
Bill Ford Isn't Scared of Apple - evanh2002
https://medium.com/backchannel/bill-ford-isn-t-scared-of-apple-9822fd3ecb78#.t8akt1pny
======
steven
Writing this story, I got a good sense of the difference between silicon
valley culture and auto industry culture (at a time when carmakers perceive
the threat from tech companies and are trying, sort of, to be more nimble and
tech-ish). Bill Ford is a great entry point because his heart is in the
environment and innovation--but his soul runs on fossil fuel motors zipping
down the highway. And now Ford (the company) is trying to get into services--
and to take on Uber.

~~~
6stringmerc
As an auto enthusiast for a couple decades plus, I can really appreciate the
approach and attitude Bill Ford seems to be reaching to achieve. The inventor
and innovator side of me enjoys the often blase notion of "disruption" that
comes with SV culture, but I've still got distinct reservations about the
general "practical ethics compass" of the approach, to coin a phrase for lack
of a better one that I know. Where SV and Auto culture meet in the middle
definitely interests me.

I guess what I find more appealing about Auto industry culture is the general
notion of accountability (give or take) with respect to products. Auto
companies are not nimble, should not play 'fast and loose' with regulations
like safety, and they have public shareholders as well. This is a different
model - one that I honestly believe serves the Auto industry well - because
there are perfectly reasonable avenues to take SV-like approaches - it's
called R&D, and taking stuff out racing. WRC. BTCC. Le Mans. All sorts of
different avenues!

This isn't to give Auto companies like Ford a free pass when they make
mistakes (Firestone and Ford comes to mind) but rather acknowledge that
there's still merit in their approach to creating, manufacturing, and
supporting products.

~~~
Sven7
Well said. I too would like to see Brick and Mortar models survive and thrive.
SV speed and scale of disruption these days, is too quick for anyone's good.
If we want more whales in the ocean we need larger oceans. We are getting very
good at producing whales fast. We need to get better at producing more ocean.

------
xlayn
My opinion: “I don’t want to sound arrogant,” This is critical, remember
Ballmer dismissing the iPhone? and Blackberry... and telcos...

"Apple doesn’t know how to handle a supply chain, or market its wares" that
could also mean they can disrupt and disruption points are associated with
market changes (check vapor engine vs fuel or iPhone vs every other phone).

“We are going to build smart cars, but we also need to build smart roads,
smart parking, smart public transportation systems, and more,” and this is the
critical point, I'm old in tech years... and I like my clockwork internal
combustion engines, I like to be able to drive them but the future people may
not, getting what that future mass wants is the million dollar goal. For
example... people may not want a car but to get somewhere and for example in
NY that sound more rational than in TX, can we build a company around
providing "Car as a service" (you hear it first here from xlayn :p)

"the Ford executives believe that the firm’s in-house tech expertise is under-
appreciated" or it can also mean they could leverage someone else expertise...
(this is a question, I don't really know the answer).

Last but not least... he want's to get the company into something while
keeping the strong advantage they have in what they are strong and not
becoming a hipster startup (as in lets make a trillion dollar company around
140 characters but there is no revenue model)...

Edit: typos

~~~
jessriedel
> "the Ford executives believe that the firm’s in-house tech expertise is
> under-appreciated"

5 minutes trying to use a Ford's music system makes it pretty clear that, at
least for tech UI, they are awful. That they aren't publicly sheepish about it
suggests that the guys in charge don't even notice the differences.

~~~
sisk
... but isn't Sync a Microsoft product built into Ford cars? It certainly was
when I worked there in the mid-2000s.

EDIT: Gen 1 and 2 are while the upcoming Gen 3 is built by Blackberry.

"Ford cited issues with Microsoft's complex software dragging down its scores
with Consumer Reports and other consumer magazines being a reason it switched
to BlackBerry."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Sync](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Sync)

~~~
SilasX
I tried out Sync myself, and I strongly agree with jessriedel. What's more, I
don't think the bad design can be blamed on MS; much of Ford's side of it was
a failure too. From my review at the time [1]

\- They don't make it easy to get someone to show you the system. (pts 1 and
2)

\- They make it so that if you just leave your iPod (a lot of people didn't
have the phone at the time) plugged in, it has to be prominently visible to
thieves (pt 4)

\- Despite them expecting you to use Sync for anything and everything, it's on
an inner row of the steering wheel, requiring a really long thumb stretch to
reach. (pt 6)

\- Hitting the phone button when you don't have a phone set up with it, will
disable the audio system (and thus, further Sync action) until next time you
turn the car on. (pt 8)

[1] [http://blog.tyrannyofthemouse.com/2008/07/setting-sync-
strai...](http://blog.tyrannyofthemouse.com/2008/07/setting-sync-straight-or-
sync-sucx.html)

~~~
bduerst
That blog post is from _eight_ years ago.

I am currently driving a C-Max and some of your points aren't relevant:

\- The dealer rep went to lengths to train me on the sync system even though I
insisted I didn't need it. (Maybe it's different elsewhere)

\- The USB connection is inside the cubby between the seats, so you don't need
to leave mp3 players in visible locations.

\- The sync activation is on the steering wheel, near the volume buttons, and
is not at all difficult to tap.

All in all, Sync has a weird tiered command system which is why I don't use it
much, but it's not for lack of physical design.

~~~
SilasX
I know -- the point was to criticize how many serious blunders they committed
in their initial attempt and which couldn't be blamed on Microsoft, to
substantiate the point about poor UX expertise. Certainly, they eventually got
it right 8 years later, but the point stands that they don't have some stellar
in-house team.

------
6stringmerc
> _“So many of those features are going into the vehicles today — self-
> parking, lane keeping, all these things that ultimately are going to be very
> much a part of full autonomy. And customers are already getting used to
> it.”_

This reminds me a lot of how advanced and amazing the avionics and support
systems are on Airbus planes, and why shit pilots crash them whenever anything
doesn't go exactly like a simulator textbook. It's a part of the future of
automotive "advancement" that I'm not optimistic about. This is certainly a
personal opinion, one coming from a guy who likes to really be involved while
driving and has his fair share of mistakes on his record, but I think it's
worthwhile to keep in mind.

~~~
cujo
And the number of accidents with advanced systems + shit pilots is still lower
than that of good pilots + no advanced systems.

That's also worth keeping in mind.

~~~
vlehto
Nobody is arguing against radar altimeter, weather radar, gyrocompass and
artificial horizon.

I'm very doubtful that the actual autopilot has saved any lives. It's more
likely to just allow captain to nap.

~~~
Retric
Tired pilots are very dangerous. So, the actual numbers on this might be
counter intuitive. We may very well be at a point where flights would be safer
without on board pilots.

------
vvanders
One thing that's really uplifting is to see the giant tidal wave of uptake in
electric drive platforms.

I really don't think you'd see this without Tesla really setting the bar with
the Model S. Now we're seeing GM, Ford, BMW, VW and many other auto companies
making serious commitments.

~~~
rorykoehler
I want to see a company release a cheap framework for an electric car that
anyone can build on top of. Just the chassis and battery pack maybe with in-
wheel motors. Then people could design and print their own cabs.

I saw the documentary by BMW on making the i8 and while their technical
knowledge/competency is impressive at this stage it seems they are way over-
engineering when a simple solution would suffice.

~~~
jackcosgrove
The auto industry has an Apple product model (keep design in house and release
very well-finished products) as opposed to a PC model (build a platform for
both hardware and software that others can design, build, mix, and match for).
Sure there are Delphis and other suppliers, but they build nuts and bolts
while the drive train, chassis, and body have remained the domain of the auto
companies. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm very interested in the production of standard drivetrains and chassis,
analogous to processors and motherboards, that hobbyists and customizers can
build upon.

~~~
rorykoehler
I'm thinking more of an enabler for Michael Dell type entrepreneurs. With the
democratization of design/manufacturing tools, a framework as I have
described, will allow smaller players/designers express their vision. While I
agree that the auto industry is very closed, I feel that the playing with the
interior of a car allows for more creativity than the interior of a pc or
phone, especially when there is no need to design for a driver.

~~~
tjl
There was something similar to this when cars first came out. You'd buy the
engine and the frame and hire a coach building company to build the body and
the interior.

------
Jerry2
Palm CEO Ed Colligan’s remarks regarding Apple’s prospects in the mobile phone
market:

> _Responding to questions from New York Times correspondent John Markoff at a
> Churchill Club breakfast gathering Thursday morning, Colligan laughed off
> the idea that any company — including the wildly popular Apple Computer —
> could easily win customers in the finicky smart-phone sector._

> _“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make
> a decent phone,” he said. “PC guys are not going to just figure this out.
> They’re not going to just walk in.”_

[https://web.archive.org/web/20061205211900/http://www.mercur...](https://web.archive.org/web/20061205211900/http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/columnists/16057579.htm)

------
csours
> Anyone who spends a few minutes in a Tesla gets that it’s different from
> other cars — more a delightful digital device than a cabin pulled by
> belching engine — and even those who aren’t “car people” experience object-
> lust.

I think this highlights some disconnects between Silicon Valley and Detroit.

* Detroit hasn't made "belching" engines since the 1980's.

* Average car age is 11.5 years. [1] It's pretty clear that people are OK with the user experience in their vehicles.

* "Selling Cars" is not a market prone to disruption. The cost structure is hideous. Enormous capital is required for at least 5 years before you sell anything, and after that your sales trickle in slowly.

* "Mobility Services" may be an amazing new market; we'll see. 11.5 years means there are a lot of old cars on the road that people may want to replace, but it also means that people are OK with those cars, and that there are a lot of people who have a minimal amount of money to spend on a new car.

* Upmarket vehicles _absolutely_ have to differentiate themselves in a number of areas, and while UX is increasing in importance, it is a middling 5th place after Safety, Quality, Reliability, and Performance.

* UX is difficult in automobiles. If you get UX wrong in an app, you can update, or your app can die and people will forget about it. If you get UX wrong in a car, people will hate you for it, but still buy your cars. [2] You can't download buttons and knobs [3] if people can't get used to your touchscreen. [edited]

* UX in autos can't be flashy or distracting, should get out of the way, be usable with 5% of the user's attention, but it must provide enough information and feedback to be used reliably and quickly.

1\. [http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2015/07/29/new-car-
sales...](http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2015/07/29/new-car-sales-
soaring-but-cars-getting-older-too/30821191/)

2\.
[https://www.google.com/search?q=cue+sucks](https://www.google.com/search?q=cue+sucks)

3\.
[http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/a1531/421...](http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/a1531/4213770/)

Disclaimer - I work for GM, these opinions are solely my own.

~~~
vvanders
WRT app updates Tesla has an advantage over everyone in that they do App OTAs
on a regular cadence(just got 7.1 last night).

Fun fallout from dealership agreements is that it looks like GM and others
can't legally do OTAs for their vehicles(dealer owns all software
updates/upgrades) which gives Tesla a distinct advantage:

[http://www.streetinsider.com/dr/news.php?id=11202274](http://www.streetinsider.com/dr/news.php?id=11202274)

~~~
csours
I did not know that. It is a big challenge to get the best value out of the
traditional partners in the automotive space: Labor (UAW), Dealers, and
Suppliers.

And by challenge, I mean it is a big mess.

Also, call me a fuddy duddy, but OTA updates for automobiles _SCARE_ me. They
should scare Tesla as well, and I hope they do. They've done well for now; in
5 years will they still have the same discipline? That being said - the OTA
mechanism has a HUGE value proposition and they absolutely deserve the kudos
they got for it.

~~~
vvanders
Yeah, if you don't have diligence and discipline you shouldn't be doing OTA
updates regardless of what industry you're in.

FWIW they've got a pretty awesome bug reporting mechanism via the voice
command "report <X>" which sends a snapshot of the car along with the
description.

They also have the ability to pull more detailed logs remotely(with your
permission). Had a few spurious messages come up, called service and they were
able to pull logs, verify that it was fixed in an upcoming OTA and not an
issue. Much better than having to drive to the dealer(which is ~2 hours
roundtrip for me). It's very slick to be able to pull CAN bus + other diags
remotely.

------
TheMagicHorsey
I'm skeptical of the ability of big, old companies to change their internal
cultures enough to become nimble and responsive.

Old companies have calcified political structures and old managers that have
enough political capital to detonate any change that threatens their fiefdoms.

Software/Services businesses are not slow and comfortable with huge moats that
just appear. You can't afford to be slow and bureaucratic. You have to be
constantly changing, reorganizing, and employees have to be comfortable
living/working in a zone of continuous chaos ... where you aren't exactly sure
what the next step is ... but you are experimenting to find out--and internal
groups are always rising and falling ... and managers are always rising and
falling.

------
TorKlingberg
Ford is the only American car brand that is considered a "normal car" in
Europe. I exclude Opel/Vauxhall that are owned by GM but no seen as American
brands.

~~~
eitally
That's largely because Ford Europe was largely autonomous, and also did things
like introduce a lot of modular chassis innovations, as well as EU-specific
designs like the Mondeo, original Fiesta, and Kuga, not to mention C-Max. They
deserve a lot of respect for putting up a good fight against VW on their home
turf.

------
chiph
Sounds like he's trying to change Ford from a product company to a services
company. That's going to be really tough - all those mid-level managers have
to be pointed in the new direction.

~~~
talmand
Depends on how long it takes. If the timeline is not too short then many of
those mid-level managers may not be around long enough to factor in that much.

------
BuckRogers
I had an uncle retire from Ford Motor Credit and a cousin still working there
as an engineer on the F150. I have faith that company will transition well
into the autonomous car and electric car future. They adopted MS Sync pretty
early on compared to competitors.

On Bill Ford, I don't know the whole story on him, but I could see how he was
a bad CEO and a decent advocate and visionary for these technologies. For a
wealthy man who probably doesn't have to do anything, he sounds commendable to
be trying so hard to contribute.

It's a bit of a shame in a way that the government bailed out GM and Chrysler
because Ford deserved to gain more advantage out of that due to their good
decision making. I hope that moving ahead they reap more rewards than they
have in the past for their forward looking moves.

I'm still preordering a Tesla Model 3 in March, but I'll definitely keep my
eye on what Ford has to offer soon.

------
Avshalom
Apple just doesn't seem like they'd make an f150 competitor. Which like what
half of USA Fords sales?

~~~
arprocter
An electric truck would be an interesting proposition - good torque for
towing, and a large footprint gives plenty of battery space, but currently I'd
imagine the high cost of entry and the range problem stop it from being
viable.

The new smaller engined forced induction Ford trucks seem to be getting good
reviews, so perhaps the segment is more open to innovation than I would've
guessed

~~~
Avshalom
Personally I'm hoping that electric trucks will eventually allow late 80s
early 90s sized compact pickups (like less than 190 inches in length) to find
a market again.

Though I'm not holding my breath for it.

------
Animats
Despite all the noise Tesla makes about their "advanced manufacturing
capabilities", their productivity is very low by auto company standards:

Tesla: 12,000 employees, about 50,000 cars/year, 0.24 man years per car.

Ford: 181,000 employees, 3,230,000 cars/year, 0.06 man years/car.

Tesla is heavily subsidized by government, sells an expensive car, makes very
few models, and still loses about $4000 per car. Something is wrong there.
Their head count is way too high.

~~~
vvanders
ZEV credits haven't been a significant part of their income stream for quite a
while.

Also they make ~20% profit per car but are reinvesting large amounts of
capital for Model X/3 + Gigafactory.

Please don't go throwing around FUD like this without looking into things in a
bit more detail. See their last quarterly report for the figures I referenced
above.

------
kposehn
He will be.

He _will_ be.

Obligatory SW:ESB reference aside, I think that the danger Bill may not be
cognizant of is just how advantageous vertical integration is for companies
like Apple. Other companies disregard it at their peril.

The thing is, I'm a dyed-in-the-wool car guy. I love cars, and probably will
never own an electric car. I prefer my snarling twin-turbo V8 german bruisers
that have an extremely high rubber-to-tarmac transmission rate.

But: I know which way the wind is blowing.

~~~
Animats
_" Bill may not be cognizant of is just how advantageous vertical integration
is for companies like Apple."_

The CEO of Ford not being aware of the advantages of vertical integration?
That's a joke. Until 1989, Ford made its own steel. They still operate
foundries and rolling mills. The Ford River Rouge plant was once the most
vertically integrated auto plant in the world - iron ore came in at one end
and cars came out the other.

Apple doesn't make iPhones. Foxconn makes iPhones.

~~~
kposehn
That's the thing - until 1989. The current leadership may not be, but that
doesn't mean they weren't in the past.

------
Ultan
_“We are going to build smart cars, but we also need to build smart roads,
smart parking, smart public transportation systems, and more”_

This is what will slow down the widespread adoption of autonomous vehicles, be
they in the form of a transportation service initially or not. The
infrastructure just isn't there yet.

------
smacktoward
_> Anyone who spends a few minutes in a Tesla gets that it’s different from
other cars — more a delightful digital device than a cabin pulled by belching
engine — and even those who aren’t “car people” experience object-lust._

Is there any car listing for $75,000 that _doesn 't_ inspire "object-lust"?

~~~
alricb
Possibly a really big utilitarian van with a super expensive diesel, like a
Mercedes Sprinter? (but ooooh that headroom)

------
gist
> "The point of the day was to emphasize Ford’s evolving strategy."

And the "point" of emphazing Ford's evolving stategy is to make it appear that
Ford is moving and grooving with the times and won't be left behind and
ultimately to have a positive impact on the stock price.

------
vlehto
>example of Apple and Nokia. Only Apple successfully built a broad customer
experience and robust ecosystem. “You can become extinct when you only focus
on the hardware,” he said.

I'm pretty certain Nokia's problem was never focusing only on hardware. They
focused on software all the time. The problem was that Symbian sucked and they
didn't open up for alternatives until it was too late. Samsung actually does
just hardware and they are doing fine.

~~~
Retric
Samsung's smartphone profits are tanking fast. Sure, Google saved them in the
short term, but in the consumer electronic industry over the long term you
really need to be a good software company or your margins are going to end up
paper thin.

~~~
femto113
I think if there's one thing Ford should be afraid of from Apple it's not
taking marketshare, it's taking profit share. Apple has carved out exactly
that slice of the the smartphone market where you can make a profit, and left
everyone else to fight over the no-margin remainder. Apple could conceivably
do something similar in cars by building one or two models that compete
directly with the most profitable cars (though it seems that all of Ford's
profits actually come from big trucks--hard to imagine someone hauling a half-
ton of manure in the back their rose gold Apple Pickup).

[1] [http://www.autoblog.com/2015/04/30/ford-f-150-profit-per-
veh...](http://www.autoblog.com/2015/04/30/ford-f-150-profit-per-vehicle/)

~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
> Apple could conceivably do something similar in cars by building one or two
> models that compete directly with the most profitable cars

If it were that easy, why hasn't anybody done it?

~~~
femto113
Because it is actually not easy? Keep in mind Apple has unprecedented
resources so not easy is not really a problem for them, as Musk pointed out
recently they've hired thousands of people to work on this. Also I think it
has been done to some extent, Tesla's Model S is now (by some measures) the
bestselling luxury car, and can probably be credited with accelerating BMW and
Porsche moving towards all-electric vehicles.

