I feel like if Ford had just not made this thing a "Mustang" then nobody would be griping about its weird grille. Sean swears it looks better in person and says that if you can move past all that, the car is further along than you might expect (mostly)
Polarizing bits aside, what struck me the most about seeing the Mustang Mach-E in person is how much it already feels like a complete package, despite having a year to go until it ships. (Save for the software, that is, which wasn't even close to working in the models Ford showed off Sunday night. Woof.) That's a testament to the work done by "Team Edison," the group inside Ford that has been developing the Mach-E since mid-2017 after pivoting away from a Focus-based electric car.
That sound you're hearing is not the artificial car noises the Mach-E makes by force of law, it is my mornful keening over the possibility (likelihood) that typically terrible car software will ruin an otherwise great car.
The Tesla comparisons are inevitable and warranted, but I think Sean's right to hold back on getting too deep into them until we see much more from Ford. A lot is going to depend on how well Ford executes in the coming year.
Bottom line: this is a very ambitious vehicle, and it's fascinating to see Ford throw so many different options at the wall. Here's just a taste of the many variations Ford is selling:
Let's start with that base $43,895 version of the Mustang Mach-E, which Ford has dubbed the "Select" model. The Select Mustang Mach-E will be offered in both rear-wheel drive (RWD) and all-wheel drive (AWD) configurations when it ships in "Spring 2021," and both versions use the same 75.7kWh "standard range" battery pack Ford has designed for its new EV. The RWD version will have a range of about 230 miles, and around 255 horsepower, with the ability to go from 0 to 60 miles per hour in six or seven seconds.
How badly did Google needs to squeeze in some good news for Stadia before launch? Very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very (that's 22 verys) badly.
This case has given us so many juicy details, but at this point I'm over it. Adi Robertson does a good job laying out the stakes here, though. Even though I'm over it, I'm going to be paying attention because there's a lot of software precedent about to be set.
That's two folding tablet/phones that actually shipped. I'm not sure if we'll be reviewing this particular one on The Verge yet, as it's not going to be particularly relevant in the markets we publish to (especially without Google Apps and services).
All these streaming Live TV services were priced unrealistically to start. Which is a bummer, because for a minute there I really did think we'd have a shot at getting live TV over the internet for a lot less money than it's ended up costing.
I don't know precisely where the costs are coming from, but I'm happy enough depending on an OTA antenna for the few times per year I can't get what I want to watch on Hulu or Netflix or Disney+ or HBO or YouTube. I would prefer to have more live sports and news channels, but that's not a $600+ per year kind of preference. I suspect a lot of people agree.
I'd like this. I'd like it better if 3rd-party apps could register access to NFC so I could tap my iPhone to my Sony camera to automatically transfer photos without having to open the app first (this is how it work on Android).