This report seems fishy on so many levels. Compartmentalization of information is one of the most elementary security measures out there. If an organization is trying to keep something secret, limit the number of people who have access to the information. This has two benefits. First, it limits the chance of leaks. Secondly, if the information does get out, then it's easier to trace the source of the leak.
Knowing Apple's penchant for secrecy, there are probably a small group of employees who are working on this project, if one even exists. For many people, the chance to be part of such an exciting project has got to be the opportunity of a lifetime. If I were in can't understand why someone would throw away all of that to get quoted in a BusinessInsider article. It's impossible that they would be unaware of the strong likelihood of Apple finding out about this leak and the swift reaction that would follow.
I can't help but think that this story is a plan to stir the pot coming from the highest echelons of the company. This story comes on the heels of a story about how Apple is trying hard to recruit Tesla employees but has not been very successful. That article said that instead, many are leaving Apple to work for Tesla. Elon Musk himself said that not many people have left Tesla for Apple but this source says the opposite. The timing of the two reports is too close.
When Tim did a TV interview last year he as asked who he thought Apple's competitors were and he answered 'Google'.
I thought that sounded odd, I guess he was talking about Android, but? Considering the Car idea, maybe it makes sense.
Jonny Ive has said he most wants to design a car next. I imagine the refining of the current products isn't as challenging for him. Apple has the money to go with any idea they like. They are all about saying No to ideas they don't want.
Perhaps it is time for Apple to dream big? Perhaps this is what they chose.
Car manufacturers for the most part, are ripe for disruption. Basically, the electric car engine is a device not so far out of Apple's purview. They could also load it with their current tech. Hmmm. They are studying human anatomy, that fits.
Still, though, the manufacturing of automobiles is a high hurdle. They do have the money. I wish most they would make carbon fiber cars. Wait, they've been studying carbon fiber too.
Probably many companies are studying this. I think once the complexities of a gas engine are discarded for electric, it makes for simpler manufacturing.
We NEED electric cars with range and reliability.
As IQatEdo pointed out, Elon Musk did give up patents in the hopes more companies would manufacture electric cars. Why did Tesla meet with Apple's acquisition team, I wonder??
What ever happened to the battery plant they were in talks to build with Tesla? Anyone know?
Mass production of vehicule takes a lot of money. If they target the high-mid and high end (their usual haunts), it takes significantly less investment. That wouldn't make them compete against ford, but it would make them compete against Tesla.
Please - no "self driving cars." Self driving cars aren't going to happen.
I'd love to have an "auto", or "self driving car" if you like:
No more fiddling with pedals, sticks and steering wheel. The auto's interior is going to look dramatically different. Like an extended living room.
The exterior design of the auto is going to change dramatically as well. An auto is no longer engineered for high impact crashes. So, no more bulky looking cars.
Zero road kills!
Better mobility for your grandparents. They no longer have to rely for transport on their children.
No more bringing your kids to school. Your auto takes care of that
Yes because designing personal computers translates to designing automobiles. ?TV hasn't been updated in several years, Apple still doesn't have a streaming music service to compete with Spotify, their cloud services leave a lot to be desired, software releases are quite buggy, ?Watch hasn't even shipped yet and people want Apple to get into the car business? What next should Apple start designing appliances? Seriously people are off their rockers.
Apple can do it! They have the money to do whatever they want! Apple can go into space if it wanted to!
Designing a car isn't all that hard, especially if you have tons of cash. And those other things that you mentioned wouldn't be affected at all, because no resources or manpower would be pulled away from other projects.
When Tim did a TV interview last year he as asked who he thought Apple's competitors were and he answered 'Google'.
I thought that sounded odd, I guess he was talking about Android, but? Considering the Car idea, maybe it makes sense.
Jonny Ive has said he most wants to design a car next. I imagine the refining of the current products isn't as challenging for him. Apple has the money to go with any idea they like. They are all about saying No to ideas they don't want.
Perhaps it is time for Apple to dream big? Perhaps this is what they chose.
Car manufacturers for the most part, are ripe for disruption. Basically, the electric car engine is a device not so far out of Apple's purview. They could also load it with their current tech. Hmmm. They are studying human anatomy, that fits.
Still, though, the manufacturing of automobiles is a high hurdle. They do have the money. I wish most they would make carbon fiber cars. Wait, they've been studying carbon fiber too.
Probably many companies are studying this. I think once the complexities of a gas engine are discarded for electric, it makes for simpler manufacturing.
We NEED electric cars with range and reliability.
As IQatEdo pointed out, Elon Musk did give up patents in the hopes more companies would manufacture electric cars. Why did Tesla meet with Apple's acquisition team, I wonder??
What ever happened to the battery plant they were in talks to build with Tesla? Anyone know?
I would love Apple to design a classic car, perhaps in the shape of a Morgan or classic Rolls Royce, but with modern conveniences.
Please - no "self driving cars." Self driving cars aren't going to happen.
I agree, Google is only pushing self driving cars so they can drive you into an advertiser's business.
I've promised my self I'll never buy or even drive one. No rentals please.
Just imagine if your self driving car causes an accident, the legal fight could go on for several years.
Call me when they can do 500 miles on a full tank without running out of power and have capacious boots.
The current Tesla is a rich person's feel good about green car.
Far too expensive for city driving and useless for distance (100+miles) highway driving.
Perhaps Apple is interested in building devices to entertain Tesla drivers while they are waiting for a charge.
@rob53: You are very narrow minded. The suing business you are talking about is only typical in the USA. Do you really believe insurance companies in the rest of the world act by suing people? Sorry dude, but wake up %u2013 you're the exception here. Insurance companies will not stop this evolution, they will embrace it.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that self-driving vehicles will be available commercially soon. Even more, they will be the only alternative in the not so far future. In 50 years from now people will refer to the 20th century as the cowboy era of driving. Where 16 year old kids, and hormon-stuffed guys in their 20'es, and senile old men with hats were allowed to plow their half-ton smoking steel rams across the land.
Sure, I will miss the days with my Harley as well. But the side effects are just stacking up to impossible levels.
@rob53: You are very narrow minded. The suing business you are talking about is only typical in the USA. Do you really believe insurance companies in the rest of the world act by suing people? Sorry dude, but wake up %u2013 you're the exception here. Insurance companies will not stop this evolution, they will embrace it.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that self-driving vehicles will be available commercially soon. Even more, they will be the only alternative in the not so far future. In 50 years from now people will refer to the 20th century as the cowboy era of driving. Where 16 year old kids, and hormon-stuffed guys in their 20'es, and senile old men with hats were allowed to plow their half-ton smoking steel rams across the land.
Sure, I will miss the days with my Harley as well. But the side effects are just stacking up to impossible levels.
Miss Bates: I am sure that driverless cars will not be available commercially soon.
This is true. It is also true that regulation will lag behind technology by about 20 years in this case due to misinformed legislators and members of the public and media beating the fear drum, so it won't actually be legal until we're old.
Please - no "self driving cars." Self driving cars aren't going to happen.
It's not regulation, or lack thereof, that impedes self driving cars. It's liability. Who is responsible when a self driving car kills someone, or, as in the case of safety equipment such as helmets, fails to save someone's life?
It's not regulation, or lack thereof, that impedes self driving cars. It's liability. Who is responsible when a self driving car kills someone, or, as in the case of safety equipment such as helmets, fails to save someone's life?
Self driving cars will creap in gradually over the next 15-20 years. By 2040, 80% of cars on the road will be self-driven. Yes, that soon. Ironically, it may be because cars with full assist have less accidents (and thus cost less to insure).
A few options :
a) They provide all sort of services impossible now. Sharing car rides will become incredibly easy, car routes could be optimized to pick up several near passengers needing a ride in the viccinity. That would enable the speed of cars with the savings of public transport.
b) Another option, smaller pod cars could go get individuals and then join together to become much faster trains of cars on the freeway. Maybe this "train" would be driven by a powerful, more efficient, lead vehicule, that relay themselves on freeway stretches getting power from central lines. That way you get the efficiency of public transport and the end point comfort of the individual vehicule (that scenario though i NOT in 25 years :-). Doing so, it would even be possible to have different lanes for tje "trains" with different speeds for local traffic versus long distance traffic. Inner traffic of those road trains could go to 120mph.
Also, you could combine direct local public transport (a) with those road trains (b) to create extremely, very high density, high speed transport. Maybe having self-adjusting standing seats in the local public transport so when they join the trains, they can get to a very high speed because of sparser traffic 120-140mph. With something like that, many people that take cars now wouldn't mind spending very little on transport that'S just as fast as their cars. Of course, some would still want to pay more for the individual pods. Everyone could do so if they wish. Options are good.
Apple Car, giving Tesla a run for their money. Very unlikely but not impossible. Apple could have bought superior battery technology (because several very promising projects should be market ready by now) and could be using superior 4 wheel drive wheel hub motors (using carbon wires), but integrating it all making superior power electronics (or buying it) and software will be a big effort. I guess if that was the case we would have had a lot more rumors.
Most likely this is a rumor purposely started to be able to attract people from Tesla instead of the other way around, and Apple simply doesn't have projects that interesting.
It's not regulation, or lack thereof, that impedes self driving cars. It's liability. Who is responsible when a self driving car kills someone, or, as in the case of safety equipment such as helmets, fails to save someone's life?
Who's liable when a defect in electronics cause car accidents? Who's liable when a Pitot system causes an airplane to tumble into the Atlantic, killing hundreds of people? Answer is, car manufacturers and plane designers, who themselves are insured against that AND push down the blame when they can to the manufacturers of the parts.
In the case of the airplane company, for example, the aircraft maker paid part of the damages, the manufacturer of the Pitot systems paid part of the damages, and anyways the total sum is capped up.
Who's liable when a multi billion dollar industry called "the oil industry" has a huge tanker wash up on shores and pollute for billions of euros of damage? Answer, very good question. A combine of oil companies has set up a very limited fund, which is the end authority for determining how much of these billions of dollars of damage are actually going to be paid for, usually a very low percentage, counting in the hundreds of millions of dollars at best. Check the data out, it's on the Internet.
Conclusion: self driving cars are going to happen, and either car makers will insure themselves, and ensure that the blame can be traced down, or they will set up a government-or-treaty-enforced conglomerate like the oil industry did to deal with possible "issues".
Liability when it happens on mega-scales become a legislation matter, not a fundamental blocking issue, if the forces driving change are strong enough.
Jonny Ive has said he most wants to design a car next. I imagine the refining of the current products isn't as challenging for him. Apple has the money to go with any idea they like. They are all about saying No to ideas they don't want.
Most likely this is a rumor purposely started to be able to attract people from Tesla instead of the other way around, and Apple simply doesn't have projects that interesting.
I wouldn't be surprised if people at Apple, especially Apple PR are laughing their asses off right now. Certainly they will be if this story goes viral.
Comments
This report seems fishy on so many levels. Compartmentalization of information is one of the most elementary security measures out there. If an organization is trying to keep something secret, limit the number of people who have access to the information. This has two benefits. First, it limits the chance of leaks. Secondly, if the information does get out, then it's easier to trace the source of the leak.
Knowing Apple's penchant for secrecy, there are probably a small group of employees who are working on this project, if one even exists. For many people, the chance to be part of such an exciting project has got to be the opportunity of a lifetime. If I were in can't understand why someone would throw away all of that to get quoted in a BusinessInsider article. It's impossible that they would be unaware of the strong likelihood of Apple finding out about this leak and the swift reaction that would follow.
I can't help but think that this story is a plan to stir the pot coming from the highest echelons of the company. This story comes on the heels of a story about how Apple is trying hard to recruit Tesla employees but has not been very successful. That article said that instead, many are leaving Apple to work for Tesla. Elon Musk himself said that not many people have left Tesla for Apple but this source says the opposite. The timing of the two reports is too close.
When Tim did a TV interview last year he as asked who he thought Apple's competitors were and he answered 'Google'.
I thought that sounded odd, I guess he was talking about Android, but? Considering the Car idea, maybe it makes sense.
Jonny Ive has said he most wants to design a car next. I imagine the refining of the current products isn't as challenging for him. Apple has the money to go with any idea they like. They are all about saying No to ideas they don't want.
Perhaps it is time for Apple to dream big? Perhaps this is what they chose.
Car manufacturers for the most part, are ripe for disruption. Basically, the electric car engine is a device not so far out of Apple's purview. They could also load it with their current tech. Hmmm. They are studying human anatomy, that fits.
Still, though, the manufacturing of automobiles is a high hurdle. They do have the money. I wish most they would make carbon fiber cars. Wait, they've been studying carbon fiber too.
Probably many companies are studying this. I think once the complexities of a gas engine are discarded for electric, it makes for simpler manufacturing.
We NEED electric cars with range and reliability.
As IQatEdo pointed out, Elon Musk did give up patents in the hopes more companies would manufacture electric cars. Why did Tesla meet with Apple's acquisition team, I wonder??
What ever happened to the battery plant they were in talks to build with Tesla? Anyone know?
Mass production of vehicule takes a lot of money. If they target the high-mid and high end (their usual haunts), it takes significantly less investment. That wouldn't make them compete against ford, but it would make them compete against Tesla.
Please - no "self driving cars." Self driving cars aren't going to happen.
I'd love to have an "auto", or "self driving car" if you like:
Indeed!
Not least, a big iPad.
I'm not in the market for a Tesla, either.
Call me when they can do 500 miles on a full tank without running out of power and have capacious boots.
I would love Apple to design a classic car, perhaps in the shape of a Morgan or classic Rolls Royce, but with modern conveniences.
It would come in apple-green or apple-red.
I agree, Google is only pushing self driving cars so they can drive you into an advertiser's business.
I've promised my self I'll never buy or even drive one. No rentals please.
Just imagine if your self driving car causes an accident, the legal fight could go on for several years.
The current Tesla is a rich person's feel good about green car.
Far too expensive for city driving and useless for distance (100+miles) highway driving.
Perhaps Apple is interested in building devices to entertain Tesla drivers while they are waiting for a charge.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that self-driving vehicles will be available commercially soon. Even more, they will be the only alternative in the not so far future. In 50 years from now people will refer to the 20th century as the cowboy era of driving. Where 16 year old kids, and hormon-stuffed guys in their 20'es, and senile old men with hats were allowed to plow their half-ton smoking steel rams across the land.
Sure, I will miss the days with my Harley as well. But the side effects are just stacking up to impossible levels.
Miss Bates: I am sure that driverless cars will not be available commercially soon.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
It's not regulation, or lack thereof, that impedes self driving cars. It's liability. Who is responsible when a self driving car kills someone, or, as in the case of safety equipment such as helmets, fails to save someone's life?
It's not regulation, or lack thereof, that impedes self driving cars. It's liability. Who is responsible when a self driving car kills someone, or, as in the case of safety equipment such as helmets, fails to save someone's life?
Self driving cars will creap in gradually over the next 15-20 years. By 2040, 80% of cars on the road will be self-driven. Yes, that soon. Ironically, it may be because cars with full assist have less accidents (and thus cost less to insure).
A few options :
a) They provide all sort of services impossible now. Sharing car rides will become incredibly easy, car routes could be optimized to pick up several near passengers needing a ride in the viccinity. That would enable the speed of cars with the savings of public transport.
b) Another option, smaller pod cars could go get individuals and then join together to become much faster trains of cars on the freeway. Maybe this "train" would be driven by a powerful, more efficient, lead vehicule, that relay themselves on freeway stretches getting power from central lines. That way you get the efficiency of public transport and the end point comfort of the individual vehicule (that scenario though i NOT in 25 years :-). Doing so, it would even be possible to have different lanes for tje "trains" with different speeds for local traffic versus long distance traffic. Inner traffic of those road trains could go to 120mph.
Also, you could combine direct local public transport (a) with those road trains (b) to create extremely, very high density, high speed transport. Maybe having self-adjusting standing seats in the local public transport so when they join the trains, they can get to a very high speed because of sparser traffic 120-140mph. With something like that, many people that take cars now wouldn't mind spending very little on transport that'S just as fast as their cars. Of course, some would still want to pay more for the individual pods. Everyone could do so if they wish. Options are good.
Very unlikely but not impossible.
Apple could have bought superior battery technology (because several very promising projects should be market ready by now) and could be using superior 4 wheel drive wheel hub motors (using carbon wires), but integrating it all making superior power electronics (or buying it) and software will be a big effort.
I guess if that was the case we would have had a lot more rumors.
Most likely this is a rumor purposely started to be able to attract people from Tesla instead of the other way around, and Apple simply doesn't have projects that interesting.
but it would be hubris to think that cars will never drive themselves, or park themselves, or control their cruising speed, etc.
Mercedes already sells self-parking cars. My cousin's got one. He's not letting me drive it though, it doesn't have autopilot.
Exactly!
It's not regulation, or lack thereof, that impedes self driving cars. It's liability. Who is responsible when a self driving car kills someone, or, as in the case of safety equipment such as helmets, fails to save someone's life?
Who's liable when a defect in electronics cause car accidents? Who's liable when a Pitot system causes an airplane to tumble into the Atlantic, killing hundreds of people? Answer is, car manufacturers and plane designers, who themselves are insured against that AND push down the blame when they can to the manufacturers of the parts.
In the case of the airplane company, for example, the aircraft maker paid part of the damages, the manufacturer of the Pitot systems paid part of the damages, and anyways the total sum is capped up.
Who's liable when a multi billion dollar industry called "the oil industry" has a huge tanker wash up on shores and pollute for billions of euros of damage? Answer, very good question. A combine of oil companies has set up a very limited fund, which is the end authority for determining how much of these billions of dollars of damage are actually going to be paid for, usually a very low percentage, counting in the hundreds of millions of dollars at best. Check the data out, it's on the Internet.
Conclusion: self driving cars are going to happen, and either car makers will insure themselves, and ensure that the blame can be traced down, or they will set up a government-or-treaty-enforced conglomerate like the oil industry did to deal with possible "issues".
Liability when it happens on mega-scales become a legislation matter, not a fundamental blocking issue, if the forces driving change are strong enough.
I would love Apple to design a classic car, perhaps in the shape of a Morgan or classic Rolls Royce, but with modern conveniences.
It would come in apple-green or apple-red.
You could also just ask Rolls-Royce to make it for you. if it is not Bespoke, it is not really Rolls-Royce
What are you basing that on?
When did Ive ever say that?
I wouldn't be surprised if people at Apple, especially Apple PR are laughing their asses off right now. Certainly they will be if this story goes viral.