While the technology advances at Tesla are very interesting, they are never going to be a mass-market producer and the Market expects Apple to be a mass-market producer (for better or worse). Tesla is more like Next - very high end, very esoteric, very expensive and few bought it.
I think if Apple bought Tesla, it would sink Apple's stock, in spite of the current hype over Tesla's stock. (Or maybe I'm just envious because I'm never going to be able to afford a Tesla car and even if I did, have no place to recharge it anyway.)
On the other hand, although medical devices are also somewhat of a niche market (depending upon the device), I think that if Apple can get involved in this area in a sophisticated way (more than that accessory you stick into a Nike shoe), that's something that can pull Apple far away from Android and the other competitors. But it has to be far more than predicting heart attacks because the primary market, relatively young people, don't think they're ever going to have a heart attack. (A herpes sensor might be a great idea, though!)
I'm very interested in anything Tom Holman brings to the table. I still have a 35 year-old Apt-Holman preamp and it still sounds better than any reasonably priced audio device out there today. In some ways, it's very Apple-like: a very sophisticated device that's very easy to use, but with even more flexibility than Apple normally builds into its products. I'd love to see Holman working on ways to make the audio in Apple's devices sound much better - I think that's an area that's been ignored the last few years and again, it would give Apple a competitive advantage. And if Apple is working on a television, Holman should design the audio capabilities.
So you don't think higher density batteries and electric vehicles will ever be mass marketed? Just like NeXT, Tesla's technology could be introduced in more mainstream consumer oriented products. (Not just cars either.) Sure, while they make a premium product now, they are already working on a followup SUV more geared for soccer moms. The model S is trailblazer designed to put (and prove) the technology in the hands of early adopters.
On the medical devices I somewhat disagree with you. Apple has proven many times over that it can turn seemingly niche markets into exciting mainstream product categories. If they make it simple enough to use and fairly reliable, you might see them do very well, especially if it can tie into the rest of their iEcosystem.
Even if this doesn't bear fruit, if it is an indication of the direction Apple is heading, I'm excited to see what comes next.
I originated the unattributed poems & the "What will your verse be?" speech in the film Dead Poets Society that Apple now uses for it's iPad Air TV commercials. Apple doesn't pay taxes fairly, but the company's ethos adds inestimable value to the American brand, so cities & towns, states and nations bow and pay homage to the genius which is Apple. Even I, seeing my Pavan cum Paen being used to further a product's sales am not offended, rather I am flattered, no more, I am joyful to have contributed the verse. So, Apple, with leadership and imagination, can indeed reach the stars, just as Elon Musk must have begged. Think not of the ground, think of the sky.
Apple put the off key above the delete key, but thoughtfully keeps it on long enough to correct a novice's error. So I thank an engineer/software guy to have done the right thing for me writing here, to keep it for you all. Thanks, Apple.
Apple's success is sweet, and it can become a million times greater than it is now, either by acquisition or by original development. Apple breathes, an organism, stretching out it's wings, testing them, so seek not the ground, seek the heavens.
Incidentally, recording electrodes with subclinical stimulus electrodes can differentiate between plaque and polar fluids like blood. The plaques are made up of electrodeposited crystals, lots of them, lots of different ones. Crystals, (even liquid crystals like the cholesterols in plaque) come out of solution at characteristic temperatures. 98.6 is not one of them, of course. All the juxtaposed crystals observable on electron microscopy in plaques are electrodeposited because, naturally, that is the only device allowed by physics. Simpleton physicians (remember, the MD is a bachelor's degree) seem to think that an aggregation of hundreds of different crystals could come about by some biological process, a patent absurdity. Veins are unaffected by atherosclerosis because they lack innervation, duh. Turbulence and electrogenic proximity both enhance electrodeposition, too. Mathematically, the incomplete equation for electrodeposition explains why tall people escape while shorties succumb. See chapter 10 or 11 in Nicholson B. Exocrinology the Science of Love. Amazon.
So for the non-dummies out there, I should have just established my bona fides, eh?
When exposed to a transient electric field, dipoles align. Released, the dipoles tend to return to their original position, but then they OSCILLATE BACK. That's a T-wave. Docs have wondered why T waves form since there's no electrical activity in the heart going on at the time. Well, it's a damped, driven oscillation, which I have described for my cousin's husband who published it for me under his own name, Tom Irvine. Well, lipids without dipoles don't do that. They flatline. Of course, you are going to have to have some means of discrimination because you are going to have such diversity that learning will need to take place, so many electrodes may be necessary. Sound? It's help, but you'll need both. No problem. Nothing's cheaper than programmable low voltage electrode arrays. You may have to account for many other variables, maybe not. It all depends. It's doable, but you will probably need somebody like me, which you don't have right now. Gimme a call.
Did you intend to write subclinical or did you intend subcutaneous?
While waiting for an answer, i'd offer that he was autocorrected from subcuticle.
Anyway, an interesting line of thought. The commoditization of biosensing will be a very big deal.
I'd hate to see Apple go into the car business, unless it involved some radical rethink of personal transportation. The Tesla is laudable in its power system, but still imperious and unsustainable, like all cars have become. Not human or nature scaled, in other words. Too complex and heavy.
It's now possible to make safe cars that are light in weight. If Apple is going to keep their focus, they're going to have revolutionize any business they step into.
I've always had this wet dream of Elon Musk running Apple. Can you imagine? Holy Shit!!! Elon Musk is currently the one person most like Steve Jobs in the world. In fact IMO he's the one great industrialist that can compare. So if they bought Tesla they'd have two options: Lose him, or make him CEO. Tesla without Musk would make no sense so...
I'd much rather Musk stay where he is to do what he does best solving very big problems. Without him on board at both Tesla and SpaceX, the ultimate goal of colonizing Mars is dealt a severe blow. As Musk has already publicly stated he fully plans to be part of the next frontier and his companies are the manifestation of that tantalizing goal.
There were at least three Teslas parked in the employee area of Apple's smallish parking lot in front of 1 Infinite Loop last summer. I am sure there must have been many more.
Despite its Android-based UI, there are clearly some Apple employees -- I am guessing senior management, since those seemed like prime parking slots -- that like the car.
Parking at Apple is not reserved - i.e., higher ups get better parking. Its first come first serve.
My opinion is that their meeting may have centered on batteries.
The Tesla uses the same type of battereis that we find in Apple devices.
In order to significant lower the cost of them, Musk already said that Tesla would probably build its own manufacturing plant for them. Now imagine that he could get Apple to partner on this endeavor (such as GT for sapphire) in order to have a very high production right from start to help utilize better the production capacity and reduce the batteries costs.
The 2 companies could even cooperate in order to improve the efficiency and capacity of them, before the plant starts de production, meaning exclusive technology that Tesla uses just for autos and Apple for computers, telecommunications and whereables, with no copycats possible without major lawsuits.
At least is what I would do.
Great points. Considering all the effort Apple has poured into creating it's own tech for processors, aluminum frames, metal alloys and screens, it's a very logical progression for custom battery technology to be their next challenge.
The Model S uses google maps on the dashboard and standard in car navigation on the heads up display. I actually prefer Apple Maps and Google Maps style of turn by turn directions over any automotive vendor solutions I've seen. What cars have you seen that have nav features better than google maps?
The Model S uses google maps on the dashboard and standard in car navigation on the heads up display. I actually prefer Apple Maps and Google Maps style of turn by turn directions over any automotive vendor solutions I've seen. What cars have you seen that have nav features better than google maps?
Most in-car navigation systems work completely offline. Their entire POI database is stored in the car and does not require an internet connection to access. The same thing cannot be said for Apple or Google maps.
The Model S uses google maps on the dashboard and standard in car navigation on the heads up display. I actually prefer Apple Maps and Google Maps style of turn by turn directions over any automotive vendor solutions I've seen. What cars have you seen that have nav features better than google maps?
They all have tthe off-line feature that d4NjvRzf mentions but are also geared toward always having a destination in mind, which includes PoI along a route, whereas Apple's Maps and Google Maps want to default to simply showing you a location and require too many extra steps to make it a destination. As for PoI routes, I don't think I've used a stand-alone TomTom an in-car navigation that tried to find me PoI along a route that gave me points that were many miles behind me simply because it was the closest geographically, but this seems to be the case with, at least, Apple's Maps.
Most in-car navigation systems work completely offline. Their entire POI database is stored in the car and does not require an internet connection to access. The same thing cannot be said for Apple or Google maps.
That is an issue but at least once you set the trip, at least with Apple's Maps, it will then store all the presumed data so you could be offline and still get to your destination. If you veer off course the map will go blank but the GPS will still plot your location in relation to the map you jut left.
Can Apple or Google ever have a great product if they don't allow for at least regional mapping to be stored locally?
I've always had this wet dream of Elon Musk running Apple. Can you imagine? Holy Shit!!! Elon Musk is currently the one person most like Steve Jobs in the world. In fact IMO he's the one great industrialist that can compare. So if they bought Tesla they'd have two options: Lose him, or make him CEO. Tesla without Musk would make no sense so...
If Tesla was run like PayPal there would be a 2.9% fee for charging your car (unless you were at a friend or family member's place) and once you did charge your vehicle you still couldn't drive it for 5 more business days. (This is a work in progress)
PS: So many celebrities have their own fragrance, including George Takei's wonderfully named Eau My, but not Elon Musk?
Apple buying Tesla isn't the dumbest idea possible, but very close.
Making cars is about as far from their core competencies as you can get. There are no "synergies" between the companies, they are tech companies heavily involved in batteries but spending $8B (a year ago) or $30B (today) to get some advice on batteries from Elon Musk is beyond dumb.
This is the kind of stuff that bad analysts like Adnaan Ahmad think up without any clue on actually how to run a business successfully. They are obsessed with "growth" without purpose. Apple can generate a very high return for shareholders with only minor growth, they are generating almost 10% in net cash flow on their market cap already, growing sales 5% a year and reinvesting that cash flow well (either in dividends, buybacks or new products) means Apple's value can grow at a 15% rate for decades. BUT ONLY IF they aren't distracted by poorly thought out acquisitions, and focus on their core markets.
A Tesla acquisition is the kind of dumb thing that Google does. Buy Motorola for far too much, claim it was for patents, find out patents aren't very valuable, say it was to build better phones, the phones aren't very good, take a huge loss. Now they massively overpay for Nest which has cool products and smart people but early zero natural fit with their business, and they'll justify it by some wild assed ideas to use Nest private customer data in their other businesses, and when that becomes public knowledge it will get either blocked by congress or it will kill Nests business as customers run away.
Even if buying Tesla was a good idea, Tesla is Elon Musk, you can't buy the company because he will be able to walk away and focus on building Falcon rockets with more billions.
What's wrong with making the best PCs, Tablets & Phones for the next decade? It's a very hard thing to do, taking Apple's ability to stay on top in those businesses for granted so they can defocus on new businesses a very bad idea.
Sorry, subclinical is only an approximate usage, mea culpa. Basically, it's shorthand for a stimulus that's not consciously considered. Very low voltages can "shock" locally, but not be felt by the brain as they're below the threshold for CNS reception, sorta. So you can have electrodes that alternately shock and record without the user knowing about it.
I'm very, very, very, very smart, but my language skills have a lot to be desired. Again, please accept my apology.
Comments
I thought it was funny!
While the technology advances at Tesla are very interesting, they are never going to be a mass-market producer and the Market expects Apple to be a mass-market producer (for better or worse). Tesla is more like Next - very high end, very esoteric, very expensive and few bought it.
I think if Apple bought Tesla, it would sink Apple's stock, in spite of the current hype over Tesla's stock. (Or maybe I'm just envious because I'm never going to be able to afford a Tesla car and even if I did, have no place to recharge it anyway.)
On the other hand, although medical devices are also somewhat of a niche market (depending upon the device), I think that if Apple can get involved in this area in a sophisticated way (more than that accessory you stick into a Nike shoe), that's something that can pull Apple far away from Android and the other competitors. But it has to be far more than predicting heart attacks because the primary market, relatively young people, don't think they're ever going to have a heart attack. (A herpes sensor might be a great idea, though!)
I'm very interested in anything Tom Holman brings to the table. I still have a 35 year-old Apt-Holman preamp and it still sounds better than any reasonably priced audio device out there today. In some ways, it's very Apple-like: a very sophisticated device that's very easy to use, but with even more flexibility than Apple normally builds into its products. I'd love to see Holman working on ways to make the audio in Apple's devices sound much better - I think that's an area that's been ignored the last few years and again, it would give Apple a competitive advantage. And if Apple is working on a television, Holman should design the audio capabilities.
So you don't think higher density batteries and electric vehicles will ever be mass marketed? Just like NeXT, Tesla's technology could be introduced in more mainstream consumer oriented products. (Not just cars either.) Sure, while they make a premium product now, they are already working on a followup SUV more geared for soccer moms. The model S is trailblazer designed to put (and prove) the technology in the hands of early adopters.
On the medical devices I somewhat disagree with you. Apple has proven many times over that it can turn seemingly niche markets into exciting mainstream product categories. If they make it simple enough to use and fairly reliable, you might see them do very well, especially if it can tie into the rest of their iEcosystem.
Even if this doesn't bear fruit, if it is an indication of the direction Apple is heading, I'm excited to see what comes next.
Apple put the off key above the delete key, but thoughtfully keeps it on long enough to correct a novice's error. So I thank an engineer/software guy to have done the right thing for me writing here, to keep it for you all. Thanks, Apple.
Apple's success is sweet, and it can become a million times greater than it is now, either by acquisition or by original development. Apple breathes, an organism, stretching out it's wings, testing them, so seek not the ground, seek the heavens.
Incidentally, recording electrodes with subclinical stimulus electrodes can differentiate between plaque and polar fluids like blood. The plaques are made up of electrodeposited crystals, lots of them, lots of different ones. Crystals, (even liquid crystals like the cholesterols in plaque) come out of solution at characteristic temperatures. 98.6 is not one of them, of course. All the juxtaposed crystals observable on electron microscopy in plaques are electrodeposited because, naturally, that is the only device allowed by physics. Simpleton physicians (remember, the MD is a bachelor's degree) seem to think that an aggregation of hundreds of different crystals could come about by some biological process, a patent absurdity. Veins are unaffected by atherosclerosis because they lack innervation, duh. Turbulence and electrogenic proximity both enhance electrodeposition, too. Mathematically, the incomplete equation for electrodeposition explains why tall people escape while shorties succumb. See chapter 10 or 11 in Nicholson B. Exocrinology the Science of Love. Amazon.
So for the non-dummies out there, I should have just established my bona fides, eh?
When exposed to a transient electric field, dipoles align. Released, the dipoles tend to return to their original position, but then they OSCILLATE BACK. That's a T-wave. Docs have wondered why T waves form since there's no electrical activity in the heart going on at the time. Well, it's a damped, driven oscillation, which I have described for my cousin's husband who published it for me under his own name, Tom Irvine. Well, lipids without dipoles don't do that. They flatline. Of course, you are going to have to have some means of discrimination because you are going to have such diversity that learning will need to take place, so many electrodes may be necessary. Sound? It's help, but you'll need both. No problem. Nothing's cheaper than programmable low voltage electrode arrays. You may have to account for many other variables, maybe not. It all depends. It's doable, but you will probably need somebody like me, which you don't have right now. Gimme a call.
Incidentally, recording electrodes with subclinical stimulus electrodes can differentiate between plaque and polar fluids like blood...
Did you intend to write subclinical or did you intend subcutaneous?
While waiting for an answer, i'd offer that he was autocorrected from subcuticle.
Anyway, an interesting line of thought. The commoditization of biosensing will be a very big deal.
I'd hate to see Apple go into the car business, unless it involved some radical rethink of personal transportation. The Tesla is laudable in its power system, but still imperious and unsustainable, like all cars have become. Not human or nature scaled, in other words. Too complex and heavy.
It's now possible to make safe cars that are light in weight. If Apple is going to keep their focus, they're going to have revolutionize any business they step into.
I'd much rather Musk stay where he is to do what he does best solving very big problems. Without him on board at both Tesla and SpaceX, the ultimate goal of colonizing Mars is dealt a severe blow. As Musk has already publicly stated he fully plans to be part of the next frontier and his companies are the manifestation of that tantalizing goal.
There were at least three Teslas parked in the employee area of Apple's smallish parking lot in front of 1 Infinite Loop last summer. I am sure there must have been many more.
Despite its Android-based UI, there are clearly some Apple employees -- I am guessing senior management, since those seemed like prime parking slots -- that like the car.
Parking at Apple is not reserved - i.e., higher ups get better parking. Its first come first serve.
Great points. Considering all the effort Apple has poured into creating it's own tech for processors, aluminum frames, metal alloys and screens, it's a very logical progression for custom battery technology to be their next challenge.
The Model S uses google maps on the dashboard and standard in car navigation on the heads up display. I actually prefer Apple Maps and Google Maps style of turn by turn directions over any automotive vendor solutions I've seen. What cars have you seen that have nav features better than google maps?
The Model S uses google maps on the dashboard and standard in car navigation on the heads up display. I actually prefer Apple Maps and Google Maps style of turn by turn directions over any automotive vendor solutions I've seen. What cars have you seen that have nav features better than google maps?
Most in-car navigation systems work completely offline. Their entire POI database is stored in the car and does not require an internet connection to access. The same thing cannot be said for Apple or Google maps.
They all have tthe off-line feature that d4NjvRzf mentions but are also geared toward always having a destination in mind, which includes PoI along a route, whereas Apple's Maps and Google Maps want to default to simply showing you a location and require too many extra steps to make it a destination. As for PoI routes, I don't think I've used a stand-alone TomTom an in-car navigation that tried to find me PoI along a route that gave me points that were many miles behind me simply because it was the closest geographically, but this seems to be the case with, at least, Apple's Maps.
That is an issue but at least once you set the trip, at least with Apple's Maps, it will then store all the presumed data so you could be offline and still get to your destination. If you veer off course the map will go blank but the GPS will still plot your location in relation to the map you jut left.
Can Apple or Google ever have a great product if they don't allow for at least regional mapping to be stored locally?
No. Because PayPal.
If Tesla was run like PayPal there would be a 2.9% fee for charging your car (unless you were at a friend or family member's place) and once you did charge your vehicle you still couldn't drive it for 5 more business days. (This is a work in progress)
PS: So many celebrities have their own fragrance, including George Takei's wonderfully named Eau My, but not Elon Musk?
Making cars is about as far from their core competencies as you can get. There are no "synergies" between the companies, they are tech companies heavily involved in batteries but spending $8B (a year ago) or $30B (today) to get some advice on batteries from Elon Musk is beyond dumb.
This is the kind of stuff that bad analysts like Adnaan Ahmad think up without any clue on actually how to run a business successfully. They are obsessed with "growth" without purpose. Apple can generate a very high return for shareholders with only minor growth, they are generating almost 10% in net cash flow on their market cap already, growing sales 5% a year and reinvesting that cash flow well (either in dividends, buybacks or new products) means Apple's value can grow at a 15% rate for decades. BUT ONLY IF they aren't distracted by poorly thought out acquisitions, and focus on their core markets.
A Tesla acquisition is the kind of dumb thing that Google does. Buy Motorola for far too much, claim it was for patents, find out patents aren't very valuable, say it was to build better phones, the phones aren't very good, take a huge loss. Now they massively overpay for Nest which has cool products and smart people but early zero natural fit with their business, and they'll justify it by some wild assed ideas to use Nest private customer data in their other businesses, and when that becomes public knowledge it will get either blocked by congress or it will kill Nests business as customers run away.
Even if buying Tesla was a good idea, Tesla is Elon Musk, you can't buy the company because he will be able to walk away and focus on building Falcon rockets with more billions.
What's wrong with making the best PCs, Tablets & Phones for the next decade? It's a very hard thing to do, taking Apple's ability to stay on top in those businesses for granted so they can defocus on new businesses a very bad idea.
A Tesla acquisition is Dumb, Dumb, Dumb.
Sorry, subclinical is only an approximate usage, mea culpa. Basically, it's shorthand for a stimulus that's not consciously considered. Very low voltages can "shock" locally, but not be felt by the brain as they're below the threshold for CNS reception, sorta. So you can have electrodes that alternately shock and record without the user knowing about it.
I'm very, very, very, very smart, but my language skills have a lot to be desired. Again, please accept my apology.
I do agree. I own an electrified Quest velomobile from velomobiel.nl, but it is laborious to own if you are not in tip top shape like me.