because they saw it as the only way to get developers and apps for the Windows Phone OS. The reason for that is because without a phone presence of sufficient size they'd slowly lose not only the tablet market but also more and more of the desktop. Unlike any other company, Microsoft is 100% reliant on one product, the desktop computer. Sure they make over 30% of their profits from the server but without the server being tied at the hip with the Windows desktop, and visa-versa, they would lose all control of that market and quickly become just another player and lose billions in profits annually.
All this Windows 8 desktop UI change is about forcing, via still owning pre-loading channels, a new API platform on millions so they can market to developers to get on board those APIs and make applications which will also run on the Windows Phone phones and Windows based tablets. It is still all about developers, developers, developers as Monkey Boy once ranted in public.
they didn't release to PalmOS but eventually bought the market by paying companies to ship WindowsCE based PDAs. This is really out of character for Microsoft but then again, they have tried how many times with a Windows Phone and a Windows Tablet and failed? Apple's design and costs are going to be tough for Microsoft to break into and Android's utilitarian capabilities and existing market share also very tough to break into.
But you know, Microsoft once supported running Windows apps on UNIX until NT gained enough market share and many major UNIX apps were ported. Then they yanked the rug out from under it and vendors were left with having to spend millions porting back to UNIX or stick with a Windows-only code base.
What has surprised me more is how many XBox ads I see compared to Windows 8 ads. It seems to be at least 2:1 ratio. I guess they are doubling down on the one thing which seems to finally be showing growth and profit growth. I mean if Windows 8 fails and the PC segment keeps shrinking, they'll need something to pick up and replace those lost revenues or the stock will collapse. IMO
Microsoft declared the Windows 95 user interface some great research project where it was determined to be the best UI since sliced bread. Forget that they attempted to include even a small portion of the UI elements in the IBM OS/2 UI called the Workplaceshell but had to back them out because of performance issues. Vista was said to be the same, 'research said' or 'users asked for' blah blah blah. And so world and his dog have hammered through using that UI for going on 2 decades.
So exactly how many years of experience with the XP UI has this 3 year old had? I'm sure the kid is also simulating workloads found in the typical office setup too.
These kinds of Microsoft promotions remind me of why I dislike election season too. Lots of ads with little validity all over the place.
Because developing software and playing games are what Benioff was talking about? I don't think so. So you mentioned fringe areas where the cloud isn't the answer. Microsoft and their Windows software business can not survive with just that market.
yes, Microsoft fooled them all into thinking they had an open system when in fact they were slowly being tied to a single software platform, a single vendor and now to some extent a single hardware definition. Exactly what the entire PC market rallied against in the beginning. Unfortunately those tied into this Microsoft world see all these ways to enable new use cases and computing models as hardships and their only solution is to bring them all back into one Microsoft way via things like VDI. VDI should be the exception and not the rule.
the only way I read any validity into what he said was in the context of also using remote computing. I know a few who got off the Microsoft Windows bandwagon and do just fine running virtual machines once in a while locally but do lots of their business work using remote connections into their Windows environments at the office. When BYOD means you have bluetooth input devices at the office or at home and these remote access mechanisms in place there's no need for a local Windows box.
Given the above scenario and the life expectancy of Windows 7, in 5+ years who thinks there won't be even more migrations away from Win32 tied apps to even more cloud based solutions? It does mean that there really would be little need for Windows 8.
Also remember, Microsoft forces their new OS on the retail channels( remember how Vista was forced when nobody wanted it? ) and likes to use those sales numbers showing how many shipped units of Windows X there was for the 1st and 2nd year on the market. Businesses don't buy these new releases so soon so those numbers were always mostly pre-loads at retail. Considering how much the Windows is slowing at the retail channels(notice how poorly OEMs are doing lately?) Microsoft is going to have to pull big numbers of shipped Windows 8 PCs out of their thin air. Not to mention it's not likely home buyers are going to swarm to Windows RT on tablets given they all are running Windows XP, Vista, or 7 now and already have Android or Apple products. I see them picking up a Windows RT device and going 'WTF is this, what else do you have?'.
And then there's the jumping on the Post-PC era bandwagon to help get the message across that things are changing and that's what cloud vendors call marketing.
right but don't lots of the same ISV APIs shared across phone, tablet and desktop now that Microsoft is pushing the UI formerly known as Metro, across all devices? That would mean the core OS is the same and so are a somewhat large chunk of the developer APIs and all that which is there to support it.
I'm thinking less like Android which really does use mostly the kernel and everything else is in the Dalvik JVM, and more like Meego. ie Android has little in common with desktop GNU/Linux while Meego had lots more in common.
If it really is just a Windows kernel/core and the APIs are so very different between the devices, I don't see why Microsoft would be pushing developers to Metro apps. Sure desktop Windows has all the included Win32 old stuff but we're talking the cross device stuff here.
I thought Windows was ported to ARM and all Windows 8 devices were now based on that ARM port( not the x86 version so much ). That is Windows Phone 8 and Windows 8 RT( tablets) both running the Windows 8 for ARM OS but with modified UI for the screen size and obvious APIs differences for what the device has/needs/uses like making phone calls. The fact that the Windows Phone 8 phones now have multi core support and added memory capabilities lead me to believe this was due to using the x86 ported Windows system to ARM.
So Windows Phone 8 is still a Windows CE based OS?
not really. The investors are getting pissed that not only has Microsoft's stock price been flat but they are seeing the world+dog getting excited about Apple products and Apple's stock is flying high. Microsoft is supposed to be this great innovator and market leader and the investors are finally realizing they are not and have not been and want Ballmer to step it up and show Microsoft is an innovator.
Microsoft has tried many different versions of the Windows based phone but are failing and again Apple along with Google are shutting Microsoft products down to single digit market share. The iPad really lit the fire under Ballmer too. Not only because the tablet segment is much closer to the PC segment than a small screen phone but also because Microsoft has been in this space many times and failed.
So Microsoft needs this to succeed and they are using a two pronged, or three pronged, approach with the phone and tablet segments merging app development and app stores. To some extent they also want the desktop to help in that ecosystem and is probably why they are forcing the Metro UI onto the desktop even if it ends up just being an initial launcher for the old Windows apps.
Ballmer's continued career at Microsoft likely hinges on Windows 8 being successful on _all_ these devices.
Microsoft can not run down prices and survive at the bottom in the tablet space. So they are "adding" features to make their tablets closer to the laptop/desktop feature set or should we say usability model. They will advertise their system runs an office application suite or parts of it and have desktop like capabilities. Apple can't really say this. Therefore you see why Microsoft is pricing their system up so high IMO.
will it fly? I doubt it but they are a great marketing company so we'll see.
IIRC, he said he'd cut the loopholes, etc but give them tax breaks so they pay the same as they have been paying.
I do doubt his ability to get his Party and/or any of the Democrats behind tax code reform such as cutting all the holes out. Only a flat tax will do that otherwise it's just more rules and more/new holes.
Talk about following his Party line. If he said rewriting the ethanol rules and re-evaluating it than sure but those current laws requiring ethanol mixtures in fuel have food based corn requirements. Clearly another farm subsidy.
as one of the comments on TFA site states, 700 jobs at even $50K each and just over 9% State tax is $3.5 million annually. So the State makes their money back just in direct employment taxes in about 3 years. Add to it the sales tax on the vehicles and all the money moving around by building them in CA and it seems like a no brainer considering Tesla has proven they can build good cars already.
netbooks using Intel chips and/or Microsoft software also had those limitations put on them. The difference is that netbooks started with GNU/Linux on them and the name was coined in the open. I should clarify something, those limitations were put on netbooks once Microsoft and Intel got their paws in on the market. Most likely they didn't want cheap hardware and software to eat into their profits and setting those limitations did a nice job at killing that market. Win for Microsoft and a win for Intel.
The tablet sector is yet another attack vector against these two but so much more entrenched with Apple's iPad and ARM hardware. But they are still trying very hard. IMO
and Steve Ballmers comments about the pricing would follow them going for the high end of the market. Don't forget, netbooks dragged Microsoft kicking and screaming into the low end 'laptop' market. Once they sweet talked OEMs into using Microsoft's old and even a limited version for extremely low licensing and including marketing packages which most likely eliminated the OS "expense" for the OEM...Microsoft came out with Windows 7 for netbooks and pretty much killed that cheap netbook market.
Free or very cheap software is not what Microsoft wants to promote and since the dominant market for tablets is that which the iPad define that's what Microsoft will target. A small tablet by Apple will not complicate the Windows 8 tablet segment because there is no overlap for users. To complicate it, someone would have to be opting for a Windows 8 tablet( >9" size ) at iPad pricing and then opt for a much smaller iPad Mini instead for not much less. For a second there I thought it was a C/net article and just more promotional buzz for Windows 8 tablets.
no shit sherlock, it's an opinion but then again all you seem to be able to do is oppose the statement and not the content. So, attacking the statement does not make it incorrect.
I've seen time and time again stock footage being used in the press( typically TV ) where they didn't have real footage or images of the area of topic. So when I heard a few weeks ago about the DNC using the Russian warship footage, I just wrote it off as being done by someone hired from the typical media outlets.
I am surprised someone with a military background didn't catch that unless it was first seen only during the event, ie not during any rehearsals or proofed.
they probably over stated how many people would be using their services( servers ) so they got tax breaks etc for putting the data center there with the understanding of how much they'd spend on things like energy. These "expenses" were calculated for how much revenue was put back into the community/State/etc.
So nobody is using BING and hotmail usage is going down so they are not using enough energy and get fined for not meeting their obligations. Make sense now?
the chargers and stations are probably pretty cheap and it's a fixed/onetime cost so not a big deal for them and the solar panels are probably paid for partially by marketing. As for the cost of electricity for charging, that's very cheap. If you figure even 15 cents per KWh then at 40-85 KWh charging it'd cost between $6-$12.75. Not really a big expense at all when it allows existing and prospective buyers of their cars to travel all over California and into Nevada without the need of a 2nd car.
what's not stated is that this system is grid-tied and that means there are no batteries needed to hold the solar charge. The electricity generated by the solar array puts electricity on the grid for others to use at the time of generation and the charger pulls power from the grid as needed, when needed.
I didn't see anywhere where it was stated these charging stations where powered only by solar. That was a leap others seemed to make by not knowing how the system works.
or it couldn't be the Toyota dealerships are fighting the electric car as is likely the US automaker dealerships are. And Toyota has a hybrid lineup which is soon to be 14 different models and retains the nice features the dealerships like, ie constant maintenance. They also have plugin hybrids which cross the pure EV and hybrid lines without having to try to change the publics mind about how viable EVs are.
While it may still be true that huge battery packs which get you 200+ miles on a charge and are very expensive, those super luxury EVs are not for everyone. But there are lots of people who could use an EV for their daily driving needs if they just opened their minds about how/what they really _needed_ and reasonably priced EVs were on the market.
BTW, back when GW Bush hoodwinked everyone into believing hydrogen cars would be everywhere while only million dollar prototypes remained available for years, then CA governator Schwarzenegger pledged millions to put in hydrogen fueling stations throughout CA. But EV charging stations are hugely less expensive yet, the cars are somewhat obtainable and real yet we have nothing. So I say great for Tesla for putting their money where their mouth is and showing how this can work.
why not this kind of rental system for standard hybrids so people with their own EV can use them for long trips or at any other time their EV isn't what they need? Like needing a full sized 5 passenger or even 6 passenger vehicle besides the long trip needs.
This would drop the price of the EV by enabling the dropping of the cost/size of the battery packs. There could be EVs for rent too and great idea on having a cleaning service tied in. With fully data connected vehicles the cleaning services could take the cars out of service for the 15 minutes or so of cleaning and the operator can tell the doors were opened/closed during those 15 minutes to possibly verify something like a cleaning occurred.
why not EVs with 100 mile range or less paired up with a rental car system for longer trips? Even provide charging stations at the rental company for your EV. Maybe it's even the EV dealership handling these rentals?
It's been researched and stated many times, most people drive less than 40 miles each way so the EV would do the trick except the occasional longer trips. Wouldn't it be great to have nice rental car to use for those other trips and it's as easy as swiping a credit card or membership card to pickup your rental?
Don't look to your standard ICE(Internal Combustion Engine) selling dealership to get involved in this because they don't want to sell EVs since they make tons of profit from servicing your vehicle's ICE and drive train. Doing tires and wiper fluid on EVs doesn't allow for many trips to the bank depositing profits.
It'll probably have to be companies like Tesla who kickstart programs like this. I just don't see the standard auto makers wanting this nor the government backing it with so much lobbyist money at stake.
Slashdot Mirror
because they saw it as the only way to get developers and apps for the Windows Phone OS. The reason for that is because without a phone presence of sufficient size they'd slowly lose not only the tablet market but also more and more of the desktop. Unlike any other company, Microsoft is 100% reliant on one product, the desktop computer. Sure they make over 30% of their profits from the server but without the server being tied at the hip with the Windows desktop, and visa-versa, they would lose all control of that market and quickly become just another player and lose billions in profits annually.
All this Windows 8 desktop UI change is about forcing, via still owning pre-loading channels, a new API platform on millions so they can market to developers to get on board those APIs and make applications which will also run on the Windows Phone phones and Windows based tablets. It is still all about developers, developers, developers as Monkey Boy once ranted in public.
LoB
they didn't release to PalmOS but eventually bought the market by paying companies to ship WindowsCE based PDAs. This is really out of character for Microsoft but then again, they have tried how many times with a Windows Phone and a Windows Tablet and failed? Apple's design and costs are going to be tough for Microsoft to break into and Android's utilitarian capabilities and existing market share also very tough to break into.
But you know, Microsoft once supported running Windows apps on UNIX until NT gained enough market share and many major UNIX apps were ported. Then they yanked the rug out from under it and vendors were left with having to spend millions porting back to UNIX or stick with a Windows-only code base.
What has surprised me more is how many XBox ads I see compared to Windows 8 ads. It seems to be at least 2:1 ratio. I guess they are doubling down on the one thing which seems to finally be showing growth and profit growth. I mean if Windows 8 fails and the PC segment keeps shrinking, they'll need something to pick up and replace those lost revenues or the stock will collapse. IMO
LoB
Microsoft declared the Windows 95 user interface some great research project where it was determined to be the best UI since sliced bread. Forget that they attempted to include even a small portion of the UI elements in the IBM OS/2 UI called the Workplaceshell but had to back them out because of performance issues. Vista was said to be the same, 'research said' or 'users asked for' blah blah blah. And so world and his dog have hammered through using that UI for going on 2 decades.
So exactly how many years of experience with the XP UI has this 3 year old had? I'm sure the kid is also simulating workloads found in the typical office setup too.
These kinds of Microsoft promotions remind me of why I dislike election season too. Lots of ads with little validity all over the place.
LoB
Because developing software and playing games are what Benioff was talking about? I don't think so. So you mentioned fringe areas where the cloud isn't the answer. Microsoft and their Windows software business can not survive with just that market.
LoB
yes, Microsoft fooled them all into thinking they had an open system when in fact they were slowly being tied to a single software platform, a single vendor and now to some extent a single hardware definition. Exactly what the entire PC market rallied against in the beginning. Unfortunately those tied into this Microsoft world see all these ways to enable new use cases and computing models as hardships and their only solution is to bring them all back into one Microsoft way via things like VDI. VDI should be the exception and not the rule.
LoB
the only way I read any validity into what he said was in the context of also using remote computing. I know a few who got off the Microsoft Windows bandwagon and do just fine running virtual machines once in a while locally but do lots of their business work using remote connections into their Windows environments at the office. When BYOD means you have bluetooth input devices at the office or at home and these remote access mechanisms in place there's no need for a local Windows box.
Given the above scenario and the life expectancy of Windows 7, in 5+ years who thinks there won't be even more migrations away from Win32 tied apps to even more cloud based solutions? It does mean that there really would be little need for Windows 8.
Also remember, Microsoft forces their new OS on the retail channels( remember how Vista was forced when nobody wanted it? ) and likes to use those sales numbers showing how many shipped units of Windows X there was for the 1st and 2nd year on the market. Businesses don't buy these new releases so soon so those numbers were always mostly pre-loads at retail. Considering how much the Windows is slowing at the retail channels(notice how poorly OEMs are doing lately?) Microsoft is going to have to pull big numbers of shipped Windows 8 PCs out of their thin air. Not to mention it's not likely home buyers are going to swarm to Windows RT on tablets given they all are running Windows XP, Vista, or 7 now and already have Android or Apple products. I see them picking up a Windows RT device and going 'WTF is this, what else do you have?'.
And then there's the jumping on the Post-PC era bandwagon to help get the message across that things are changing and that's what cloud vendors call marketing.
LoB
Nice to see an open source implementation already.
http://www.instructables.com/id/Arduino-EV-J1772-Charging-Station/?ALLSTEPS
LoB
right but don't lots of the same ISV APIs shared across phone, tablet and desktop now that Microsoft is pushing the UI formerly known as Metro, across all devices? That would mean the core OS is the same and so are a somewhat large chunk of the developer APIs and all that which is there to support it.
I'm thinking less like Android which really does use mostly the kernel and everything else is in the Dalvik JVM, and more like Meego. ie Android has little in common with desktop GNU/Linux while Meego had lots more in common.
If it really is just a Windows kernel/core and the APIs are so very different between the devices, I don't see why Microsoft would be pushing developers to Metro apps. Sure desktop Windows has all the included Win32 old stuff but we're talking the cross device stuff here.
LoB
I thought Windows was ported to ARM and all Windows 8 devices were now based on that ARM port( not the x86 version so much ). That is Windows Phone 8 and Windows 8 RT( tablets) both running the Windows 8 for ARM OS but with modified UI for the screen size and obvious APIs differences for what the device has/needs/uses like making phone calls. The fact that the Windows Phone 8 phones now have multi core support and added memory capabilities lead me to believe this was due to using the x86 ported Windows system to ARM.
So Windows Phone 8 is still a Windows CE based OS?
LoB
not really. The investors are getting pissed that not only has Microsoft's stock price been flat but they are seeing the world+dog getting excited about Apple products and Apple's stock is flying high. Microsoft is supposed to be this great innovator and market leader and the investors are finally realizing they are not and have not been and want Ballmer to step it up and show Microsoft is an innovator.
Microsoft has tried many different versions of the Windows based phone but are failing and again Apple along with Google are shutting Microsoft products down to single digit market share. The iPad really lit the fire under Ballmer too. Not only because the tablet segment is much closer to the PC segment than a small screen phone but also because Microsoft has been in this space many times and failed.
So Microsoft needs this to succeed and they are using a two pronged, or three pronged, approach with the phone and tablet segments merging app development and app stores. To some extent they also want the desktop to help in that ecosystem and is probably why they are forcing the Metro UI onto the desktop even if it ends up just being an initial launcher for the old Windows apps.
Ballmer's continued career at Microsoft likely hinges on Windows 8 being successful on _all_ these devices.
LoB
Microsoft can not run down prices and survive at the bottom in the tablet space. So they are "adding" features to make their tablets closer to the laptop/desktop feature set or should we say usability model. They will advertise their system runs an office application suite or parts of it and have desktop like capabilities. Apple can't really say this. Therefore you see why Microsoft is pricing their system up so high IMO.
will it fly? I doubt it but they are a great marketing company so we'll see.
LoB
IIRC, he said he'd cut the loopholes, etc but give them tax breaks so they pay the same as they have been paying.
I do doubt his ability to get his Party and/or any of the Democrats behind tax code reform such as cutting all the holes out. Only a flat tax will do that otherwise it's just more rules and more/new holes.
LoB
Talk about following his Party line. If he said rewriting the ethanol rules and re-evaluating it than sure but those current laws requiring ethanol mixtures in fuel have food based corn requirements. Clearly another farm subsidy.
LoB
as one of the comments on TFA site states, 700 jobs at even $50K each and just over 9% State tax is $3.5 million annually. So the State makes their money back just in direct employment taxes in about 3 years. Add to it the sales tax on the vehicles and all the money moving around by building them in CA and it seems like a no brainer considering Tesla has proven they can build good cars already.
LoB
netbooks using Intel chips and/or Microsoft software also had those limitations put on them. The difference is that netbooks started with GNU/Linux on them and the name was coined in the open. I should clarify something, those limitations were put on netbooks once Microsoft and Intel got their paws in on the market. Most likely they didn't want cheap hardware and software to eat into their profits and setting those limitations did a nice job at killing that market. Win for Microsoft and a win for Intel.
The tablet sector is yet another attack vector against these two but so much more entrenched with Apple's iPad and ARM hardware. But they are still trying very hard. IMO
LoB
and Steve Ballmers comments about the pricing would follow them going for the high end of the market. Don't forget, netbooks dragged Microsoft kicking and screaming into the low end 'laptop' market. Once they sweet talked OEMs into using Microsoft's old and even a limited version for extremely low licensing and including marketing packages which most likely eliminated the OS "expense" for the OEM...Microsoft came out with Windows 7 for netbooks and pretty much killed that cheap netbook market.
Free or very cheap software is not what Microsoft wants to promote and since the dominant market for tablets is that which the iPad define that's what Microsoft will target. A small tablet by Apple will not complicate the Windows 8 tablet segment because there is no overlap for users. To complicate it, someone would have to be opting for a Windows 8 tablet( >9" size ) at iPad pricing and then opt for a much smaller iPad Mini instead for not much less. For a second there I thought it was a C/net article and just more promotional buzz for Windows 8 tablets.
LoB
no shit sherlock, it's an opinion but then again all you seem to be able to do is oppose the statement and not the content. So, attacking the statement does not make it incorrect.
LoB
sorry, no mod points or it'd be funny. thx for the LOL
LoB
I've seen time and time again stock footage being used in the press( typically TV ) where they didn't have real footage or images of the area of topic. So when I heard a few weeks ago about the DNC using the Russian warship footage, I just wrote it off as being done by someone hired from the typical media outlets.
I am surprised someone with a military background didn't catch that unless it was first seen only during the event, ie not during any rehearsals or proofed.
LoB
they probably over stated how many people would be using their services( servers ) so they got tax breaks etc for putting the data center there with the understanding of how much they'd spend on things like energy. These "expenses" were calculated for how much revenue was put back into the community/State/etc.
So nobody is using BING and hotmail usage is going down so they are not using enough energy and get fined for not meeting their obligations. Make sense now?
LoB
the chargers and stations are probably pretty cheap and it's a fixed/onetime cost so not a big deal for them and the solar panels are probably paid for partially by marketing. As for the cost of electricity for charging, that's very cheap. If you figure even 15 cents per KWh then at 40-85 KWh charging it'd cost between $6-$12.75. Not really a big expense at all when it allows existing and prospective buyers of their cars to travel all over California and into Nevada without the need of a 2nd car.
LoB
what's not stated is that this system is grid-tied and that means there are no batteries needed to hold the solar charge. The electricity generated by the solar array puts electricity on the grid for others to use at the time of generation and the charger pulls power from the grid as needed, when needed.
I didn't see anywhere where it was stated these charging stations where powered only by solar. That was a leap others seemed to make by not knowing how the system works.
LoB
or it couldn't be the Toyota dealerships are fighting the electric car as is likely the US automaker dealerships are. And Toyota has a hybrid lineup which is soon to be 14 different models and retains the nice features the dealerships like, ie constant maintenance. They also have plugin hybrids which cross the pure EV and hybrid lines without having to try to change the publics mind about how viable EVs are.
While it may still be true that huge battery packs which get you 200+ miles on a charge and are very expensive, those super luxury EVs are not for everyone. But there are lots of people who could use an EV for their daily driving needs if they just opened their minds about how/what they really _needed_ and reasonably priced EVs were on the market.
BTW, back when GW Bush hoodwinked everyone into believing hydrogen cars would be everywhere while only million dollar prototypes remained available for years, then CA governator Schwarzenegger pledged millions to put in hydrogen fueling stations throughout CA. But EV charging stations are hugely less expensive yet, the cars are somewhat obtainable and real yet we have nothing. So I say great for Tesla for putting their money where their mouth is and showing how this can work.
LoB
why not this kind of rental system for standard hybrids so people with their own EV can use them for long trips or at any other time their EV isn't what they need? Like needing a full sized 5 passenger or even 6 passenger vehicle besides the long trip needs.
This would drop the price of the EV by enabling the dropping of the cost/size of the battery packs. There could be EVs for rent too and great idea on having a cleaning service tied in. With fully data connected vehicles the cleaning services could take the cars out of service for the 15 minutes or so of cleaning and the operator can tell the doors were opened/closed during those 15 minutes to possibly verify something like a cleaning occurred.
LoB
why not EVs with 100 mile range or less paired up with a rental car system for longer trips? Even provide charging stations at the rental company for your EV. Maybe it's even the EV dealership handling these rentals?
It's been researched and stated many times, most people drive less than 40 miles each way so the EV would do the trick except the occasional longer trips. Wouldn't it be great to have nice rental car to use for those other trips and it's as easy as swiping a credit card or membership card to pickup your rental?
Don't look to your standard ICE(Internal Combustion Engine) selling dealership to get involved in this because they don't want to sell EVs since they make tons of profit from servicing your vehicle's ICE and drive train. Doing tires and wiper fluid on EVs doesn't allow for many trips to the bank depositing profits.
It'll probably have to be companies like Tesla who kickstart programs like this. I just don't see the standard auto makers wanting this nor the government backing it with so much lobbyist money at stake.
LoB