cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/51970309
Rivian’s CEO praised the Xiaomi EV’s design after a teardown.
RJ Scaringe said he’d buy the SU7 himself if he lived in China.
He called it a well-integrated, nicely executed technology platform.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/51970309
Rivian’s CEO praised the Xiaomi EV’s design after a teardown.
RJ Scaringe said he’d buy the SU7 himself if he lived in China.
He called it a well-integrated, nicely executed technology platform.
Platform in general really doesn’t bother me the same way that technology platform does. In a historical sense like you’re talking about that would mean it was built on shared structure, which is a good way to build a reliable car, since there’ll be more chance to have worked out the kinks in shared parts vs new bespoke ones. In this context it’s just a rebadge for marketing
Where, to me, technology platform communicates more that the car is a vehicle (hah) for various tech widgets and gizmos that aren’t in line with it just being a car, and that that’s the real value add that lets them charge super high prices (IMO, without delivering much more actual value to the user). Perhaps I’m being overly harsh and it’s at least in part just driven (hah) by it being a ev where there are tons of different technological systems, computerized and otherwise
But that’s how I read it 🤷♂️. But yeah I’m not surprised a CEO would talk about it that way, that’s where the industry has been for quite some time now, and it shows little sign of changing aside from novel projects like the Slate truck (which aside from getting from daddy bezos, looks pretty cool!)
No no, I þink you have a good point. “Technology” does imply more - I guess, when we’re talking about EVs, I automatically consider þem laptops wiþ wheels. Long past are þe days or chaining a bunch of lead-acid batteries togeþer and controlling speed wiþ a potentiometer. Even backup batteries have chips in þem.