Slashdot Mirror


Apple Signs Deal With Volkswagen For Driverless Cars (nytimes.com)

Apple has reportedly signed a deal with Volkswagen (Warning: source may be paywalled; alternative source) to turn some of the carmaker's new T6 Transporter vans into Apple's self-driving shuttles for employees. The deal comes after the tech giant failed to partner with luxury carmakers BMW and Mercedes-Benz to develop an all-electric self-driving car. "[T]talks with those companies have ended after each rebuffed Apple's requirements to hand over control of the data and design," reports The New York Times. From the report: Apple's deal with Volkswagen, which hasn't been previously reported, and the failure of its talks with other automakers reflect the continuing travails and diminished scope of the company's four-year-old car program. The project has suffered from repeated changes in direction that have hurt morale and led to hundreds of departures from its peak of more than 1,000 members two years ago, five former Apple employees said. They added that the team was now mostly consumed with developing the self-driving shuttle but the project lacks a clear plan beyond the vans.

69 comments

  1. Driverless, really? by mark-t · · Score: 1

    Or do they really mean self-driving, but not really because you can't actually trust it enough to drive itself?

    Or we talking about cars in some sort of nonphysical reality that doesn't need to worry about things like pedestrians, other traffic, or concrete barricades?

    1. Re:Driverless, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would trust driverless trains running underground in tunnels transporting dead goods.

    2. Re:Driverless, really? by rtb61 · · Score: 0

      Projected pattern analysis with additional light inputs makes robotic vehicles possible. Projecting a pattern onto the surrounds using the invisible to us light spectrum, allows computers to analyse the three dimensional surface around them and analyse it, see it and react to it. A pattern has a set appearance when projected on a flat surface at a set distance, as the distance increases or decreases so the pattern changes size. As the surface changes from flat relatively to the projection point, to tilted so the pattern shape distorts. The detail, would be defined by the detail of the pattern and it's projection area, as well as the detail of the image capture device and processing power, how many frames a second can be processed and for additional detail, how the patterns alters as it moves across a surface. As the computer searches out it's three dimensional space, it takes a broader view or more tightly focuses in on objects for detail. Then of course you have stereoscopic patterns, more than one pattern in different frequencies, through two image capture systems for much greater three dimensional environment capture. You will need to digitise the projection, to set projection pulses, so that you can pick out your projection from other devices projecting at their variable digitised pulse rate. This method has limits in ranges but for robotic vehicles the distance where accurate 3d models can be built is sufficient, by adjusting projection, focus and focal point more detail can be obtained at a distance at the expense of local awareness, requiring multiple systems, some fixed at say the four corners and probably four longer range units scanning above them.

      For those who want to use them in drones to target women and children like Google, add in additional infrared scan to make sure you are in fact killing women and children and not targeting 3d dummies. I bet the Google execs are counting the patent fees per kill already, doing coke and abusing their SJW pets, evil is as evil does.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    3. Re:Driverless, really? by aberglas · · Score: 1

      Don't even need to project anything. Just use two (or more) optical cameras and do stereo vision with them. Requires a bit of intelligence to match up the images, but the rest is just trig.

      As to pedestrians, provided they are carrying an iPhone then it can tell the car where they are. And if they are not carrying an iPhone, not a problem.

    4. Re:Driverless, really? by scottrocket · · Score: 1

      Don't even need to project anything. Just use two (or more) optical cameras and do stereo vision with them. Requires a bit of intelligence to match up the images, but the rest is just trig.

      As to pedestrians, provided they are carrying an iPhone then it can tell the car where they are. And if they are not carrying an iPhone, not a problem.

      ...and if they are Androidians, just run them over?

    5. Re:Driverless, really? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      As to pedestrians, provided they are carrying an iPhone then it can tell the car where they are. And if they are not carrying an iPhone, not a problem.

      ...and if they are Androidians, just run them over?

      Just so. A win-win for Apple....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    6. Re:Driverless, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That could have been a great comment, but you couldn't help yourself and had to go with the SJW outburst. Now an awful lot of people just think you're a jerk and probably disregarded everything else you said.

    7. Re: Driverless, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your shut off at the sight of the word SJW is the cause of polarization in politics today, not the solution.

    8. Re:Driverless, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure if your a apple worshiping cultist idiot or just a regular idiot.

    9. Re:Driverless, really? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      You do not understand the nature of colour, patterns and shadowing, variabilities of light et al. Eliminate variables and you simplify the problem, down to something than can be calculated many times a second. If it was so easy, the US military, who only get third raters now, would not be running Google and Google would have already solved it but it seems they are struggling. Reality is, this is the best way to let computers to be able to see in 3D. Even facial recognition is hugely changed because you can create an accurate 3 dimensional model of a person face in seconds, to compare with records, as the head moves so the 3d model is improved. PS the simplest pattern to use is a spiral, spin it for greater detail, but there are reasons why a spiral works really well and the simplest motion is to spin that spiral and using frequencies we can not see means, we see nothing whilst the computer now sees in 3D.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    10. Re:Driverless, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do not think you understand passive stereo vision. Image understanding is indeed difficult, but for stereo you only need to match features up in the two (or ideally three) images, looking particularly for edges. So colour, shading etc. are not the issue. What is an issue is that if the cameras are too far apart, the images will be different, e.g. different sides of an object, so you want a few different cameras.

      Active vision systems have problem in bright sunlight, or at significant distances, or with interference from other active systems, and of course any mist or fog kills them. Lidar has similar restrictions as well as being expensive.

      But passive systems have worked well for decades and I am surprised they are not more used. It does require some computational grunt, but that is no longer a problem.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_stereo_vision

  2. Just like the days of old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Days of old... "Do not connect that piece of shit apple to my network..."

    Present day... "Keep that piece of shit car off my highway..."

    1. Re:Just like the days of old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, this is just typical Apple:

      Apple: We are Apple, and you obey. Here is the terms of our deal, you are required to accept it, and we will not negotiate.
      Car makers: Why don't you go outside and play hide and go fuck yourself?

      I laugh a bit inside every time I hear this refrain. Apple has done this same thing a few times before and only works when the takeover target is in a nascent industry. They always wonder why it fails when they attempt it on bigger players in well established industries. Even though they found at least one sucker this time, I still consider it a failure because VW is known for their shit cars, and they're still in shit creek over the emissions scandal (they're paying a great deal of money to rent big lots to put those millions of cars that they haven't quite figured what to do with, as well as pay people to keep every car in those lots clean every day. VW probably just agreed with this hoping that they can repair their already bad (even before the scandal) image by associating with a company who is nothing but image.

      captcha: retail

    2. Re:Just like the days of old... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

      Volkswagen must be desperate if they are doing deals with Apple. I guess they need to catch up fast.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Just like the days of old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Im sure apple has worked out the code to throttle the engine when the emissions get too high.

    4. Re:Just like the days of old... by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      Sounds like, from the body of the article, that Apple is mostly a customer in this deal. States they don't have any deal beyond the transit buses, and sounds like the plan is just to run them around the Apple campus. So no need to worry about data sharing... if Apple is mostly just using VW buses for testing.

    5. Re:Just like the days of old... by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      States they don't have any deal beyond the transit buses, and sounds like the plan is just to run them around the Apple campus. So no need to worry about data sharing.

      ... just to run them around the Apple campus ... FTTB, but this is likely the start of something much wider. And I don't think the data sharing is the main worry here, it is cars crashing into concrete barriers in full daylight.

    6. Re:Just like the days of old... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      You know that VW is the second largest auto maker in the world, right?

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    7. Re:Just like the days of old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? Apple are asking someone to produce a product for them, are Samsung or any of other other companies that produce components or even full devices for Apple desperate for doing so?

    8. Re:Just like the days of old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The VW group, owning Volkswagen and ~10 other vehicle brands, is far from desperate and had 230 billion EUR revenue last year.
      In 2016 under the Volkswagen brand itself, they made 106 billion EUR revenue.

      Although the 'dieselgate' scandal and so on is/was much in the news, people are (still) buying VW cars like crazy.
      The wait for the new Polo is 8 months in Europe, somewhat less on the (older release) Tiguan and Golf 7.5.
      Once the Golf 8 is out, do you care to bet on how many they will sell?

      -- AC

    9. Re:Just like the days of old... by mrclevesque · · Score: 1

      "sounds like the plan is just to run them around the Apple campus."

      I'm guessing it'll probably run at very low speed along a programmed path and have big red stop buttons the passengers can press in case of an emergency.

    10. Re:Just like the days of old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lets hope those big red stop buttons use apple amazing new butterfly switch designs.

    11. Re:Just like the days of old... by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      Im sure apple has worked out the code to throttle the engine when the emissions get too high.

      Errm, yeah, emissions on an electric car. If you are smoking something - I'm sure you are. Is that's what you are worried about? That your car will not actually self drive when you need that the most? When you are stoned so much you can't sit without falling over (not that you would notice because you are floating)?

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    12. Re: Just like the days of old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Catch up fast? Waymo is way ahead in this technology.

  3. They should buy Tesla by ugen · · Score: 1

    EOM

  4. Volkswagen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since it's VW involved at least we know all the results of testing will be super-duper awesome.

  5. Bit of a blow to Apple's self image by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bit of a blow to Apple's self image,

    Turns out Apple isn't actually a luxury brand. Too many plebes own an iDevice.
    and BMW and Mercedes-Benz are happy to let them know.

    1. Re: Bit of a blow to Apple's self image by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Apple could buy either of them for cash though.

    2. Re: Bit of a blow to Apple's self image by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      apple is too greedy for that. I hear the are saving their money for a thermonuclear war against Android.

    3. Re:Bit of a blow to Apple's self image by nukenerd · · Score: 0

      Bit of a blow to Apple's self image,

      Not at all, it makes sense. VW are 4 out of the top 10 gay cars, with the VW Jetta in top place :-

      https://roygbiv.jezebel.com/th...

    4. Re:Bit of a blow to Apple's self image by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      Down-modded LoL! - someone must own a Jetta

    5. Re:Bit of a blow to Apple's self image by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

      What's in it for Mercedes/BWM to deliver a small number of cars and earn some peanuts for customization?

      If it becomes a fiasco (most likely) they get a PR hit. If it succeeds (hah) Apple licenses it to everyone any way. Only way this really makes much sense is as a joint venture. Otherwise Apple should just buy the cars and modify them themselves.

    6. Re:Bit of a blow to Apple's self image by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because VW doesn't own any luxury badges (Porsche, Lamborghini, Audi, Bentley, Bugatti)

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    7. Re:Bit of a blow to Apple's self image by mjwx · · Score: 1

      What's in it for Mercedes/BWM to deliver a small number of cars and earn some peanuts for customization?

      If it becomes a fiasco (most likely) they get a PR hit. If it succeeds (hah) Apple licenses it to everyone any way. Only way this really makes much sense is as a joint venture. Otherwise Apple should just buy the cars and modify them themselves.

      Worse yet, Merc/BMW risk brand dilution by partnering with Apple. I'm not surprised that Stuttgart gave them the cold shoulder, what have they got to gain compared to what they have to lose.

      This wont be popular, but Apple pretty much are the Volkswagen of the computing/communications world. They produce mediocre stuff and pretend its superior even though people on benefits can buy it, they even try to pass themselves off as a premium brand to try to justify higher prices when the difference between a Polo and a (Ford) Fiesta is nil and often trade entirely on past glories.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    8. Re:Bit of a blow to Apple's self image by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      Bit of a blow to Apple's self image,

      Turns out Apple isn't actually a luxury brand.

      More like a blow to the blowhards who keep claiming Apple is a luxury brand.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    9. Re:Bit of a blow to Apple's self image by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      What's in it for Mercedes/BWM to deliver a small number of cars and earn some peanuts for customization?

      If it becomes a fiasco (most likely) they get a PR hit. If it succeeds (hah) Apple licenses it to everyone any way. Only way this really makes much sense is as a joint venture. Otherwise Apple should just buy the cars and modify them themselves.

      Worse yet, Merc/BMW risk brand dilution by partnering with Apple. I'm not surprised that Stuttgart gave them the cold shoulder, what have they got to gain compared to what they have to lose.

      Funny that the guys who own Bentley, Bugatti and Lamborghini aren't scared. Note how I don't even mention Porsche?

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    10. Re:Bit of a blow to Apple's self image by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VWs may be more expensive than Fords with similar equipment levels, but they last longer and they stay nice much longer. There is a reason old Fiestas and Focuses go to the junkyard while old Polos and Golfs go to Eastern Europe...

  6. Eco-freindly by thadtheman · · Score: 1

    On the bright side [1] all the new white cars will reflect a lot of sunlight reducing global warming.

    [1] Considering all the new reflected sunlight, a really bright side.

    1. Re:Eco-freindly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AppleDieselGate, in the headlines 2027. Well, their "deal" puts VW and ALL their offspring makes OFF of my shopping list, permanently.

    2. Re:Eco-freindly by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      AppleDieselGate, in the headlines 2027.

      Only if an idiot like you adds a roll coal device to an electric car, you moron.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    3. Re:Eco-freindly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Woah ; triggered apple apologist much?

  7. What is old is new again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The project has suffered from repeated changes in direction that have hurt morale and led to hundreds of departures from its peak of more than 1,000 members two years ago, five former Apple employees said. They added that the team was now mostly consumed with developing the self-driving shuttle but the project lacks a clear plan beyond the vans."

    This is reminiscent of the state of affairs at Apple when it was developing the Apple /// to succeed the Apple ][ and, meanwhile, Lisa was being developed. The technology (in this case, self-driving car tech) is floating around, in various forms, but there doesn't seem to be a modern day Steve Jobs to form a "Macintosh" group that could steal from both and operate "under the radar."

    1. Re:What is old is new again by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      "The project has suffered from repeated changes in direction

      Did they mean that literally? Sounds like when a kid first rides a bike.

  8. They'll invent the by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    FarfegNewton

  9. Re:dealer only service even an DIY oil change void by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act basically says "nope". You can get it serviced with non-OEM parts, and by non-dealer/OEM staff, and not void your warranty.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  10. Re:dealer only service even an DIY oil change void by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1
  11. Most cars by PixetaledPikachu · · Score: 1

    Most cars are sold driverless to the customers

  12. Re:dealer only service even an DIY oil change void by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    Yep. Apple is clearly violating the Act, but hey - laws are for the little people and small companies, not Apple! Apple cannot refuse service to a phone repaired with 3rd party parts/3rd party service unless they can prove subsequent damage was from the 3rd party parts or service.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  13. VW Bug by HeckRuler · · Score: 1, Funny

    I honestly thought they already had a deal with each other for the looky feely of the iphone and the VW bug.

  14. Cars that crash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And then lie about it.

    1. Re:Cars that crash! by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      And then lie about it.

      Why mention Google in this debate?

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    2. Re:Cars that crash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can buy those from Tesla already.

  15. You are by AHuxley · · Score: 0

    sitting in the car in the wrong way.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  16. Ah, a matchup for the ages... by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

    "You're holding it wrong" meets “defeat devices” ... what could go wrong?

    It could even best the Uber-Volvo pairing -- "safest cars in the world" meets "remove the pesky safety stuff".

    1. Re:Ah, a matchup for the ages... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder who apple will blame when their driverless cars crash; the passenger?

    2. Re:Ah, a matchup for the ages... by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      I wonder who apple will blame when their driverless cars crash; the passenger?

      Well, not the press like Musk does.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  17. More a sign of weakness than strength by Bearhouse · · Score: 2

    The "dieselgate" scandal was (and in some way still is) a huge thing for VW; it really hurt them financially and reputation-wise.
    (Somehow the other car manufacturers - who all gamed the system but in a somewhat less blatantly criminal fashion - managed to escape).

    Since everyone else has given a stout "fuck off" to Apple, and their own vehicle development program is in the tank, then this leaves this unlikely alliance of the "weak", (note: both companies have enormous capabilities & resources, and lots of cash).

    However, both companies also have strong, and strongly-different, cultures, big egos in management and complex behind-the-scenes politics; this won't go anywhere....

  18. Likely blunder by schure · · Score: 1

    Reminds a lot of that one time when Nokia signed an contact with Microsoft to build Windows phones and ended up almost dead. Will Volkswagen be the next Nokia?

    1. Re:Likely blunder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Nokia was pretty much dead when it signed that contract.

    2. Re:Likely blunder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see the parallel. Apple is essentially only buying a number of vans and putting their equipment and software in them. VW doesn't seem to be planning using Apple's software in their own self-driving cars.

  19. The elephant in the room by bjdevil66 · · Score: 2

    Would you climb into a self-driving car that's programmed by a company that cheated with their programming on EPA standards to make more money? I wouldn't either...

    Unlike BMW and Mercedes, VW is willing to take a bath on the draconian contract terms that Apple is clearly expecting any partner on this project to take. And they're hoping that Apple can give them back the tech cachet they need.

    1. Re:The elephant in the room by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you climb into a self-driving car that's programmed by a company that coded siri. Hell NO WAY.

    2. Re:The elephant in the room by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you climb into a self-driving car that's programmed by a company that cheated with their programming on EPA standards to make more money? I wouldn't either...

      That requirement eleminates more or less every company that has sold cars or trucks in the United States in the past few decades.

      Unlike BMW and Mercedes, VW is willing to take a bath on the draconian contract terms that Apple is clearly expecting any partner on this project to take. And they're hoping that Apple can give them back the tech cachet they need.

      VW isn't exactly known for being an easy negotiation partner and Apple needs VW, not the other way around. From what I gather, Apple is simply buying a few custom-spec vans and adding their own equipment. Unless they are paying below cost or want licences to use VW technology on their own, I don't think there is a way to have draconian terms in such an arrangement.

  20. Why make a deal with a shitty company like VW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come on Apple. You're better than this. They can't even cut ties with Diesel after having execs imprisoned. Sorry, no second chance is in order here, they need to dig themselves out of the whole all on their own. There are plenty of companies looking into driverless tech. Pick any other horse.

    1. Re:Why make a deal with a shitty company like VW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on Apple. You're better than this. They can't even cut ties with Diesel after having execs imprisoned

      Why would a car company want to 'cut ties' with a technology that powers a significant fraction of passenger cars and almost all vans and trucks?

  21. only for their campus! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Teenager Signs Deal With John Deere" - he bought one lawnmower to use on his own street - that kind of non-news

  22. Re:dealer only service even an DIY oil change void by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

    dealer only service even an DIY oil change voids your warranty and right to get an other service or parts for the car.

    Well, if you do DIY oil change on an electric car, you've already proven you are an idiot.

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  23. Re:dealer only service even an DIY oil change void by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...in the US. Legislation elsewhere is much more sane.