1.) Design is subjective. I for one think while the Model S looks great, the X and 3 do not look that attractive.
2.) I really don't think "faster" really means much when are you talking about the majority of the mainstream automobile market. Top speed is low on the list of priorities for the average consumer.
3.) Cheaper is not free. I would save about $70 (based on today's gas prices in Ontario, Canada) per month in gasoline costs, but it would still cost me about $60 a month in electricity costs to do an average of 20,000 km a year.
4.) Production capability, supply chain and support network can not be overlooked. Tesla struggled to get 50,000 cars out last year. BMW sold north of 2 million cars in 2015. I recognize Tesla is growing day by day, but 50,000 to 2 million is a big jump.
To be fair, acceleration speed is most important, and zero-to-sixty in 6 seconds is competitive against $30k cars. (The fastest cars in this price range... like Ford Focus RS... is zero-to-sixty in 4.7 seconds. $35,900 for the RS.)
Everyone appreciates a speedy acceleration, when merging into highways or getting out of the way. Its far more important to be quick on acceleration than to have a top-speed.
6 seconds is fast for a luxury sedan, but there are plenty of cars for less than $30k that will do zero-to-sixty in under 6 seconds. The Subaru WRX does 0-60 in under 5 seconds and costs ~$26k. That's the only 4 door car I can think of that's quite that quick, but there are plenty of performance oriented cars in that price range that are very quick.
Yeah, this is more about what I was getting towards.
Tesla Model 3 isn't breaking any records. I can think of plenty of cars in the price range that is that fast actually (and as you noted, the WRX definitely undercuts the Tesla significantly in price).
But in my experience, zero-to-sixty in 6 seconds is a good speed. Its not "slow", and should be fast enough to feel somewhat luxurious.
The Subaru WRX, and Ford Focus RS are performance-oriented cars after all. They happen to also be good daily drivers. Performance-oriented drivers will stick with Subaru WRX / Focus RS because the real time performance people care about is the Laguna Seca lap-time (or other lap times on famous tracks)... a combination of cornering speed, handling, acceleration, AND braking to test all aspects of the car.
Zero-to-sixty in 6-seconds isn't amazing, and the M3 likely won't do Leguna Seca very well (Model S overheats for example and is forced to slow down. Its probably something to do with electric motors)
And there's the Subaru WRX, beating out the Model S on Leguna Seca by a few seconds, let alone the Model 3. So yeah, people who care about overall performance aren't going to be getting any of the Teslas any time soon.
----------
So the real selling point is the electric car value. The question is if the Model 3 can actually deliver. Its still a concept-car, a lot of things are going to change between now and "late 2017", probably 2018 when the cars actually come out for most people.
The GM Bolt is launching this year. BMW is launching their electrics soon. Tesla has a leg up inside of the electric market IMO, but I'm curious to see if the M3 actually gets widespread adoption.
And no, I don't think a refundable $1000 deposit really counts as a real sale.
The other thing to remember is the Model 3 will still have that "100% torque from a full stop" feel that gives the Model S it's kick. I suspect it will feel much faster than an ICE with the same 0-60 speed.
I doubt it'd be much better than any manual car reving up to 4000 RPM and then dropping the clutch. You can squeal the wheels of even low-power engines with that technique.
Frankly, zero-to-sixty in 6 seconds WITHOUT shifting and with 100% standing torque is kind of... awful actually. I suspect the opposite, when a ICE engine hits 4000 to 6000 RPM and the torque kicks in, you'll be accelerating far stronger than the smooth acceleration a Model 3 will give you.
Consider a jerky zero-to-sixty with three gear shifts on your typical manual car (say... Ford Focus ST or RS), in contrast to the smooth acceleration from like a Nissan or a Subaru WRX. You definitely feel more G forces from the Focus, while the WRX only beats the other car because the CVT engine never has to "stop" for the gearshift.
Similarly, I'd expect the smooth acceleration on the Model 3 to have less peak G-forces than a manual car. It will happen to be a smooth and constant acceleration, but there's a HUGE difference in Model 3 vs Model S acceleration. And I hope people aren't getting their hopes up.
I'd go the opposite direction. As the owner of a Golf R (which competes with the STI and Focus RS), the 1-second-slower-to-60 Model 3 (this is the very base model, mind you.. no talk of dual engines or performance models yet) will certainly have less peak torque, but I think it will feel faster due to the linear nature of it. Having driven and ridden in a number of different-spec RWD Model S, the impression of acceleration is exaggerated by the off-the-line torque and lack of jerky shifts (remember, power has to let up in order for a shift to subsequently jerky).
Car and Driver just released a review of the STI vs Golf R vs Focus RS. Both the R and the RS had 1-second-slower 5-60 runs vs 0-60. Why? Because they don't have clutch-dropping launches. The STI was vastly worse -- 2 seconds slower 5-60 vs 0-60. That's right -- 5-60 was ~6.8 seconds vs ~4.8 seconds 0-60.
Remove the ICE drivetrain dump launch and suddenly ICEs don't feel so quick. A Model 3 that can do 6 seconds 0-60 might sound slow, but is faster than it sounds, and likely feels so. It laughs at 5-60 because, in the electric world, that's 5 fewer mph it has to accelerate through. In the ICE world, we're talking about a lot of revs we need to pound through before the exhaust gasses spin up the turbo enough to create adequate boost to force air into the engine to create powerful enough explosions to try to create enough power in the itty bitty engine. That's, quite simply, a huge amount of time lost.
Even in my R, I can mash my foot to the floor and wait a second or two before acceleration is truly impressive.
Which is crap compared to the naturally-aspirated 3.2L I6 in my BMW. Which is crap compared to the same engine with individual throttle bodies where there's less distance between the outside air and the valve controlling the intake. Which is crap compared to a much larger engine, like a big V8. All of which are crap compared to a properly-tuned electric motor. (yes, in the interest of efficiency, you may find that many electric motors are programmed to have really laggy throttle response; even so, BMW brags that the i3 is quicker 0-30 than their own M3, even though I found it to be horribly laggy in throttle and deceleration response)
Would you recommend the Golf R as daily driver - for someone who likes to drive? I currently have a 3.2 A3, its nice to have 6 cylinders, but I'm tentative about turbo 4 in the R. I gotta have a hatch.:) With that said, I have tested the Tesla S and the linear torque is different sensation compared to ICE. Totally agree with you on that, its the smooth power that feels faster. So, I ended up reserving the Model 3 because its closer my price range.
I love, love, love the Golf. I'm not the kind of person who always needs a new car -- my other car I've had for 10 years, a Z3 M Coupe. But despite not having owned a ton of other cars, I've driven quite a few (and especially the ST/WRX/STI/etc), and the R is head and shoulders above the rest. The number one thing is it oozes quality -- just such a nice car, it would feel premium even if it wore a BMW badge; it's not just "nice for a VW".
Performance is great, torque everywhere, handles great, great grip. Love it.
Meh. In my opinion, manual transmissions are a waste and appeal to people's vroom vroom instincts. Which is not utilitarian. My electric fiat feels super powerful from a stop and I really appreciate it for merging or other uses. I don't want to drop any clutches or have my car sound like a revving chainsaw just to speed up quickly.
My previous car was a Honda civic, and I appreciate the considerable improved acceleration and smooth everything of an electric car. I'll never again get an ICE if I can help it, and it looks like the model 3 will be waiting for me when I'm ready.
Even the Volvo XC90 managed to slide under the bar at exactly 6 seconds. You really have to work hard to move downmarket enough to still be over 6. Sorry Kia owners.
The comment he replied to said nothing about Tesla competing with BMW on all models, the original comment was referring to model 3 vs bmw 3 series and C class Merc
His point was that the supply chain is there and working well. Tesla has a non-trivial amount of work to do to be able to catch up to those sorts of production numbers.
Just curious, when was the last time you used a Samsung device ?
A couple of points as I used to share your opinion, but I recently purchase a Edge Plus which changed my views (which while not as extreme were aligned with yours.
1.) For the most part, I do prefer stock android in terms of aesthetics and some key apps (dialer, etc).
2.) Samsung has really toned down their over the top "colourful" aesthetic on phones. They are increasingly following Material design guidelines.
3.) Depending on the carrier variant (and this could be killer), Samsung bundle apps are not as critical anymore and they definitely do not cause weird breakages when disabled.
4.) Having used both a Nexus 6P (considered the cream of the crop when it comes to stock Android experience) and there is very little performance difference between the two.
5.) Samsung (and other OEMs) have always been ahead of the curve of stock android when it comes to features that were co-opted into later versions on Android. They were the first to have quick access toggles in the notification bar, lock screen notifications, etc. So there were always some trade-offs.
6.) Even without getting into third party launchers, etc that can completely ape stock android in looks - Samsung has finally included proper theming support for their devices - so even a novice user can download a "Material Dark / Material Light" theme.
One perfect example that is still relevant to this day is the multi-window option that I use daily on my Edge Plus, which would not be possible on a Nexus device (just yet).
I'd argue that they aren't "so much further" ahead of almost everyone of the dimensions you listed with the exception of:
1.) potentially performance (as I'm not familiar with the true technical benchmarks of something like the A9 chip vs the latst Snapdragon, Exynos, etc)
2.) Apps - only if you include true "tablet" apps as well, as Android has done a terrible job with their tablet apps (basically glorified phone apps for the most part).
High resolution displays were around long before the iPhone 4 moved from their standard resolution. "Retina" is a branded term for a high resolution display from Apple. And in the current phone space, the iPhone 6S Plus lags quite a bit behind in terms of PPI and actual native resolution.
Similar arguments can be made for fingerprint scanning, personal assistant, 5 Ghz wifi and the waterproofing.
> "Around" isn't the same as "widely available and popular"
Agreed. That is, in fact, the entire point of my post at the top of this thread. Apple is not some magical pixie creating new innovative features out of thin air. They're imitating the best features from the competition (which is a wide landscape) and bringing them together in a single device.
This may sound critical of Apple, but I don't intend it as such. This sort of "trail and steal" attitude is genius, and Apple will only be beaten when they start to believe their own propaganda of being "innovative" and start introducing useless features that they will nonetheless have to keep supporting in new phones until the end of time.
My personal belief is that Siri and Force Touch are both instances of this phenomenon, although at least they have not made it easy for apps to integrate with Siri, so they could effectively remove (or significantly change) that features in future OS upgrades. Force Touch they're probably stuck with forever so users will keep trying to break their screens while they figure out that pressing on this particular thing doesn't do anything.
Out of the gate, I think Apple did many things very, very right, and that's put them in a position where they can afford to let their competition try out new features and only appropriate them if the feature is actually useful. Notably, I think, the "App" model, with the container-based isolation and installation, the curated selection, and the limited access to things outside of the app. And of course, finally making a touch screen that actually worked by being responsive enough that you rarely have to wonder "did it register that I pressed it, and now it's waiting, or did I miss the target?" which was the downfall of all previous touchscreens.
Apple has been this way for a while. They are not innovators, despite what they claim. They do excel at "polish" though. Whenever they take someone else's idea, they usually do a really good job of making it smooth, simple, and usable. I don't think that's a bad thing, but it's not "innovation".
Your tablet analogy doesn't hold true for the high resolution screens in phones.
Android's most popular devices (Samsung and Motorola/Droid) prior to Apple's first "retina" display had higher resolution displays than the standard 320 x 480 that Apple had for the first few iPhones.
Except the new XPS 13 is made out of aluminium and carbon fibre. And the $1299 model has a 13" screen with touch and a higher resolution. And it has an i5 processor versus a Core M.
It will be interesting to see how much RAM the base configuration of the new Macbook will ship with, because the XPS 13 at $1299 comes with 8 GB.
I think that Twitter might be entwined enough into the OS such that it'd get permissions that other third-party devs wouldn't. I would totally love to be wrong though.
I actually started watching the live stream after they demoed Cortana but going back now and seeing Belfiore demo Cortana:
- He added a show to his queue in Hulu but it stayed in the app
- He said "what's up with Terry Meyerson" and it went straight to Terry's facebook profile.
And I realize that FB has some deep integration within the OS (just like Twitter)
I have the HTC One X (International Version) apart for the horrible thing that is HTC Sense 4 (apart from the camera improvements and certain dialer improvements), I've been able to root and load custom ROMS on my phone without any issues.
If they ape the Windows 8 snap view completely, it won't work in portrait.
It will be interesting how they deal with installing phone apps on the tablet. They might just allow carte blanche or might require a developer to opt in to avoid issues with phone specific apps being unusable on the tablet.
What issues would they have with phone-specific apps, other than possibly lacking a microphone and cell plan? If their security model makes the developer list what sensitive APIs (like voice and location) they use, then they already have enough information to disable apps that depend on having a microphone.
If you mean having apps work on bigger screens, it looks like side stage lets them keep phone apps at a reasonable phone size. They might require opt-in to make phone apps fullscreen - that seems reasonable. (Although it sounds like one of their goals with QML is to make it easy to write apps that grow with screen size, so they're hoping that almost all apps will be able to do it.)
With Skype around, I'd imagine that microphones are actually pretty standard on tablets nowadays? And it's not terribly uncommon to see tablets with HPSA+ connections (or even LTE), right? Tablets and phones are rapidly becoming one in the same, just with different screen sizes.
As someone pointed out, it's just a re-branding of am existing third party "trade in" company.
Here's one for the Xbox https://microsoftconsoletradeca.cexchange.com/online/home/in...