Why Apple should build bikes
The Boardman AiR is a wonderful piece of engineering. Named after one of Britain’s most celebrated cyclists, its shape has been honed in a wind tunnel, ensuring maximum aerodynamic efficiency. I saw one on my ride to work this morning — a U-lock was hanging off its handlebars, jumping into the air with each bump of the road and swinging gently against the rider’s leg as he cornered.
To a first approximation the bikes I see on my daily commute are a daft showcase of the inappropriate. A rasping, under-inflated, puncture-ready platoon with a hodge-podge of misaligned lights and dangling locks. More Mad Max than Tour de France. Yet the latter provides the heritage for most of these bikes.
Thin tubes and tires save weight, but leak air and puncture easily. An oiled chain with external derailleur provides gears in a lightweight package, but readily converts dirt from the road into a grinding paste that wears down the drivetrain.
A dispiriting gulf exists between the types of bikes people buy and those on which they commute. All commuter bikes need lights. The majority of winter riders will want mudguards too. Anyone who doesn’t have the luxury of a secure parking spot needs a lock.
Buying a car without lights or a lock would be inconceivable, yet this is business as usual when purchasing a bike. If you enjoy being gaped at in disbelief, pop into a bike shop and ask for a bike that integrates the item that a typical commuter will use daily for 4 months of the year, and occasionally throughout the year. Yet integrated lighting is considered such a radical concept that only a handful of producers like Vanmoof offer them.
At the parts level, things are more promising. Schwalbe makes a tire with a Kevlar lining. Since switching to it my puncture rate has gone from about 1 a month to none in 8 months. Combining a belt drive with an internal hub — as opposed to chain and external derailleur — makes for a virtually maintenance-free drivetrain.
Despite innovation at the parts level, where bike building is concerned it seems most engineering effort is spent jacking up the height of a local maxima. The cycling world hasn’t had a MacBook Air moment where a bike launch elicits howls of protest from true cyclists.
Part of the problem is that most bikes commuters ride are built by cyclists for cyclists — this is unequivocally not what commuters need and results in the aforementioned hodge-podge where the stuff that converts a racing bike into a useful commuter bike is added as an after-thought.
At this point I should mention Dutch style bikes and the cities where they thrive — Amsterdam and Copenhagen. Cycling culture is interwoven into the DNA of these cities; in Copenhagen 20% of those aged 80 to 84 cycle regularly. Their mature cycling infrastructure allows for the relaxed riding position of Dutch style bikes, bikes which have storage space, lights and mudguards. Unfortunately, these bikes aren’t well suited to cycling amidst traffic or in hilly environments i.e. most cities that aren’t Amsterdam or Copenhagen. In London, New York or Sydney commuting on a bike means cycling amongst traffic, and notwithstanding upcoming improvements, will continue to do so for some time.
So, a problem exists. People who want to cycle to work, to school, to shops or friends, are not well served. What does this have to do with Apple?
There are many reasons to cycle, but perhaps the simplest are that cycling is good for your health, and that cycling feels good. Apple’s ambitions as a company that makes the world a little better for its people and their environment are clear. Their $2B spend on datacentres powered by 100 percent renewable energy dovetails nicely with Healthkit, a tool that “just might be the beginning of a health revolution”. Encouraging more people to cycle by building better bikes isn’t selling sugared water, it’s changing the world. Building bikes is consistent with Apple’s culture and vision, both old and new.
Could Apple design bikes? Perhaps more so than any other company, Apple understands design that doesn’t intrude or impose, design that allows function to come to the fore. So, I think they’d understand what makes a good bike. A bike that doesn’t demand your regular attention, but that can be depended upon equally on a cold and wet night, or a warm summer’s day. A bike that can be forgotten about, but relied on absolutely. There’s clearly demand for such a bike. Crucially, a bike should not only meet this need, but it should also appeal strongly. This too, I think Apple could achieve.
Why don’t the incumbent manufacturers offer such bikes? Perhaps they don’t see the problem; perhaps when they walk around cities and see bikes secured with three locks (one for each quick-release wheel, one for the frame), lights stuck on with gaffer tape and chains brown from rust, they think everything is just fine. This seems unlikely. So maybe they deem it a problem not worth solving. But to do so, they’d have to ignore the cities around the world turning to cycling as a tool for decreasing CO2 emissions, congestion and noise pollution, and increasing the health of their inhabitants. Again, this seem unlikely. So we’re left with the conclusion that they’ve attempted to design such bikes, but have been unable to do so. It may be that combining the features needed for a commuter bike into a lightweight package that can be produced at acceptable cost is deeply challenging, and beyond the ability of current producers.
From the original iPhone through to the sapphire crystal of the iWatch, Apple have repeatedly shown themselves capable of delivering products that others could not. Their control of the supply chain is renowned. Their cash reserves gives them manufacturing leverage unavailable to others. Too challenging for a bike producer might be within reach for Apple.
Should Apple build bikes? Roughly 130 million bikes are sold each year, around one-eight the number of smartphones. While the revenues of, say Shimano, are paltry compared with Apple, the bike business can be profitable. Furthermore, swift growth can occur under the right conditions, such as road design that offers cyclists safety.
Inevitably, a lateral move into bike building would be met with much skepticism. But Apple have had hobbies before. The first generation could merely be very good, it doesn’t need to be a knockout.
London is spending £900m on cycle routes. Many new cyclists will tentatively venture onto those routes and onto the road. They deserve to ride something better than the status quo.
