Tesla Model 3

KCross

We need a thread split!

BoatMad

EndaHonesty wrote: »

Goes to great lengths to tell us that Apple isn't an innovator and then gives examples of Apple's innovation... :rolleyes:

Innovate Definition
verb
verb (used without object), innovated, innovating.
1. to introduce something new; make changes in anything established.
verb (used with object), innovated, innovating.
2. to introduce (something new) for or as if for the first time:
to innovate a computer operating system.
3. Archaic. to alter.



Tells us how it's not possible for people to predict the future.

Then proceeds to predict the future... :rolleyes:

Before you decend into an adhominen attack , which is the last refuge of a person with no erudite retort ...

I have merely attempted to illustrate my future predictions , based on experience and logic and I have placed caveats around those things ( by way of my examples like the " mighty micro ")

What examples of apples " innovation " have I mentioned.

They didn't innovate the small mpeg player , creative labs did , Nor the smart phone , nor laptops or desktops

Solidly engineered products , absolutely and that's why I buy them in preference to other brands , but clearly not for technical innovation. ( arguably in smartphone that mantle belongs to Samsung )

Apple is the Cartier of the IT world, that's its " innovation. "

( and is run by a guy whose expertise is logistics and whose key designer could as easily be designing women's handbags )

KCross

BoatMad wrote: »

What examples of apples " innovation " have I mentioned.

They didn't innovate the small mpeg player , creative labs did , Nor the smart phone , nor laptops or desktops

Your mixing innovation and invention. Apple innovates, but rarely invents entirely new products.

BoatMad

KCross wrote: »

Your mixing innovation and invention. Apple innovates, but rarely invents entirely new products.

I would argue it's not much of an innovator either ( innovation is a very broad definition. )

It's primarily success has been marketing and branding and solid engineering

It leaves others to innovate , either copies or buys them up.

( see xerox parc, next , etc )

[snip]

BoatMad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This is bollicks, who gives a feck about it anyway !

I agree actually , but I was just providing the background to my justifications

Of course " bollocks " is seemingly a time honoured erudite response at this stage on boards

BoatMad

BoatMad wrote: »

Of course "" is seemingly a time honoured erudite response at this stage on boards

[snip]

BoatMad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Bollicks !

It only gets better

gctest50

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This is [snip], who gives a feck about it anyway !

This would be a nice upgrade in a few years - any more news of it ?



https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/glass-battery-technology/

John B. pioneered the lithium-ion battery technology that is now the industry standard, and now the 94-year-old is ready to push the envelope on battery innovation again.

EndaHonesty

BoatMad wrote: »

Before you decend into an adhominen attack , which is the last refuge of a person with no erudite retort ...

I have merely attempted to illustrate my future predictions , based on experience and logic and I have placed caveats around those things ( by way of my examples like the " mighty micro ")

What examples of apples " innovation " have I mentioned.

They didn't innovate the small mpeg player , creative labs did , Nor the smart phone , nor laptops or desktops

Solidly engineered products , absolutely and that's why I buy them in preference to other brands , but clearly not for technical innovation. ( arguably in smartphone that mantle belongs to Samsung )

Apple is the Cartier of the IT world, that's its " innovation. "

( and is run by a guy whose expertise is logistics and whose key designer could as easily be designing women's handbags )

Kane Kramer invented the digital audio player in 1979.

His failure to renew his patent allowed other companies to adopt his technology cheaply.

Apple's innovation of marketing, design and ease of use made them cool and the innovation of itunes disrupted the recorded music industry.

Apple didn't invent the smart phone but their innovation of marketing, design and ease of use was a major factor in the widespread adoption.

They continue to innovate with each new model they release.

The point is innovation is not invention, it's is changing something to make it different/better.

It's funny that you make such a strenuous argument against Apple's innovation and then cite Samsung as a "true innovator".

Tell us what inventions Samsung have brought us?

Before you label me an Apple fanboy. I have an imac for work but 4 pc's also and I have never had an iphone or ipod.

gctest50

gctest50 wrote: »

This would be a nice upgrade in a few years - any more news of it ?

https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/glass-battery-technology/

They've being working on solid state batteries for some time, no working prototype EV battery has been created yet as far as I'm aware.

BoatMad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

They've being working on solid state batteries for some time, no working prototype EV battery has been created yet as far as I'm aware.

Nor is the inventor referenced the pioneer of Li tech

Ned A. Godshall A British scientist is really the power house behind Li and holds the patents

He built on German , British and others of course

cros13

Cut the abusive language down lads...

aliveandkicking

Apple innovated through it's software hardware combinations. They didn't invent portable music players nor did they come up with the idea of an internet platform to download music. The innovation came by marrying a nicely designed music player (iPod) with a simple easy to use platform (iTunes). They did the same with mobile phones. Nokia and others had full touchscreen mobiles long before Apple but the software they ran on wasn't great. Again Apple's innovation was marrying up a nice design with the iOS platform which was a game changing step forward for mobile devices. I say all this as someone who doesn't use any Apple devices. I prefer Android and others but can't deny Apple's innovation changed the industry.

Getting back on topic somewhat there is no doubt that Tesla is a major disruptor to the cosy cartel auto manufacturers have operated in for decades. Their whole business model is different. They sell directly through their own network instead of a traditional dealership operation. They do their own repairs of which their stated aim is to make no profit on repairs thus incentivising them to make the cars as reliable as possible. Contrast this to the traditional manufacturers and dealerships who rely on the profits they make on parts and repairs. Then we have the constant over the air software updates making their cars better over time instead of worse. Add in the supercharging network for fuelling their own cars and there can be absolutely no doubt Tesla's presence in the market is a major disruptive influence for the auto manufacturers, the traditional auto dealerships, the motor parts and repair industry and the oil industry.

How someone as intelligent as yourself Boatmad can't see this is beyond me.

eeguy

aliveandkicking wrote: »

How someone as intelligent as yourself Boatmad can't see this is beyond me.

Not to mention the overall design of the cars.
The worlds fastest 0-60 production car.
A range that outclasses all other electric cars and many petrol cars.
Has seven seats.
A 5.4 safety rating on a 0-5 scale.

Yup. No innovations here :rolleyes:

samih

One thing that I can't still understand is that how come a small "startup" company like Tesla was able to design and release an all around amazingly competitive clean slate design (Model S, of course) that is not only pretty but also remarkably well designed in all aspects, apart from lack of headroom :-) . It still appears bang up to date and in league of it's own compared to other electrics after half a decade. Compared to the Roadster the leap in technology and the manufacturing process was just mind boggling. You just have to admire the drive of the people behind it.

It's just so desirable.

eeguy

samih wrote: »

One thing that I can't still understand is that how come a small "startup" company like Tesla was able to design and release an all around amazingly competitive clean slate design (Model S, of course) that is not only pretty but also remarkably well designed in all aspects, apart from lack of headroom :-) . It still appears bang up to date and in league of it's own compared to other electrics after half a decade. Compared to the Roadster the leap in technology and the manufacturing process was just mind boggling. You just have to admire the drive of the people behind it.

It's just so desirable.

Money. Lots and lots of money. Also they started at a time when US car manufacturers were in a downturn and selling equipment for a song.

Fireball14013

The Roadster is over 15 years old surely? It didn't happen overnight to be fair!

samih

eeguy wrote: »

samih wrote: »

One thing that I can't still understand is that how come a small "startup" company like Tesla was able to design and release an all around amazingly competitive clean slate design (Model S, of course) that is not only pretty but also remarkably well designed in all aspects, apart from lack of headroom :-) . It still appears bang up to date and in league of it's own compared to other electrics after half a decade. Compared to the Roadster the leap in technology and the manufacturing process was just mind boggling. You just have to admire the drive of the people behind it.

It's just so desirable.

Money. Lots and lots of money. Also they started at a time when US car manufacturers were in a downturn and selling equipment for a song.

Yeah, but they had to design all the hardware and software from scratch and the team was not that massive. They got the plant for peanuts alright but still needed to kit it out with process including the robots. I mean have you seen the factory? It looks more like a McLaren facility than anything else. All this took a lots of money but to get it done so quickly and with so few people is pretty cool combined that the actual end result is no ugly duckling.

Knowing the risks Musk had to personally take to get it going, and don't mention SpaceX which is his real job is like magic to me. Yeah, I'm a fan, but even objectively it was not a trivial task to get Model S in production.

samih

Fireball14013 wrote: »

The Roadster is over 15 years old surely? It didn't happen overnight to be fair!

True, but the leap in technology between Roadster and S is massive. It's like a difference between an airfix kit plane and a Boeing 777.

Fireball14013

samih wrote: »

True, but the leap in technology between Roadster and S is massive. It's like a difference between an airfix kit plane and a Boeing 777.

That's kinda my point. Even with Musk pouring massive amounts into a single outcome from a fresh start with no legacy hangovers, it took 15 years! Job well done though.
Regarding the self-driving, that's a different ball game entirely. The new E-Class has all the tech the Model S has (if not more) and Merc won't deliberately let it drive itself as much as Tesla do, they feel there's another few years dev in there for a much better outcome. 2020 they reckon. With recent developments in Lidar etc, I think they're right. Self-driving won't be a challenge for the established brands.
Electric only production will, but most will manage fine. There is much more innovation in the car world than the mainstream brands ever put on forecourts. Models with the largest margins are what gets pushed, and until that changes, they'll keep at it.
Interesting times ahead.

samih

Actually if I remember it right the Roadster was realeased pretty much 10 years ago so the gap between it and S was about 4..5 years.

You make very good points about the driver automation, others could do it too if they so decided. But currently, and in the near future, they won't be able to compete with Tesla's (and Nissan's) ability to manufacture enough battery cells for as many cars as the market can absorb. And this is why there are non-Tesla cars that can compete in range and performance even with the first Model S cars that are now pushing 5 years of age. It will be a very difficult task for anybody, apart from Nissan, to match Model 3's price/range ratio and have access to enough battery cells to make reasonably priced long range electric cars profitable.

It remains to be seen if Tesla investors' huge risk pays off but I have no doubt that the car will be very good.

BoatMad

Getting back on topic somewhat there is no doubt that Tesla is a major disruptor to the cosy cartel auto manufacturers have operated in for decades. Their whole business model is different. They sell directly through their own network instead of a traditional dealership operation. They do their own repairs of which their stated aim is to make no profit on repairs thus incentivising them to make the cars as reliable as possible. Contrast this to the traditional manufacturers and dealerships who rely on the profits they make on parts and repairs. Then we have the constant over the air software updates making their cars better over time instead of worse. Add in the supercharging network for fuelling their own cars and there can be absolutely no doubt Tesla's presence in the market is a major disruptive influence for the auto manufacturers, the traditional auto dealerships, the motor parts and repair industry and the oil industry.

selling a high end 100K plus EV to a select number of small customers, is one thing , and Teslas model has worked well. There are serious commentators that suggest this model will not work with a mass market medium priced car.

For example are you suggesting that people in Killarney will be expected to journey to Sandyford ( and the horrendous traffic around it ) and like it . I suspect not.

Teslas is not a disrupter Yet. It hasn't actually disrupted anything , because it has being playing in a very niche field , its a tiny producer of cars in the grand scheme of things

Add in the supercharging network for fuelling their own cars and there can be absolutely

Other car companies are planning the same , and with the model 3 Tesla is charging for this service . While its a different scale , Nissan for example in Ireland also installed and made available Free , a charger network for its Cars . Tesla was " forced ?" in the USA to install charge parks, because the states were in general not prepared to invest in state funded chargers, This is not the case in Europe and the Tesla superchargers are less of an advantage

Then we have the constant over the air software updates making their cars better over time instead of worse.

There are two opinions here , today software updates are often applied to modern cars during their annual services etc , equally many cars dont need software updates at all. But I agree in the future this technology will ripple down into most cars, Theres nothing innovative or new in it and its easily added to modern cars . Its a small feature in the scheme of things

BoatMad

Fireball14013 wrote: »

That's kinda my point. Even with Musk pouring massive amounts into a single outcome from a fresh start with no legacy hangovers, it took 15 years! Job well done though.
Regarding the self-driving, that's a different ball game entirely. The new E-Class has all the tech the Model S has (if not more) and Merc won't deliberately let it drive itself as much as Tesla do, they feel there's another few years dev in there for a much better outcome. 2020 they reckon. With recent developments in Lidar etc, I think they're right. Self-driving won't be a challenge for the established brands.
Electric only production will, but most will manage fine. There is much more innovation in the car world than the mainstream brands ever put on forecourts. Models with the largest margins are what gets pushed, and until that changes, they'll keep at it.
Interesting times ahead.

Tesla took 15 years , largely because , it didn't have the initial capital to go for broke with a mass market car, and it clearly did not have the engineering and production know how to do so either. ( nor a suitable factory )

None of these are issues for mainstream auto companies

VW and BMW and so on , are playing an " Apple " game, watching a market get established and then hoping to bring their engineering and production expertise into an "established" market . You only have to look at Nissans losses on the Leaf to see how the early adopters got burned.

But I agree with others , initially as is clear with the Ioniq, battery manufacturing capacity, in the near future , will be a defining issue. ( not raw materials ) This is compounded by the emergence of SolarPV , powerwall markets as well

BoatMad

The new E-Class has all the tech the Model S has (if not more) and Merc won't deliberately let it drive itself as much as Tesla do, they feel there's another few years dev in there for a much better outcome. 2020 they reckon. With recent developments in Lidar etc, I think they're right. Self-driving won't be a challenge for the established brands.

Indeed , I have read that most tech insiders feel that Mercs driver automation is considerably ahead of Teslas, even if Merc is more reluctant to let it out of the lab then Tesla

BoatMad

samih wrote: »

True, but the leap in technology between Roadster and S is massive. It's like a difference between an airfix kit plane and a Boeing 777.

from a battery and drive train issue not so much though , the lineage is clear and is clearly iterative

eeguy

BoatMad wrote: »

selling a high end 100K plus EV to a select number of small customers, is one thing , and Teslas model has worked well. There are serious commentators that suggest this model will not work with a mass market medium priced car.

400k preorders would disagree with these serious commentators. Has there been a car in history with this sort of impact?

BoatMad wrote: »

For example are you suggesting that people in Killarney will be expected to journey to Sandyford ( and the horrendous traffic around it ) and like it . I suspect not.

Seriously? People from Killarney have been travelling to Croke Park for almost yearly and loving it. Taking one or two trips to Sandyford to spend 30 - 100k isn't an issue at all.

BoatMad wrote: »

Teslas is not a disrupter Yet. It hasn't actually disrupted anything , because it has being playing in a very niche field , its a tiny producer of cars in the grand scheme of things

Yeah, niche.
Not like its the most highly valued car company in the US.
Not like BMW directly targetted Tesla in an ad campaign.
Not like their cars are hugely sought after.
Not like they're creating an entire ecosystem of solar panel, wall battery and car.
Niche :rolleyes:

BoatMad

eeguy wrote: »

400k preorders would disagree with these serious commentators. Has there been a car in history with this sort of impact?

Ford sold 500,000 Mustangs ( and built them ) in the first year of its launch ( tesla may take up to 3 years to actually deliver this amount !!!)

500,000 autos is a drop in the ocean to car companies , Wolfburgs produces a Golf every 3 secs ( i know I , did some of the original robots )

Seriously? People from Killarney have been travelling to Croke Park for almost yearly and loving it. Taking one or two trips to Sandyford to spend 30 - 100k isn't an issue at all.

Not to buy it, I was saying to service it . would a cork BMW driver expect to drive to sandyford to just service a 3 series , like hell he would

Yeah, niche.
Not like its the most highly valued car company in the US.

Yet Goldman Sachs has a sell recommendation !!!

Not like BMW directly targetted Tesla in an ad campaign.
Not like their cars are hugely sought after.

well they only make a few each year , the Leaf is the worldwide leader in numbers

Not like they're creating an entire ecosystem of solar panel, wall battery and car.
Niche :rolleyes:

Nissan releasing a powerwall type solution this year as are several other manufactures , many companies powering up panel and battery solutions ( I had coffee with one last week ) , nothing new here , move along Tesla

grogi

BoatMad wrote: »

Yet Goldman Sachs has a sell recommendation !!!

It is getting into public head that Tesla valuation is just ridiculous, the bubble must burst at some stage...

One doesn't want to get out of the position too early because will lose. But the moment someone big decides to get out, everyone else will get out ASAP.

eeguy

BoatMad wrote: »

Ford sold 500,000 Mustangs ( and built them ) in the first year of its launch ( tesla may take up to 3 years to actually deliver this amount !!!)

Yes, but they didn't have 400k preorders.
And they were an established automaker with a half dozen manufacturing plants building on long established technology.

BoatMad wrote: »

500,000 autos is a drop in the ocean to car companies , Wolfburgs produces a Golf every 3 secs ( i know I , did some of the original robots )

Another apples to oranges comparison. Golfs have been made for 50 years and VAG is the largest automaker in the world.

BoatMad wrote: »

Not to buy it, I was saying to service it . would a cork BMW driver expect to drive to sandyford to just service a 3 series , like hell he would

Tesla provide outcall servicing for people who live far from a centre.
Also Tesla as a brand only launched in Ireland with the opening of the Sandyford centre last month. No doubt there'll be more in the coming months and years.

BoatMad wrote: »

Nissan releasing a powerwall type solution this year as are several other manufactures , many companies powering up panel and battery solutions ( I had coffee with one last week ) , nothing new here , move along Tesla

Again, you're confusing innovation with invention.