The salesperson had the misfortune of suggesting I engage right when there was an exit coming up on the right.

It wasn't a great first user experience to have the car immediately drift right towards the guardrail crusher.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by ellieh on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:24AM (#34262154)
Any car behaving differently to a human driver is outright dangerous.

For example, motorcyclists depend on inferring behaviour more than the average driver. Someone swerving towards an exit is far more reliable an indicator of them taking it than a signal - many drivers don't bother using them.

Many bikers I know avoid Teslas like the plague, as they're deeply difficult to read at best, and lethal at worst.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by twoWhlsGud on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:51AM (#34262662)
Yowsa! Thanks for pointing this new hazard out! As someone who spends a fair amount of time on a bike in the city, I too depend on reading the body language of cars/drivers. You've given me something new and disturbing to think about...
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by dsfyu404ed on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:02PM (#34262830)
> Any car behaving differently to a human driver is outright dangerous.

Any traffic participant (of any type) behaving sufficiently differently than the fat part of the bell curve for the situation (traffic, weather, location, vehicle type, time of day, etc) they are in is dangerous because they violate the expectations of all other road participants have for them. Other road participants need to be able to make reliable enough and accurate enough predictions of future state for things to work properly. This holds regardless of human or computer.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by Symbiote on Thursday January 05, 2023 @03:18PM (#34265905)
At least in the UK, this is why learner drivers have a clear sign on the back of the car ("L"), and people who have only just passed their test are encouraged to display a similar sign ("P").
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by toss1 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:44PM (#34263535)
THIS!

It is critical to be aware of the surrounding traffic, and recognizing the driving style — the wheel angle and the current balance/attitude of the cars — is critical to understanding what they'll do next.

Just one example a while ago in traffic on a highway, I slowed a bit and moved to the other side of my lane, barely thinking about it. Seconds later the car on my left suddenly drifted into my lane, right where we would have been and only feet off my front bumper. My wife exclaimed "How did you know that was going to happen?!?", and I said I'd just noticed in the corner of my vision an odd wiggle in their front wheel, like the driver's attention or direction was off.

Sussing out what a driver is doing with any intersection, regardless of their signals, is key. Are they actually setting up to turn or stop, or just going along ignorantly?

So far, I haven't yet noticed anything big from Teslas, but although I've done a lot less driving since COVID, I still have noticed that their road positions and attitudes are, ummm unique. But really good to know about this fake-move towards the exit lane — very helpful — Thanks!

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by TheCleric on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:55PM (#34263699)
> motorcyclists depend on inferring behaviour more than the average driver

And honestly it's less inference and more "I assume this person is going to try to kill me. How would they do so and how do I avoid that?"

I haven't ridden in years, but even in my car I'm allergic to being in someone's blind spot.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bsagdiyev on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:02AM (#34261694)
That's the point of assistance, it shouldn't need double checking by a human every time. It should just work.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by shadowgovt on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:04AM (#34261764)
Unfortunately, Autopilot currently exists in the liminal space where it should just work... Unless it doesn't, in which case it's allowed to kick out with no margin of notice time and the driver is immediately responsible for what happens next.

It's entirely possible that is an unsafe-at-any-speed configuration.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bsagdiyev on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:09AM (#34261869)
It's sketchy at best. Our newest car does emergency braking and that's it. And it's good at it, only engaging when there is a situation it feels (and is correct) about me not braking in time or hard enough. I shouldn't have to worry about it failing.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mynameisvlad on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:10AM (#34261891)
That’s the point of a Level 4 driver assistance system. Tesla’s Autopilot is 2 while Mercedes’ Drive Pilot is 3 in limited areas. Waymo is an example of a Level 4 system, albeit very limited in geographic area.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by d_tr on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:45AM (#34262555)
I 'd freak out for sure. How can you be cool with your car changing direction when it should not? And how can someone not pay attention? What will you do? Sleep? Read a book?
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by arcticbull on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:54AM (#34262703)
It tries to murder you from time to time too. This is at least a consistent glitch. I took a long road trip in a 3 with FSD and had I not been paying attention it would have sent me into a median once, and off to the ditch a second time.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by freejazz on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:25PM (#34264173)
Thanks, dad!
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by darknavi on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:09PM (#34262946)
> The mapping and charge planning on the BMW and particularly the EQE/EQS are arguably slightly superior now to Tesla

Really? One of the main selling points for me is that the center screen in Teslas are actually usable, non-laggy POS like most cars these days.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by aplummer on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:26PM (#34263244)
I think everyone else just turns on CarPlay / Android Auto and forgets they have an infotainment system.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by eloisant on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:40PM (#34263476)
Which is great, except on a Tesla where you can't use them
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by recursive on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:28PM (#34263289)
Aside from playing music and texts, I prefer the native functions in my Ford system, over the Android Auto.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by lostmsu on Thursday January 05, 2023 @02:05PM (#34264798)
Can you name a few? Ford's maps being better than GMaps would be very surprising.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by recursive on Thursday January 05, 2023 @08:28PM (#34269737)
I don't know what the general consensus is, but all I can say is that I prefer the Ford map. For one, it integrates chargers into route planning.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by PyWoody on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:58PM (#34264696)
Which can be a great way to save a few bucks in areas of the world that charge higher registration fees for vehicles that have built-in SatNavs. I've had no issues with Android Auto wrt navigation or music.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by izacus on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:32PM (#34263348)
None of the infotainment systems on new EVs are particularly laggy anymore - BMW and Mercedes systems are quite good.

VW is the only one still shipping a piece of crock.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by rtp4me on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:41PM (#34264422)
Mind if I show you my 2021 Toyota Rav4 Hybrid Infotainment system? Utter garbage. Slow, clunky, almost unusable.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mbesto on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:27PM (#34263282)
Ya, anyone have a video to back this up? For all of Tesla's woes, their mapping screen is above and beyond superior to any native GPS I've ever seen.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bbbbb5 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:32PM (#34263353)
Tesla is far behind everyone else on navigation due to the simple fact that Teslas do not have Carplay. There's no Waze on Teslas, how can you drive without it?

But here's how the current Mercedes navigation looks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCgy3askMcM The AR stuff works really well and is arguably way ahead of anything Tesla offers.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by nouveaux on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:57PM (#34263736)
Waze is not able to plan a route with all the charging stops you need. Waze is fairly bad in an EV.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by rtp4me on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:39PM (#34264378)
Hard disagree on this one. I have both a 2021 Tesla Model Y and a 2021 Toyota Rav4 Hybrid. Overall, the Tesla system is much better than the Toyota Infotainment system. For example:

  * Tesla maps has a much better zoom/scroll feature (faster, more detail, smoother).   The Toyota map requires you to hit the "zoom" button and then click zoom-in/out

  * The calendar tool built into the Tesla allows me to easily navigate to the appointment location.

  * Tesla maps have way-point selection (set an additional stop between start and end) 

  * The Toyota Infotainment system does not appear to have a "night mode".  Thus, the display puts out a ton of light during night-time driving (even with the brightness level set to minimum)

  * Waze is way too "chatty" for my taste

Because of the above, I am forced to use Apple CarPlay in the Toyota because the default UI experience is so horrible. Overall, I like the Toyota (great gas mileage), but I much prefer to drive the Tesla.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by lostmsu on Thursday January 05, 2023 @02:10PM (#34264881)
None of what you listed is applicable to Android Auto/CarPlay, which is exactly what parent was saying. For Android Auto it is a $100 device to make the system wireless so you don't have to pull your phone out of your pocket.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by rtp4me on Thursday January 05, 2023 @03:13PM (#34265842)
Sorry, but the parent to my specific comment did not mention anything about Andriod Auto/Carplay. Their comment specifically said "Tesla is far behind everyone else on navigation due to the simple fact that Teslas do not have Carplay". I am pointing out this is definitely not true.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by gggggg5 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @03:20PM (#34265934)
That's a deeply confusing interpretation. The correct reading is "Carplay brings better-than-Tesla navigation to any car."
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bbbbb5 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @03:09PM (#34265783)
Great, your Tesla has better infotainment than ... a Toyota.

> * Waze is way too "chatty" for my taste

You can adjust that.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mbesto on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:52PM (#34264595)
I've used both Tesla and Honda's Carplay for ~2 years now. I really enjoy Carplay (and the phone integration is a huge plus), but a few things:

- re: waze - huh? Google Maps is just fine. The differences are such a personal preference that they are moot.

- The touch controls on Carplay are not great. Try pinching and zooming on Google Maps in Carplay and its awful. (note - I do think Tesla misses the boat on having more physical controls as they almost rely entirely on touch...which is unsafe and not great)

> But here's how the current Mercedes navigation looks

Looks awesome, but that appears to be on a €185k ICE car.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bbbbb5 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @03:07PM (#34265755)
>- re: waze - huh? Google Maps is just fine. The differences are such a personal preference that they are moot.

Waze tells you where cameras and cops are, Google Maps usually does not.

>- The touch controls on Carplay are not great. Try pinching and zooming on Google Maps in Carplay and its awful. (note - I do think Tesla misses the boat on having more physical controls as they almost rely entirely on touch...which is unsafe and not great)

I don't think I've ever needed to do this, it always automatically positions the map correctly.

>Looks awesome, but that appears to be on a €185k ICE car.

Pretty sure the pricing starts at €94,540. They also have an EV at around the same price, but it's an all-around worse car.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mbesto on Friday January 06, 2023 @09:11AM (#34274719)
> Waze tells you where cameras and cops are, Google Maps usually does not.

Cameras are only really relevant in Europe. We don't really have these in the US. I do get the cops angle - google maps doesn't really do this.

> I don't think I've ever needed to do this

Tesla uses google maps under the hood and its auto adjustments are incredible (as good as Waze). However, every once in an awhile you want to "look ahead" and the Carplay simply sucks for this feature.

> Pretty sure the pricing starts at €94,540

It literally says in the description:

PRICE OF THE MODEL IN THE VIDEO: 185.269 EUR

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bbbbb5 on Friday January 06, 2023 @11:58AM (#34277274)
>Cameras are only really relevant in Europe. We don't really have these in the US. I do get the cops angle - google maps doesn't really do this.

Well yeah, in Europe we don't have cops on the roads. In the US you don't have cameras, but have cops everywhere. You still want Waze in either case, probably more so for the cops.

>PRICE OF THE MODEL IN THE VIDEO: 185.269 EUR

This has to be including local taxes, which in some EU countries can double the price of a car.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bbbbb5 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:25PM (#34263230)
It's not really surprising, the 3 big German automakers spent around 3 billion USD to buy (at least at the time) the best mapping product on the market.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by judge2020 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:12AM (#34260681)
The difference seems to be that Tesla was 5-10 years ahead on everything: Minimalistic interiors, modern infotainment, mobile app performance, and of course they lead the way in making electric cars viable by showing that they can both look good and blast off in record time. But you're right that other automakers see Tesla as a threat and are catching up; for example, the range and charging curve improvements on models like the EV6 / Ioniq 5 look great, assuming the charger work [in the cold].
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by cainxinth on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:21AM (#34260855)
> Minimalistic interiors, modern infotainment, mobile app performance

None of that is why Tesla was ahead of everyone for so long.

It's because their cars have better range, and Tesla is still the range leader. They held four of the top six spots in 2022, and the number one is the Lucid Air (only 3k of them have actually been sold):

https://www.caranddriver.com/shopping-advice/g32634624/ev-lo...

Also, I just want to say I am categorically not an Elon or Tesla fanboi and I am rooting for other brands to meet and exceed their range performance.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by musasabi on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:34AM (#34261101)
They also have by far the best charging network. IMO Teslas have the best long range driving experience. This detail is important although not the only thing to consider. However, it looms large in how Americans think about their cars.

I say this as someone who owns an electric car by a different manufacturer.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by oblio on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:42AM (#34261266)
> They also have by far the best charging network.

In the US.

And the US drives these crazy valuations.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by toomuchtodo on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:16AM (#34261996)
Of course, the US and China are the biggest global markets accounting for need and purchasing power. Europe has 400M more people than the US, but not the need for cars like the countries mentioned.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by diblasio on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:44AM (#34262525)
Supercharger network is also much better than the other networks in Europe as well in the current state.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by oblio on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:37PM (#34264351)
Yeah, but there it doesn't matter. You can take your €15k Dacia Spring there and use the Tesla chargers :-)
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by diblasio on Thursday January 05, 2023 @02:03PM (#34264774)
It's true, but the cost is much higher. Normally I see folks using another vendor nearby in the same parking lot as as the Supercharger as they can get a better rate. In the future I think the other vendors will catch up unless some EV bubble bursts.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mikeryan on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:38AM (#34262423)
They also have by far the best charging network

This isn't a defensible position though for Tesla. New charging networks are coming online at a furious rate. I'm not sure maintaining their own network makes sense unless everything becomes compatible and they use it as an additional revenue stream. But for them to compete when every other auto manufacturer is subsidizing shared networks is risky.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by judge2020 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @02:48PM (#34265470)
A pretty easy choice when the other charges don't work on some of the busiest travel days in the US: https://youtu.be/S4e8GfBzqSk
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by tshaddox on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:31AM (#34261039)
Is it really that simple? Is there something about Tesla’s technology that enables longer ranges? Surely they just put in bigger batteries and charge more for the car, and competitors could also do that if it was really a primary competitive advantage of Teslas.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by l33tman on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:40AM (#34261224)
Many of the competitors are STILL building on an ICE chassis and stuff batteries where the center axle would have been etc. When enough of them finally switch to pure EV platforms things will quickly improve I guess. But designing a new chassis that behave as well as their previous premium models, is not something they do in 1 year so it makes sense there is some delay..

The competitors also charge much less quickly, so there's some optimization there that they lack. Like, on paper they can do 250 kW but you never get more than 100 when actually charging it etc

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by hef19898 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:46AM (#34261343)
And they basically all did develop EV platforms, probably the main reason it took them as long to catch up as it did. But now that they have them, the benefits coming from those platforms are just enormous.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by NickM on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:01AM (#34261671)
Like, on paper they can do 250 kW but you never get more than 100 when actually charging it etc

Yeah this is one area where there's a lot of deceptive marketing. For example the Kia EV6 specs list a max fast charging rate of 350 kW but what that actually means is that you need a 350 kW charging station to reach the car's actual max charging speed of 240 kW (or 180 kW, depending on the battery options).

Granted, that is still nice and fast, and the EV6 is a great car, but it's really frustrating how hard it is to compare charge speed from different manufacturers.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by abledon on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:32AM (#34262315)
> For example the Kia EV6 specs list a max fast charging rate of 350 kW but what that actually means is that you need a 350 kW charging station to reach the car's actual max charging speed of 240 kW (or 180 kW, depending on the battery options).

Wow that is the scummiest thing

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by giobox on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:41PM (#34263493)
How is this deceptive? Anyone who has ever charged a phone is probably familiar with the concept that a higher wattage charger provides faster charging speeds - electric cars are no different. Higher power chargers charge faster is not some secret.

The car simply states the fastest DC connection it supports - 350kw. It works with any charger up to this wattage, just like my laptop charges from any USB-C source up to 100w - was I missold my laptop too because if I use a 50w charger it only charges at 50w?

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by jefftk on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:51PM (#34263638)
The specs say: [1]

DC Fast Charge Time (10-80% @ 350 kW via Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment) Level 3 Charger: Approx. 18 min.

and

Drive Battery Energy: 77.4 kWh

The battery is 77.4 kWh. This implies the battery is charging at 180kW.

If it were taking in the full 350kW and losing 170kW as heat that would be one (inefficient and dangerous) thing, but it doesn't sound like it actually draws 350kW?

For comparison, they say 73min for charging at 50kW, which implies the battery is charging at 45kW. If we figure that same 10% loss, then to charge at 180kW it's probably drawing 200kW from the charger.

[1] https://www.kia.com/us/en/ev6/specs

[2] 70% * 77.4 kWh * (60min / 1h) / 18 min = 181 kW

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by giobox on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:54PM (#34263683)
As battery charges its pretty common to taper the charge rate to improve health of the battery. To my knowledge, no EV today will sit at 350kw for the full 10 to 80 percent even if it can draw this. You still get faster charge times as the full draw can usually happen at close to empty, but charge rate will taper as battery fills. 181kw average is still pretty great - there are many EVs on sale that still max draw at 50 (looking at you VW...).
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by jefftk on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:00PM (#34263779)
If the peak current draw were 350kW then I'd agree the specs were fine.

I'd thought they were advertising a 10% to 80% charge because that's the period over which they can charge at max speed? Looking now, it seems like they start tapering at 50%, and it's peak draw is 235kW? https://www.arenaev.com/kia_ev6_crowned_the_best_charging_ev...

(I agree this is very good, but it's still wrong to quote 350kW if they never draw this much.)

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by freejazz on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:32PM (#34264284)
"Anyone who has ever charged a phone is probably familiar with the concept that a higher wattage"

I assure you that my mother has no idea what a watt is.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by tshaddox on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:26PM (#34264200)
> For example the Kia EV6 specs list a max fast charging rate of 350 kW but what that actually means is that you need a 350 kW charging station to reach the car's actual max charging speed of 240 kW

> it's really frustrating how hard it is to compare charge speed from different manufacturers

Is the discrepancy just the inefficiency (i.e. waste heat) of the charging circuitry and/or battery chemistry? And if so, do different EV battery+charger systems have significantly different efficiencies?

I would have expected that the consumer-facing spec is always the power taken from the grid, that there is always some inefficiency (you can draw less energy from the batteries than came out of the grid), and that the level of efficiency would be roughly similar across all cars.

If that were the case, it wouldn't be much of a problem to compare charging rates across cars. But perhaps one or more of my expectations are wrong.

Oh, and EVs presumably vary wildly in their "fuel economy" (miles per kilowatt-hour or whatever unit EV folks use), so even a "fair" comparison of charging rate presumably wouldn't paint the entire picture.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by NickM on Thursday January 05, 2023 @05:37PM (#34267926)
Is the discrepancy just the inefficiency (i.e. waste heat) of the charging circuitry and/or battery chemistry?

I'm not positive on the specifics but I believe it has more to do with the combination of supported voltages/amperages offered by different chargers. i.e. a "350 kW capable" charger in practice means it can do 800V charging, which other chargers of lower kW ratings typically can't do, and the EV6 requires 800V to reach its max charge speed but can't actually handle a high enough amperage to get to 350 kW.

Like I said though, I might be confused on some of the details there, but I'm fairly positive it's not just waste heat...dissipating 110kW of waste heat would require some pretty insane cooling hardware.

Oh, and EVs presumably vary wildly in their "fuel economy" (miles per kilowatt-hour or whatever unit EV folks use), so even a "fair" comparison of charging rate presumably wouldn't paint the entire picture.

This is indeed a good point. A more relevant measure of charging speed would be something like "miles per hour at EPA rated efficiency", though even that gets messy since most cars don't charge at a linear speed. And I haven't seen any car manufacturers use this metric other than Tesla, who like to brag about their supercharger stations exceeding 1,000 MPH of charging speed (though only the newest stations can just barely do that, for very short durations, and only on certain car models). "Time from 20%-80% charge" would also be a better metric, due to non-linear charging speed curves, but I haven't seen that one used much either.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by tshaddox on Thursday January 05, 2023 @08:09PM (#34269598)
> A more relevant measure of charging speed would be something like "miles per hour at EPA rated efficiency", though even that gets messy since most cars don't charge at a linear speed.

Pretty much the only time charging speed even matters is the "road trip" mode, where you are driving further than a single battery charge in one day and you want to stop as little as possible. In that mode, all I really want to know is what my duty cycle will be, e.g. "every 5 hours of driving you'll need to stop to charge for 30 minutes."

If I'm not in road trip mode, then as long as I can Level 2 charge overnight and/or all day at work, I would barely care what the peak charge rate is. It would still be nice to have something quick for the rare pickle (and of course road trips), but it doesn't seem like that big of a deal. I guess it's so prominent in marketing because range anxiety is still so deep in our mindset?

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by shadowgovt on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:06AM (#34261804)
> The competitors also charge much less quickly

Counterintuitively, it can be cheaper timewise (and money-wise) to spec and build a new factory than to re-tool one that was custom-built to manufacture cars with a large set of core assumptions about power plant and drive train.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by usrusr on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:58AM (#34262774)
It's not just the platform. Another hindrance is baseline expectations: if Tesla designs the exterior strictly form-follows-cda, it's the "Tesla style". If an ICE maker does the same they break brands identity. Same for interior minimalism. Same for configuration options. They are used to selling a product that is basically solved (consider how cheap you can get e.g. a Dacia) and filled whatever capacity in terms of mass, cost and complexity with extra bells and whistles. That their customers now expect, ICE or not. Or that they suspect their customers to still expect, that's perfectly sufficient to never dare going a bit leaner. But for a BEV the manufacturer mostly sells a battery (in terms of mass, in terms of cost, in terms of quality) and the entire rest needs to be lean. Lean in cost, lean in complexity, lean in physical characteristics like mass and cda like it wasn't really all that necessary with the ICE.

A trivial example (in unnecessary complexity, physical properties not really involved): on the German website, when you pretend to be ordering an Audi A6 you get twelve different sets of wheels to choose from at five price points. And that's before you add winter wheels to the mix. And tire options, and different approaches to the pressure gauge problem and theft preventing bolts. The Tesla S offers a choice between baseline and expensive an optional winter wheel. Now this isn't an example that directly relates to range, but it's organisational cruft. They need to have boatloads of people employed only for solving various aspects of their solution to the made-up problem of not enough wheel choice (all the way from design to spare parts logistics..) and that robs focus. Those people might actually have better careers than their peers dealing with batteries and they do compete for intraorganizational attention. It's all rooted in customer expectations built over decades of inventing car problems to solve better than the competition, after the ICE was basically done. New, BEV-specific lines can help (apparently the e-tron gets by with only eight sets of wheels at two price points, yay!), but they are far from being as much of a fresh start as that blank slate as Tesla has been.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by pieter_mj on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:26PM (#34263256)
This is a huge dealbreaker for me tbh. Tesla's competitors are mostly still using an electrified ICE platform, showing even now they're years behind. It's comparable to countries who were pioneers in broadband internet and who are now lacking in progress and falling behind, or like MS Internet explorer that totally stagnated and held back browser technology.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by politician on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:45AM (#34261329)
Can competitors source the raw metals required in sufficient quantities to put bigger batteries in their cars?
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by elisharobinson on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:04AM (#34261747)
not quite, if you bought it in the open market its 10~20% more $ than having a fixed longterm contract. and ICE carmakers usually have one OEM like samsung and Panasonic who have interest in getting best price for each cell . Tesla has inhouse cell production capacity and uses cells from all oems to get the best possible price / cell . This will give tesla a permanent 5% lead (outside of china) in cell pricing.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by hef19898 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:48AM (#34261387)
Yes. And if Tesla would move to block them from doing so, they would set themselves up for an anti-competition suite of epic proportions in all markets, from the US over the EU all the way to China.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by JumpCrisscross on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:04AM (#34261739)
> if Tesla would move to block them from doing so

Tesla is in no position to do so. They have a strong position in battery assembly, but zero direct presence in extraction or refining.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by politician on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:51AM (#34262655)
The problem of procurement is about access to Lithium and Nickel ores. Telsa has a joint partnership with a Nickel mine in New Caledonia and rights on mining Lithium in Nevada. GM, Ford don't and there is a global shortage, so I don't see them succeeding in battery production long term. If they source batteries from Panasonic, they're buying an inferior battery. If they source from Tesla, that's obviously positive for Tesla.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56288781

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by hef19898 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:02PM (#34263827)
If you hold a de-facto monopoly on certain taw materials, you are legally obliged to share it with competitors.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by hef19898 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @03:53PM (#34266378)
Plus: Tesla's battery cells came for a very long time from Panasonic. So much for inferior tech.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by ancientworldnow on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:13AM (#34261948)
Tesla's range advantage exists primarily in advertising. In real world tests it ranges from barely higher to moderately lower to equivalent competitors.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by xiphias2 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:29AM (#34262255)
As batteries were even more expensive years ago, Elon put energy efficiency above everything else, like putting in lighter seats than ICE car manufacturers and optimizing the thermal system (octovalve).

The ,,false advertising'' that others say come from the fact that when you drive fast it doesn't matter how energy efficient you are, so it works out only with low speeds.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by cvak on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:35AM (#34261106)
I think it's range per $, and I think tesla just about started loosing there last year.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by warinukraine on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:37AM (#34261136)
Does tesla have better range because they have better batteries, or just bigger batteries?
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by jesuscript on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:52AM (#34261465)
I always thought their valuation was more tied to the Chinese market which the CCP has made hostile to anything but electric going forward.

I don’t know if people have heard, but China is one of the bigger market. Heh.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by hannasanarion on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:56AM (#34261553)
You mean the range that a major governmental agency declared to be false advertising just a few days ago?

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/03/south-korea-fines-tesla-for-...

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by dlivingston on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:23AM (#34262138)
> South Korea’s antitrust regulator said it would impose a 2.85 billion won ($2.2 million) fine on Tesla for failing to tell its customers about the shorter driving range of its electric vehicles in low temperatures.

As a Tesla owner: range and ambient air temperature are significantly correlated (i.e., your 300 miles of range plummets to ~120 when below freezing).

But, on a good, sunny, warm day, their range claims are correct.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bombcar on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:33AM (#34262352)
And IIRC from a previous post, Tesla by far wins the "loses least range during shitcold temps".
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by darknavi on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:11PM (#34262975)
Their new octovalve heat pump stuff makes a significant difference in cold weather. Anecdotally our Model Y (heat pump) is a bit more performant in the cold vs our 2018 Model 3 (not heat pump).
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by LarryMullins on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:33AM (#34262348)
I bet if Tesla were in Detroit instead of California, they'd remember that winter exists.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by rxhernandez on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:42AM (#34262487)
There's plenty of snowy winter weather within an hour or two drive of LA. I'm sure they test in the Angeles Mountains as much as every other car manufacturer I saw test up there when I lived in those mountains.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by kwhitefoot on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:16PM (#34264037)
The place where Teslas form the largest fraction of the car population is Norway. They don't seem to have more problems with winter than any other car brand. I have driven my 2015 Mode S 70D at 1000 m altitude, -20°C, on numerous occasions with no problems at all.

My Model S is certainly better at handling the winter than a Nissan Leaf of the same vintage.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by FireBeyond on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:23PM (#34264142)
Most Norwegians in my experience are a lot happier wearing a woollen jumper or layers to cope with their weather, whereas many Americans are not happy unless their car is cranking to keep the interior at 72 while it's in single digits outside.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by LarryMullins on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:42PM (#34264447)
Heh, in my experience most Americans start complaining if the heat isn't cranked up to 80F in the dead of winter. But come summer, everybody wants the AC cranked down to 60F. T-shirts in the winter and stylish jackets in the summer, nobody dresses for the seasons.

Personally, I prefer an open window. Fresh air is almost always better than warm/cold stale air. But I think that'll kill a car's aerodynamics anyway, maybe worse for efficiency than running the heater/AC.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by jjeaff on Thursday January 05, 2023 @07:30PM (#34269172)
You can set your ac or heat to pull air in from outside. With the added benefit that most nice vehicles have an outside air filter to filter the fresh air first.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by FireBeyond on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:09PM (#34270468)
Hell, higher end vehicles will even auto-switch to recirc air based on outside air quality (particulate count). Surprised me the first time I saw it on my Jaguar.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by kwhitefoot on Friday January 06, 2023 @06:07AM (#34273418)
My driving in the mountains in the winter was in shirtsleeves and bare feet. No trouble keeping the interior of the car warm. Also because it is electric I can sleep in it and be kept warm without the risk of being poisoned by exhaust fumes or kept awake by the noise. There was one occasion when I had to move my car to the other side of the car park because someone parked their ICE car next to mine and left it idling all night while they slept. As this was in an otherwise silent landscape it was pretty annoying.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by aeternum on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:29PM (#34263306)
That's true with most batteries. It's foolish for car-markers to not include an air-temp variable when making range claims, I predict you will see all of them do that.

Battery longevity will also soon include depth-of-discharge and temp limits as well.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by FireBeyond on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:22PM (#34264122)
> But, on a good, sunny, warm day, their range claims are correct.

Just like FSD works, vaguely, on a good clear day (not too sunny, though, in case you blind the vision sensors!) on good roads.

Totally ready "this year".

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by dougmany on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:01AM (#34261666)
That article states > Although we haven't tested each of the longest-range models under our own EV highway range testing procedure, we've provided the data where possible.

I don't think Tesla is as far ahead on range as everyone thinks. Highway miles are what matters and Tesla tends to be optimistic on their numbers.

https://insideevs.com/reviews/443791/ev-range-test-results/

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by theturtletalks on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:05AM (#34261773)
And isn’t that battery innovation and IP that Panasonic owns?
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by jcfrei on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:29AM (#34262268)
Tesla Long Range (573km) and Mercedes EQS (566km) are basically on par. Here's a good overview by independent testers: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1k1DOw-NwvW8E8tQeXlac...
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by Kirby64 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:24PM (#34263218)
It might be on par in range, but it's far behind in terms of efficiency... and also much more expensive to boot. Also, comparing it against the Model 3 (which, I know, is not even the same league of 'luxury' as the EQS) it's even further behind in range/efficiency.

The only cars that get the 'A' rating on that spreadsheet are the two Model 3 cars (316 mile version, and 200ish mile one), the 62kWh Nissan Leaf (216mi), and a bunch of super low range cars where efficiency is easy, since weight is way lower.

Competitors are catching up, yes, but they're still pretty far behind in the efficiency game... which means that Tesla can produce quite a few more cars for the same amount of raw battery pack. Which drives better margins and more production capacity.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bdcravens on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:43AM (#34262519)
Worth noting that list is each model's top trims. The Model 3 Long Range is currently unavailable for purchase.

I wish the EPA would clamp down on manufacturer's range estimates, as those ranges are theoretical (perfect driving with no real acceleration, no climate control, etc). We need practical city/highway range like we get for ICE cars. My EV6 is rated at 310, but driving as conservatively as possible in Houston I get more like 285. On a road trip where it was mostly exposed freeway and cruise control, my range was closer to 220.

Should also probably disclose range in freezing temps as well (I'm in Houston so I don't consider that as much as others). The first manufacturer to solve that problem well would possibly be a better car than one with a larger theoretical range.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by MrMan on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:43AM (#34262520)
they are the leader in claimed range not realize range.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by crypot on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:32PM (#34263363)
Real world tests show something different:

"Every Tesla we've tested has failed to hit its EPA range estimate"

https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-cons...

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by judge2020 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @02:49PM (#34265490)
I blame the EPA just because they've allowed two sets of EPA test suites to co-exist under the same marketing term.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bartread on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:21AM (#34260863)
> Minimalistic interiors

Is this something you see as a benefit? For me Tesla's overall aesthetic, including both their exterior looks and interior design, along with the absence of physical controls that go long with that represent their biggest downsides (outside of build quality).

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by lotsofpulp on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:25AM (#34260935)
The giant tablet screen that sticks out like a sore thumb is the opposite of minimalistic, or minimalistic in the worst way.

I wonder how long Tesla can get away with not offering CarPlay/Android Auto functionality. The lack of that basic, cheap, and often used feature disqualifies any car from consideration in my view.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by throwaway894345 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:53AM (#34261498)
I don’t love that I have to use the touch screen to open my glove box, and I certainly think there are a lot of UI issues (and the lack of integration with phones beyond regular bluetooth), but one thing I appreciate is that there aren’t any blinding dash lights. I can see a lot better at night in my Tesla as a consequence compared with any other vehicle I’ve driven.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by lotsofpulp on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:10AM (#34261878)
I have not driven many cars, but I feel like there is usually a dial adjust the brightness of dash lights. At least in Toyotas.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by throwaway894345 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:06PM (#34262905)
Hah, I had a Camry for 10 years and never knew it had such a dial!
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mrguyorama on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:15PM (#34264017)
You should read the instruction manual to the over $30k machinery you purchased. There's likely many features you didn't realize were there.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by throwaway894345 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @06:49PM (#34268740)
Joke’s on you. My Camry was only $25k new.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mikestew on Thursday January 05, 2023 @04:31PM (#34266940)
Congrats on being one of the 10,000, but given that my '81 VW Vanagon has adjustable dashlights, I'd not buy a modern car if it didn't have that feature. Rheostats aren't exactly cutting-edge technology (though I'm sure a modern car uses software to run the driver that sends commands down the CANBUS, which then...)
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by throwaway894345 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @06:48PM (#34268732)
Relax. I didn’t say they don’t exist or that my Camry didn’t have it. I’m just saying I didn’t know it had it.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by firmnoodle on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:20AM (#34262077)
I have a dedicated glove box button in my Tesla S. It's one of the few dedicated buttons.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by lb1lf on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:58AM (#34262768)
Most cars (all?) have the option to dim the dashboard backlight.

I find Saab's solution to be extremely elegant - on some, if not all models, there's a night mode button - what happens is that all non-essential instruments are simply dimmed to black (leaving only the speedo lit), until something happens which warrants your attention; the instrument in question will then come on.

Simultaneously, it dims all button backlights &c to just about off, so that you only get some assistance in locating the control you're after, not losing your night vision the moment you let your eyes stray from the road.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bartread on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:02PM (#34262840)
I had a Saab 93 estate (station wagon, for the benefit of non-UK residents) with this feature and loved it. I'd often use it and then also dial the brightness all the way down. Really helped to reduce visual fatigue when driving at night.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by skykooler on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:20PM (#34263144)
The Nissan Leaf lets you dim the dashboard lighting really far down. I’ve never had a problem with visibility at night.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by _huayra_ on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:47AM (#34261372)
People ooh and aah over the tacky gigantoscreen in Teslas, but it was really a hack to avoid having to design the usual litany of buttons and knobs that go onto a dash. Thankfully most other manufacturers haven't gone as totally screen-centric as Tesla (yet...)
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by neuronic on Thursday January 05, 2023 @03:30PM (#34266087)
Yup the "minimalism" in Teslas is just a hack to forego complex interior designs that they are holistically unable to reproduce in their "giga"factories. It helps to reduce complexity and weight if you just slap an iPad next to the steering wheel.

What's REALLY bad though is that other manufacturers rushed after Tesla and turned their brains off. Now we have a bunch of electric cars with crappy plastic interiors (light weight for range) and shitty tablets as user interface. Some are recognizing these horrifying mistakes that will cost lives but it will take years to recover because a lot of projects are too far ahead already to be changed or canceled.

I mainly speak from extensive experience with Volkswagen - the crappy capacitative touch buttons on the steering wheel will finally go. The new CEO Blume is not as blind as Herbert Diess - he doesn't view Tesla as the second coming of the iPhone, especially since Teslas continue to stagnate in quality and other manufacturers are quickly catching up.

Good luck outproducing Hyundai, Kia, Volkswagen, BMW, Audi... time was Teslas ally especially because Toyota kept insisting on Hydrogen cars for so long and VW fucked up software development so bad with CARIAD that Konrad Zuse is spinning in his grave ready to produce energy for all EVs sold.

I credit Tesla with 2 things:

- Opening the EV market and pushing other manufacturers to invest

- Great engineering regarding battery and range (in the past)

The list of issues is longer nowadays and I am not willing to forgive quite as much as in 2014 with great alternatives on the market.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bsagdiyev on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:03AM (#34261732)
Yeah it's ugly as shit. Their build quality didn't help any of that either.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by jonathankoren on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:18AM (#34262053)
Personally, I kind of like the Tesla exteriors with the exception of the nose of the 3.

The interiors though are pure trash. They look unfinished and designed by Rule of Cool, instead of practicality.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by adolph on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:55AM (#34262714)
>> Minimalistic interiors

> Is this something you see as a benefit?

Yes. It's a distraction free operating environment. Tesla's aesthetic choices are semi-scandinavian/Ikea. Minimal doesn't have to be that style specifically. The early New Beetle did a passable job. The typical car is like MS Word with every ribbon open at once. A minimalist interior is focus mode.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by thebooktocome on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:30PM (#34263325)
The lack of tactile buttons increases distraction considerably.

I cannot activate most controls on a Tesla without taking my eyes off the road.

They also seemingly refuse to keep the GUI stable for more than three or four months at a time.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by adolph on Friday January 06, 2023 @05:03PM (#34281903)
I agree. minimalistic design != "lack of tactile buttons"

Multi-touch capacitance with tuned solid state haptic feedback and fused OLED display technology with very thin tempered glass is a wonderful thing, especially considering how far it has gotten since 2007) but it has remained resounding and disappointingly flat.

While manufacturers are working with different display dimensions and gentle curves or even folds, I agree there is a need for topologically shaped glass to bring the tactile affordances of traditional buttons to software enhanced user interfaces. I'm not a display engineer but I suspect that different glass thicknesses result in poor visuals so we will have to wait for organic magneto-laser displays.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by jzb on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:25AM (#34260932)
Being ahead on everything doesn't help if the larger players can pick and choose improvements and learn from your mistakes and adapt.

It really doesn't help when the leadership of said car company is erratic and eroding the goodwill of the brand while people generally feel comfortable with more established carmakers. I feel pretty confident that major automakers are going to be around in 10 years. Buying a Tesla already feels like a bit of a gamble to me just because of its newness.

With an economy that's already slowing it could really hurt them when it's likely fewer people are buying cars and will be more cautious about it when they do. "Maybe I'll hold off another year and see how the new crop of cars compares with the Tesla."

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by throwaway894345 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:55AM (#34261530)
I haven’t checked in a while, but last time I looked Tesla was supply constrained—they couldn’t make cars fast enough to meet demand, so (unless that has changed) they’re probably not too worried about hypothetical demand reduction.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by status200 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:41AM (#34262467)
I don't think this is true anymore, since they recently started rolling out discounts on vehicles, which is usually a sign of overstock / slowing demand [0]

[0] https://www.torquenews.com/14335/tesla-sweetens-deal-discoun...

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by davidcbc on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:08AM (#34261851)
Their global backlog of orders has gone from ~470k to ~74k over the last few months. There is no backlog of orders at all in the US or Canada and the backlog for the rest of the world is dropping quickly.

https://twitter.com/TroyTeslike/status/1609346097733828609?s... (This is the most recent data made public, the Patreon data goes through Dec 31 with the numbers quoted)

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by conductr on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:31AM (#34262291)
Just to add, I used the 'build a tesla' recently for Model Y and was quoted delivery time of about 30 days. Not sure if that's accurate, but doesn't sound too supply constrained compared to discussions with other automakers I've spoken to recently (6-12 months out in some cases). I backed out because I'm really concerned with build quality issues that seem to be worsening, and generally losing confidence daily this company will be around in 5 years.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by eatsyourtacos on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:40AM (#34261215)
>Minimalistic interiors, modern infotainment, mobile app performance,

Which are all gimmicks.

The vast majority of people don't want that from a car. I've been in Telsas plenty of time and absolutely hate it. Yeah it looks cool for a moment, but I would never want that.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by zaroth on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:09PM (#34263929)
I for one absolutely love it. It doesn’t just look cool, it’s maximally functional for all of my use cases.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by freejazz on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:38PM (#34264359)
Yeah, I totally love having to take my eyes off the road in order to press any button in the cockpit. Truly brilliant design!
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by zaroth on Thursday January 05, 2023 @04:02PM (#34266518)
Why are you pressing buttons in the “cockpit” while you’re supposed to be driving? </s>

The “cockpit” button-obsession on HN is really cute sometimes. As if most drivers with button-filled “cockpits” actually feel around for them while still looking at the road.

Everything timing critical for driving is either fully automated or on the wheel in a Tesla, by the way.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by freejazz on Thursday January 05, 2023 @04:54PM (#34267338)
I don't think the obsession is "on HN", I think the obsession is made by literally every other car manufacturer in the world.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by oblio on Tuesday January 10, 2023 @04:33AM (#34322376)
Can you control the AC fully automatically or on the wheel in a Tesla?
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mavhc on Friday January 06, 2023 @06:54AM (#34273732)
Which features do you have to take your eyes off the road to activate?
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mperham on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:27AM (#34260978)
They were 10 years ahead, 5 years ago. The market has realized that.

It's also starting to creep into the mainstream consciousness that EVs aren't a good long-term solution to our poor transportation system.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by Pet_Ant on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:05AM (#34261783)
The answers to our woes are joint transportation and housing infrastructure. However those are anathema to the American character. I don't see it happening.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by scarface74 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:40AM (#34261233)
The infotainment system on Teslas is worse than Nissan Sentra with CarPlay/Android Auto
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by throwaway894345 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:56AM (#34261559)
If it would just integrate with airplay (and whatever the Android equivalent is) then Tesla wouldn’t need to support a one-off application for every streaming service.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by filoleg on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:19PM (#34264085)
You don't need a one-off application for every streaming service, those are there in case you want to use them without phone at all. Bluetooth audio is a thing, and you can stream whatever audio you want from your phone to your car audio using that.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by scarface74 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @02:58PM (#34265622)
Bluetooth audio is a poor substitute for a full UI.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by throwaway894345 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @03:03PM (#34265707)
> You don't need a one-off application for every streaming service, those are there in case you want to use them without phone at all

I agree. That's why it doesn't make sense that Tesla is approaching it as "bespoke or bust".

> Bluetooth audio is a thing, and you can stream whatever audio you want from your phone to your car audio using that.

Yes, but "streaming a single audio track (with low audio quality)" is pretty much all BlueTooth is fit for, and the problem is much larger than that--a luxury car should be able to stream higher quality audio and it should also be able to stream video (e.g., HBO, Paramount Plus, etc). Moreover, it should facilitate a media browsing experience through the touch screen. First of all, it's limited to audio--it doesn't help me stream HBO or Paramount or any other video service.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by scarface74 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @03:27PM (#34266052)
It’s illegal in most states to stream video on a console that the driver can see while they are driving.

Apple and I believe Google are very strict about which apps can be used for CarPlay/Android Auto. There would be major repercussions if they weren’t.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by throwaway894345 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @06:47PM (#34268723)
Of course. I’m not arguing for video while driving.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by filoleg on Friday January 06, 2023 @04:25PM (#34281368)
> First of all, it's limited to audio--it doesn't help me stream HBO or Paramount or any other video service.

Tesla has apps for a bunch of video streaming services. And for those it doesn't have, you can just use the built-in web browser. It works just fine (assuming you are in a parked mode, they won't work while you are driving for obvious safety reasons).

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by throwaway894345 on Saturday January 07, 2023 @09:19AM (#34288158)
The built-in web browser is extremely slow and tedious to use (at least in my 2022 Model Y), but yes, it technically works.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mavhc on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:29AM (#34261015)
Tesla's only competition is Chinese EV makers, everyone else can't make enough cars, and none of them are profitable.

Tesla are 5-10 years ahead on profit, due to adopting cost savings such as no buttons, more miles per kwh, thus smaller batteries, casting most of the body in 2 or 3 pieces.

And then there's in house software creation, vs everyone else. Software makes their use of their motors more efficient.

That's before you have the problem with how to get rid of your non EV business.

Then you have battery tech, opening lithium refining facilities, owning more of the supply chain. Everyone else will be paying extra for batteries for decades.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by davewritescode on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:46AM (#34261334)
> And then there's in house software creation, vs everyone else. Software makes their use of their motors more efficient.

You think automakers don't know about software? You do realize that what the ECU has to do to keep internal combustion engines running as efficiently as they do today is at least an order of magnitude more complex that electric motor management

> That's before you have the problem with how to get rid of your non EV business.

That's an asset, not a liability. Some places in the world are unlikely to have the infrastructure to support a conversion to EVs in the next decade or two. It doesn't mean we stop trying but having mature technology that you don't need to invest a lot in to support a niche use case is a good thing, not a bad thing.

> Then you have battery tech, opening lithium refining facilities, owning more of the supply chain. Everyone else will be paying extra for batteries for decades.

There's no reason to believe that Tesla's suppliers will remain exclusively theirs unless they've signed massive longterm deals that the public is unaware of.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by sumtechguy on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:06AM (#34261795)
You can listen to what the CEO's of the 'big 3' are saying. Tesla has vertically integrated. The big 3 spent the past 50 years doing the opposite. They use many of the same ODM/OEMs for things with small twists here and there. The companies that make those things for that supply chain are behind tesla. For creating a new market like tesla is in you probably want vertical integration again to iterate on it. It was one of the 2 key innovations Ford had early on (as they were not the first car company). But as years went on it made less sense to do that. Now it is making sense again to do it.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by michaelt on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:47AM (#34262589)
> You think automakers don't know about software?

Judging from my experience with cars' integrated sat-nav, speech recognition and bluetooth hands-free I would say most automakers do not consider good software to be a priority.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mavhc on Friday January 06, 2023 @05:09AM (#34272992)
Yes, automakers outsourced all their software, someone else made the ECUs.

https://www.teslarati.com/volkswagen-herbert-diess-third-par...

Tesla will be Tesla's supplier https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-19/tesla-con...

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by altacc on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:08AM (#34261857)
It sounds like you're saying that Tesla has no competition if you ignore their competition. You can't be dismissive of Chinese EV makers, who are rapidly encroaching on western markets and are reshaping the motor industry. Here in Norway I'm noticing more and more Chinese EVs on the road and they are competing at all levels of the market, from "affordable" to high end. To add to those numbers, many originally Western marquees now have full or partial Chinese ownership.

Many Chinese companies are multifaceted or have co-ownership with suppliers. For example, look at a company like BYD, which appears to be out producing Tesla and has yet to fully enter many markets. They also build their own batteries. The Chinese motor industry is a formidable competitor.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mavhc on Friday January 06, 2023 @05:11AM (#34273006)
Indeed, that's Tesla's only competition, BYD's numbers include hybrids though, and ASP is much lower.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by nradov on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:23AM (#34260912)
Most car buyers don't actually want minimalistic interiors.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bryanlarsen on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:27AM (#34260971)
Some people like black overstuffed couches. Some people like Danish modern.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by eatsyourtacos on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:42AM (#34261264)
Of course some do. The point is the vast majority do NOT want the interior of a Tesla.

They want everything in the same darn place that 99% of cars have it, with physical switches to be able to change things so you can just feel what you are doing without taking your eyes off the road.

Most people see the interior of a Tesla as a complete gimmick.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by tgeorge on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:57AM (#34261574)
I think a lot of car manufacturers have gone the path of no physical switches and it's becoming irritating. You shouldn't have to navigate screens to adjust your hvac while driving.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by frant-hartm on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:28AM (#34262239)
VW admitted it was a mistake and will go back to physical buttons with next gen of their models.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by twoWhlsGud on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:00PM (#34262796)
This move gives me hope that by the time an EV is practical in my corner of the world it'll be less annoying, too : )
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bryanlarsen on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:53AM (#34261493)
I trust HN's opinion on many things, but definitely not on their opinion of what the vast majority of people think is fashionable. HN is solidly "overstuffed black leather couch" in their fashion sense.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by jeltz on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:10AM (#34261881)
I would say the other way round. Hacker News feels like a Danish modern crowd. Personally I am all for minimalism but Teslas are plain ugly.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by darksaints on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:17AM (#34262015)
I consider myself to be minimalist/modern in my choices, and in my opinion the Tesla is a garbage nightmare that took all of the complexity away from physical buttons and just shoved into a hard to navigate touchscreen menu with poor visual placement. I guess that makes me an overstuffed black leather couch type in your opinion.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by gernb on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:14AM (#34261965)
their sales indicate otherwise
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by eatsyourtacos on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:40PM (#34264410)
No they don't. We have the small rich population that want a new fancy toy. I've seen it with everyone I know that has a Telsa. "Oh look how geeky I am, this is so neat I have a big screen!".

That is the insane minority.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by theduder99 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:36AM (#34261124)
Last time I went car shopping, I saw a digital speedometer which irritated me for some reason so I rejected that model from further consideration.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by leetcrew on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:42AM (#34261268)
I take it you're not shopping for new cars then? the cheapest new car I'm aware of that has analog gauges is a porsche.

btw I have the same preference, just letting you know you are in for a disappointment.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by michaelt on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:30AM (#34262280)
You just haven't looked cheap enough. For example, the Fiat Panda [1] the Nissan leaf [2] and the Kymco VSR-125 [3] all have analog speedometers.

[1] https://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/fiat/panda [2] https://www.parkers.co.uk/nissan/leaf/review/interior/ [3] https://www.kymco.co.uk/scooters-and-motorcycles-range/125cc...

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by Macha on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:37AM (#34262399)
Seems to be a market difference? Of the three cheapest cars I could think of in my local market (Honda Civic, Kia Picanto, and Nissan Micra), only the Honda Civic has a digital speedometer.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by code_runner on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:30AM (#34261023)
I know you’re coming back in a few minutes to cite your sources. Excited to see the results of this survey!
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by dtjb on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:53AM (#34261499)
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by phreenet on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:12AM (#34261937)
I know it's personal preference but I think a good number of people don't know they will be fine without 15 buttons on the steering wheel or 10 different buttons for climate control. I haven't missed any of that moving to a Model 3.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by MisterBastahrd on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:07PM (#34262919)
Most of them would rather have buttons on their doors to control the things that have been controlled that way for generations, though. You shouldn't have to hunt through a menu to lock a door.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by zaroth on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:11PM (#34263972)
Why do you have to manually lock a car door? I’ve never pressed the lock/unlock icon on the screen in 4 years of driving my Model 3.

But by the way, you don’t have to hunt thru a menu for it, the lock status icon is pressable and it’s always on the home screen.

Lock and unlock is like start and stop buttons. Almost totally extraneous and easily inferred 99% of the time.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by pengaru on Thursday January 05, 2023 @02:01PM (#34264748)
> Why do you have to manually lock a car door? I’ve never pressed the lock/unlock icon on the screen in 4 years of driving my Model 3.

Conveniently accessible manual door lock/unlock mechanisms become non-negotiable the moment your software-based power-dependent interface becomes inoperable, especially if that's during some emergent crisis like say a giant lithium battery letting the smoke out.

This isn't just some hypothetical:

https://stealthoptional.com/news/tesla-driver-trapped-in-bur...

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by phreenet on Thursday January 05, 2023 @02:43PM (#34265414)
An emergency is a valid concern and I believe all cars, regardless of Tesla, that feature electronic (fancy) doors also feature physical escape latches. In the Model 3 you can pull up on a handle on the door to force the door open without the power required to first roll down the window to clear the weather seal this will also unlock the door as well.

From your own linked article:

> Juhta criticized the emergency protocol for Tesla’s electric cars, saying that it isn’t intuitive enough.

Which is kinda ironic to me considering anytime a new rider is in my car I make sure to tell them about pressing the small button to open the door because they seem to find that escape latch on their own and often think it's just a regular open door latch.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by pengaru on Thursday January 05, 2023 @02:47PM (#34265467)
> Which is kinda ironic to me considering anytime a new rider is in my car I make sure to tell them about pressing the small button to open the door because they seem to find that escape latch on their own and often think it's just a regular open door latch.

Is it the same in the Model Y from the article as your Model 3?

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by judge2020 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @02:52PM (#34265540)
It is, but the manual latch isn't on the door at all in the back seat, so passengers are unlikely to mix it up there.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by staunch on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:21AM (#34260847)
> The difference seems to be that Tesla was 5-10 years ahead on everything...

This is pretty much the definition of a great tech product: it's ahead of anything else by N years. What makes a great technology company is that they manage to consistently maintain that lead with product after product.

We'll see if Tesla can maintain its lead. It's not looking good and it probably depends mostly on whether or not Elon Musk can regain his grip on reality.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by myko on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:10PM (#34262956)
Tesla has already lost its lead as far as the car itself. The Ioniq is an affordable car and better than Tesla Model 3/Y. Mercedes and BMW have better luxury models with EQS and i7, and the BMW i4 is more fun to drive than a Model 3. The Cadillac Lyriq costs what a Model Y does but compares favorably to the Model X. Tesla interiors feel cheap compared to other cars in their same class and they have notorious build quality issues.

They do have one major advantage, which is why I still drive a Model S, and that's the Supercharger network. It's a big deal for anyone who regularly drives a few hundred miles in their EV.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by conductr on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:22AM (#34262112)
> in making electric cars viable by showing that they can both look good and blast off in record time

I still don't get the 'look good' part, why do non-ICE cars always need to have a different look that what is already popular/proven in the market. The traditional automakers are still doing this today with their first big pushes in EV. If they don't sell they'll blame 'the market' for not wanting EV, but in reality it could be folks just aren't interested in the design / don't what to make the fashion statement.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by 8ytecoder on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:12PM (#34262988)
Almost as if ICE car companies don’t want electric to sell. BMW was the worst of the lot. They’re doing better now.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by FireBeyond on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:47PM (#34264514)
I don't think that makes them conspiring or evil. Just pragmatic.

"We have tens of billions and tens of decades invested in 'perfecting' ICE. This is a huge upheaval" is an attitude I'd expect any of them to take (while still recognizing they need to see where the market is heading and planning for that).

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by FireBeyond on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:45PM (#34264495)
And also, I get that it's subjective, but the Model Y does not look anything resembling "good" to me. It's like a weird futuristic Aztek. It's not attractive.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by Octoth0rpe on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:37AM (#34261147)
> I have a Tesla and I also hold a short position on TSLA. My Tesla is a great car.

This shouldn't have to be a position that requires any kind of defense or explanation. There's nothing contradictory about believing that:

1) A company makes a great product 2) The quality of that product and its total addressable market justifies the company's value at $X 3) The market cap of that company is far, far higher than $X

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by gwbas1c on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:13AM (#34260705)
> The idea that Autopilot has some magic sauce that nobody else can replicate is laughable.

Apparently GM's Supercruise is better, and cheaper.

I got enhanced autopilot in my first Tesla. Except for changing lanes, things like summon and autopark are just toys. The auto lane chance is so glitchy I decided I was better off saving seven grand on my second Tesla.

But if Enhanced Autopilot was 1-2 grand, I'd have bought it without regrets.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by stoddur on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:28AM (#34260986)
Wait what, SuperCruise better then AP? Any sources?
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by gwbas1c on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:55AM (#34261540)
Well, that's highly subjective based on reviewer.

But, in general, Supercruise is hands-free and doesn't require jiggling the steering wheel every 30 seconds.

From what I understand, Supercruise is a lot more limited in where it'll work, compared to Autopilot.

But, EV market options are so limited that the differences really don't matter, unless that kind of functionality is top on your list. In my case, I bought a second Tesla because of the charging network, and because I needed a 3rd row.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by nradov on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:08AM (#34261860)
Independent reviews indicate that GM SuperCruise is superior to Tesla AutoPilot in most areas, but Tesla does still have some features that GM lacks.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/21/test-driving-gm-ford-and-tes...

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by firmnoodle on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:28AM (#34262234)
It's really a different approach that will yield different outcomes and experiences. Super Cruise works on "pre-mapped divided highways". That suggests it's more like hard coding most of the environment and working with HD-maps. While I don't know what Tesla Autopilot does, Tesla FSD is designed to drive with interpolation of the current input. It's a much harder problem for Tesla to solve but the results mean that it can deal with changes and unusual situations without something like massive case statements pre coding those exceptions.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by FpUser on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:23AM (#34260900)
>"I was better off saving seven grand"

Seven grand for a software update sounds like a ripoff. Especially just for lane change.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by darknavi on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:12PM (#34263001)
Wait until you learn that "Full Self Driving" is $15,000USD right now.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by FpUser on Thursday January 05, 2023 @02:52PM (#34265537)
If it was real, and legally letting one sleep at the wheel someone might pay for it. As it is now - meh. They can have their soft and I'll keep my 15G
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mikeryan on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:39AM (#34262451)
This keeps coming up and I'm wondering what's Waymo's goal? Is it to be licensed self-driving product?

If that's the case and any manufacturer could just license Waymo's tech I'd think that relying on Telsa to win at autopilot is suspect.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by hnburnsy on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:54PM (#34264619)
GM’s Autonomous Cruise Program Facing NHTSA Investigation

https://www.autoweek.com/news/technology/a42268159/general-m...

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by albertopv on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:40AM (#34261223)
> Apple can make an even better car than Tesla

Paying a premium for Apple smartphones hardware and software is a thing, paying same percentage premium for a car is a lot different, it's a lot more money.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by taylodl on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:59AM (#34261627)
I cringe when I see statements like that. Apple has ZERO EXPERIENCE with automotive design, automotive manufacture, automotive distribution, automotive marketing, and automotive evolution. In other words, Apple KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT ANY ASPECT of the automotive industry.

Whether Apple can make a car better than Tesla is a moot point - Tesla isn't able to make cars as well as the other global automakers. Their whole schtick was the EV drivetrain. That's what set them apart from everybody else. It was never build quality. Now that governments around the world are essentially mandating EV's the global automakers are now entering the market. They have the know-how and experience in all the other areas of automotive manufacture that Tesla does not.

Bottom line: Tesla has had to come up-to-speed with the entirety of automotive manufacture and still aren't there. The global automotive manufacturers only have to come up to speed with an EV drivetrain, a drivetrain they've been experimenting with for years. Want to bet money on who's most likely to win the market?

Apple would be fools to enter this market and their investors should howl if they were foolish enough to do so.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by twelve40 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:14AM (#34261976)
> Tesla isn't able to make cars as well as the other global automakers

can you please point to where you found this data?

> experience in all the other areas of automotive manufacture that Tesla does not

I believe Tesla is still overvalued, but in 2022 they made 1.3 million cars, so dismissing them as amateurs is simply nonsensical. In 2023, they are a major car manufacturer with tons of experience with the entire process by now.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by taylodl on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:15PM (#34264021)
Tesla's poor fit and finish has become legendary, certainly not up to snuff compared to other automakers at their price point. They're not even up to snuff compared to automakers making cars costing half as much.

Another aspect of being an automaker for which Tesla is woefully behind on is service and repair. They've gotten away with it during their first few years because their sales were low and were to enthusiasts. Now things are going to be different because they're selling into the general market at a price point where the customers expectations have been set by the likes of Lexus, Audi, Mercedes, etc. They're going to have an interesting time should they get into an accident and need repairs. It's not uncommon for Tesla customers to have to wait weeks or even months for repairs.

While 1.3 million cars is a decent amount, it pales to Toyota's 8 million cars - which they've been doing now for decades. That's a lot of experience Tesla doesn't have under their belt.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by hnburnsy on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:58PM (#34264687)
Does it pale when compared to GM, which sold 70000 EVs in all of 2022?
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by taylodl on Thursday January 05, 2023 @02:37PM (#34265316)
Which do you think is more important to the question of service and reliability - the fact that GM sold 6.5 million cars, trucks, and SUVs last year, which was a down year for them, or that they only sold 70,000 EV's?

GM has been dealing with global supply chains for decades.

GM has been dealing with auto unions for decades.

GM has been dealing with service centers for decades.

Who do you think can more quickly adapt to whom? GM to Tesla, or Tesla to GM?

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by AlexandrB on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:15AM (#34261981)
I think many would happily pay it. Look at brands like Rolls Royce, Range Rover, or Maserati - I'd never pay that kind of premium for what they offer, but they still have a healthy market.

The real question is whether the high-end car market is large enough for Apple to bother with.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by helen___keller on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:33AM (#34261075)
> The idea that Autopilot has some magic sauce that nobody else can replicate is laughable.

Openpilot by comma is very equivalent to autopilot (not FSD) and can be added on to a boring cheap car (depending on that car's compatibility) like a prius, corolla, or sonata, all for just about $2,000 dollars. Granted, it's a "dev-kit", requires a bit of research to install, but if you can pass the barrier it's really equivalent to autopilot and available to consumers at a price point that Tesla is not.

And if you don't want the latest and greatest (comma 3) you can get a used comma 2 or a comma knock-off "Mr One" for a few hundred dollars and still have an excellent experience for basic level 2 functionality (automated highway navigation, essentially)

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by samwillis on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:22AM (#34260881)
Autopilot [FSD] is a boondoggle that is a distraction from their core mission. They have wasted time and resources on it, when by now they should have a cheaper mass market car and a full suite of commercial vehicles (small vans to large trucks).

Edit: yes meant FSD

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by aardvarkr on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:32AM (#34261054)
I strongly disagree. Autopilot is what made them COOL and gave them their secret sauce. I used to be a major fan back in 2015 and that was an incredibly momentous initiative that cannot be understated. You can say this now with the benefit of hindsight but do not make the mistake of assuming it was all just a waste of money. Autopilot was a key driver in the hype and fanaticism that turned Tesla from a hip startup into the trendsetter for the entire industry.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by freejazz on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:39PM (#34264395)
"I strongly disagree. Autopilot is what made them COOL and gave them their secret sauce."

To dorks who believed the hype, yeah.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by elteto on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:32AM (#34261065)
Wrong. Autopilot is a pretty standard smart cruise control, which many other carmakers have and have had for years. It works and it works well. You are thinking of FSD.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by AlexandrB on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:03AM (#34261733)
Tesla's naming continues to suck. It's very common to see people confuse Autopilot with Full Self Driving. I'm not sure this is to Tesla's benefit since every FSD snafu gets attributed to Autopilot as well in the mind of someone not following the company closely.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by fenrisbear on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:20AM (#34260819)
Not sure what the general consensus on Tesla in Norway. Sure, they are great cars during the summer, but during the winter they severely lack the robustness of the traditional car manufacturers. One of them being able to open the car door!
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mavhc on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:23AM (#34260890)
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by nradov on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:26AM (#34260947)
It's hilarious that anyone would consider this an acceptable work around for such an idiotic design flaw.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mavhc on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:32AM (#34261072)
It's fine for 99.9% of the time, and saves you energy. Also reduces noise when moving.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by l33tman on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:46AM (#34261352)
Yeah well that they omit a windshield wiper stalk is also idiotic and furthermore outright dangerous. I've done overtakes next to trailers some times in heavy rain where in a second I had to hit the wiper stalk to max. Relying on their camera-based AI to do that (yes they skip on the cost of the industry standard IR sensor for rain detection) is crazy. A german guy actually died a few years back because he was searching through the UI to find the control to set the wipers to max..
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by AlexandrB on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:09AM (#34261863)
The charitable take on this is that it's an optimistic design that anticipates a future where an AI will deal with all these minor decisions. The cynical take is that it's a cost cutting measure so Tesla can sell cheaply-made cars at premium prices.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by freejazz on Thursday January 05, 2023 @02:20PM (#34265038)
That's not charitable, that's deluded. There's nothing charitable about giving you an inferior product in the name of a hope that at some point in the future, other things will be done just as poorly.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by FireBeyond on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:52PM (#34264589)
I don't even get the AI/ML wipers. Like you say, IR (and I believe some, though a definite minority, even use electrical conductivity/resistance) auto wipers have been reliable[1] for nearly three decades now. Why do we need ML for wipers? Are we anticipating new types of rain that existing auto wipers won't recognize?

[1] To those about to say "they're not reliable", I'm yet to find one that can't be tweaked with the sensitivity controller. If anything the only flaw I have had is when my wiper _blades_ are near the end of their life and they leave a 'streak' of water droplets over the sensor, and increase the false positive.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by l33tman on Friday January 06, 2023 @07:38PM (#34283549)
My guess is that they already have the front-facing camera so someone suggested they can cut costs by removing the IR sensor and "just write some AI" for it. Likewise the stalk is a cost saving.

They also removed the ultrasonic parking sensors from October to use the cameras for it to save cost. Good luck for all who happen to back into stuff at night or into glass windows or something..

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by AlexandrB on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:07AM (#34261812)
Love taking my gloves off to use an app in freezing weather.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by moonchrome on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:09AM (#34260626)
> I think Apple can make an even better car than Tesla if they build the hardware and software like their phones and computers.

I'm not sure outsourcing manufacturing and focusing on design works in auto industry - but could be wrong.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by Server6 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:28AM (#34260989)
Foxconn is designing an EV platform specifically for this.

https://www.foxconn.com/en-us/products-and-services/event-hi...

We'll see if it works out. Seeing as how they're Apple's biggest partner I'd be surprised if Apple one day doesn't design a car. EV's are simpler, eventually they'll all be fast and have 500 mile ranges. The platform won't matter, so what sells the car? Design.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by jasonwatkinspdx on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:11AM (#34260659)
"Outsourcing" is a very poor way to describe Apple's supply chain. They are deeply integrated. For example Apple owns most of the CNCs and similar equipment used. Having tight control over all logistics is core to Apple's strategy of huge global product launches.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by elil17 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:23AM (#34260907)
You’re wrong. Auto manufacturers source parts from a huge variety of outside manufacturers. Auto manufacturers:

1) manage supply chain (hardest part) 2) spec parts (establish quality metrics, change small aspects of design) 3) come up with car concepts 4) assemble parts certain components (e.g. weld the frame, install all the premade parts)

They are not building or designing every component in a car - not even close.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by moonchrome on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:36AM (#34261121)
I mean what do you expect - for them to build everything down to a screw in-house in order to do manufacturing ?

Final assembly, fit and finish - those are very important things on high end cars - and as Tesla demonstrated - not that easy to do even when you're flush with cash.

Apple outsources all of it's production - I'd be surprised if they can get premium car assembly from Foxconn model when Tesla is still having issues.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by elil17 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:25AM (#34262166)
Final assembly, fit and finish aren't really the key part of what they're doing, though. There's no reason they can't outsource that too.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by badpun on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:31AM (#34262300)
It’s not that they don’t build. They don’t even design a lot of the car components (incl. gear boxes, abs, traction control etc). They’re bough from OEM companies, who design and manufacture them.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by jonathankoren on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:37AM (#34262408)
> Final assembly, fit and finish - those are very important things on high end cars - and as Tesla demonstrated - not that easy to do even when you're flush with cash

Is it that hard though? The initial build problems came from ignoring industry experience about trying to automate final assembly — a step that very manufacture had tried and failed to do before.

No shame in trying it, maybe industrial robotic control have improved since then, but you usually don’t test such a thing in your assembly lines.

After Tesla ripped out the robots, I don’t know what their problem was beyond poor training and line management. Putting doors on straight — let alone with matching colors — for over a hundred years.

If it’s really hard to physically build a car, we’d see similar massive faults from Rivian and Lucid, but I’m unaware of any.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by dylan604 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:21AM (#34260862)
Huh? The auto industry if famous for outsourcing to plants outside of the country and bring the final cars back in to the country. They are also famous for manufacturing the parts from all of the world, and then assembling them in another country. Apple's "Designed in Cupertino, assembled in ___" is the same thing.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by JumpCrisscross on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:18AM (#34260782)
> not sure outsourcing manufacturing and focusing on design works in auto industry

Engines were monuments of engineering. A new engine design could dig a decades-long moat around a company. This combination of proprietary zeal and complexity dictated the market structure.

EVs are different. They’re simpler. And their differentiation is on soft points like style and software. (The tech driver is the battery, but nobody is vertically integrated to a differentiated extent anymore.) This, theoretically, permits a small(er) design team to arrange supply chains and command factories from afar. It also permits mix-and-match manufacturing, with specialisation and competition at the component level.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by citrus1330 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:27AM (#34260981)
Even if that were true, you don't think Apple is capable of building out manufacturing capabilities?
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by hef19898 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:20AM (#34260831)
It does, Magna's whole business model is based around that.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by multiplegeorges on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:14AM (#34260717)
Fisker is trying it and should have a car to market next year. They've been hitting all their targets.

They outsource their manufacturing to Magna Steyr.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by papruapap on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:17AM (#34260777)
like how they outsourced their chips, right? They only designed a square with a M1 stamped on it.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by mprev on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:17AM (#34262023)
Manga Steyr builds Jaguars, BMWs, Fiskers, and others under just this model.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by macco on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:46AM (#34261342)
I would think the most valuable part of tesla is the network of loading stations that the own. At least in the US. In Europe the EU is setting a standard which is good for competition, but maybe less good for innovation.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by elisharobinson on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:52AM (#34261467)
"carmaker" != "electric carmaker" , all other carmakers DO NOT make profitable EV's and require heavy subsidies to be in parity. Tesla has better margins because it is vertically integrated . Apple will NEVER make a car , cars require a totally different supply chain not as simple as moving a low mass objects like phones and PC's , ie cant move them multiple times across different continents. other car makers will have to make significant investments while having losses and being dependent on ICE to break even all the while EV's grow and the ICE mkt share reduces (less profits) . They will probably never catch tesla in building a tech platform "infotainment" , how long would it take for any other car maker to ship steam games and have 60 fps gaming on the car.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by jeffbee on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:02AM (#34261690)
Tesla earned 5.5 billion on 54 billion in sales in 2021. 1.5 billion of that was in air pollution credits Tesla sells to other carmakers, meaning they earned about a 8% margin on the car business. You could definitely argue that Tesla is only profitable because of government price supports.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by elisharobinson on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:07AM (#34261814)
they have grown production capacity yoy of >50% , 2021 was a heavy capex year. tesla makes > 30% margin on each car sold.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by wahnfrieden on Thursday January 05, 2023 @10:56AM (#34261556)
isn't tesla heavily subsidized via carbon credits?
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by elisharobinson on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:29AM (#34262260)
"carbon credit" != "tax credit"

carbon credit: EU law fines ICE car makers for making cars. they inturn purchase carbon credits to have the right to keep polluting. further more tesla made 53 B$ in rev for 2021. 1.5B is not nothing but not > 5% of revenue for the year. ie bulk of it came from actually making and selling cars.

tax credit: the US federal govt had a tax credit program which was lobbied by GM in the 2010's that gave car buyers 7.5K as a tax write off . this was only eligible for less than 100k cars sold (tesla sold 405,300 in q4 2022) and was only useful if you made enough income where a tax writeoff made sense. 2023 new laws are in place with more rules which makes them almost useless (or only useful for those who lobbied for it).

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by bsagdiyev on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:05AM (#34261790)
We don't talk about Bruno.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by qazwse_ on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:46AM (#34262563)
>how long would it take for any other car maker to ship steam games and have 60 fps gaming on the car.

I'm still young, but hearing about this kind of feature makes me feel like a luddite. I just don't get it. Is it so passengers can play while you're driving, or just to play while the car is charging/you're waiting somewhere?

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by dlivingston on Thursday January 05, 2023 @08:20PM (#34269680)
Yeah, it's entertainment for passing the time while charging. Tesla has long had Hulu, Disney+, Netflix, etc. apps in their cars for this reason, along with a number of games.

It's pretty neat. It's really cool to go car camping and effectively have a portable mini-theater come with you.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by jpeter on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:07AM (#34261820)
Have you driven other cars in the same price range as your Tesla?
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by kylecordes on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:25AM (#34262169)
It appears so far that the good UI/UX Tesla offers is something other makers could replicate, but stubbornly refuse to.

Still... that doesn't mean the stock is infinitely valuable. Presumably the market will shake out and TSLA will end up with a valuation kinda high for a car company, but not in tech-company range.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by paxys on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:45AM (#34262543)
What is laughable is thinking that Apple (or anyone else) can just walk into a multi-trillion dollar industry with zero prior experience and displace existing players. Heck they have even tried to build a car/self driving tech for many years now and constantly failed at it.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by VirusNewbie on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:07PM (#34263897)
Didn’t they do that with cell phones?
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by paxys on Thursday January 05, 2023 @02:25PM (#34265123)
They were already the market leader in computers and portable devices (iPod), plus "smartphone" was a very recent and underdeveloped sector to begin with (existing products were all focused on business use cases and no end consumer had one). Very different from cars.

Look at all their other efforts to enter areas with a dominant player. People were saying Spotify was doomed when Apple Music launched, yet it has barely has an impact (even though Apple had a massive amount of expertise and industry connections in music). Their social network (Ping) was an instant failure. Hopepod couldn't compete with Echo and Sonos. They tried multiple times to get into video gaming and went nowhere (Pippin, Arcade). iAd was dead in the water when it tried to compete with Google and Facebook. Same with Maps, MobileMe. Heck they are even having trouble with a wireless charging pad, and have basically conceded the market to Qi.

Dominance in one sector rarely extends to an unrelated one regardless of how many billions you throw at the problem.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by nebula8804 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @05:51PM (#34268103)
>Heck they are even having trouble with a wireless charging pad, and have basically conceded the market to Qi.

Do you own any Magsafe devices? Their Magsafe implementation is like magic and its extremely practical. It (among many other things) has essentially locked me into iPhone ecosystem for good.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by paxys on Thursday January 05, 2023 @07:08PM (#34268943)
Magsafe (the iPhone one) = Qi + magnets. There is nothing "magic" about it. You can even get non-Apple branded wireless chargers that have replicated the functionality. The new Qi2 standard will also have this built-in (with help from Apple in fact). It is hardly some revolutionary new product area or source of revenue for the company.

Meanwhile AirPower was in announced in 2017 and has still failed to materialize.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by nebula8804 on Sunday January 15, 2023 @08:04AM (#34389099)
Is it implemented as standard in any series of Android phones? As far as I have seen, it is standard on the entire iPhone line 12 and up(minus the old iphone 8 design used in SE). Thats three generations and it has spawned a whole ecosystem of products that utilize the functionality(my favorite being the magnetic car mount/charger). Its magic because they managed to implement it extremely well + make this ecosystem possible due to their decision of rolling it out nearly complete product wide which helps expand the third party ecosystem. As a user, I measure how magical something is by how much better it makes my life and let me tell you, this implementation has been amazing. It is the third Apple thing I have called "magical" in the last 5 years. The other two being the Airpods Pro(again amazing implementation) + the M series chips(the speed and snappiness has made me impressed with a new computer for the first time in a long time).

I once had a similar solution with the Nexus 5(the last Android phone I bought new before I tried an iPhone and subsequently never looked back). This phone had some sort of magnetic charging system that combined with a third party car mount. Unfortunately the implementation sucked as many times it would fail to begin charging and once in a while some freak accident would happen where it would charge but the phone would get scary burning hot and then overheat. When this happened, the stupid phone starts to throttle and nothing is responsive anymore, not even the damn ability to power down the phone. Real great having to correct this issue when im supposed to be driving the damn car. The Nexus5 was the poster child for all that was wrong with Android.

>Meanwhile AirPower was in announced in 2017 and has still failed to materialize.

Why would this matter to me? I'm pleased with the solutions Apple has already provided. If they can't deliver something then I'm not going to call that particular thing magical but the magsafe in the phones is shipping and it is in fact magical.

Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by julosflb on Thursday January 05, 2023 @03:39PM (#34266210)
Jumping from computer to cell phones appears to me order of magnitude easier than jumping from computer to car buisness.
Re:Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm by leesec on Thursday January 05, 2023 @11:48AM (#34262615)
>I think Apple can make an even better car than Tesla if they build the hardware and software like their phones and computers.

OK but we don't even officially know if Apple is trying to make a car?

>The idea that Autopilot has some magic sauce that nobody else can replicate is laughable.

The idea that a very difficult, innovative software problem can't be just replicated by legacy auto manufacturers who lack software engineering expertise is not laughable at all. The legacy auto manufacturers will really have to prove themselves here and so far they have not.