The automotive industry has been more or less same interms of energy efficiencies for around past 100 years. With this huge increase in the energy usage, the mankind has to come with disruptive technologies to increase the usage of every ounce of energy source, efficiently.
What better than Apple - Tesla tie up or other relation can start the change, other than some start up inventions. Looking forward to marriage between great minds who strive for perfection
If at all it happens, I mean if at all Tesla goes for a sale, then it should not go any of the auto companies . Tesla has made a unique space for itself as a technology leader in EVs and its marriage with Apple will boost that image further and something revolutionary will happen in terms of an EV with all kind modern features which Apple will be able to implement.
This will be a marked distance away from those BMWs or Mercedes which are trying only incremental features in their luxury cars.
With Tesla and Apple coming together , such modern technology cars can become an affordable solution for the IT savvy young population.
Why does everyone assume Apple is going to buy Tesla entirely? Why not just a partial investment, in exchange for Apple handling the computer interface?
Have you seen the inside of a Tesla S? The dashboard is just this large flat touchscreen. Normally I would think that this would create terrible driver distraction, but apparently they've done it right with minimal, large buttons on the touch screen when you are driving.
But coming up with this interface and adding new functionality to it probably requires a large staff of dedicated programmers, and nowdays it needs to tie into a cloud infrastructure to allow advanced Internet functions. It can become a never-ending game of catchup. And this team needs to be really good at intuitive and non-distracting user interfaces to keep the drivers' eyes on the road. Apple could easily fill this role.
I loved the tesla model S. However, I hated that giant ugly flat panel. Its like our display devices haven't caught up to the elegance that is designed into the dash or something. It stuck out like a sore thumb.
Since Apple has determined that existing roads are inefficiently designed, the new iCar will only travel on Apple roads. But all the Apple fanboys are happy, assuring us that these are the roads of the future anyway.
Honestly, I can see no combination better than Tesla and Apple, to get the press all a-twitter.
I was going to comment that my ipod would play anything, and I loaded music on it using a 3rd party application. However, I'm not sure if you can do that anymore. Can you use anything other than itunes to put music on an apple product now? I love my iphone (yes, yes, I've tried android phones, MANY of them), but I HATE itunes.
I was actually referring to iPhones and iPads summarily dropping Flash, *the* de-facto standard still today, with some concocted excuse about inefficiency, and a promise that the world was moving to HTML5 anyway.
Don't know the answer to your question. What I do know is that some Internet radio stations do not use MP3, AAC+, Real, or WMA, so they won't play on devices that don't also support Flash and Silverlight. I can sort of see the problem faced by designers of single-purpose, low cost Internet appliances. What I can't buy is the attitude Apple had when they dropped Flash.
If you've been a web developer at any point in the past, you would whole heartedly applaud them for dumping that horrible beast of flash. There were lots of fun things made with that horrible horrible tool, but it can go away forever and everyone will be better off.
Yes, I've heard that reaction from others, but isn't it entirely beside the point? No one was asking Apple to develop web content using Flash. But to leave the users in the lurch, with some nonsense about low efficiency, at a time when just about all web video required a Flash player, is inexcusable.
I could say the same thing about roads. They can be terribly unsafe. Let's applaud the iCar for not being designed to use them!
I can totally see both sides of the argument here.
1. flash worked HORRIBLY on touch screen devices when the ipad first came out. Apple knew this and didn't want people put off. Flash content was simply not designed for touchscreens (back then especially). It was prudent of apple to avoid the bad experiences and push developers to use a better tool. I jailbroke an ipad and used flash a couple times, it was infuriatingly unpleasant.
2. I DID jailbreak mine because I HATE a company telling me what I can or can't do with hardware I own. If this hardware is capable of doing a thing, they shouldn't be stopping me from doing it.
So, I guess I agree with you that it was rude of them to presume they know better than me, but I completely see why they did it, and might have made that same decision if it were me in charge. Maybe I would have left it enabled but popped up a big nasty warning that, unless designed for a touch interface, it would not function correctly.
I can't even imagine apple buying tesla completely. While it is cute to talk about and imagine the internet buzzing about, it just seems incredibly unlikely. It would be much more feasible to assume apple would invest and contribute some design, or possibly improve the interface.
Imagine, for example, their partial ownership of pixar. We didn't see iMovies and there was no apple lock in.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.