You need to realise the difference between investment in R&D and selling a product. Apple is (allegedly) investing in automotive R&D. Tesla is selling cars.
People expect Tesla to make money selling cars. They aren't. Apple is making money on everything it sells.
How does it make sense to remove a CEO who is generating more money than any other CEO and replace him with a person who is losing money on everything he sells?
You make the assumption that Apple is ignoring all its products. You think a company so big has no roadmaps for all its lines? Do you have any evidence that Apple has removed engineers from the Mac, iPhone and iPad lines to work on Project Titan? How can you suggest they are ignoring revenue generating products for unprofitable R&D products?
You suggest that Apple has enough money to make substantial improvements in the Mac. Your bad assumption here is that throwing money at things will solve problems. Anyone working on projects knows that simply throwing money and people at a project isn't going to make it faster.
So, Apple is better because their R&D investment is generating 0 revenue. But Tesla, which is investing in exactly he same market, has positive revenue. So Tesla's losses in the EV market are smaller than Apple's, but you think Apple is doing better in that market than Tesla. I think the only reasonable conclusion is that Apple can do no wrong in your eyes, and you will come up with whatever argument best fits the facts to reach the conclusion that Apple is awesome.
You don't seem to be able to follow the conversation. As I've said before, Tesla is more than a decade old. If 13 years on Apple can only make 15,000 cars a quarter and can't make any profits, then yes, I'd say Tesla is winning. You'd have to be an idiot to expect project Titan to have revenue after two years. Frankly, Tesla has set a very, very, low bar and I'd be shocked if Apple can't get over it. They still have ten years to go. Musk also is 46- at this point in Steve Jobs life Apple was profitable and putting millions of devices into the hands of middle class people, and Pixar had revolutionized animation. Musk has certainly had his good days but he is no Steve Jobs and hiring him wouldn't bring back Steve Jobs' Apple (which by the way was a third the size and far less successful than Tim Cook's Apple).
Anyone who believes an Apple car will see the light of day before 2021, if ever, is kidding themselves.
And by then the big auto makers will have an insurmountable lead.
Regarding 'staring over', and this is just speculation on my part, maybe Bob was always involved. Do we know what that 'secret mission' was Tim put him on, back when he seemed to step out of the spotlight? If it was actually car related then Apple is far from starting all over. I have no comment on your date, my crystal ball is off line.
May be he needs first to improve CarPlay? Why the world's largest auto maker would not adopt CarPlay? He needs to be able to answer this correctly?
The world largest Volkswagen/Skoda/Audi/Porche , did adopt CarPlay (as did Ford, GM and Fiat/Chrysler/Jeep). Toyota, and a few others, like Land Rover, are staunchly sticking to the belief that they know how to do user interaction better than Apple & Google, and are trying to prevent the phone companies getting between them and the car.
At least most Toyota units are standard 2 DIN brackets and you can rip out the factory one and put in a after-market unit like Alpine or Kenwood.
Land Rover's App idea has some interesting attributes, but I'd prefer if they were able to integrate it WITH Carplay, rather than reject CarPlay .
Tesla is just getting ready, and making that point come sooner, but once it's reached, development will go forward in leaps and bounds. Dinosaurs will die out.
I guess Tesla is buying Solar City for $2.6B (all stock) to help move things along.
Comments