Volkswagen to invest up to $5B in Rivian
reuters.com
reuters.com
https://ev.com/news/byd-and-catl-set-to-introduce-ev-batteri...
Capacitors.
Huawei has already announced 600 kW DC fast chargers: https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Electric-cars-in-China/Chi...
BYD's technology, not so much--they're better at manufacturing cars in degrees compared to Tesla, not an order of magnitude.
The magic is at CATL and friends. There is a Cambrian explosion of battery technology in China that doesn't get reported super well in the mainstream press.
Iron [1] and now sodium [2].
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_iron_phosphate_batte...
[2] https://www.electrive.com/2023/11/20/byd-huaihai-move-on-pla...
https://www.drive.com.au/news/byd-to-introduce-new-second-ge...
They’re doing a lot of licensing to western companies.
Who are these makers that allegedly outclass Autopilot/FSD?
https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/27/23892154/mercedes-benz-dr...
Drive Pilot:
Works only when behind another car, it just follows that car
Cannot change lanes
Works only under 40MPH
Works only in daylight, does not work at night
Does not work in rain
Works only in traffic jams and heavy traffic
Works only on a few pre-approved roads
How is the world is FSD "severely lagging behind" this tech when FSD has none of these limitations?
Something weird about how the Mercedes tech is hyped up in message forums.
As for Autopilot.. almost everybody has good lane keeping/radar cruise tech now. My 18 Acura was as good as Autopilot, and maybe better than “post LiDAR” autopilot.
Also Teslas are among the lasts (with X-Peng) in their price range lacking a capacitive steering wheel (doesn't require moving the wheel, a light touch from time to time is enough to keep cruise control on).
And none of them suffers from the dangerous "phantom braking" defect, which occurs almost certainly at least once for any one-hour long trip.
I have FSD, but don't use it, so I don't let the car dry to automatically overtake anyone.
Rivian focuses on a different segment of the market from most cars sold by VW Group (trucks, SUVs, the American market in general) so from Rivian's perspective they're not likely to be cannibalized.
Kodak wasn't a camera company, they were a chemical company. Cameras and lenses were a loss-leader for selling film and the equipment and chemicals used to develop it. You can't just swap the products and make a little less money, it changes the entire business model.
Likewise a lot of these car companies make money on the long chain of maintenance as much as or moreso than the cars themselves. Electric cars come with a whole new business model. And the core competencies that are required are much different. Less precision machining and more electrical engineering
I like the Audi E-tron because I can mostly ignore or turn off the center screen and have everything important in front of me behind the wheel. The center screen on the Polestar 2 is a bit more pronounced but can be muted when switching to the music screen. Teslas and VW EVs have way to much happening in the center screen so I avoid those. It's sad to see Volvo go down the same path but a correction should be in order.
Anyways, all the tech is commoditised so you need something else to differentiate yourself. For me that's not a big center display to show how "tech forward" you are, as it ends up suggesting you're anything but.
Couldn't be more wrong. VW is building up a direct competitor to Rivian.
They still have a few years to improve their EVs, and when people really start to switch their gas cars with EVs in large volumes they have the benefit of being well established while having a wide range of model that can replace any of their old gas car offerings.
I’m not 100% sure that Teslas strategy of superoptimizing 3-4 bland models is a winning strategy in the very long run. People like to buy cars that fit their needs and personality.
Tesla is taking way too long to develop interesting models, and the Cybertruck, while interesting, might be too weird and flawed to be a big international success in the long run.
Though if the bet on robotaxis pay off, I could see Tesla being a huge success in the future as well. I’m just not sure if that’s going to actually happen. Or if Elon will bet too much of their development efforts on it too early, and thus run out of steam before it takes off.
Buying mass produced car is the most environmentally friendly way - it has least manufacturing, repairs, customisation footprint. I do agree people are sick of seeing same model 3/y everywhere which is depressing thought.
VW basically sells the same car through 4-5 different brands.
Also, even if VW has a platform they still sell 10x less cars than Tesla.
Don't ask me, ask VW: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Volkswagen_Group_platf...
A lot, I guess, otherwise VW wouldn't have become the #1 manufacturer in the world back in 2016 and wouldn't remain #2 even now.
> Also, even if VW has a platform they still sell 10x less cars than Tesla.
Be careful with that Reality Distortion Field, it's powerful stuff. No.
VW sold 5x more <<cars>> than Tesla (2023 data).
VW sold 60% fewer <<BEV cars>> than Tesla. VW sold ~800k, Tesla sold around 1.8m (also 2023 data).
The facts say:
1. VW has been using platforms for decades, they're good at it, they think they're preferable to having 1-2-3 models.
2. Their sales numbers for vehicles based on platforms seem to back up their thinking.
3. VW is slowly ramping up regarding BEV sales, but growing quite fast (~40% per year; about the same growth rate as Tesla).
4. Long term VW almost for sure will bridge the gap, they will be a major player for BEVs. Time will tell which position, exactly.
According to his own admission, they'd have been insolvent around the time he went on to promise full self driving and claiming that Teslas will be able to become unstaffed taxis in early 2010. Ballooning it's valuation and solving the solvency issue by selling of some stocks.
The only surprising thing is how people still but into it, over a decade later. Wanna bet there is going to be another large sell of Tesla stock after the latest announcement?
Yes there are differences in the models however the center console airbag doesn’t justify a 50% price bump.
Chinese EVs are eating the lunch of European manufacturers has nothing to do with tech. The MG EVs that are some of the best selling cars in many EU countries for example are objectively worse than any European competitor they are just substantially cheaper.
And unlike their Euro counterparts their base models are actually available for dealerships you can’t get a VW in the UK without tacking like 8-10K worth of addons onto it unless you want to wait for months.
Re: (2), even if there were alternatives like ClarisWorks being able to open and share MS Office documents was critical to keeping the Mac alive at that time. Plus, the web was one of the things that helped Apple survive the platform wars (i.e., proprietary document formats, two-sided markets, etc.). And whatever its imperfections, Internet Explorer was becoming the standard as Netscape lost share and this was before Mozilla, Firefox, Safari, or Chrome. the Mac needed a first-class browser and Microsoft committed to providing one for 5 years.
In contrast, while the cash, additional market for EV software, and vote of confidence is no doubt very valuable to Rivian, it would be an even more valuable if VW could provide some distribution or other advantages to get Rivian out of it's current hole.
Rivian is also Apple, but it just doesn't have any clout.
https://www.theregister.com/1998/10/29/microsoft_paid_apple_...
TLDR: Microsoft was stealing with help of Intel, both companies scared by QuickTime positioning Apple as the leader in Multimedia (1991 Adobe Premiere build by ex Quicktime engineer on Mac platform, 1991 Avid ported from Apollo $workstations$ to Mac). When Jobs came back in 1996 he didnt like (or couldnt afford) all the litigation and promptly settled for $ and Microsoft support commitment (Office, IE) in exchange for letting MS save face.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Canyon_Company
"David Boies, attorney for the DoJ, noted that John Warden, for Microsoft, had omitted to quote part of a handwritten note by Fred Anderson, Apple's CFO, in which Anderson wrote that "the [QuickTime] patent dispute was resolved with cross-licence and significant payment to Apple." The payment was $150 million."
"Microsoft and Intel had been shocked to find that Apple's QuickTime product made digital video on Windows seem like continuous motion, and was far in advance of anything that either of them had, even in a planning stage. The speed was achieved by bypassing Windows' Graphics Display Interface and enabling the application to write directly to the video card. The result was a significant improvement over the choppy, 'slide-show' quality of Microsoft's own efforts. Apple's intention was to establish the driver as a standard for multimedia video imaging, so that Mac developers could sell their applications on the Windows and Mac platforms. Microsoft requested a free licence from Apple for QuickTime for Windows in June 1993, and was refused. In July 1993, the San Francisco Canyon Company entered into an agreement with Intel to deliver a program (codenamed Mario) that would enable Intel to accelerate Video for Windows' processing of video images."
"Intel gave this code to Microsoft as part of a joint development program called Display Control Interface."
"Canyon admitted that it had copied to Intel code developed for and assigned to Apple. In September 1994, Apple's software was distributed by Microsoft in its developer kits, and in Microsoft's Video for Windows version 1.1d."
https://web.archive.org/web/20091006022255/http://www.firing...
"FS: What was Microsoft's philosophy or attitude regarding games when you began?
Alex St John: Oh, it was completely nonexistent! During that time, their entire focus was on multimedia video, the primary mission of DirectX wasn't to benefit and push gaming, but simply to drive Apple and Quicktime into the ground."
What exactly is the goal here? Technology sharing for products?
One article claims they are interested in the platform, maybe they want that platform for Scout? The last "real" truck VW was a rebranded Ford F-150. It might not make a lot of sense to adapt their current MEB platform for a truck, as it has vastly different requirements compared to the usual VW car.
Are you sure that Scout is targeted at Rivian customers? Or at people who wish they could afford a Rivian and can't?
Almost certainly. I don't think there is any point in making an EV truck for less than a Rivian R3.
Trucks are expensive and VW has never tried to compete at the absolute low end. To really undercut Rivian they would need an EV truck at 25k, which is a product which would absolutely suck.
Tell that to the rabbit pickup
VW Golf?
I'd kind of wonder if VW is more interested in vans here, tho. They seem to have missed the boat on electric vans; it's all Merc/Citroen/Renault in Europe, and Rivian in the US. VW's only electric van is a cargo version of the id Buzz.
The really challenging part for the old car companies has been the software and that was Rivian's edge. Now they've given that way and have to compete with VW on purely the hardware side that the old car companies are already good at.
And it is a 15 year old company, not a new startup.
But still I’ve yet to see one with a sled deck or a tailgate pad though so I assume it’s just people who don’t really need a truck at all.
I think they’re just for putzing around town. There’s not much options for chargers, and towns and destinations are far apart. I imagine that’s even more true in Wyoming.
I drove across state a couple weeks ago, Jackson to Laramie and back, and almost every gas station had a couple EV chargers. Granted, I doubt they were fast chargers and they may not have even been working.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29247594 EV maker Rivian eclipses Volkswagen in value while Lucid overtakes Ford (ft.com) Nov 16, 2021
Tesla is still valued at 2x Toyota:
https://companiesmarketcap.com/automakers/largest-automakers...
and then at least 5-10x what companies that actually make a lot of cars are valued.
Tesla should probably be valued at something like #3 or #4, their market value needs to crater by at least 50%, more like 80%, to reflect their real long term standing.
Because this moron thinks that users care about Rivian's "experience" or whatever.
Don't need to worry about this with VW, they already have hit rock bottom on that front!
And yet it still makes borrowing a Tesla a pain.
Address book syncing is the main issue. I want my contacts on my phone. So taking phone calls gets a bit awkward, though with Siri getting a little better it’s sort of doable.
Other than that it’s the constant re-typing of destinations from the calendar.
Minor stuff. Hence a pain, not a problem.
Arguably they could have switched over at some time, but they're doing well enough that they haven't felt the need.
But I'd be surprised if there isn't a Tesla somewhere in the bowels of Musk's volcano lair that has CarPlay running, just waiting for the right time to release it as a software upgrade option (only $1000!).
Idiots.
It’s also just more lucrative to drive people to use the built in stuff instead of mirroring their phone, both for easier data mining and for pushing users into subscriptions.
I don't think at least CarPlay has anything able to meet the actual need there or even a way to provide something that would ... Maybe a separate map app that ran inside carplay to provide the required featureset?
> Maybe a separate map app that ran inside carplay to provide the required featureset?
Yup. It's a pretty straightforward feature. Heck, I'd write it myself once I get an EV with Android Auto.
(https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/set-up-electric-vehic...)
Important to note as well that you can technically support CarPlay and Android Auto just for the infotainment and keep the map function in-house running along with it.
Day to day it or (my the usage patterns) don't change much and after the firstof when and where charging would fit in my schedule (usually while getting groceries each week).
For people who drive a lot of different routes or on vacation an dedicated EV mapping feature is nice but so far A Better Route Planer worked just fine (my car has no usable native solution).
I'm in my car to go from point A to point B, not to be entertained by Google or Apple.
Is Google Maps okay'ish for nav? Yup. Is it better than, say, Porsche's previous nav system: not really.
Is Google Maps, in the EU, better at indicating speed traps than my (legal) "Coyote" system: no, definitely not.
To me AndroidAuto and CarPlay are fucking gizmos.
The one thing that counts to me is how pleasant the car is to drive and its safety. On that later point arguably a car that does not have a Google/Apple tablet in its dashboard is safer than the same car that does.
I understand that we're in a FB/Instagram/WhatsApp society but maybe, just maybe, that when you're driving is the time to...
Disconnect?
P.S: if anyone comes out saying "but music", I'll answer this: my car has a better soundsystem than yours and it's not using AndroidAuto/CarPlay. It's some stuff working on top of the QNX OS. The point is the same: I care about the quality of the sound/music (so much that I basically bought a high-end limousine for its soundsystem/sound insulation), not about how I select it.
Speaking anecdotally, having CarPlay work on a rental means I can just talk to Siri. Having to futz with the car's own system, on the other hand, means lots of time not looking at the road.
Here's the thing. Tesla does not have speed trap detection. And so you're screwed, there's NOTHING you can do with the built-in software. Your only recourse is to go and cry at Musk's feet to add the function.
With AA/CarPlay, I can just switch to a different software. E.g. Sygic supports speed traps in multiple countries, and it has fully offline maps.
Tesla's maps become a gray box once it loses the data connectivity. And in 4 years, you'll be paying $10 a month to have maps _at_ _all_ because the Standard Connectivity will not be free anymore.
Great, ain't it?
> my car has a better soundsystem than yours and it's not using AndroidAuto/CarPlay
Android Auto / CarPlay can transmit the lossless audio stream.
You could...not speed. (Unless your cops are psychotic about 5 over.)
I just provided it as an example.
It’s also another thing to have to log everything into which is a pain and has to be repeated for each person frequently driving the vehicle.
CarPlay/Android Auto avoid both nicely.
Now of course I’d trust Tesla or Rivian to not pull support prematurely more than any traditional automaker, but it’s still a risk regardless of brand.
What am I missing? I can play podcasts/music/whatever from my phone, the name/progress bar shows on the UI. I can control volume, next track, next in play list etc from the Tesla UI.
Maps/Nav are already google and speech recognition works well. I've seen horrid interfaces from Ford, Subaru, and Toyota, which would make me beg for a phone UI, but the tesla UI seems pretty similar to my Pixel 8. I.e. pinch/zoom/rotate works pretty well with a decently high update rate.
Another feature I miss from CarPlay is my podcast app. Instead, to listen to my podcasts I have to again use the phone instead of the Tesla console.
others include that my phone streams better and has more services. I could take a video call with CarPlay or stream something from a service not available on Tesla
I'd also like to use a functional browser on the large screen while charging. Tesla's browser has crashed on me just trying to read the Tesla manual. It's useless
Like say thai food? Hardware stores? Etc. That works for me. Displays a list with letters on the map, then I can click on the letter or on the list to navigate. It also tells me hours and if they are about to close, just like maps.google.com.
I've gone back and forth between maps.google.com and clicking nav, and voice searching and clicking nav. I see no practical differences. I assume they use the same engine since they give me the same route and ETA. Can you give me a specific search that doesn't work for you?
> another feature I miss from CarPlay is my podcast app. Instead, to listen to my podcasts I have to again use the phone instead of the Tesla console.
Before I start I click on the podcast or playlist on my phone and hit play. Then it's a pretty nice experience. I can pause, next track, play, change volume, see the title, etc through the Tesla UI. If I get a call it auto pauses, if I open the door it decreases the volume, etc. I'm quite fond of it, so say I have a dog park play list. I can listen to it while I put on my shoes, enter the car, audio switches to car, I start driving to dog park, I leave the car, audio switches back to phone, etc. Basically seamless.
How would it be different with carplay?
> others include that my phone streams better and has more services. I could take a video call with CarPlay or stream something from a service not available on Tesla
Er, exactly, my audio comes from my phone. Youtube music auto downloads my playlist, I can download youtube videos, and both seem to have much better audio quality than the built in music streaming from the default breezer (default tesla app). I thought the Tesla sound system was crap, turns out breezer quality is crap. I especially like that I can "stream" music from my playlist, even when I have no signal, great on cross country drives.
> I'd also like to use a functional browser on the large screen while charging. Tesla's browser has crashed on me just trying to read the Tesla manual. It's useles
Ah, never tried the browser.
so Tesla added that because it wasnt there when I bought the car. But it still missing essential info like ratings, reviews, pictures, etc....
> podcasts
my app lets me swtich to any podcast. that's more than just next/prev on a playlist. It also lets me advance +30s, +2m which is use all the time to skip ads or segments
> video
you seemed to miss the point of wanting to use the large console display to show video from the phone (while charging). the face that audio comes out the car speakers is not an arguement against CarPlay support
Ha. Try to search for "Safeway". The UI in Tesla is made by utter morons who need to be fired and forever banned from working on UI, so the list CUTS OFF THE ADDRESS DETAILS. So you just get a list of "Safeway" stores with a distance to them.
This also happens when you type a regular address for something like "1935 E 5st", the first result in the list might be in a wrong city.
Zero UI testing, zero fucks given.
I get the following list:
A 1701 Jackson St, 1.4 miles away, open to 11pm
B 13111 W Alameda Pkwy, 4.6 miles away, open to 11pm.
C 11088 W Jewell Dr, 6.3 miles away, open to 11pm
I've seen the different city thing before, but almost always when I don't have the address quite right. Things like missing a digit, or missing a S or N on a street. Once I fix it, it's always the local one.
Context: I used Android Auto almost entirely for maps and streaming audio, and I always have my phone mounted on the dash to play some media when I drive.
1- Versus either wired or wireless Android Auto, there's just one less step after getting in the car. The car boots ready to go and navigate. There isn't a 2 step loading of the car OS, and then streaming your phone content
2- No battery usage in wireless mode. Phone runs less hot generally vs charging wirelessly or plugged in, which matters on sunny days.
3- If you're not just one-tap navigating to a routine place and you're actively searching for a destination, given how big infotainment screens are continuously getting, I just don't think it's generally a good medium for prolonged interactions. I rather hold the phone in my hands and interact with a familiar phone interface and then send the destination to the car, than doing search and explorations on a car. And I rather hold an untethered phone that isn't slowing down because of the heat from streaming when I do interact with the phone.
4- CarPlay might be better, but Android Auto still has plenty of edge cases, correctly controlling volume, play/pausing media, depending on which app was in the foreground when Android Auto got initially connected. For the first few years, Google Maps disallowed having Maps open simultaneously on the car display and on the phone. And the car app has much less features. I have to turn the engine off or turn off wifi to disconnect Android Auto and use Maps directly. Having 2 full functioning devices with a thin, mature (Bluetooth) interface between them on the Rivian is a cleaner separation.
Rivians look very good though.
As a result that it's becoming increasingly easy to "total" a car in collisions that would have been repaired a decade ago. If you damage a major part of the chassis you get totaled, regardless if it was 25 welded pieces or 1 cast piece.
Really?
Analogous to software-defined radios [1].
I don't even know how to define a SDV besides the confusing and hand-wavy marketing materials.