I hate driving (specifically in the city), but I am fascinated by the next generation of Apple's CarPlay, which I recently wrote about, here.
One of the reasons why I'm fascinated is because so much of our built environment is built around the car. And since the built environment tends to be very sticky, I think one can safely assume that -- for better or for worse, it's actually worse -- we're going to need a lot of cars for the foreseeable future.
According to Apple, 98% of new cars in the US come with CarPlay already installed. So, all cars. And the obvious reason for this is that many or most people want it. According to this survey, about 1/3 of new car buyers say that they wouldn't buy a new car if it didn't have Apple CarPlay or Android Auto.
I hate driving (specifically in the city), but I am fascinated by the next generation of Apple's CarPlay, which I recently wrote about, here.
One of the reasons why I'm fascinated is because so much of our built environment is built around the car. And since the built environment tends to be very sticky, I think one can safely assume that -- for better or for worse, it's actually worse -- we're going to need a lot of cars for the foreseeable future.
According to Apple, 98% of new cars in the US come with CarPlay already installed. So, all cars. And the obvious reason for this is that many or most people want it. According to this survey, about 1/3 of new car buyers say that they wouldn't buy a new car if it didn't have Apple CarPlay or Android Auto.
Apple believes this number is much higher at
79% of US buyers
. I don't know what the right number is, but I do believe the number is substantial and probably closer to Apple's than the 1/3 figure. I certainly wouldn't buy a new car without CarPlay.
The result is a suboptimal situation for carmakers. Apple is still going to do whatever it takes to make carmakers want to use CarPlay. My recent post was largely about the design efforts that they have undertaken. But in the end, I'm not sure the auto industry has much of a choice.
There's likely no way they're going to be able to compete with Apple (and Alphabet) from a software perspective and, in the end, consumers are going to want whatever pairs perfectly with their existing phone, since that's where their entire life already lives.
No wonder Apple killed their car project. They can just use everyone else's cars. Even if this is a departure from their typical approach of controlling both the hardware and software.
The US Department of Transportation has just finalized a new vehicle safety standard that will require all light-duty vehicles to be equipped with a more advanced form of automatic emergency braking (AEB) by 2029. (Light-duty vehicle = pretty much all passenger vehicles, including SUVs and trucks.)
Now, most light-duty vehicles on the road today already have some form of emergency braking. What's noteworthy about this ruling is that it requires a more robust version. Some might say one that works. Specifically, it will need to work at much higher speeds and at night.
Most of the AEB systems in operation today don't really work at night -- basically at all -- and many have shown to be ineffective when it comes to stopping for humans.
This new standard will require vehicles to automatically brake at up to 90 mph when a possible collision with a car is detected and up to 45 mph when a possible collision with a pedestrian is detected.
This seems like a very good thing, especially given the persistent problem we are having with cars killing too many people. But how do we do it?
From what I have read, this new standard will be pretty challenging to meet without the use of long-range LiDAR, especially since night vision is a requirement. I find this interesting because, even though autonomy is taking a lot longer to arrive than most people anticipated, there's still meaningful progress being made.
Last week we spoke about parking space dimensions. And my point was that these dimensions can dramatically change parking designs in new developments. In the comment section of this post, you'll now find a number of examples of how these dimensions vary by city.
But the reality is that cars do keep getting bigger -- at least in this part of the world. In the 1970s, SUVs and trucks made up less than a quarter of new car sales in the US. Today, this number is greater than 80%. It has become the standard kind of car.
So this week, let's touch on why this has happened.
79% of US buyers
. I don't know what the right number is, but I do believe the number is substantial and probably closer to Apple's than the 1/3 figure. I certainly wouldn't buy a new car without CarPlay.
The result is a suboptimal situation for carmakers. Apple is still going to do whatever it takes to make carmakers want to use CarPlay. My recent post was largely about the design efforts that they have undertaken. But in the end, I'm not sure the auto industry has much of a choice.
There's likely no way they're going to be able to compete with Apple (and Alphabet) from a software perspective and, in the end, consumers are going to want whatever pairs perfectly with their existing phone, since that's where their entire life already lives.
No wonder Apple killed their car project. They can just use everyone else's cars. Even if this is a departure from their typical approach of controlling both the hardware and software.
The US Department of Transportation has just finalized a new vehicle safety standard that will require all light-duty vehicles to be equipped with a more advanced form of automatic emergency braking (AEB) by 2029. (Light-duty vehicle = pretty much all passenger vehicles, including SUVs and trucks.)
Now, most light-duty vehicles on the road today already have some form of emergency braking. What's noteworthy about this ruling is that it requires a more robust version. Some might say one that works. Specifically, it will need to work at much higher speeds and at night.
Most of the AEB systems in operation today don't really work at night -- basically at all -- and many have shown to be ineffective when it comes to stopping for humans.
This new standard will require vehicles to automatically brake at up to 90 mph when a possible collision with a car is detected and up to 45 mph when a possible collision with a pedestrian is detected.
This seems like a very good thing, especially given the persistent problem we are having with cars killing too many people. But how do we do it?
From what I have read, this new standard will be pretty challenging to meet without the use of long-range LiDAR, especially since night vision is a requirement. I find this interesting because, even though autonomy is taking a lot longer to arrive than most people anticipated, there's still meaningful progress being made.
Last week we spoke about parking space dimensions. And my point was that these dimensions can dramatically change parking designs in new developments. In the comment section of this post, you'll now find a number of examples of how these dimensions vary by city.
But the reality is that cars do keep getting bigger -- at least in this part of the world. In the 1970s, SUVs and trucks made up less than a quarter of new car sales in the US. Today, this number is greater than 80%. It has become the standard kind of car.
So this week, let's touch on why this has happened.
One argument might be that this was just what consumers inherently wanted. But there's lots of evidence to suggest that this wasn't really the case; it was instead encouraged by government policy.
One specific example is the creation of Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards (also known as CAFE). This was first introduced in the 1970s, but importantly, it was done with two different fuel economy standards: one for cars and one for light trucks.
Since the light truck standard was less onerous (see above chart), this created a strong incentive for car makers to just make and sell more light trucks. And curiously enough, that's exactly what they did.
One argument might be that this was just what consumers inherently wanted. But there's lots of evidence to suggest that this wasn't really the case; it was instead encouraged by government policy.
One specific example is the creation of Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards (also known as CAFE). This was first introduced in the 1970s, but importantly, it was done with two different fuel economy standards: one for cars and one for light trucks.
Since the light truck standard was less onerous (see above chart), this created a strong incentive for car makers to just make and sell more light trucks. And curiously enough, that's exactly what they did.
