“Today’s cars have advanced crash prevention breaking, intelligent heads-up displays and pre-crash alters, but customers still think the tech companies Apple and Google can do a better job, according to a survey by CarSafetyRules.com,” Daniel Berg reports for LAPTOP.
“The study asked 1,000 new car owners in the UK which brand would be most likely to develop technologies to best improve road safety,” Berg reports. “Apple took the lead, with 21 percent of the vote, with Google ranking a close second at 19.8 percent. Both beat Volvo, a brand widely known for high safety standards, which garnered 19.7 percent of user confidence.”
Read more in the full article here.
Related articles:
Apple quietly turning every car on the road into an ‘iCar’ – March 8, 2013
Apple and Volkswagen working on iCar? – August 29, 2007
RUMOR: Apple prepping vehicle navigation system – June 18, 2007
Business writer begs Apple CEO Steve Jobs to start a car company – November 02, 2006
weird survey..
It makes me wonder whether Apple could produce better chickens than Perdue.
Isn’t Volvo owned by the Chinese government? If so, safety will suffer. Or was that Saab?
Saab.
I would be more than happy if they would just make some great, powerful computers with robust operating systems and realize they could corner the market as the only company doing that. Instead, they are making phones, pads, and pods that about 90% of consumers think are the same as everyone else who is making phones, pads, and pods. However, there is hope in this idea. Send Tim Cook to run the automobile manufacturing division and let someone who knows what he is doing take over the role of CEO of the re-energized computer company.
Dumbass
I don’t agree Jay.
I think Tim is very capable. I just wish that he wouldn’t bend over backwards for Wall Street.
I live in the Detroit area. I’ve been to Silicon Valley. The people don’t think AT ALL like the people there. We work hard, but basically in 19th century terms. Out there they work hard in 21-22nd century terms, visioning and building the future, etc. When Detroit thinks about the future it looks just like now only shinier, more expensive and with more curves. Out there the future looks nothing like now, but is rather a disrupted, revolutionized now…
So would Silicon Valley make a better car? He’ll, what they make wouldn’t be a car, it’d be better than a car, bearing only a slight resemblance to a car, and in all the best ways.
In short, yes; yes they would. (Although I can’t imagine they would deign to do the same.)
Tesla
Not surprised.
What system is Ford using? Or who develop the Sync and software developer than controls the car functions?
Dell would install the cheapest break system they could find and then charge you extra for the seat belts.
And oil changes would have to be done in India!
Good meme: the dell car.
Dude, where’s my car
I wonder if one were to crash in a Google car would the HUD display during the accident choice of doctors, nearby floral shops to send condolence flowers, funeral parlors, Hallmark stores, contacts of next of kin, etc. in real time as the accident is happening? (of course)
Should read, “…a Google car would the HUD display ads during…”
Breaking?!
More like brake, brakes and braking.
This just proves that education in America is broken.
Good joke though.
Do you wash your hands a lot?
If wishes and buts were candies and nuts then every day would be a Merry Christmas.
they said there were 1,000 people surveyed, so the difference between 19.8% and 19.7% is ONE person.
jeez, should would design a better exterior than Volvo..they are boxes.
Volvo’s current lineup isn’t boxy anymore.
Sturdiest, safest, most durable (peacetime) boxes to ever have wheels.
Isn’t it interesting that they say Apple and Google beat Volvo, where the difference in votes between Google and Volvo is 0.1%, but they didn’t say (in the headline) that Apple beat Google, where the difference is 1.2% ?
Ok, I guess I read the headline wrong. (Or did they change it???)
Sure! Apple will make my Volvo still safer with iCar Safety accessory 🙂 …at the same time putting my iPleasure factor through the roof (of my Volvo of course), closer to iHeaven.
Oh guys, what pleasure awaits us all, enjoy; iHeaven to us all.
Tim, are you listening?
You could as well wonder wheather a wrong question can come up with the (b)right answere. Like adding one stupidity to another and think you get the bright answere or solution out of it.
Try the math, multiply zero with any number of our choosing and all we get is zero.
Sorry but I actually want to operate my vehicle not the other way around. Which means, yes, I want to pay attention to the car and the road and the traffic myself. And use a stick.
Ah life is so simple and theoretical in the world of opinion surveys……..until you actually have to build something that works.
It’s funny that people think of Volvos as being so safe
They got that recognition by Ralph Nader, upon their invention of the three-point seatbelt
However, it was a paid-for option, and it took them three years to make it standard.
Mercedes-Benz, however, licensed or from them in the first year and made it standard immediately across all of their lines!
People don’t often realize that it was Mercedes-Benz that invented the automobile, as well as 90% of all auto safety standards.
(Seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, abs, traction control, the steel safety cage, etc, etc, etc…)
Mercedes, actually Daimler these days, did not invent the automobile. Having lived in Stuttgart and having visited their museum (the old one- not the current one), I know Daimler claims to have invented the car, but there were wheeled powered inventions previous to Daimler.
http://citedelautomobile.com/en/collections/jacquot-break-0
Would Apple disable ALL cell phone use in the car or automatically disable the car if a drunkard or drug addict gets behind the wheel? These would improve safety more than anything else.
As for the ridiculous survey, the intelligent reader stops reading as soon as the writer reveals his IQ, using the word “breaking” instead of “braking”. Obviously not a tech journalist nor a valid survey….
The last time a startup automaker attempted to enter the market with a technologically superior and demonstratedly safer automobile was the Tucker Torpedo. Bloat, not real safety enhancement, has ensued ever since. If we really cared about safety, our cars would weigh much less & all seats would have 6-point harnesses instead of air bombs.
Adding more gadgets or mass only increases price while usually decreasing performance & reliability. The intelligent buyer increasingly finds new overcomplicated vehicles to offer little additional value over last decades’ models. But automakers have taken advantage of the unquestioning gullible consumer who accepts whatever oversized chintzy glitzy plasitc polished turd is offered in the showroom.
Just as fuel economy standards are actually a reasonably effective way to protect the consumer from needless excess fuel use, the best way to increase automobile safety might actually be to phase in a small progressive manufacturer vehicle tax based on weight. Incentivize automakers to decrease the average mass of moving metal, and everything improves: safety, economy, and dynamic performance. The end user can always pay more (or install aftermarket steel roll cages and 6-point racing harnesses) if they think safety needs further improvement. Clearly almost nobody does this, so it’s obvious that the word “safety” is more a marketing term than a tangible concept that consumers actually assess objectively.
…and what about the safety of the roads themselves? In the USA, too, motor fuel taxes should be slowly increased and dedicated ONLY for road system maintenance, instead of the current system where a balkanized & politicized mixture of property taxes & income taxes cover the vast majority of road work, with streets falling apart whenever some corporation lobbies their lapdog politician to redirect those tax revenues toward other pet projects. Hence instead of a logical system where the more people drive, the more money would be available for road upkeep, the opposite is usually true — and self-evident by the crumbling infrastructure of the nation. Seems odd to focus on automobile safety when the roads on which we drive are unsafe, poorly marked, and inefficiently managed.
Bottom line: there is much that could be done to improve automotive safety, but most of these things would have to be implemented collectively, preferably at the international level. Nothing Apple currently does, no technology it possesses, would noticeably improve transportation safety. That’s probably why Apple will continue to stick to computing.
Apple would design a masterpiece, Google would copy it and have it manufactured by Samsung.
That’s is brand perception. Very nice Apple.