←back to thread

A $20k American-made electric pickup with no paint, no stereo, no screen

(www.theverge.com)
1329 points kwindla | 5 comments | 25 Apr 25 15:01 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
taylodl ◴[25 Apr 25 15:27 UTC] No.43794600[source]▶
I LOVE it! THIS is the kind of truck I'd be looking at to replace my 1998 Ford Ranger.

Here is what could be potential deal-breakers:

- Lack of a mobile app. Minimalist design is great, but I still want an app to manage charging and be alerted to any vehicle issues.

- Lack of good charge management and battery conditioning. Either that, or a cheap and easy to replace battery pack. I'd really like both!

- Comparable hauling and towing capacity to the 1998 Ford Ranger. Those numbers aren't exactly impressive, but I do use the truck as a truck, and I occasionally need the hauling capacity (weight).

- Bucket seats. I need a bench seat so I can take my wife and dog. Think weekend glamping trips. Picture 8 shows a bucket seat. It doesn't look like that would work.

If anyone from Slate is reading this, this is how I'm looking at this truck. FYI, I'll be comparing this to the Ford Maverick.

replies(31): >>43794692 #>>43794700 #>>43794763 #>>43794811 #>>43794831 #>>43794885 #>>43794914 #>>43794974 #>>43795270 #>>43795643 #>>43795656 #>>43795796 #>>43795943 #>>43796252 #>>43796714 #>>43796752 #>>43797342 #>>43797635 #>>43797641 #>>43797951 #>>43798033 #>>43798145 #>>43798246 #>>43798255 #>>43798738 #>>43799693 #>>43799714 #>>43799836 #>>43800852 #>>43801127 #>>43805436 #
ryandrake ◴[25 Apr 25 15:42 UTC] No.43794811[source]▶
> - Lack of a mobile app. Minimalist design is great, but I still want an app to manage charging and be alerted to any vehicle issues.

Noooooooooo! No apps, please! Finally a car not tethered to and dependent on your phone, and we already have our first request to app-ify it!

EDIT: Ughhh, according to the video that another user posted, it looks like there's an app, and yes, "updates" go through it :(

> - Lack of good charge management and battery conditioning. Either that, or a cheap and easy to replace battery pack. I'd really like both!

Yes to a simple battery system!

> - Comparable hauling and towing capacity to the 1998 Ford Ranger. Those numbers aren't exactly impressive, but I do use the truck as a truck, and I occasionally need the hauling capacity (weight).

Yes!

> - Bucket seats. I need a bench seat so I can take my wife and dog. Think weekend glamping trips. Picture 8 shows a bucket seat. It doesn't look like that would work.

Yes, definitely. It being a 2 seater is kind of a deal breaker for families. You really want a bench seat to at least stick a small child between the driver and passenger. Back in the day, we'd stuff 3 kids between two adults, but these days the Safety People would have a heart attack just thinking about that.

The article mentions an SUV upgrade kit that will bolt onto the back of the truck. Ugh, OK I guess. Sad that that's the way it will probably have to go.

1: https://youtu.be/cq1qEjwSYkw

replies(10): >>43794873 #>>43795949 #>>43796259 #>>43796268 #>>43796857 #>>43797069 #>>43797219 #>>43798980 #>>43799459 #>>43802258 #
taylodl ◴[25 Apr 25 15:46 UTC] No.43794873[source]▶
I'd want the mobile app to be an auxiliary, not a requirement for operating the truck. Keep the dashboard simple.
replies(5): >>43794981 #>>43795372 #>>43796286 #>>43797290 #>>43799160 #
ryandrake ◴[25 Apr 25 15:54 UTC] No.43794981[source]▶
I'd be worried that once an app got a foothold into the product, the company would be unable to resist the urge to spread the app's tentacles across the entire vehicle, adding connectivity and telemetry and DRM, integrating it into the other car's systems, adding remote-this and wireless-that, and then inevitably the product would end up just like the turd cars we have today.
replies(2): >>43795240 #>>43795278 #
instaclay ◴[25 Apr 25 16:12 UTC] No.43795278[source]▶
I have a iron filter that works via app. All configs can be done with button presses on the valve but in a much more tedious process/workflow.

It connects via bluetooth and not WiFi. If the company goes belly up, I'd just need the APK and an android phone to continue using the app to configure the valve and see/download water usage data.

Fast forward 20 years when I can't install the APK on android v79, I'd need an older phone to run the APK.. but that seems to be pulling hairs.

Apps would be great, it's how you handle the backend to it that's the gotcha.

I also have a water softener with an app that no longer works that had it's backend shut down. It can still be configured via the valve head button presses, but none of the "smart" usage data is available. As an example of good design, this is a perfect dichotomy of one company doing it well and one company doing it un-well[sic].

replies(2): >>43795356 #>>43797580 #
1. ryandrake ◴[25 Apr 25 16:17 UTC] No.43795356{4}[source]▶
Not only the backend, but what happens 40 years in the future, when our phones don't run the app anymore, or we're all on phones that are totally unlike the phones of today, or if we don't even have phones or apps? I would expect the car to still work after that long, and making it dependent on a technology that is specific to a particular decade risks premature obsolescence.
replies(3): >>43795648 #>>43796039 #>>43797012 #
2. instaclay ◴[25 Apr 25 16:35 UTC] No.43795648[source]▶
I'll be ecstatic if my iron filter lasts 40 years.

I saw in another post that a person said there's a difference between "device dependent" and "device augmented" that really resonated with me.

There's diminishing returns on everything, and just throwing your hands up on any subject as bad/good might be a disservice.

If I live through an era where phones are no longer a thing and APKs are a thing of the past.. then I either...

A. Don't use the iron filter like that anymore. (manual programing now) B. Get a new iron filter. (ewwwww) C. Keep a legacy-device for the purposes of programming the iron filter. (doesn't need any internet connection or subscriptions)

(C) would be my most liked solution.

3. stevenwoo ◴[25 Apr 25 17:03 UTC] No.43796039[source]▶
Relying on a mobile app is relying mobile operating system compatibility over the years and is just asking for combinatorial methods of obsolescence via OS/app/library breaking changes, plus if your old phone breaks, etc. Open sourced mobile app with open sourced back end might be somewhat acceptable but otherwise it's just asking to be bricked as soon as one of the companies involved goes under as we have seen time and again just in past couple of years.
4. EvanAnderson ◴[25 Apr 25 18:27 UTC] No.43797012[source]▶
> ...what happens 40 years in the future, when our phones don't run the app anymore...

40 years? How about, like, 3 to 5 years? Remember when Apple decided to kill all 32-bit iOS apps for new hardware? I have an old iPod and iPhone 4S with "landlocked" software I enjoy using but can't anymore because Apple.

Phone manufacturers have shown they don't give a damn about allowing old software to function. Physical devices tied to software is a terrible idea.

replies(1): >>43797512 #
5. ryandrake ◴[25 Apr 25 19:13 UTC] No.43797512[source]▶
Fully agree. We may have to keep a 40 year old phone around in order to just use a 40 year old car's companion app.