dspp wrote:Howard wrote:dspp wrote:
I can see you've never been up close & personal with the costs associated with NRE for conventional instrumentation, or the BoM costs, or the production assembly costs. And these offer no ability to deliver OTA updates. And these lock a manufacturer/designer into a short model life between (costly) design refreshes. And which lock the designer/manufacturer into a pre-existing industry supply chain & cost-base which they are intent on disrupting.
There is a reason that Tesla are doing it their way. In all respects, including the other ones you airily wave your hands at. It may be that Tesla are wrong, but they sure as heck are giving it a cracking good go, much to the envy of all the other automotive OEMs out there.
- dspp
I think you are missing the point. Just the use of all your TLAs indicates you are approaching Tesla as an engineer who isn't in touch with a large and affluent consumer market. Your point would be made better if you explained yourself in plain English (or American
).
Achieving a better and more practical look to the interior of a Model 3 can't be that hard, other manufactures excel at these things and they make a huge difference to customers.
And making Tesla more environmentally friendly wouldn't be too difficult surely?
regards
Howard
Nope. I am explaining this from the perspective of an engineering economist or technology strategist, both of which are far more relevant to the matter at hand than waffling about wine in California. And I am using nothing other than very standard TLAs.
Experiencing a Tesla for the first time is like your first encounter with Ikea furniture if you were in the 70s, or your first encounter with an Apple computer in the 90s, or with an Apple/Android smartphone in the 00s. Pretty soon you start to wonder why the old stuff didn't get ditched faster.
regards, dspp
Be fair, dspp, unless I'm mistaken you are happy to drive an old economy car or a basic rental car. Have you owned or regularly driven a new 40-70k car?
The display on a modern luxury car is much more flexible than a Tesla. And a delight to use compared with basic touchscreens.
For example today, I was able to enter my destination over a coffee in my study, this was ready for me when I got in the car (no phone required). However, I could have entered it by writing on the rotary control, using the rotating selector, talking to the SatNav, using the car's connection to the internet or the touchscreen.
When driving, a touchscreen is not ideal as it is difficult to use it without taking one's eyes off the road and if the road isn't smooth it's easy to touch the wrong digit. That's when a rotary control is far superior.
My screen gives me every bit of information I require, for example the weather on route, communications and media details, a map of the route easily enlarged with a rotary control (or the touchscreen when it is safe to do so). Details of the next junction ahead are enlarged on a separate display straight in front of me. And any other information I regularly require like range is easily seen without looking down. And, of course, the car's systems are always in touch with the internet so, without using my phone, I can find a local restaurant, hotel, castle, public loo
etc without much hassle.
I guess from your dismissive comment that you don't have much time for people who enjoy a nice glass of wine or a quality car
. Tesla have to sell to people like that.
Engineering economists and technology strategists need to understand Marketing and Customer Service issues as well as technology to prosper. When I was a director of a medium-sized manufacturing company I worked alongside a few but they weren''t the type of customer Tesla needs to cultivate.
We'll see. I wouldn't be surprised to find that Tesla add some extra controls to the Model 3 or the Model Y in due course. Then we'll know who is right about what they need to do to get on the next stage of becoming a serious (and high-tech) car manufacturer. Using your analogy let's hope they are not a Nokia.
regards
Howard