Look at those tactile buttons and knobs. For cruise control and wipers. And the flip switches for Infotainment / climate.
The "LUNCH" mode button that you have to pull and then shows a glowing ring. Feels 90s science fiction. I wonder if I can 3D print a replica, not sure for what yet, but I want it. It's literally inspiring for me.
You can certainly see the modern Apple influence: 4 different instrument panels, 7 different corner radii.
The control panel is the odd one out at the moment, but perhaps in the next version they'll "upgrade" it to a lop-sided rhomircle instead. Maybe even find a way to make the seatbelt foul the accelerator pedal when in use, in homage to the Magic Mouse.
I like tactile knobs and switches. I can see my self enjoying using them, similar to a fidget toy. Or an earbuds case that you can close with a satisfying SNAP.
Look at the infotainment, you have the handle bar thing that you can feel and thus rest your hand vertically. But instead of just a row of flip switches, in the middle you have the depressed button and a wheel. All of this helps using it without taking your eyes of the road.
I don't have a way with words, but there is also something about the instruments cluster. Looks cool I guess. Reminds me of 80s / 90s Mercedes maybe? Shows everything without being too much.
What does something looking ugly have to do with it having buttons?
The interior looks like the car version of those "Xbox 720", "Gameboy Omega" meme renders from the late 2000s. It's just plain ugly.
Compare that to some of the beautiful devices Braun and Sony created in the past. Buttons don't prevent something from looking beautifully crafted. But ugly design does.
Thinking of it, you know who could design a beautiful Ferrari interior? Teenage Engineering. Look up the OB4 radio in red.
You're not the only one. Users have been screaming for tactile buttons for about a decade or more now. Mercedes recently switched to tactile buttons and more expected to follow.
But regarding this car, did you check where it says "CONTROL PANEL" in your link? It is still a flat screen ...
Anyway, none of this looks revolutionary to me. Whether you think it is aesthetically pleasing or not (I do not).
> "CONTROL PANEL" in your link? It is still a flat screen ...
Yes, it has 9 or so physical buttons. Those are the ones I talked about in the post you are replaying to. As long as you can most needed tasks by buttons I'm fine also having a touchscreen.
Just judging my the images it seems the climate On/Off is touchscreen only. Even though you can control temperature by buttons. Could be that you can enable / disable it via other means. (Double click climate or whatever)
> none of this looks revolutionary to me.
Yeah same. But then again I have no idea what was revolutionary in car dashboards. Maybe GPS navigation?
Seems to still depend on some state that they show on the display, makes it seems like you still need to hit "invisible" buttons in the iPad UI to start setting the temperature with the hardware "lever", kind of defeating the purpose. But maybe again it's just the website/images/videos being unclear.
I guess there is probably some easy and "no look" way to go to some default state where you control temperature etc. If you start fiddling with songs etc it's been distracting since forever anyway, physical knobs or not. Fine-tuning the frequency knob to get rid of the noise was always distracting.
I know there's reasons they don't, but just take a form factor that is already loved, and stick an EV drive train in it. There's nothing about electricity that requires everything to look like something from Star Wars.
They specifically avoided this due to the center of gravity issue, as mentioned in a top gear article several days ago. The design philosophy makes sense to start from scratch - but IMO they hired the wrong designer.
Speaking of Porsche, they did once design a Star Wars ship and ended up with something super generic that looked like a free sci-fi model on sketchfab. Same as this car.
Hilariously, the quote that comes to my mind when reading about this monstrosity, is one from Steve Jobs "Everything around you that you call life was made up by people that were no smarter than you".
Ferrari sells dreams. That's not a car anybody will dream about.
I really like how you put it down! This is how I'd have imaged to be the Apple car, not a Ferrari. The "irony" of people defending this monstrosity are saying thing like "this is the type of comments of someone who cannot afford this", but they are completely missing the point. If it doesn't making people dream about it, then it's not worth of being a real Ferrari product.
With the kind of press it’s getting, I bet this model will outsell all others made in the last 10y. I don’t remember the last time a Ferrari was on the news.
For people who buy a Ferrari the price is not part of the equation at all.
Also Ferrari’s whole game is demand and supply manipulation - there are always more people who want a Ferrari than can actually buy one. These will all sell out whatever happens.
For previous models, it was the excessive "sportiness" that sometimes made them look like a car from a mecha anime.
Luce's is more of an underwhelmed look, especially with the outstanding interior design it was privileged to have that was (rightfully) overhype over the last few months.
A car with that kind of an interior deserved a much bolder design.
The new Toyota Prius looks better than this. I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but if Ferrari is being outdone on design by a common commuter vehicle it looks terrible.
I had a conversation with my industrial design teacher at university once about how slight ugly and uncommon design might have a positive effect on consumer demand over time.
I don’t know if there is a psychological term for that phenomena in design but I think it’s related with mere-exposure effect [1]. A design that stands out and is uncommon, will evolve a deeper relationship over time with the observer than a well-polished predictable design.
This is an uncommon design for a Ferrari, but this a very common design for commoners. What is more common than a Nissan Leaf? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Leaf
Its ugly and not fast for its class, even compared to much cheaper cars.
That's a paradigm shift for Ferrari which has always been associated with exclusive performance and beauty - and the removal of that USP is why it is seeing such pushback.
0-60 in 2.5s — faster than a GT3RS, but slower than a 911 turbo S. I guess for north of half a million, you should be able to keep up with the german top dog.
It's acceleration by itself isn't noteworthy for it's class but it's a Ferrari and they don't really half ass these things. I'm sure it handles amazingly.
Same reason why people buy Porche SUVs instead of 700hp Grand Cherokees (it's a fucking shame they never tossed that engine in the Journey though) or Corvettes instead of Chargers.
"Know your place" is what came to my mind when I looked at this.
I get that they think about going away from the combustion engine, but as a manufacturer of insanely expensive, loud and overpowerd sports car this doesn't make sense.
It's like if I as a software dev would be worried about the future market and suddenly advertise myself as a psychologist in search for clients.
It should not be a surprise that if you hire Ive to design something, it's gonna look like an iPad. It should not be a surprise that Ferrari stakeholders don't want an iPad car.
This is just gross incompetence all around.
Above all, Ive had an ethical responsibility to protect his clients from harming themselves by refusing the commission.
When I first saw this car, I thought it was ugly and expensice. Look at Chinese cars, they're cheap, stylish, and comfortable. I really envy Chinese people who can buy those cars.
Some chucklehead car review guy on YouTube is going to get their hands on one of these, put a Door Dash car topper on the roof and drive around town to see if anyone notices the $640k delivery vehicle. Few people will, and that's what's wrong: the entire point of Ferrari, for better or worse, going on 85+ years, is to get looks.
If all the people that have ever purchased a Ferrari for its interior design vanished today, there are so few it wouldn't make a headline. The Testarossa interior was so tragically bad it probably shouldn't have been permitted by the DOT et al. Yet there it was, plastered on posters and magazine covers; a thing of dreams around the world.
So only yet another case of complete disconnect between a brand and its loyalists. Not the first, and given the myopia plaguing such folk today, not the last.
How about this: techbros got their hands everywhere nowadays, so even an iconic car brand is forced to use their brainfarts? Forced by market pressure, forced by export conditions, you name it, but I cannot fathom why otherwise getting a tech guy design a car. I actually like the design, but I must agree it doesn't look Ferrari at all. Did they fire Manzoni or what?
I hope that at least they keep the one great thing from this exercise, the controls-UI bundle. Looks really great, intuitive and unique enough for the brand
I didn't know Jony Ive was involved. That may explain why it looks so disappointing.
Jony Ive is a brilliant example of the role selection plays in evolutionary processes. It is the sorting method that punishes bad ideas with death and allows good ideas to survive. After Jobs passed away the selection mechanism that only let Ive's good ideas pop through disappeared. It is popular to accuse Jobs of credit hoarding, but in that relationship he was the talent. Ive just someone who could generate ideas for him to choose from.
More than a mutation agent, less than a good designer.
What makes Ive bad for Ferrari is that he operates under the delusion that he is a great designer. This makes him arrogant. Arrogance paired with mediocrity isn't the best of combinations. And Ive sans Jobs is mediocre on a good day. But his myth is persistent.
Ferrari has a long history. Ive completely ignored it and designed a mediocre bar of soap.
If he did so out of an abundance of arrogance, or simply because he actually doesn't understand Ferrari is unclear. But it is an undeniable fact that the car neither looks like a Ferrari, nor is it a particularly elegant car. If you saw it without knowing what it was you could be forgiven for thinking this was a more modestly priced asian mass market car.
For admirers of a brand that aspires to make iconic cars this is, of course, a disappointment.
I did like the instrument cluster though. It dials back the somewhat childish and gaudy displays that sports car manufacturers have offered for the past couple of decades and replaces it with something that is more tastefully retro. A lot of older Italian cars had beautiful dashboards that give off strong race car vibes. (for instance the Bertone-designed Alfa Romeo GTV from the late 60s and early 70s - those had gorgeous instrument clusters)
I wish there was an article on this matter that wasn’t written like a capitalist industrial consumer taste manufacturing piece. Takes longer to get to the point too, but that’s just me.
This is a brand that permanently banned Paris Hilton for painting her Ferrari pink, Kim Kardashian for modifying her 458, and Justin Bieber for wrapping his in neon blue.
Where does that fall on the line between your product, your rules and I bought the thing, I own it, I paint it blue? My gut reaction was that this should totally not be legal, neither telling people how to paint their car, nor telling them what [not] to do with it, or to which places they can take it, seriously? And also banning people from buying one to enforce this.
That line is not that clear. Putting up a sign in your shop selling only to white people or not selling to Jews will get you in trouble in quite a few jurisdictions. On the other end of the spectrum you have things like a bouncer rejecting people at the door because they do not fit in. Also the difference between not allowing to paint your Ferrari blue and not allowing or making it hard to have your John Deere tractor serviced by yourself or a third party is not that obvious.
Ferrari's done this for... I don't know how long. Hilton bought one, she owned it, and she painted it pink. That's all legal. Then Ferrari fired her as a customer - also legal.
You missed out on the more egregious (IMO) points about having to buy certain "entry" Ferraris to be allowed to buy the rarer ones too.
What if they reject a customer not because of their wrong Ferrari color but their wrong skin color? I am not saying that they are the same thing, but there are probably acceptable and unacceptable reasons for rejecting a customer. And to me painting a Ferrari pink seems to be pretty far on the unacceptable side.
Legally, "Pink Ferrari owners" are not a protected class, and Ferrari's legally in the clear here.
Morally... I dunno. Telling a customer they're not worth the headache is something I'm generally on the side of, so long as the goods being sold are entirely optional. Once again, Ferrari's in the clear. A Lamborghini may not be exactly the same, but they're wildly different goods they are not.
And as lazy a counter it is: If you disagree, you're more than welcome to start your own luxury car brand. That's even how Lamborghini got their start - to knock Ferrari down a peg
Also relevant: the “swallow my pride and do this for the clicks” videos in the day of release that YouTubers began posting once the embargo was lifted. It was obvious no matter what they actually thought they were going to toe the line Ferrari wanted. Sad but hey, lie with pigs expect to get dirty…
I recognize Ferrari is one of our most iconic and exported brands.
Also I could not give any less fucks about the new Ferrari, the fact that it's ugly, the fact that it's probably going to tank or be a hit. They and their products are so detached from the lives of 99.9999999% of the population.
Also, what do you expect from a guy that used to design computer mice.
The inside looks so freaking cool: https://www.ferrari.com/en-EN/auto/ferrari-luce-design
Look at those tactile buttons and knobs. For cruise control and wipers. And the flip switches for Infotainment / climate.
The "LUNCH" mode button that you have to pull and then shows a glowing ring. Feels 90s science fiction. I wonder if I can 3D print a replica, not sure for what yet, but I want it. It's literally inspiring for me.
The outside though :(
I think all cars should have a ‘LUNCH’ button.
It can be sponsored by Uber Eats and whenever you press it, it automatically orders a burger to your current GPS co-ordinates.
Americans when describing their ideal car interior: "Imagine a burger ordering button".
Are we looking at the same interior? It is ugly as sin. Looks like a mockup render that is going to need ten more iterations to look good.
You can certainly see the modern Apple influence: 4 different instrument panels, 7 different corner radii.
The control panel is the odd one out at the moment, but perhaps in the next version they'll "upgrade" it to a lop-sided rhomircle instead. Maybe even find a way to make the seatbelt foul the accelerator pedal when in use, in homage to the Magic Mouse.
If you want to discuss it, maybe explain it?
I like tactile knobs and switches. I can see my self enjoying using them, similar to a fidget toy. Or an earbuds case that you can close with a satisfying SNAP.
Look at the infotainment, you have the handle bar thing that you can feel and thus rest your hand vertically. But instead of just a row of flip switches, in the middle you have the depressed button and a wheel. All of this helps using it without taking your eyes of the road.
I don't have a way with words, but there is also something about the instruments cluster. Looks cool I guess. Reminds me of 80s / 90s Mercedes maybe? Shows everything without being too much.
What does something looking ugly have to do with it having buttons?
The interior looks like the car version of those "Xbox 720", "Gameboy Omega" meme renders from the late 2000s. It's just plain ugly.
Compare that to some of the beautiful devices Braun and Sony created in the past. Buttons don't prevent something from looking beautifully crafted. But ugly design does.
Thinking of it, you know who could design a beautiful Ferrari interior? Teenage Engineering. Look up the OB4 radio in red.
> I like tactile knobs and switches.
You're not the only one. Users have been screaming for tactile buttons for about a decade or more now. Mercedes recently switched to tactile buttons and more expected to follow.
But regarding this car, did you check where it says "CONTROL PANEL" in your link? It is still a flat screen ...
Anyway, none of this looks revolutionary to me. Whether you think it is aesthetically pleasing or not (I do not).
> "CONTROL PANEL" in your link? It is still a flat screen ...
Yes, it has 9 or so physical buttons. Those are the ones I talked about in the post you are replaying to. As long as you can most needed tasks by buttons I'm fine also having a touchscreen.
Just judging my the images it seems the climate On/Off is touchscreen only. Even though you can control temperature by buttons. Could be that you can enable / disable it via other means. (Double click climate or whatever)
> none of this looks revolutionary to me.
Yeah same. But then again I have no idea what was revolutionary in car dashboards. Maybe GPS navigation?
> Look at those tactile buttons and knobs. For cruise control and wipers. And the flip switches for Infotainment / climate.
Are we looking at the same images? The steering wheel (https://ferrari-cdn.thron.com/delivery/public/image/ferrari/...) has a bunch of switches, yeah, but the Infotainment/climate (https://ferrari-cdn.thron.com/delivery/public/image/ferrari/...) seems to be all touchscreen buttons on the huge iPad-like device in the middle? Like most modern cars, it looks incredibly difficult to use and outright dangerous.
Those aren't touch screen buttons. Clear in any non-frontal image of which there's plenty.
You're right, the image seemed to kind of hide this. Seems this "video" with some perspective change makes it a lot more clearer what's going on: https://ferrari-cdn.thron.com/static/MXY2SL_Control_Panel_16...
Seems to still depend on some state that they show on the display, makes it seems like you still need to hit "invisible" buttons in the iPad UI to start setting the temperature with the hardware "lever", kind of defeating the purpose. But maybe again it's just the website/images/videos being unclear.
I guess there is probably some easy and "no look" way to go to some default state where you control temperature etc. If you start fiddling with songs etc it's been distracting since forever anyway, physical knobs or not. Fine-tuning the frequency knob to get rid of the noise was always distracting.
Yeah, climate on/off seems to be a touchscreen button.
Hopefully you can activate it by changing the temperature. Or maybe double pressing the "climate" physical button.
The interior design by Jony Ive is outstanding.
The perfect mix of tactile controls and mechanical needles with the screens feels revolutionary.
I expect others will follow replicating some of the ideas.
I know there's reasons they don't, but just take a form factor that is already loved, and stick an EV drive train in it. There's nothing about electricity that requires everything to look like something from Star Wars.
They specifically avoided this due to the center of gravity issue, as mentioned in a top gear article several days ago. The design philosophy makes sense to start from scratch - but IMO they hired the wrong designer.
Porsche do this and have been very successful.
Speaking of Porsche, they did once design a Star Wars ship and ended up with something super generic that looked like a free sci-fi model on sketchfab. Same as this car.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJevc8fQVEg
Hilariously, the quote that comes to my mind when reading about this monstrosity, is one from Steve Jobs "Everything around you that you call life was made up by people that were no smarter than you".
Ferrari sells dreams. That's not a car anybody will dream about.
I really like how you put it down! This is how I'd have imaged to be the Apple car, not a Ferrari. The "irony" of people defending this monstrosity are saying thing like "this is the type of comments of someone who cannot afford this", but they are completely missing the point. If it doesn't making people dream about it, then it's not worth of being a real Ferrari product.
With the kind of press it’s getting, I bet this model will outsell all others made in the last 10y. I don’t remember the last time a Ferrari was on the news.
Yes, people spend $640,000 based on some news...
As apposed to spending it based on feels?
For people who buy a Ferrari the price is not part of the equation at all.
Also Ferrari’s whole game is demand and supply manipulation - there are always more people who want a Ferrari than can actually buy one. These will all sell out whatever happens.
That goes the other way as well: who spends 640k on a car won't care much about the opinion of influencer X on platform Y.
Exactly, everybody will instantly recognize it, like the Cybertruck.
While all the other recent Ferrari's are basically a blur, I bet 95% of people could order then roughly by year.
> will instantly recognize it,
It looks like a generic Hyundai. If not for the badge I'd have assumed it was some Chinese mid tier EV.
Charging it is an interesting choice:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/13-ZdXDJTIfhe1vkAuzssvRx9bOQ...
I don’t possess the design vocabulary to properly roast the design, but it looks like an amateur’s first sketch at a “car of the future”.
Or it look like a modern successor to the Pontiac Aztek.
I can only imagine what the Italian designers have to say about it…
Don't worry, they are all pissed off
Isn’t it kinda traditional for people to say new Ferrari models are ‘ugly’ and ‘not a Ferrari’?
This is a different kind of ugly.
For previous models, it was the excessive "sportiness" that sometimes made them look like a car from a mecha anime.
Luce's is more of an underwhelmed look, especially with the outstanding interior design it was privileged to have that was (rightfully) overhype over the last few months.
A car with that kind of an interior deserved a much bolder design.
The new Toyota Prius looks better than this. I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but if Ferrari is being outdone on design by a common commuter vehicle it looks terrible.
It's not ugly. It's generic. That's the problem. Ugly can be eye catching. Generic will never be. Ferrari sells eye catching.
It's like "that's not a real Jeep real Jeeps have..." but for white collar office people.
I had a conversation with my industrial design teacher at university once about how slight ugly and uncommon design might have a positive effect on consumer demand over time.
I don’t know if there is a psychological term for that phenomena in design but I think it’s related with mere-exposure effect [1]. A design that stands out and is uncommon, will evolve a deeper relationship over time with the observer than a well-polished predictable design.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect
This is an uncommon design for a Ferrari, but this a very common design for commoners. What is more common than a Nissan Leaf? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Leaf
The problem is that the eFerrari looks like a slightly improved bog-standard $40k Chinese EV crossover suppository.
It's not all that ugly, it just doesn't really hit any Ferrari design language, or even do something interesting enough to justify the extreme cost.
Balenciaga
Regarding "The exterior looks like an iPad since Jony Ive designed it":
Marc Newson is also on the team, and there striking similarities to (t)his 27 year old concept car[1]: https://marc-newson.com/ford-021c-concept-car/
Regarding the UI: This is miles ahead of any other digital cockpit made by Ferrari. Also pretty good overall.
[1] via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48271629#48278841
Its ugly and not fast for its class, even compared to much cheaper cars.
That's a paradigm shift for Ferrari which has always been associated with exclusive performance and beauty - and the removal of that USP is why it is seeing such pushback.
0-60 in 2.5s — faster than a GT3RS, but slower than a 911 turbo S. I guess for north of half a million, you should be able to keep up with the german top dog.
It’s 0.4 seconds faster than a 50K Model 3 performance.
At that point, does it even matter
Pure acceleration is not everything, especially on track. But I guess a Model S Plaid (RIP) would beat easily a Luce.
It's acceleration by itself isn't noteworthy for it's class but it's a Ferrari and they don't really half ass these things. I'm sure it handles amazingly.
Same reason why people buy Porche SUVs instead of 700hp Grand Cherokees (it's a fucking shame they never tossed that engine in the Journey though) or Corvettes instead of Chargers.
"Know your place" is what came to my mind when I looked at this.
I get that they think about going away from the combustion engine, but as a manufacturer of insanely expensive, loud and overpowerd sports car this doesn't make sense.
It's like if I as a software dev would be worried about the future market and suddenly advertise myself as a psychologist in search for clients.
It should not be a surprise that if you hire Ive to design something, it's gonna look like an iPad. It should not be a surprise that Ferrari stakeholders don't want an iPad car.
This is just gross incompetence all around.
Above all, Ive had an ethical responsibility to protect his clients from harming themselves by refusing the commission.
Given it's Ive I'm surprised he didn't try to make the car as thin as possible
Or make it look round:
https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-airpods/airpods-max-2/starlig...
=>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_Multipla
The squircles and rounded triangles kill the interior for me.
Or arbitrarily remove something that everyone takes for granted. Like the glove box or the door handles.
And you have to flip it over and charge it from the underside.
Let' just hope it doesn't bend.
The jokes practically write themselves, right? :)
I mean, if Rolex hired Apple and gotten the Apple Watch then nobody except Jony Ive would have been happy either.
When I first saw this car, I thought it was ugly and expensice. Look at Chinese cars, they're cheap, stylish, and comfortable. I really envy Chinese people who can buy those cars.
I just want to know what exactly is wrong with it?
I get the history with Ferrari cars and their aesthetic and all.
But it looks like what one would expect from the man who designed iPhone.
> what exactly is wrong
Some chucklehead car review guy on YouTube is going to get their hands on one of these, put a Door Dash car topper on the roof and drive around town to see if anyone notices the $640k delivery vehicle. Few people will, and that's what's wrong: the entire point of Ferrari, for better or worse, going on 85+ years, is to get looks.
If all the people that have ever purchased a Ferrari for its interior design vanished today, there are so few it wouldn't make a headline. The Testarossa interior was so tragically bad it probably shouldn't have been permitted by the DOT et al. Yet there it was, plastered on posters and magazine covers; a thing of dreams around the world.
So only yet another case of complete disconnect between a brand and its loyalists. Not the first, and given the myopia plaguing such folk today, not the last.
You just identified what (some) people dislike about it. It's the disconnect between your final two sentences.
It would have worked fine with a much lower price and if it were badged as an Apple car.
It's an overpriced Hyundai. Just because it has a Ferrari badge does not make it a Ferrari.
Here's what an electric EV supercar could look like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlRIdLz6Juk
> from the man who designed iPhone
How about this: techbros got their hands everywhere nowadays, so even an iconic car brand is forced to use their brainfarts? Forced by market pressure, forced by export conditions, you name it, but I cannot fathom why otherwise getting a tech guy design a car. I actually like the design, but I must agree it doesn't look Ferrari at all. Did they fire Manzoni or what?
I hope that at least they keep the one great thing from this exercise, the controls-UI bundle. Looks really great, intuitive and unique enough for the brand
I didn't know Jony Ive was involved. That may explain why it looks so disappointing.
Jony Ive is a brilliant example of the role selection plays in evolutionary processes. It is the sorting method that punishes bad ideas with death and allows good ideas to survive. After Jobs passed away the selection mechanism that only let Ive's good ideas pop through disappeared. It is popular to accuse Jobs of credit hoarding, but in that relationship he was the talent. Ive just someone who could generate ideas for him to choose from.
More than a mutation agent, less than a good designer.
What makes Ive bad for Ferrari is that he operates under the delusion that he is a great designer. This makes him arrogant. Arrogance paired with mediocrity isn't the best of combinations. And Ive sans Jobs is mediocre on a good day. But his myth is persistent.
Ferrari has a long history. Ive completely ignored it and designed a mediocre bar of soap.
If he did so out of an abundance of arrogance, or simply because he actually doesn't understand Ferrari is unclear. But it is an undeniable fact that the car neither looks like a Ferrari, nor is it a particularly elegant car. If you saw it without knowing what it was you could be forgiven for thinking this was a more modestly priced asian mass market car.
For admirers of a brand that aspires to make iconic cars this is, of course, a disappointment.
I did like the instrument cluster though. It dials back the somewhat childish and gaudy displays that sports car manufacturers have offered for the past couple of decades and replaces it with something that is more tastefully retro. A lot of older Italian cars had beautiful dashboards that give off strong race car vibes. (for instance the Bertone-designed Alfa Romeo GTV from the late 60s and early 70s - those had gorgeous instrument clusters)
I don’t see the “face” in the design. Is this a break from that tradition?
I wish there was an article on this matter that wasn’t written like a capitalist industrial consumer taste manufacturing piece. Takes longer to get to the point too, but that’s just me.
There's a reason why the top Swiss brands don't manufacture quartz watches.
From some point on, people buy stories, experiences, luxury. Gadgets don't provide the same experience.
They do.
Ferrari devalued their brand.
From manufacturing luxury vehicles they are now manufacturing gadgets.
If someone is interested in buying a tablet on wheels, he can shop Tesla or Xiaomi, they don't need a Ferrari.
It's literally retro futuristic. Looks exactly like a concept car from the 80's
This is exactly the Innovator Dilemma at work.
Ferarri took the bold action to not be tied with it's past.
One of their director explicitly said they used an external design company to intentionally to avoid a minor refinement of its ICE cars.
They knew how this car will be perceived, if only because surely there must have been fierce internal resistance.
Ignore that car, but what is this?
This is a brand that permanently banned Paris Hilton for painting her Ferrari pink, Kim Kardashian for modifying her 458, and Justin Bieber for wrapping his in neon blue.
Where does that fall on the line between your product, your rules and I bought the thing, I own it, I paint it blue? My gut reaction was that this should totally not be legal, neither telling people how to paint their car, nor telling them what [not] to do with it, or to which places they can take it, seriously? And also banning people from buying one to enforce this.
You are free to do whatever, but companies are also free to choose who they conduct business with.
In the case of Ferrari, their products are essentially also rolling advertisements, so modifying them goes against what they are trying to sell.
That line is not that clear. Putting up a sign in your shop selling only to white people or not selling to Jews will get you in trouble in quite a few jurisdictions. On the other end of the spectrum you have things like a bouncer rejecting people at the door because they do not fit in. Also the difference between not allowing to paint your Ferrari blue and not allowing or making it hard to have your John Deere tractor serviced by yourself or a third party is not that obvious.
Ferrari's done this for... I don't know how long. Hilton bought one, she owned it, and she painted it pink. That's all legal. Then Ferrari fired her as a customer - also legal.
You missed out on the more egregious (IMO) points about having to buy certain "entry" Ferraris to be allowed to buy the rarer ones too.
What if they reject a customer not because of their wrong Ferrari color but their wrong skin color? I am not saying that they are the same thing, but there are probably acceptable and unacceptable reasons for rejecting a customer. And to me painting a Ferrari pink seems to be pretty far on the unacceptable side.
Legally, "Pink Ferrari owners" are not a protected class, and Ferrari's legally in the clear here.
Morally... I dunno. Telling a customer they're not worth the headache is something I'm generally on the side of, so long as the goods being sold are entirely optional. Once again, Ferrari's in the clear. A Lamborghini may not be exactly the same, but they're wildly different goods they are not.
And as lazy a counter it is: If you disagree, you're more than welcome to start your own luxury car brand. That's even how Lamborghini got their start - to knock Ferrari down a peg
Also relevant: the “swallow my pride and do this for the clicks” videos in the day of release that YouTubers began posting once the embargo was lifted. It was obvious no matter what they actually thought they were going to toe the line Ferrari wanted. Sad but hey, lie with pigs expect to get dirty…
I am Italian.
I recognize Ferrari is one of our most iconic and exported brands.
Also I could not give any less fucks about the new Ferrari, the fact that it's ugly, the fact that it's probably going to tank or be a hit. They and their products are so detached from the lives of 99.9999999% of the population.
Also, what do you expect from a guy that used to design computer mice.