MobilEye details their unusual strategy.

Topic: 
Tags: 

People don't talk as much about MobilEye (Intel) in the self-driving race, but their strategy is different and interesting, and they are the most established in working with automakers. I have an article discussing some elements of their strategy include a very different approach to sensor fusion and mapping, among other things.

Read my new Forbes site column at MobilEye's strategy to win self driving

Comments

Hey Brad! Your rss feed is not working.
https://ideas.4brad.com/index.rdf

On the strategy of different companies, any thoughts on the MVP (Minimally Viable Product) approach? Best historical example is VHS vs Beta.

I don't think Beta vs. VHS is an example of MVP vs. complex product. Many teams are taking an MVP approach, though a few are not. Waymo wants to go directly for the brass ring, a full robotaxi service, and can afford to, but their first product is still only a portion of that.

Largest fleet of cars on the road with their chips, much bigger than Tesla (but they don’t have the ability to update software in those cars on demand that Tesla has.) Nonetheless, a valuable asset for mapping.

This is incorrect. Since 2019 they have been doing OTA updates which allows them to improve performance and update the feature set.

Tesla's ability to update is vastly more than any other car company or component maker. They control the entire stack, the update process, the data channel. It's almost akin to the ability Waymo and others have -- and in some ways more as Waymo doesn't get access to some of the internal parts of their base vehicle.

Add new comment