But there is something to be said about a car that can gauge the movement of others around it, and a car company that is willing to push for a better type of vehicle. The largest automakers in the world have had the power, finances, and means to progress vehicles for quite some time and have not. Tesla's are not perfect, but it terms of what they are doing I give them a big hats off.
No offense intended, but you haven't been paying attention if you think that's the case. For instance, I've read on this very forum how Tesla's driving-assistance technology is a bit dated (camera and no LIDAR, for instance) in comparison to Daimler, et. al.
As for other aspects of progress, I don't know what you're looking for. Within my lifetime alone we've gone from vehicles that need constant maintenance (ignition points and 5K mile plugs, anyone?) to appliances-on-wheels. My Mom's '16 Corvette puts out 450bhp, still gets 25mpg, and I'll bet you could put your nose straight up the pipe and die of boredom before the exhaust fumes get you. And, unlike something of equivalent horsepower from the 70's, you can drive it in town.
Large brands made hybrids, EVs like the Leaf that made an EV "everyman's car" before the Model S and loooong before the Model 3.
So to play it like Tesla's the only one with the guts to do what needs to be done just means their marketing is working.
Signed,
Owner of Many Shares of TSLA
The major autos that "had the means to progress vehicles for quite some time and haven't" have literally sold millions of cars with this technology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_cruise_control_syst...
Tesla's one turns, works in peak traffic and can change lanes though.
- LIDAR is extremely expensive! The LIDAR unit that Google uses costs $80,000 by itself [0], whereas the entire hardware package that Tesla uses is $8,000 [1].
- Path planning, in my personal experience, is significantly easier given millimeter-level accurate readings on millions of points every second, than with 60fps video, even from multiple cameras.
The way I see it, it appears that Tesla has been able to achieve comparable (or better) progress on self-driving cars with significantly lower-cost hardware. The name of the game is making self-driving cars the default option, and that can't happen when the self-driving hardware by itself costs as much as a luxury car.
[0] http://articles.sae.org/13899/
[1] http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/20/13346512/tesla-self-drivi...
Delphi is probably the largest auto supplier in the world and they recently invested a significant amount of money into a silicon valley company producing a solid state lidar who are targeting a $250 price point:
https://www.google.com/amp/www.forbes.com/sites/lianeyvkoff/...
If lidar makes self driving safer, there is no reason at all not to use it.
It's worth noting that in the aftermath of the death of a Tesla driver whose autopilot system couldn't see a white semi trailer, Tesla's sensor supplier reiterated the need for lidar and redundant sensors:
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2016/07/1...
Watching closely, the red car directly in front does not appear to slow down measurably, and certainly, their brake lights do not light up. You do, however, see the black SUV's brake lights light up.
Prediction is a strong word, to be sure. It's great when it's right, and annoying when it's wrong -- like car alarms -- but if it it fires some portion of the time when there is an actual accident imminent -- like a smoke alarm -- then it's clearly useful.
Agree. N=1 here. For all we know this was just a coincidence or what you are giving as a reason.
As a "car guy" for 30+ years, could have fooled me that there hasn't been progress. In fact, there's a 1995 and 2015 Toyota Corolla in my driveway, and the cars are not remotely the same.
EVs are a paradigm shift, but aren't the only form of technological progress.