Thanks for watching y’all! We produced a 2nd video with Robert on Google car related patents so stay tuned for that in a week or so. Glad you like this topic and format.
You are missing the underlying point. This lawyer--me--spent the better part of 20 years commuting 2 hours or more per all over the Bay Area. I know exactly how bad the 101, 280, 580, 680, 24, etc can be. The point is this: the longer your commute the more enjoyable the car should be to DRIVE. It does not have to be fast, it should be engaging. It does not require a Porsche or a sports car to get that. There are lots of well designed daily drivers that are fun to drive.
My son (a young teen) has no interest in driving, and when he is in the car he sees it as an opportunity to have extended time with digital devices. I am pretty sure he sees us as being unreasonable when we ask him to just enjoy the trip. I don’t think Apple is designing cars for the people using them now, I think they are making cars for kids his age who will be adults in a few years.
I don't know man. I was the Gameboy generation, extra batteries and all. But every time we went somewhere new, My eyes were glued out the window. I think it depends on the kid, you know?
@@sethtenrec Don’t be, he is fine. Smart as a whip and happy! I’m sure his generation will figure out what they want for themselves. If that doesn’t include the same fascination that we had with cars, I don’t see that as a serious problem. 😀 it’s just different.
@@octavius8562 I am largely the same. I don’t really enjoy driving and I am looking forward to the option of self driving cars. However, I don’t think they will come as soon as most people believe. I mean they have been “right around the corner” for 15-20 years now. 😀
He clearly is ignoring the fact most people aren’t driving enthusiasts. Just look at the sales of front-wheel drive CVT cars compared to rear-wheel drive cars. The average person doesn’t care. Look at the sales of crossovers compared to sedans, coupes, and convertibles. The future of the car is a living room on wheels whether enthusiasts driving their manual rear-wheel drive BMW like it or not. Manufacturers are already discontinuing sedans for crossovers. It is a glaring fact people want more space in their four wheeled vehicles.
Actually, it's a glaring fact that SUVs and crossovers are more profitable than sedans and coupes. Manufacturers don't just react to demand. They create it as well. Yes, Americans "want" bigger spaces because we're told that's what we want by tons of marketing. Back in the day, the must have family vehicle was the station wagon. Then Chrysler introduced the Voyager and Caravan in 1984 and the minivan era exploded. Supply creates demand. Second, an SUV/XO doesn't mean a dull driving experience. The first SUVs were based on truck chassis and well drove like trucks. There are a number of SUVs that still are based on truck chassis, but the driving dynamics have been vastly improved. And crossovers are by definition built on car chassis, again in part to provide improved handling and ride characteristics. And I've owned 4 SUV/crossovers, and picked those that were at least modestly enjoyable. True most folks are not driving "enthusiasts." But then why do so many car commercials emphasize the driving experience?
@@rsachs the marketing has cracked me up for years now. But it works and people rush to buy these cars that they’ll be bored of just 3 months later .. then after being stuck with what ended up being just another car for the last 2 -3 years, they rush out to trade-in for or lease the new and way better model that they keep seeing on cool commercials and that the YT “car enthusiast” channels are all raving about. Rinse and repeat.
I also feel the physical vehicle will be very bare bones, however AR glasses would essentially be the UI for the vehicle. So the AR glasses could be a required accessory for the vehicle. The AR glasses could be multi functional and also work at home watching a suspended tv in the living room with friends, or on the Mac, looking next to the display to reveal a complete AR experience to compliment the work. Essentially the phone will still be valuable to some extent, but AR glasses will definitely be the next platform frontier.
If you want to discuss the validity of any patent, you first have to investigate the man who issued the patent. The so-called “Patent Examiner”. What’s his name? Where’s his internet profile? And most importantly, what professional connections does he have which might represent a conflict of interest? All government employees are famous for taking bribes, including Patent Examiners. For that reason, the man who issued the Apple Patents should be asked to swear under oath that he has not received any benefit from his office; directly or indirectly. That’s called a “Video Deposition”. Right now, the American people have zero trust in government. This patent examiner probably received payment of some sort. If he did, then the patents are invalid.
Here's a thought. Apple usually makes patents for items that are too expensive for them to put in their own technology, because they always prefer the low-cost hardware that they augment with their sophisticated software. Almost nothing mentioned in this video sounds like it would go in a commercial car, but almost everything mentioned in this video sounds like it would go into an amusement park vehicle. Is Apple building an amusement park vehicle? They could then charge Apple prices for the car.
The patent at 2:00 is to ensure the passengers don’t get motion sickness as images can be displayed far out in the distance so people can work without getting fatigued in this way.
How close are we to an apple car announcement and how much is the estimated price? Idk if I should just buy a Tesla or wait a few years for an apple car
Watch Mark Rober’s video where he discusses his time with Apple (he’s responsible for the virtual reality patent) spoiler alert: it has less to do with entertainment and more to do with productivity and not getting carsick
I thought he was gonna present the patents and explain what they meant, and he did that while adding his opinion and that he Wants to drive fast cars. driving is tedious, driving a sports car for fun vs driving a regular sedan to work aren't the same. I bet most people would rather be able to catch up on studies, watch shows, news or even nap than drive, Apple is trying to make that possible while in motion.
"Driving is tedious"---to you. Perhaps you drive tedious cars? Lots of cars are as dull as dirt, but plenty are not. There are many affordable sedans today that offer plenty of power and handling that 20 years ago you could only find in a sports car. The Kia Stinger, for example, has 300 Hp and does 0-60 in 4.7s. The 2002 Corvette had 350 Hp and did 0-60 in just over 5s.
@@rsachs Cars are expensive money eating machines. To most people, driving cars is an unpleasant necessity to get from A to B. Getting there as fast and comfortable as possible, is what most want. Car enthusiasts are a minority.
Given the choice of a VR headset permanently mounted in the car, or another glovebox for general storage (which woudl take up about as much space) I think I'd prefer the latter.
In patent drawings and descriptions are ambiguous by design so it can’t be overstepped by specifics. Like if a car was drawn instead of a boxy vehicle. A competing company could say “Patent doesn’t apply as picture shows a car and not a truck”. The Boxy car is actually a place holder for all vehicles so this type of overstep is not possible.
lol why would I want a bumpy ride?? That's actually so dumb. Sure, if I were playing a video game I would want that, but if I am wanting a trip I enjoy, I would absolutely hate them simulating bumpy/hill roads when there are none I am driving on in real life
Ladies and gentleman and everyone in between, for those who don’t know, this apple car is not meant for you to own or have opinions with like driving it. The car apple wants build is supposed to be an autonomous taxi. Something we should see by 2030. It makes sense for an autonomous vehicle to go and charge it self at this special charging in their patent. All the patents make sense for this autonomous car. I don’t think this guy realized that’s what apple is making these patents for.
I did realize this. Not all of the patents here "makes sense for this autonomous car." The active glare suppression and the AR patent assume a human driver.
It's funny to hear people talk about plugging in EV as some onerous task. I get out of my car, usually with one hand free, and it takes literally 8 seconds to plug in. Wireless charging and this robotic solution to a problem that doesn't exist, are completely ridiculous.
I have owned an EV for several years now and can honestly say I have never thought of plugging it in as a burden. It’s kinda enjoyable really, because it is a regular reminder of the money I save and the hassle I avoid going to get gas.
The patent expert totally missed this so I do not blame you for missing it to, but the point is that Apple is planning on having autonomous driving robo taxis, and EV robo taxis will need to be able to go and charge themselves without having someone there to plug them in.
But this solution also assuages some of that fear people have of forgetting to plug in their ev and not having enough juice to make their commute (slightly irrational, but a real reason why some people aren’t getting evs)
Many of these patents are just for "statistics for the anual report for investors"... For a large corporation such as Apple, filing a useless patent is "cheap as chips" and can serve a multitude of reasons: Distracting competitors, pleasing investors, etc... Some years ago I had a minor job on the R&D department of a major European helicopter manufacturer, and a colleague of mine told me that they (and their competitors) often file patents for ideas (valid or not) that they don't intend to pursue/develop, just to block the other competitors from pursuing it freely...
The iPhone isn't the product, it's a platform for Apple's real product - data and apps. the iCar won't be the product, it will be the platform for the real product - transportation and travel data. I have every expectation that Apple won't SELL an iCar, they will introduce iRide, a subscription robotaxi service. Which means their cars won't be 'fun to drive', they'll be 'fun to ride in'. Which would need an automated charging system.. Like is shown in the patents. Or infotainment on the side windows for passengers, instead of on the front window for a driver.. like is shown in the patents And a holographic system means no displays to be goobered by passengers. And it doesn't matter if the display costs a lot if it means less maintenance for a revenue earning vehicle. And a passenger vehicle would be easier to get into and out if it had a coach-style seating arrangement.. like is shown in the patents. And if you're sharing a robotaxi you might want a display that shows your own route progress.. like is shown in the patents. Because you're riding thru the same route every day, not taking a joyful country drive. Patent expert is not a visionary.
Two of the parents are similar to what already exists. Hyundai and Genesis has implemented augmented reality already and now already has the glare reducing technology from 10 year using polarizers, no need to add such complex system to windshield
A lot of these patents seem to assume that Apple will have level 5 autonomous technology, where the car drives itself zero human attention. Apple certainly has the software engineers and the compute power to match Tesla in chasing level 5, but they have no real world data, and data, immense amounts of data, is a requirement to get there. But I do not think that your romantic view of the fun of driving is reality. Most people spend most of their time in traffic driving around in the city they live in, not driving on gorgeous twisting mountain roads. Most of the time, once freed from the task of driving, people will want to be entertained instead of watching traffic crawl along around them.
Apple has your iPhone data which can be located and see your speed. If you connect your phone to the apple car it will have a better connection. I’m assuming this is apples plan
@@ashranbakth5861 Apple recognizes that cars will be the next great entertainment platform and they want to be able to include cars in their ecosystem. Sony is thinking the same thing, and the orientation of the large Tesla screens is no accident either, nor is Tesla just dabbling in video games for kicks. Robo taxis will be summoned based on price, availability, and entertainment options.
Just fyi TH-camr mark Rober did an interview with mkbhd on how he worked for apple with the virtual reality. The main purpose seems to be about stopping motion sickness.
There was a TH-cam on a North Sea Ferry that auto-connects to a charge port (just lots bigger) . Why would that not be prior art? They are both 'vehicles'
How it's even possible to patent basic concepts? Holographic display? They didn't explain how exactly it would work they just say "ok, we have a swell idea to use holographic displays" and that's it. Well, why don't patent beds inside car? It is so "complex" idea it surely needs to be patented.
Space ship. One wing is all thats left. Higher speed you get sparks can that be as good as nitrox. Is there anything that can create artificial nitrox in ship like unlimited. Is nitrogen also called hydrogen. Planes has collision warning does this have too. You need gps for every car.
A lot of these visual elements would be better implemented with AR glasses. If it's built into the car's glass it's going to be destroyed by UV light when the car sits outside in the sun. Will also be exponentially less expensive to build/implement/repair/service.
Very interesting video. Can you do one on Apple’s patents for the video game industry? Recently there have been a lot of patens by them on game controllers for example
It's not that they don't want to see where they are. They might be in a meeting on that VR headset or hanging out with friends. Also, some city just look terrible and you'd rather escape somewhere nice.
I had to stop watching. “Either Apple wants to hide their real design, or Apple thinks that what a car should look like”. 🤦🏻♂️ He’s not even joking around their, he legit sounds like he thinks it’s possible that Apple is designing a box for an EV.
This guy’s ideas are ridiculous. I’m sure this fellow is an excellent patent lawyer, but his fantasy that cars are about going out and exploring and seeing the world is crazy. Yes, people do occasionally use their cars to explore the world, but come on, 99% of the time people are driving the same roads back and forth to the store and to work. Is it fun to drive that? Is it a ride full or wonder? Or would being able to read a book or watch a movie be a reasonable thing. Rich people have drivers. Why? Because they can afford it and driving is a chore.
I suppose a passenger could attend a Zoom meeting with a virtual headset and get work done during a boring commute the scenery of which they have seen a thousand times. Apple is clearly looking towards a fully autonomous vehicle and possibly then TAAS (transportation as a service) where the car is summoned, arrives and take the passengers where they want to go. It seems though that fully autonomous remains some years off because computers cannot make good "decisions" in all of the infinitely variable situations drivers can be presented with. Too much programming required and then clunky response times even with the fastest of processors and memory systems.
Holographic elements is an unbelievable idea, no one else is even thinking it!! It’s obviously not going to be that expensive! Or they wouldn’t perfect it.
I get where this guy is coming from and relate, but think of the family with 3 kids or grandma in a wheelchair and how something like this would change their every day life. Not even the Apple Car specifically, but the long term goal of true L5 autonomous vehicles.
Unfortunately I believe the experts opinion is adverse to the general population's opinion of car rides. Where I see the beauty and romanticism of a simple road trip, I believe that most of the population does not. This age gap and difference of opinion reminds me somewhat of what's going on in the current US political system... a bunch of elderly old men with an opinion of where they believe the future should go that is adverse to the majority of the population. Even with a starch divide in politics.
It should not really be valid to sit at your desk and dream up fantasy future tech ideas and place patents on them. This makes a mockery of what the patent system is supposed to be all about (protecting genuine innovation and the investment behind it). These are all small ideas (ideas that many people could have come up with in many places in a limited amount of time). Unless the patent industry is shaken up soon, it is going to become a major block to innovation. The people out there who are genuinely productive, genuinely capable of innovation, are going to be constantly tripping over patents written in some guys bedroom during an idle Sunday afternoon. This needs fixing!!!!
Our patent system is not about "genuine innovation." We don't know a priori what inventions are real innovations and what are not, and it's not appropriate for the government to decide that--that is the function of the marketplace. Indeed, Britian had a restrictive patent system based largely on identifying what you would call "genuine innovation" and investment. The problem is that this very anti-democratic. It excludes those without the money and the research labs. The Framers of the Constitution were well aware of this, and intentionally created a system that was open to everyone. Read Khan, "Premium Inventions: Patents and Prizes as Incentive Mechanisms in Britain and the United States, 1750-1930." She shows that "the inventors in the U.S. were drawn from a much broader spectrum of the population than were their counterparts in Britain,", that " much of the important invention during the early stages of U.S. industrialization came from individuals with only very limited formal schooling, [which] raises questions about what sorts of technical or scientific knowledge were really required to make a significant discovery," and "the examination of the record for the great inventors and the prizes or honours that they were accorded for their discoveries provides little evidence that this approach toward encouraging private investment in inventive activity was especially effective."
Would be better to bring someone on next time who doesn’t reveal his bias, how can you criticise a company’s decision to hide their car design in a patent.
I think it’s safe to say apple wants to make a luxury limousine service instead of a luxury car. Their wasn’t a single patent related to building a electric car.
This man keeps saying this is ruining driving, but really this is making the road trip capable of having additional and more productive experiences. People still ride horses. People will still drive cars, just not Apple. Theirs will be a whole new frontier for sure. Good stuff.
Wow, he really missed the mark with the idea that the VR alternate route technology takes away from the joy of a roadtrip and experiencing new things. What about people who drive the same route day after day -- going to school; carpooling to work; whatever. That seems like a really cool technology to make the trip fun and enjoyable instead of mundane and boring. Sure, if you're on a road trip you want to see the sights. But 99.9% of the time people aren't on road trips! LOL Fail for that POV.
I did not miss the the point. First, the alternate route technology does not apply to "people who driver the same route day after day." You can't be the driver and use this tech. You'd be the passenger. And that means you are off in VR land. Now assuming there is a driver, then at best you could be telling the driver about what you are experiencing, but that's a bit dull for the driver. True, if there is no driver, then entertain away.
![⭐ฮิตในTikTok!! ( มะมะมะหมูเด้ง MooDeng ) Ver. แดนซ์ ReMix BY [ ดีเจกิต รีมิกซ์ ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4noyAoMa7bQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for watching y’all! We produced a 2nd video with Robert on Google car related patents so stay tuned for that in a week or so. Glad you like this topic and format.
These are expensive unnecessary gimmicks
He speaks like a man who does not have to commute long distances every day
He speaks like a man with a brain.
Most people don't. Most people just spend a long time in traffic driving short distances
He speaks like a man who commutes on vastly different routes everyday
@@KamiInValhalla no
You are missing the underlying point. This lawyer--me--spent the better part of 20 years commuting 2 hours or more per all over the Bay Area. I know exactly how bad the 101, 280, 580, 680, 24, etc can be. The point is this: the longer your commute the more enjoyable the car should be to DRIVE. It does not have to be fast, it should be engaging. It does not require a Porsche or a sports car to get that. There are lots of well designed daily drivers that are fun to drive.
My son (a young teen) has no interest in driving, and when he is in the car he sees it as an opportunity to have extended time with digital devices. I am pretty sure he sees us as being unreasonable when we ask him to just enjoy the trip. I don’t think Apple is designing cars for the people using them now, I think they are making cars for kids his age who will be adults in a few years.
I don't know man.
I was the Gameboy generation, extra batteries and all. But every time we went somewhere new, My eyes were glued out the window.
I think it depends on the kid, you know?
Murdock, I feel sorry for your teen.
@@sethtenrec Don’t be, he is fine. Smart as a whip and happy! I’m sure his generation will figure out what they want for themselves. If that doesn’t include the same fascination that we had with cars, I don’t see that as a serious problem. 😀 it’s just different.
@@octavius8562 I am largely the same. I don’t really enjoy driving and I am looking forward to the option of self driving cars. However, I don’t think they will come as soon as most people believe. I mean they have been “right around the corner” for 15-20 years now. 😀
@@undefined7141 I think you are making some really big assumptions. 😀
Apple Car features:
1) MagSafe level 2 charger 🔌
2) ProMotion notched Gorilla Glass windshield
3) Nano-textures glare reduction windshield coating ($10,000 extra)
4) color: Space gray, silver, starlight, mid-night blue.
5) M6 Pro with 32-core Neural Engine
6) 8 GB unified memory
7) 256 GB SSD
8) 16x4” Liquid Retina front display, 16” Pro XDL center infotainment display.
9) Magic steering wheel with Touch ID
10) CarPod mini surround sound system with spacial audio.
11) 6G modem
12) Privacy built in
8gb 256gb 😂😂
this is a very undervalued video
I think the VR being adaptive to the current conditions of the drive is actually to reduce motion sickness.
The VR idea was developed by Mark Rober while he worked at Apple. he talked about it an interview with Marques Brownlee.
He clearly is ignoring the fact most people aren’t driving enthusiasts.
Just look at the sales of front-wheel drive CVT cars compared to rear-wheel drive cars. The average person doesn’t care.
Look at the sales of crossovers compared to sedans, coupes, and convertibles.
The future of the car is a living room on wheels whether enthusiasts driving their manual rear-wheel drive BMW like it or not.
Manufacturers are already discontinuing sedans for crossovers. It is a glaring fact people want more space in their four wheeled vehicles.
I definitely agree, Thank you for saying this because he did not understand anything lol
Actually, it's a glaring fact that SUVs and crossovers are more profitable than sedans and coupes. Manufacturers don't just react to demand. They create it as well. Yes, Americans "want" bigger spaces because we're told that's what we want by tons of marketing. Back in the day, the must have family vehicle was the station wagon. Then Chrysler introduced the Voyager and Caravan in 1984 and the minivan era exploded. Supply creates demand. Second, an SUV/XO doesn't mean a dull driving experience. The first SUVs were based on truck chassis and well drove like trucks. There are a number of SUVs that still are based on truck chassis, but the driving dynamics have been vastly improved. And crossovers are by definition built on car chassis, again in part to provide improved handling and ride characteristics. And I've owned 4 SUV/crossovers, and picked those that were at least modestly enjoyable. True most folks are not driving "enthusiasts." But then why do so many car commercials emphasize the driving experience?
@@rsachs the marketing has cracked me up for years now. But it works and people rush to buy these cars that they’ll be bored of just 3 months later .. then after being stuck with what ended up being just another car for the last 2 -3 years, they rush out to trade-in for or lease the new and way better model that they keep seeing on cool commercials and that the YT “car enthusiast” channels are all raving about. Rinse and repeat.
On the patent for the VR system, the first name is Mark Rober. That is the same TH-cam famous Mark Rober.
Amazing patients
Knowing Apple they will be charging extra for the wheels, then add-on fees for the brakes, then a subscription to use the A/C.
I also feel the physical vehicle will be very bare bones, however AR glasses would essentially be the UI for the vehicle. So the AR glasses could be a required accessory for the vehicle. The AR glasses could be multi functional and also work at home watching a suspended tv in the living room with friends, or on the Mac, looking next to the display to reveal a complete AR experience to compliment the work. Essentially the phone will still be valuable to some extent, but AR glasses will definitely be the next platform frontier.
A year later Vision Pro says hold my beer.
If you want to discuss the validity of any patent, you first have to investigate the man who issued the patent. The so-called “Patent Examiner”. What’s his name? Where’s his internet profile? And most importantly, what professional connections does he have which might represent a conflict of interest?
All government employees are famous for taking bribes, including Patent Examiners. For that reason, the man who issued the Apple Patents should be asked to swear under oath that he has not received any benefit from his office; directly or indirectly. That’s called a “Video Deposition”.
Right now, the American people have zero trust in government. This patent examiner probably received payment of some sort. If he did, then the patents are invalid.
Here's a thought. Apple usually makes patents for items that are too expensive for them to put in their own technology, because they always prefer the low-cost hardware that they augment with their sophisticated software.
Almost nothing mentioned in this video sounds like it would go in a commercial car, but almost everything mentioned in this video sounds like it would go into an amusement park vehicle. Is Apple building an amusement park vehicle? They could then charge Apple prices for the car.
Lol what?
The patent at 2:00 is to ensure the passengers don’t get motion sickness as images can be displayed far out in the distance so people can work without getting fatigued in this way.
I think the virtual headset is more about apple adding their own advertising content as you are travelling dedicated to the profile of the passenger.
The route plotting looks awesome!
How close are we to an apple car announcement and how much is the estimated price? Idk if I should just buy a Tesla or wait a few years for an apple car
Watch Mark Rober’s video where he discusses his time with Apple (he’s responsible for the virtual reality patent) spoiler alert: it has less to do with entertainment and more to do with productivity and not getting carsick
Spoiler alert, it has more to do with Apple corporation making money.
Ideas for a boring commute, because you can't get that on a bus. I used my iPad the most on a bus, and the iPhone is just a dumb radio when I drive.
Um, I don't understand; if I'm driving in Jersey, why would I want to be "virtually driving" in London? 😕
Thanks for the video, team CNET!
I thought he was gonna present the patents and explain what they meant, and he did that while adding his opinion and that he Wants to drive fast cars.
driving is tedious, driving a sports car for fun vs driving a regular sedan to work aren't the same. I bet most people would rather be able to catch up on studies, watch shows, news or even nap than drive, Apple is trying to make that possible while in motion.
"Driving is tedious"---to you. Perhaps you drive tedious cars? Lots of cars are as dull as dirt, but plenty are not. There are many affordable sedans today that offer plenty of power and handling that 20 years ago you could only find in a sports car. The Kia Stinger, for example, has 300 Hp and does 0-60 in 4.7s. The 2002 Corvette had 350 Hp and did 0-60 in just over 5s.
@@rsachs Cars are expensive money eating machines. To most people, driving cars is an unpleasant necessity to get from A to B. Getting there as fast and comfortable as possible, is what most want. Car enthusiasts are a minority.
Thanks for this excellent presentation!
Given the choice of a VR headset permanently mounted in the car, or another glovebox for general storage (which woudl take up about as much space) I think I'd prefer the latter.
In patent drawings and descriptions are ambiguous by design so it can’t be overstepped by specifics. Like if a car was drawn instead of a boxy vehicle. A competing company could say “Patent doesn’t apply as picture shows a car and not a truck”. The Boxy car is actually a place holder for all vehicles so this type of overstep is not possible.
every part of that car will be extremely expensive to repair or replace
I have sunglasses that kill the glare and reflection while driving. That cost 100 bucks. So, why pay for a whole window for it.
lol why would I want a bumpy ride?? That's actually so dumb. Sure, if I were playing a video game I would want that, but if I am wanting a trip I enjoy, I would absolutely hate them simulating bumpy/hill roads when there are none I am driving on in real life
Ladies and gentleman and everyone in between, for those who don’t know, this apple car is not meant for you to own or have opinions with like driving it. The car apple wants build is supposed to be an autonomous taxi. Something we should see by 2030. It makes sense for an autonomous vehicle to go and charge it self at this special charging in their patent. All the patents make sense for this autonomous car. I don’t think this guy realized that’s what apple is making these patents for.
I did realize this. Not all of the patents here "makes sense for this autonomous car." The active glare suppression and the AR patent assume a human driver.
It's funny to hear people talk about plugging in EV as some onerous task. I get out of my car, usually with one hand free, and it takes literally 8 seconds to plug in. Wireless charging and this robotic solution to a problem that doesn't exist, are completely ridiculous.
I’m sure people said the same thing about automatic windows. Who needs to pay extra for that when I got my ArMs?!?
I have owned an EV for several years now and can honestly say I have never thought of plugging it in as a burden. It’s kinda enjoyable really, because it is a regular reminder of the money I save and the hassle I avoid going to get gas.
I am sure said the same thingh about automatic indicator switch off after the turn coz it just a mini second to turn off the indicator.
The patent expert totally missed this so I do not blame you for missing it to, but the point is that Apple is planning on having autonomous driving robo taxis, and EV robo taxis will need to be able to go and charge themselves without having someone there to plug them in.
But this solution also assuages some of that fear people have of forgetting to plug in their ev and not having enough juice to make their commute (slightly irrational, but a real reason why some people aren’t getting evs)
Many of these patents are just for "statistics for the anual report for investors"...
For a large corporation such as Apple, filing a useless patent is "cheap as chips" and can serve a multitude of reasons: Distracting competitors, pleasing investors, etc...
Some years ago I had a minor job on the R&D department of a major European helicopter manufacturer, and a colleague of mine told me that they (and their competitors) often file patents for ideas (valid or not) that they don't intend to pursue/develop, just to block the other competitors from pursuing it freely...
omg they need to have the macintosh starting sound as the chime when you turn the car on.
The iPhone isn't the product, it's a platform for Apple's real product - data and apps.
the iCar won't be the product, it will be the platform for the real product - transportation and travel data.
I have every expectation that Apple won't SELL an iCar, they will introduce iRide, a subscription robotaxi service. Which means their cars won't be 'fun to drive', they'll be 'fun to ride in'.
Which would need an automated charging system.. Like is shown in the patents.
Or infotainment on the side windows for passengers, instead of on the front window for a driver.. like is shown in the patents
And a holographic system means no displays to be goobered by passengers. And it doesn't matter if the display costs a lot if it means less maintenance for a revenue earning vehicle.
And a passenger vehicle would be easier to get into and out if it had a coach-style seating arrangement.. like is shown in the patents.
And if you're sharing a robotaxi you might want a display that shows your own route progress.. like is shown in the patents.
Because you're riding thru the same route every day, not taking a joyful country drive.
Patent expert is not a visionary.
Two of the parents are similar to what already exists. Hyundai and Genesis has implemented augmented reality already and now already has the glare reducing technology from 10 year using polarizers, no need to add such complex system to windshield
VR headsets are for the kids so parents don’t loose their minds on a road trip from the constant “are we there yet?”. 🤣❤️🤘
Good use case
These patens are mostly for potential lawsuits for if someone makes something similar, not for potential apple products.
Genuinely surprised that a guy with a Dell on his desk would provide such insightful commentary on the future of technology.
Please talk about the recent automatic apple toilet seat patent.
Maybe we’ll do another round of this 🙃
A lot of these patents seem to assume that Apple will have level 5 autonomous technology, where the car drives itself zero human attention. Apple certainly has the software engineers and the compute power to match Tesla in chasing level 5, but they have no real world data, and data, immense amounts of data, is a requirement to get there.
But I do not think that your romantic view of the fun of driving is reality. Most people spend most of their time in traffic driving around in the city they live in, not driving on gorgeous twisting mountain roads. Most of the time, once freed from the task of driving, people will want to be entertained instead of watching traffic crawl along around them.
See my first comment. The more time you spend driving a car, the more enjoyable the car should be to drive.
Apple has your iPhone data which can be located and see your speed. If you connect your phone to the apple car it will have a better connection. I’m assuming this is apples plan
@@ashranbakth5861 Apple recognizes that cars will be the next great entertainment platform and they want to be able to include cars in their ecosystem. Sony is thinking the same thing, and the orientation of the large Tesla screens is no accident either, nor is Tesla just dabbling in video games for kicks. Robo taxis will be summoned based on price, availability, and entertainment options.
Just fyi TH-camr mark Rober did an interview with mkbhd on how he worked for apple with the virtual reality. The main purpose seems to be about stopping motion sickness.
Or adding motion sickness even more.
Not Wall-E...🤦🏾♀️🤣
There was a TH-cam on a North Sea Ferry that auto-connects to a charge port (just lots bigger) . Why would that not be prior art? They are both 'vehicles'
The world especially in America is a cesspool. There isn’t anything to see here.
How it's even possible to patent basic concepts? Holographic display? They didn't explain how exactly it would work they just say "ok, we have a swell idea to use holographic displays" and that's it. Well, why don't patent beds inside car? It is so "complex" idea it surely needs to be patented.
😂
Exactly. The patent industry has become a farce! It is starting to cause problems. Many patents are awarded that should not be.
I’m still skeptical that they really are going to make a car
surprised they didn't use a big lightning port for the car xo
The by far was the 3D navigation heads up display
Space ship. One wing is all thats left. Higher speed you get sparks can that be as good as nitrox. Is there anything that can create artificial nitrox in ship like unlimited. Is nitrogen also called hydrogen. Planes has collision warning does this have too. You need gps for every car.
Gratuitous music is distracting 😞
I love this car
That charging patent sucks. Side visual images bad news many accidents. Not good. Out of range indicators very good.
A lot of these visual elements would be better implemented with AR glasses. If it's built into the car's glass it's going to be destroyed by UV light when the car sits outside in the sun. Will also be exponentially less expensive to build/implement/repair/service.
Very interesting video. Can you do one on Apple’s patents for the video game industry? Recently there have been a lot of patens by them on game controllers for example
Good call. Thanks
Graphite tyre. Hasn't anyone developed a car that runs on dynamo itself.
It's not that they don't want to see where they are. They might be in a meeting on that VR headset or hanging out with friends.
Also, some city just look terrible and you'd rather escape somewhere nice.
I had to stop watching. “Either Apple wants to hide their real design, or Apple thinks that what a car should look like”. 🤦🏻♂️ He’s not even joking around their, he legit sounds like he thinks it’s possible that Apple is designing a box for an EV.
This guy’s ideas are ridiculous. I’m sure this fellow is an excellent patent lawyer, but his fantasy that cars are about going out and exploring and seeing the world is crazy. Yes, people do occasionally use their cars to explore the world, but come on, 99% of the time people are driving the same roads back and forth to the store and to work. Is it fun to drive that? Is it a ride full or wonder? Or would being able to read a book or watch a movie be a reasonable thing. Rich people have drivers. Why? Because they can afford it and driving is a chore.
I suppose a passenger could attend a Zoom meeting with a virtual headset and get work done during a boring commute the scenery of which they have seen a thousand times. Apple is clearly looking towards a fully autonomous vehicle and possibly then TAAS (transportation as a service) where the car is summoned, arrives and take the passengers where they want to go. It seems though that fully autonomous remains some years off because computers cannot make good "decisions" in all of the infinitely variable situations drivers can be presented with. Too much programming required and then clunky response times even with the fastest of processors and memory systems.
Holographic elements is an unbelievable idea, no one else is even thinking it!! It’s obviously not going to be that expensive! Or they wouldn’t perfect it.
3:20 how was this Patent approved when it is being actively used in space/aeroplanes?
Great content!
apple is actually building a car for Disney's tomorrowland.
Never buy apple car if this truly there cars . Someone watching too many SyFy movies me thinks
Great video
INSANE!!! Wooooow!
@APPLE this is just phenomenal! If you bring this out… omg…. I can‘t believe this is happening!
AAPL 📈📈📈📈📈📈🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
This man holds shorts in Apple, huh?
@8:19 , you can see the great TH-camr MARK ROBER himself as the first inventor of the Patent
I love ❤️ driving and I hope apple will give an option to choose between autonomous driving and manual driving 🤞.
If they don't, there's always the choice to just not buy their car! :-D
they watch bunch of sci fi movies and decide to patent everything someone else already made as cg or movie prop....nice
An Apple car would be only self driving because that would mean more time using apple products and services and that means more 💰💰💰💰.
I get where this guy is coming from and relate, but think of the family with 3 kids or grandma in a wheelchair and how something like this would change their every day life. Not even the Apple Car specifically, but the long term goal of true L5 autonomous vehicles.
Great video 👍
Storm in space.
Unfortunately I believe the experts opinion is adverse to the general population's opinion of car rides. Where I see the beauty and romanticism of a simple road trip, I believe that most of the population does not. This age gap and difference of opinion reminds me somewhat of what's going on in the current US political system... a bunch of elderly old men with an opinion of where they believe the future should go that is adverse to the majority of the population. Even with a starch divide in politics.
Curmudgeon doesn't realize most of us are just on our daily work commute each day instead of a road trip.
Well it looks like they're not using the Lightning charging port. That's good news.
It should not really be valid to sit at your desk and dream up fantasy future tech ideas and place patents on them. This makes a mockery of what the patent system is supposed to be all about (protecting genuine innovation and the investment behind it). These are all small ideas (ideas that many people could have come up with in many places in a limited amount of time). Unless the patent industry is shaken up soon, it is going to become a major block to innovation. The people out there who are genuinely productive, genuinely capable of innovation, are going to be constantly tripping over patents written in some guys bedroom during an idle Sunday afternoon. This needs fixing!!!!
Our patent system is not about "genuine innovation." We don't know a priori what inventions are real innovations and what are not, and it's not appropriate for the government to decide that--that is the function of the marketplace. Indeed, Britian had a restrictive patent system based largely on identifying what you would call "genuine innovation" and investment. The problem is that this very anti-democratic. It excludes those without the money and the research labs. The Framers of the Constitution were well aware of this, and intentionally created a system that was open to everyone. Read Khan, "Premium Inventions: Patents and Prizes as Incentive Mechanisms in Britain and the United States, 1750-1930." She shows that "the inventors in the U.S. were drawn from a much broader spectrum of the population than were their counterparts in Britain,", that " much of the important invention during the early stages of U.S. industrialization came from individuals with only very limited formal schooling, [which] raises questions about what sorts of technical or scientific knowledge were really required to make a significant discovery," and "the examination of the record for the great inventors and the prizes or honours that they were accorded for their discoveries provides little evidence that this approach toward encouraging private investment in inventive activity was especially effective."
Lol.. all that augmentation crap blinding you.. lol
Would be better to bring someone on next time who doesn’t reveal his bias, how can you criticise a company’s decision to hide their car design in a patent.
Wait is apple car like a mini bus.
I think it’s safe to say apple wants to make a luxury limousine service instead of a luxury car. Their wasn’t a single patent related to building a electric car.
Or an amusement park vehicle?
at this point , the simplicity of just normal BMW or FORD cars make them much more special and much better than a moving square with VR in it
nerds are fascinating creatures
I hope it won’t have windows.
This man keeps saying this is ruining driving, but really this is making the road trip capable of having additional and more productive experiences. People still ride horses. People will still drive cars, just not Apple. Theirs will be a whole new frontier for sure. Good stuff.
So basically Apple wants to make the average driver even more stupid.
There will be no drivers in the future. Only passengers.
VR headset selling you ads for Coca-Cola
Interesting
Clearly this guy hasn’t been out of California. Sir have you driven though Kansas? 😂
TH-camr Mark Rober is one of the inventors of the patents while he was working in Apple. 8:20
the holographic window is to place a barrage of digital signage and ads throughout the world, much in the fashion of back to the future
What does a la_wer kn_o_ws ???
First time u have posted useful video
Only the first time? 😂🤣
@@CNET nah u good!great channel
Have you watched all the others? Maybe you should have given up earlier it was a long time to keep waiting for a good one ☺️
💀
Wow, he really missed the mark with the idea that the VR alternate route technology takes away from the joy of a roadtrip and experiencing new things. What about people who drive the same route day after day -- going to school; carpooling to work; whatever. That seems like a really cool technology to make the trip fun and enjoyable instead of mundane and boring. Sure, if you're on a road trip you want to see the sights. But 99.9% of the time people aren't on road trips! LOL Fail for that POV.
I did not miss the the point. First, the alternate route technology does not apply to "people who driver the same route day after day." You can't be the driver and use this tech. You'd be the passenger. And that means you are off in VR land. Now assuming there is a driver, then at best you could be telling the driver about what you are experiencing, but that's a bit dull for the driver. True, if there is no driver, then entertain away.
Nice but it will be expensive to buy, expensive to insure. 💲💵💰.
Expect the apple tax
These patents are a complete joke, but I suppose that's just how it is with monopolies; patent everything you can think of before others do
Just give me a comfortable chair, good radio and a/c.
Man that’s cool and all but we need to get in the sky n find out bout the universe cause clearly we are lost
Apple should name the car as ipatent 🤣