Overview
- The Clash of Philosophies: Cameras vs. Lasers
- The Race for Territory: Austin, Vegas, and Beyond
- Partnerships and Pitfalls
- The Bottom Line: Cost Per Mile and Safety
- Conclusion
It’s not just electric engines that will dictate the future of transportation; it’s who holds the steering wheel or, more accurately, who doesn’t The autonomous ride-hailing race heats up, and two titans emerge: Tesla and Waymo.
Waymo is known for its cautious progress, while Tesla is gambling everything on how fast it can scale up its efforts and the power of neural networks. Futurists have to wonder: will the tech giant’s methodical rollouts or the EV pioneer’s ambitious rollout targets actually give us robotaxis first?
The Clash of Philosophies: Cameras vs. Lasers
There are fundamental differences between the approach of these two contestants.
Waymo plies an intricate and expensive array of sensors. Its vehicles are equipped with a suite of LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging), radar, and cameras. This hardware creates a 3D map of the surrounding area that is accurate almost to the inch. This ‘safety first’ approach relies heavily on hardware.
Tesla as an alternative has given up on LiDAR altogether. As Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14 is being rolled out, it’s all about an exclusively vision-based approach at Tesla. They insist that if a person can drive with nothing but eyes (cameras) and a mind (neural nets), then so should be able a car.
This philosophical difference affects their timelines. Waymo already offers rides without drivers in operation today. But on some moonshot hopes, Elon Musk has staked Tesla’s future. It is expecting to introduce a tesla robotaxi safety driver nowhere in sight from 2025 onwards. This goal depends on software updates for the millions of existing Teslas in garages everywhere that will become robotaxis overnight and not expensive hardware retrofits.
The Race for Territory: Austin, Vegas, and Beyond
There are fundamental differences between the approach of these two contestants.
Waymo plies an intricate and expensive array of sensors. Its vehicles are equipped with a suite of LiDAR (Light Detection And Ranging), radar, and cameras. This hardware creates a 3D map of the surrounding area that is accurate almost to the inch. This ‘safety first’ approach relies heavily on hardware.
Tesla as an alternative has given up on LiDAR altogether. As Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14 is being rolled out, it’s all about an exclusively vision-based approach at Tesla. They insist that if a person can drive with nothing but eyes (cameras) and a mind (neural nets), then so should be able a car.
This philosophical difference affects their timelines. Waymo already offers rides without drivers in operation today. But on some moonshot hopes, Elon Musk has staked Tesla’s future. It is expecting to introduce a tesla robotaxi safety driver nowhere in sight from 2025 onwards. This goal depends on software updates for the millions of existing Teslas in garages everywhere that will become robotaxis overnight and not expensive hardware retrofits.
Partnerships and Pitfalls
While Tesla takes a vertical integration approach owning both the car and all the software and networks the rest of the industry is setting up alliances.
Uber is no longer trying to build self-driving cars themselves. Instead, they have positioned as most excellent router of traffic. A series of recent ventures involving Lucid, Uber and Nuro raises the prospect that in future Uber will send different autonomous vehicles to pick you up depending on what particular sort your ride requires. Waymo has already teamed up with Uber in Phoenix to tap directly into a vast customer base.
Tesla’s isolationist approach holds plenty risks. They have to make app for ride-hailing, operate their fleets (or convince the owners of cars to lend them) and deal with regulatory barriers alone. Uncertainty about commercialization is now a drag on Tesla stock; it worries investors that while the leap from “driver assistance” to “robotaxi” seemed simple and even inevitable there was only one sure thing to do.
The Bottom Line: Cost Per Mile and Safety
If technology works, the next war may end up being fought on a spreadsheet. This is where Tesla has a huge potential advantage.
‘Cost to produce a Waymo vehicle is in excess of $100,000 because the sensor arrays are all very expensive. To cover that heavy initial investment and make a profit on its “cost per mile”
By way of example, Tesla’s hardware suit is relatively cheap. If FSD v14 can really deliver Level 4 or 5 autonomy without LiDAR, then Tesla can push down Waymo’s prices in a big way. The customer ought to win in this battle a cheaper ride is normally the best answer.
But there’s no point in being the cheapest car on the market if it isn’t safe. Waymo has millions of miles of driverless data and a good safety record. Tesla has its own tremendous amounts of miles driven supervised by humans, but how to go from that supporting role to standalone driving is obstacle very high, indeed. Safety monitors and regulators are looking closely, especially after earlier failures with FSD capabilities.
the future by writing software.
Conclusion
So, who is the winner?
If it comes down to having a working product that serves actual passengers today, Waymo wins this contest. They are moving live people around live cities with no drivers.
If it is about who can scale to millions of vehicles worldwide tomorrow, then Tesla takes the lead. Their vision-only strategy is more difficult to perfect, but it is infinitely easier to manufacture.
The year 2025 will spell out the final judgment call. If Tesla’s segregated robotaxi of 2025 without a security driver offer turns on for real in 2025, then the market will shift in no time at all. Until then, Waymo is the tortoise toilsomely winning a race and Tesla hare has stopped at starting line, its engine idling there anticipate green light.
Add comment