Who ordered a New Defender ?

[Pilat]

So it is a feature of minimal functionality and for some it will lead to floating Defenders. Got it.

I'm not against technology. Just prefer they focus on useful features that would differentiate LR from the crowd.

That's the umpteenth time you have used the argument that the Defender needs to "differentiate" itself in this manner.
So, what you're saying is that it needs to do without "stuff" just to be "different". I'm sorry, but I don't buy a car or do without something merely to be "different", and I suspect very few people do.

 

[mpinco]

That's the umpteenth time you have used the argument that the Defender needs to "differentiate" itself in this manner.
So, what you're saying is that it needs to do without "stuff" just to be "different". I'm sorry, but I don't buy a car or do without something merely to be "different", and I suspect very few people do.

Ah, no I didn't say "without". I did say early in the discussion of the new Defender that many of the 'new' features will be or already are commoditized as the 'cost' is very low to add them. Have you noticed that many manufacturers are selling into the same space as LR, with the same functionality and selling the perception of the same capability? While we all know that is not true, the volume of commoditized feature sets will go to the lower cost, higher volume manufacturers. Blackberry has commoditized QNX and is providing it as a product to a broad range of manufacturers. The manufacturer adds a 'skin' to the OS/Application. You see that with Android OS and the many smartphone suppliers. They look different but basically offer similar functionality. LR sourcing the OS from Blackberry is a very good decision BUT they need to realize that their OS is commoditized and brings with it some baggage.

LR needs to figure out what features will differentiate itself from the rush to apply technology to every aspect of a vehicle. Simply adding a ECU to replicate normal trail process is not differentiation. I used wading depth as an example because I really don't see the value of this technology and I also don't see the value of 'wading' defined as a sequence of normal off roading actions embedded in a single selectable function. It's just not enough nor in the right direction. For me it fails the value equation for the added complexity. The 'why am I paying for this' when I don't see the value. It's how LR ended up with 85 ECU's. That said, some will see value in the commoditized feature set. LR has already made a statement with investment/organization decisions. They overtly downsized hardware and are now positioning themselves as a IT company.

Hey, these discussion are good. Without them LR would receive little feedback and have little information with which to reflect on design decisions. They do listen/read and will use the feedback to improve products.

 

[Pilat]

That's just the same longwinded argument that they should not do "stuff" (electronics) in order to make them "different". It doesn't matter how many words you add to that.

Ah, no I didn't say "without". I did say early in the discussion of the new Defender that many of the 'new' features will be or already are commoditized as the 'cost' is very low to add them. Have you noticed that many manufacturers are selling into the same space as LR, with the same functionality and selling the perception of the same capability? While we all know that is not true, the volume of commoditized feature sets will go to the lower cost, higher volume manufacturers. Blackberry has commoditized QNX and is providing it as a product to a broad range of manufacturers. The manufacturer adds a 'skin' to the OS/Application. You see that with Android OS and the many smartphone suppliers. They look different but basically offer similar functionality. LR sourcing the OS from Blackberry is a very good decision BUT they need to realize that their OS is commoditized and brings with it some baggage.

LR needs to figure out what features will differentiate itself from the rush to apply technology to every aspect of a vehicle. Simply adding a ECU to replicate normal trail process is not differentiation. I used wading depth as an example because I really don't see the value of this technology and I also don't see the value of 'wading' defined as a sequence of normal off roading actions embedded in a single selectable function. It's just not enough nor in the right direction. For me it fails the value equation for the added complexity. The 'why am I paying for this' when I don't see the value. It's how LR ended up with 85 ECU's. That said, some will see value in the commoditized feature set. LR has already

Hey, these discussion are good. Without them LR would receive little feedback and have little information with which to reflect on design decisions. They do listen/read and will use the feedback to improve products.

 

[mpinco]

That's just the same longwinded argument that they should not do "stuff" (electronics) in order to make them "different". It doesn't matter how many words you add to that.

No. I did say that LR should partner to create standards. That turns into Intellectual Property that has protection from commoditization. I'm sure they have thought of that for some of the software that they are creating. I raised the example of communications when you are cut off from cell/HDRadio/etc. I'm sure we could all figure out a LR specific / differentiator for those environments where all the other manufacturers would be at a disadvantage. Wouldn't that be better than loading up a cabin with multiple radio's / gear? How about one interface for basic Kenwood/Yaesu/Icom functionality? What if wading was replaced with APRS and text/email capability? Ham radio is going digital. How about well thought out antenna designs? Offer it as a Defender 'Communications Package'. That is just one example of not following the crowd. LR's investment in bitcoin is another example of 'everybody will have it' commodity that in reality will be part of your wallet, not your vehicle.

 

[Pilat]

No. I did say that LR should partner to create standards. That turns into Intellectual Property that has protection from commoditization. I'm sure they have thought of that for some of the software that they are creating. I raised the example of communications when you are cut off from cell/HDRadio/etc. I'm sure we could all figure out a LR specific / differentiator for those environments where all the other manufacturers would be at a disadvantage. Wouldn't that be better than loading up a cabin with multiple radio's / gear? How about one interface for basic Kenwood/Yaesu/Icom functionality? What if wading was replaced with APRS and text/email capability? Ham radio is going digital. How about well thought out antenna designs? Offer it as a Defender 'Communications Package'. That is just one example of not following the crowd. LR's investment in bitcoin is another example of 'everybody will have it' commodity that in reality will be part of your wallet, not your vehicle.

Again, you want them to not use the tech (such as sensors repurposed as wading sensors etc.) in order to "differentiate" themselves.

You want JLR to "create standards"? You really want them at the bleeding edge of technology all of a sudden? That seems to go counter to the rest of your arguments.


You are now adding other features you want instead of the ones offered. And, really,you want ham? You do realise that if they incorporated that into the car, you'd need a license to use it, right? Not only is ham dying, it would make it even more expensive, and you'd need a license to use it. If you want ham, go buy a ham transceiver. Talk about adding unnecessary cost to everyone else.


Also, I seem to remember you were one of the people who earlier on argued that wading depth sensors would be useless for the people who only used to go to the mall. And now you want to add a frigging ham radio - something you need a license to operate as well as being a ridiculously niche interest. Hell, an iridium package (i.e. global sat phone on the iridium network) would be much, much more useful for most people. And even that is not exactly mainstream, nor even close to practical for most people. That too would be extremely unnecessary when it comes to added cost for no benefit to most people (99.99999 or so percent of people).

But again, you revert to "not following the crowd" simple because you want to "differentiate" yourself, regardless

 

[mpinco]

HAM radio is not dying. In fact Technician class is up double digits over the last 10 years as code requirements were eliminated. From some recent numbers:

".......During the period of 2005 to 2015, the US population grew about 9%, which means that the number of FCC licenses is actually growing slightly faster than the overall population........"

Yes, you need a license. Not a bid deal for technician class. Cost? Minimal. Recurring cost? Zero.

Cell/HDRadio will never cover mountain trails. It is a limitation of cell/HDRadio technology. For JLR? Opportunity!

Creating standards is not bleeding edge. The current move to electrification IS bleeding edge and does require standards. JLR is already there. They will need to make decisions on what differentiates their products from the crowd. Wasn't it a discussion on the Fireside about "Overlanding" being the latest fad?

I've supported the move to incorporating technology. I simply said that the "apps" they have chosen are easily commoditized and offer minimal value on the trail. They are "apps".

Others may have different opinions.

Isn't the new Defender suppose to be the all-purpose vehicle for all environments? What products would differentiate them from ........ say KIA? Or Hyundai? Or Toyota? I believe they are all QNX based.

This is not an argument. It is a suggestion that LR look beyond the commoditization bandwagon. Hell, everyone has "terrain response" dials of some kind. For 90% of the customers there is virtually zero difference between all the solutions. ............If you think about it there are now only 2 cell phones sold in the entire world.

Hopefully JLR is listening. They are going to need volume to be financially successful.

 

[Pilat]

I am not saying getting a ham license is difficult. I am saying it is a legal requirement in order to use it, and that you therefore need to be interested in "hamming" in order to make use of that feature you request.
Ham is dying. Yes, more people will get a license within a short period when it becomes easier to get one. However, the usage of hams are down compared to, say, 20 years ago. And for good reason. You need to be a geek to use it, and as less and less people use it, it becomes even rarer to be able to use it for emergencies or even general communication. And that is even when we discount the weather influencing the reception/transmission.

Yes, you can find scenarios where if you're in a group, all outfitted with hams where ham is better than "cell" (I wasn't mentioning cells), but there are other radio communication than hams. There is also the iridium network. I don't like how dishonest you were when you strawman me and pretend I said cell phones where better than radios (or hams, for that matter).

As for the rest of your post, it's just a rehash of you wanting JLR to put a lot of effort into making things from scratch - including frigging ham antennas - rather than roll out things that are already in the market and to some extent repurpose them for other uses (i.e. the wading sensors as a good example). It's all about implementation, but you want them to reinvent the wheel, just to be able to say they're "different" somehow.

Seriously, I guess you must really dislike something like ZF transmissions too - regardless of model and quality. And you kind of have to want every supplier to design and build their own engines - model-specific.
It's a good thing that electric/hybrid drivetrains is or will be a commodity. It generally means prices will drop due to scale, it generally means better quality, and the final-product can still be implemented differently, depending on car manufacturer. And the same holds true with JLR and the Defender. I also wonder if you're also against independent suspension. Or perhaps solid axles. I mean, both of those are commodities, yet they're implemented differently according to model and manufacturer (suspension manuf. as well as car manuf.).

Talking about commodities. Both the new Toyota Supra, the BMW Z4, and the new Morgan Plus 6 use the exact same drivetrain and engine. Yet, they are implemented differently, and quite different cars.

 

[mpinco]

You took lots of leaps on those assumptions. Like I said, this is not an argument, simply a discussion how to better the Defender relative to competition. JLR's task is to figure out how to ensure the market perceives why it is better to buy their products. Sometimes small things make a big difference. In today's world communications is increasing in importance but certain technologies have significant limitations outside urban areas. That spells opportunity.

 

[Pilat]

You took lots of leaps on those assumptions. Like I said, this is not an argument, simply a discussion how to better the Defender relative to competition.

Sheesh, that's the second time you say that. Obviously, you don't understand what an "argument" is in this context. It doesn't mean "a verbal fight". To make an argument means you use logic and reason to argue for a position.

JLR's task is to figure out how to ensure the market perceives why it is better to buy their products. Sometimes small things make a big difference. In today's world

Yes.
However, arguing that they shouldn't repurpose sensors or even have sensors (or a multitude of other things) merely to make themselves "different" is not really how they sell things best and make a profit.

communications is increasing in importance but certain technologies have significant limitations outside urban areas. That spells opportunity.

I don't think you understand what the iridium network is at all. You seem to think it is cell phone towers. It is not. It is a global satellite network that even covers the frigging poles. It has the best coverage of any sat network. It is truly global. The reason for this is that its satellite are higher than (and geostationary), say, thuraya. It means you can phone and text from anywhere in the world. Including the poles and in the middle of the Pacific.

Yes, communications is increasing in importance, but ham is not exactly where it matters. Not only are there other radios you can use instead of a ham setup (that doesn't have as a prerequisite that you're a radio geek and doesn't require a license), but you want JLR to reinvent ham antennas. Frigging ham antennas. I'm sorry, but if ham was even close to reliable for what is needed when it comes to in-vehicle "communication" (as well the car itself being connected), you wouldn't have to request it being added. In fact, it is not only due to license requirements it is not widespread. You have to be a geek as well as having fellow geeks also outfitted with it to be even remotely useful to anyone. And even then, it is far from reliable.

 

[mpinco]

I'm identifying how LR can differentiate themselves from the masses, all the new vehicles that are targeting the Overland market. Amateur Radio may appear as for geeks only but is really not. LR could create a Communications Package that addressed the complexity by leveraging the already existing standards. You don't need to reinvent antennas. You do need to provide the connectivity and best ground plane for the vehicle of choice. That could be engineered as part of the "package". That package could include the needed apps to support comm outside cell/HDRadio areas. My point is that is a unique package adds value that would appeal to a broad range of customers who view communications as an important aspect of vehicle choice. My point is for LR to think outside the commoditization box. The best example of commoditization is smartphones. You may walk into a cell phone store and see 50 devices but in reality there are only 2 phones on the market - Apple and Android, loaded with different skins and bloatware.

Iridium is interesting but expensive with very spotty reviews. It also has 'geek' issues. In addition your weekend overlander/camper/4WDer wants something that doesn't require contracts. Keep it simple.

What other 'packages' are attractive to the user profile of the Defender?

 

[Pilat]

I'm identifying how LR can differentiate themselves from the masses, all the new vehicles that are targeting the Overland market. Amateur Radio may appear as for geeks only but is really not.

There is some overlap in interests, but you're still arguing that they should implement a frigging ham radio and design their own ham antennas.

LR could create a Communications Package that addressed the complexity by leveraging the already existing standards. You don't need to reinvent antennas.

You wanted them to design their own antennas a few posts ago.

You do need to provide the connectivity and best ground plane for the vehicle of choice. That could be engineered as part of the "package". That package could include the needed apps to support comm outside cell/HDRadio areas. My point is that is a unique package adds value that would appeal to a broad range of customers who view communications as an important aspect of vehicle choice.

Again with the dishonesty from you. You say "customers who view communications as important". You try to make-believe that "communications" equals HAM. It does not. What makes this even more egregious is that until my last post, you thought Iridium was the same as cell phones.

Put it this way: In an emergency, I'd rather not rely on HAM radio. I'll take a sat phone, a plb, and even an iridium tracker over a ham radio.

My point is for LR to think outside the commoditization box. The best example of commoditization is smartphones. You may walk into a cell phone store and see 50 devices but in reality there are only 2 phones on the market - Apple and Android, loaded with different skins and bloatware.

Actually, that's not true. There are variations and implementation differences, as well as hardware differences. But the commoditization of the hardware means that modern phones are good almost across the board. Remember the "feature phones" of yore? Yeah, I'm glad we don't have those anymore.

Iridium is interesting but expensive. In addition your weekend overlander/camper/4WDer wants something that doesn't require contracts. Keep it simple.

Yeah, using ham radios is simpler than using a sat phone. Sure. How about trying to find someone who can relay your message onwards, rather than dialling a phone number to get direct access to other sat phones, landlines, mobile phones. Yeah, much simpler to use a ham radio for contact [SMH].

What other 'packages' are attractive to the user profile of the Defender?

Apparently nothing that uses sensors, actuators or anything else already on the market, according to you.

 

[mpinco]

I did not say LR should design antennas. I did suggest a package that prewired a vehicle for RF suppressed power (provide isolated power/ground directly though firewall), routed coax and a nice convenient ground plane that already has the grounding issues worked out, with say a NMO mount or appropriate RF connector. This really isn't rocket science and could be offered at a profit. Why would you not select that option on a Defender? Does the same Comm Package sell on Velar's or Evoque's? Probably not. The usage profile for those vehicles is primarily urban and dense digital comm.

The communications I'm referring to is the same as the Defender market positioning. Maybe its not Amateur Radio. Maybe Iridium as a revenue stream for LR. Iridium reviews highlight that it is also 'geek' and not very clean or plug-n-play. That again is opportunity to differentiate. I do think that a communications package targeting Amateur, CB, etc would sell better than Iridium that is too high of a cost and spotty as you have to see a satellite. 2 Way or repeater comms package would appeal to a broad section of the 4WD/Overland market and have more value than common trail processes (raise vehicle, drag brakes after water) like wading. APRS could also be pre-packaged for the non-geek. Actual weather could be a location dependent service (upload GPS coordinates, receive localized weather). Remember, you have zero cell service. That is VERY common in the intermountain west/Rockies.

 

[Pilat]

Yeah, whatever, this has run its course.

 

[Dendy Jarrett]

I agree - this has run its course and I'm locking the thread.