Even more than that, it's for bicycles powered by Mr. Fusion!
(see middle entry, below)
And then Google’s inevitable car presence…
?? “Like an omnipresent totalitarian government, Google is there!” ??
A black portal opens up, lightning flashing from within and tentacles slithering out of it, the screams of the damned heard muffled behind the roar of wind. Eric Schmidt steps out of it.
“Hey, hi, how’s it goin’? Oh, your car’s broken? Sure, I’ll fix it. Anything for our product customers.”
I’m gonna stop you right there.
paxman wrote: »
What makes me doubt the whole thing is wether an Apple Car would dilute the Apple brand. Apple's name may help launch and sell the thing, but persistent problems could also tarnish the brand.
It has to be just for Carplay. Wouldn't developing an actual car require a ton more space? Like airport hanger size
Yeah. or maybe it is just a location to outfit the mapping vehicles.
My tiny little machine shop is 3000 square feet, and there isn't any room to develop much of anything in it of any size, certainly not a car.
I'm not buying this as a automotive design facility. It's absolutely too small, and not secure enough.
dcorby23 wrote: »
The car on the render on the top of the page looks a lot like Trabant. (the 70s and 80s East Germany vehicle, not sure if it could count as a "car").
ireland wrote: »
That's applies to any new product Apple develops. That's an awful reason to doubt Apple getting into the car market. Apple's a product company, an experiences company, and Apple is certainly now a green company. An electric car would be a product that pushes Apple very much so but it may also be Apple at their best. Just at the turning point where electric cars are about to go mainstream Apple could be there to take their slice of the pie in a way only Apple can.
I'd love to see what Apple can do in this space.
Where all car companies fail more or less is the CUI - the Car User Interface.
Apple will fix that.
For everything else - who needs Apple?
You mean the D.U.I. (Driver User Interface)?
you may vehemently disagree, but as someone who owned several MGB in UK, all from the late 60's to late 70's, the MGB is alive and well, but lives under the miata mx5 badge. the new 2016, although way too little horses for me now, looks incredible. Pisses me off the was BL screwed up the MG marque.
Sadly I agree, as an owner of a MGB '74 1/2 Late Model the Miata is the closest thing out there. Almost bought a MX-5 in 1998 but ended up with a BMW R12C instead.
The Apple logo will be built into the taillights...
They are trying to keep everything secret. If they used their own building it would be too obvious
Look like they're busted now. What're they gonna do? Move to another anonymous building? To me, it's not about the location, but employees they hired leaked information. So, doesn't matter if the project is moved in house or into an unknown location, it's still leaked. These employees have no pride and respect in what they're working on. Stupid.
That would look awesome. Just make the hollow ring around Apple logo like BMW headlight.
razorpit wrote: »
I'd hope for more of a Triumph or MGB look. :-)
To me those are just classic designs.
It's not merely obvious, but public knowledge, that Apple is interested in the automotive market — CarPlay. There's no evidence whatsoever that Apple is interested in building cars, and every reason to suppose that they would not be: massive capital investment, entrenched and competent global competition, low margins, pervasive and incompatible government regulations, and on and on. Ask anyone who works in the car business and they'll tell you you'd be crazy to want to get into it. Even Tesla, which has been exceptionally creative in carving out an Apple-like market space, has yet to make dollar one in profit.
flaneur wrote: »
Tesla's solution should be attended to. The main motor's in the back and the batteries aren't even loading the front.
The joys of driving a rear engine car are worth any trade-off in oversteer. But overall balance must be calibrated. Porsche found that no more than 63 per cent of the weight could go behind the rear axle. Mid-engine is of course also fantastic.
Anyway, no need for the long phallic engine compartment if you're going electric. Tesla is needlessly conventional in its design in that respect.
sog35 wrote: »
There is way too much smoke to be no fire.
quinney wrote: »
Not entirely needless. That large front crumple zone, without an engine in it, is one of the things that makes the Model S so safe. Plus there is a frunk for storage.
Well, analysts now have lung cancer. That’s a plus.