3 of the 4 don't even remotely compare to designing and manufacturing an auto. The 3rd item they purchased. They have hired some ex tesla employees and battery engineers but that doesn't mean you know how to design a car.
its also easier to risk failing at a music player than a car. A lot more investment in machining and r&d. So it has to return money and there won't be 60% profit margins on a car.
You don't start knowing how to design anything. You learn or you buy expertise in.
And on the question of who they've been hiring, it does seem that it goes a little bit beyond 'some ex tesla employees and battery engineers'.
And I'll also have to disagree that this is riskier than the music player. If the car fails, Apple will still be sitting on a mountain of cash. If the iPod failed, it would have been pretty much game over.
Good link from Gurman clarifying some of the personnel involved in this project.
Apple survived and prospered even after Jobs himself was gone...a little perspective here...no one is irreplaceable...
They haven't developed or innovated anything since his death. If you want to say the watch, the sales on the watch are underwhelming for sure.
This is the first year that iPhone growth has petered out and while forecasts aren't that great my suspicion is that people are seeing less and less reasons to upgrade. So they now need to come up with the next product. The watch isn't it. While no one is irreplacable the question is, is Tim Cook the guy?
Sorry I disagree. I think Apple Pencil is as good as anything released under Jobs outside of the original iPhone.
Apple survived and prospered even after Jobs himself was gone...a little perspective here...no one is irreplaceable...
They haven't developed or innovated anything since his death. If you want to say the watch, the sales on the watch are underwhelming for sure.
This is the first year that iPhone growth has petered out and while forecasts aren't that great my suspicion is that people are seeing less and less reasons to upgrade. So they now need to come up with the next product. The watch isn't it. While no one is irreplacable the question is, is Tim Cook the guy?
You don't know a thing about Watch sales.
We have four in our family, use it everyday, and it is an extremely impressive piece of technology.
They haven't developed or innovated anything since his death. If you want to say the watch, the sales on the watch are underwhelming for sure.
This is the first year that iPhone growth has petered out and while forecasts aren't that great my suspicion is that people are seeing less and less reasons to upgrade. So they now need to come up with the next product. The watch isn't it. While no one is irreplacable the question is, is Tim Cook the guy?
You don't know a thing about Watch sales.
We have four in our family, use it everyday, and it is an extremely impressive piece of technology.
They haven't developed or innovated anything since his death. If you want to say the watch, the sales on the watch are underwhelming for sure.
This is the first year that iPhone growth has petered out and while forecasts aren't that great my suspicion is that people are seeing less and less reasons to upgrade. So they now need to come up with the next product. The watch isn't it. While no one is irreplacable the question is, is Tim Cook the guy?
Sorry I disagree. I think Apple Pencil is as good as anything released under Jobs outside of the original iPhone.
An accessory that can only be used with the iPad pro. Not really going to be a huge money maker for Apple.
We have four in our family, use it everyday, and it is an extremely impressive piece of technology.
It must be a huge seller then.
Apple said long before it first went on sale they wouldn't be releasing unit sales information for competitive reasons. I presume you knew this. So how were you assessing sales volume?
I put little credence into anal-ysts, but for those that do here is one article that summarizes some opinions on the Watch vs the rest of the wearable space...
Sorry I disagree. I think Apple Pencil is as good as anything released under Jobs outside of the original iPhone.
An accessory that can only be used with the iPad pro. Not really going to be a huge money maker for Apple.
Yes, but think past the current embodiment. Perhaps a multi-axis surface projection device that allows the Pencil to be used directly on your tabletop, with a display device showing actions. This could expand use to architectural, engineering, scientific, manufacturing, and other disciplines.
im not pretending to know all the practical applications of this, but as a concept, it is very intriguing.
Apple said long before it first went on sale they wouldn't be releasing unit sales information for competitive reasons. I presume you knew this. So how were you assessing sales volume?
I put little credence into anal-ysts, but for those that do here is one article that summarizes some opinions on the Watch vs the rest of the wearable space...
People don't 'need' these devices, it's an accessory, and a fairly expensive one at that. I don't expect it to be a huge source of income for them, compared to iPhone for example. That is the topic of the discussion, does apple have the right people in place to come up with the next big thing to springboard the company to the next level. Not how many accessories can they sell.
An accessory that can only be used with the iPad pro. Not really going to be a huge money maker for Apple.
I thought you were talking about innovative. Now you've switched to money maker. Make up your mind.
From my previous quote, that you replied to:
"They haven't developed or innovated anything since his death. If you want to say the watch, the sales on the watch are underwhelming for sure."
Clearly this thread has been about the management of Apple setting clear goals and realistic deadlines specifically to the car, but segued to what they have done to attempt to propel the company forward since Steve Jobs left and subsequent death. If you can't read that, and understand that context, thats your problem.
So there has to first be recognition that there are many who apply their talents, in any company, to get the actual work accomplished, with appropriate direction from management.
Haha, management always thinks that, but seldom has the talent to recognize the right direction people and equipment, they only think they do.
Thats why someone like E Musk is so important, he can recognize that and act accordingly. Plus he has a real cause (not the marketing fluff). Money alone, is not enough, even 100th of billions cannot buy you what Mr Musk has.
you do realize that Musk himself was not an auto engineer, and he was basically a web developer w/ marketing skills when he got started on the city web sites that got him started? and now you're presenting him as an almighty expert who cannot be reproduced.... right. look -- if a web guy can become a car guy, then apple's teams can become car teams. especially if they bring in talent to begin the transformation.
Apple survived and prospered even after Jobs himself was gone...a little perspective here...no one is irreplaceable...
They haven't developed or innovated anything since his death. If you want to say the watch, the sales on the watch are underwhelming for sure.
total nonsense. retina macbook pro, mac pro, watch, iPad pro, iOS, and the various new technologies found in each iterative product cycle -- these are all amazing wonders of engineering, which Steve-Jobs-trolls seem to think miraculously develop themselves, springing forth from the factories with nary an ounce of innovation....its total bullshit. if you've ever been involved with product design or development you'd know that. you overlook the innovation because its not a revolutionary new product like the iPhone. well news flash -- products like that are decades apart. see Macintosh.
as for your troll trope on the Watch sales -- what apple-published numbers are you referring to that indicate its underwhelming? by all accounts its an overnight success, a multi-billion-dollar product line.
They haven't developed or innovated anything since his death. If you want to say the watch, the sales on the watch are underwhelming for sure.
total nonsense. retina macbook pro, mac pro, watch, iPad pro, iOS, and the various new technologies found in each iterative product cycle -- these are all amazing wonders of engineering, which Steve-Jobs-trolls seem to think miraculously develop themselves, springing forth from the factories with nary an ounce of innovation....its total bullshit. if you've ever been involved with product design or development you'd know that. you overlook the innovation because its not a revolutionary new product like the iPhone. well news flash -- products like that are decades apart. see Macintosh.
You are doing the same as the other poster. They have not disrupted the marketplace or created a new market with their innovation. Does that do the trick for you?
It's been a decade since the iPhone debut and indications of market saturation appear to be here.
total nonsense. retina macbook pro, mac pro, watch, iPad pro, iOS, and the various new technologies found in each iterative product cycle -- these are all amazing wonders of engineering, which Steve-Jobs-trolls seem to think miraculously develop themselves, springing forth from the factories with nary an ounce of innovation....its total bullshit. if you've ever been involved with product design or development you'd know that. you overlook the innovation because its not a revolutionary new product like the iPhone. well news flash -- products like that are decades apart. see Macintosh.
You are doing the same as the other poster. They have not disrupted the marketplace or created a new market with their innovation. Does that do the trick for you?
It's been a decade since the iPhone debut and indications of market saturation appear to be here.
I wouldn't say market saturation is here yet but it s coming sooner than most thought. But here's a great article that tries to explain Apple's move beyond the iPhone:
I realize this is all rumour and clickbait but here's my take that I just pulled out of my ass.
The team working on Apple's car project has encountered problems with setting and meeting "clear goals," while executives push for overly ambitious deadlines. Ambiguous goals I think is the key here. If you are tasking someone to create the next big thing (self-driving electric car) and your company is entirely new to that space, you need to have a leader with a clear goal that can drive the entire team and grind them into the dust until they accomplish it. This is why Steve Jobs was so good at this, he had the personality to drive people beyond what they thought was possible. Elon Musk has a very similar personality to Jobs, he will push people past their limit to get things done and doesn't mind being an asshole in the process if that's what it takes. Apple currently doesn't have anyone with this sort of personality. Although they have great talent, the personalities are too soft to accomplish great things that push past the edge of what we think is possible.
Haha, management always thinks that, but seldom has the talent to recognize the right direction people and equipment, they only think they do.
Thats why someone like E Musk is so important, he can recognize that and act accordingly. Plus he has a real cause (not the marketing fluff). Money alone, is not enough, even 100th of billions cannot buy you what Mr Musk has.
you do realize that Musk himself was not an auto engineer, and he was basically a web developer w/ marketing skills when he got started on the city web sites that got him started? and now you're presenting him as an almighty expert who cannot be reproduced.... right. look -- if a web guy can become a car guy, then apple's teams can become car teams. especially if they bring in talent to begin the transformation.
everything starts from something.
Paypal was close to being a POS dot comer; talk about "no innovation", well you got it there. Ebay was responsible for Paypal's success, not Musk. He's been out of there for 13.5 years!
He has no engineering background, he's good at selling himself more than his products. I'll admit that he's a resilient peddler of his wares despite his slow progress; that's the mark of a good salesman and entrepreneur. And in that capacity, he is "Jobs like"...
But, he's more like iteration 1 jobs, than the one after 1998.
The post 1997 jobs was laser focused in his vision and profits were very important to him. Why? Because he knew that it allowed him to carry his vision to fruition.
Anyway, I'm not even sure anything Musk done has ever turned a profit anywhere!! That's more the mark of someone like the real "Tesla", fantastic inventor, poor businessmen.
I realize this is all rumour and clickbait but here's my take that I just pulled out of my ass.
The team working on Apple's car project has encountered problems with setting and meeting "clear goals," while executives push for overly ambitious deadlines. Ambiguous goals I think is the key here. If you are tasking someone to create the next big thing (self-driving electric car) and your company is entirely new to that space, you need to have a leader with a clear goal that can drive the entire team and grind them into the dust until they accomplish it. This is why Steve Jobs was so good at this, he had the personality to drive people beyond what they thought was possible. Elon Musk has a very similar personality to Jobs, he will push people past their limit to get things done and doesn't mind being an asshole in the process if that's what it takes. Apple currently doesn't have anyone with this sort of personality. Although they have great talent, the personalities are too soft to accomplish great things that push past the edge of what we think is possible.
So basically you've just piled on to the rumor and clickbait with more nonsense of your own.
I thought you were talking about innovative. Now you've switched to money maker. Make up your mind.
From my previous quote, that you replied to:
"They haven't developed or innovated anything since his death. If you want to say the watch, the sales on the watch are underwhelming for sure."
Clearly this thread has been about the management of Apple setting clear goals and realistic deadlines specifically to the car, but segued to what they have done to attempt to propel the company forward since Steve Jobs left and subsequent death. If you can't read that, and understand that context, thats your problem.
I don't agree with your premise. And since its complexly subjective there's no right or wrong.
I realize this is all rumour and clickbait but here's my take that I just pulled out of my ass.
The team working on Apple's car project has encountered problems with setting and meeting "clear goals," while executives push for overly ambitious deadlines. Ambiguous goals I think is the key here. If you are tasking someone to create the next big thing (self-driving electric car) and your company is entirely new to that space, you need to have a leader with a clear goal that can drive the entire team and grind them into the dust until they accomplish it. This is why Steve Jobs was so good at this, he had the personality to drive people beyond what they thought was possible. Elon Musk has a very similar personality to Jobs, he will push people past their limit to get things done and doesn't mind being an asshole in the process if that's what it takes. Apple currently doesn't have anyone with this sort of personality. Although they have great talent, the personalities are too soft to accomplish great things that push past the edge of what we think is possible.
Nice pull. I agree, although it's not the 'assholness' of Jobs or Musk hat does the trick, it's having a vision, people listening, and being right. In this case it's certainly possible for Apple to do it again, but at least to my knowledge, no one at Apple is a Jobs or Elon.
Engineers tend to have a difference of opinion about everything, even the facts, that will certainly bring you no further. I could help them by giving my take on the matter and I'll be right, but no one will listen: use wheel hub engines with carbon wires (will make the unsprung weight similar to that of a normal rim) but take the control logic out of it on the frame, maybe combine the wheel with the suspension and steering. Use some form of Air battery in the longer run (so work together with a university (in Japan) and li-ion in the meantime (but some researchers have almost ready solutions you should use), make sure that battery pack cooling is passive (otherwise it defeats the purpose), keep the weight low (like a normal car), so this means choose an advanced metal combination (maybe even liquid metal for some parts) or carbon, make the car more or less dent free (big plus if you have that) and keep the price low (so use complete automation), use augmented reality for the (front) window (all of it), so you have night vision and so on and make the car a bit self driving in a sense that its capabilities must enhance that of the driver (not replace them, if you do that it will be a big failure!). And do not make the battery replaceable (no battery swap, big failure if you do!).
Comments
We have four in our family, use it everyday, and it is an extremely impressive piece of technology.
I put little credence into anal-ysts, but for those that do here is one article that summarizes some opinions on the Watch vs the rest of the wearable space...
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/aug/28/apple-watch-smartwatch-sales-analysis
Yes, but think past the current embodiment. Perhaps a multi-axis surface projection device that allows the Pencil to be used directly on your tabletop, with a display device showing actions. This could expand use to architectural, engineering, scientific, manufacturing, and other disciplines.
im not pretending to know all the practical applications of this, but as a concept, it is very intriguing.
People don't 'need' these devices, it's an accessory, and a fairly expensive one at that. I don't expect it to be a huge source of income for them, compared to iPhone for example. That is the topic of the discussion, does apple have the right people in place to come up with the next big thing to springboard the company to the next level. Not how many accessories can they sell.
"They haven't developed or innovated anything since his death. If you want to say the watch, the sales on the watch are underwhelming for sure."
Clearly this thread has been about the management of Apple setting clear goals and realistic deadlines specifically to the car, but segued to what they have done to attempt to propel the company forward since Steve Jobs left and subsequent death. If you can't read that, and understand that context, thats your problem.
everything starts from something.
total nonsense. retina macbook pro, mac pro, watch, iPad pro, iOS, and the various new technologies found in each iterative product cycle -- these are all amazing wonders of engineering, which Steve-Jobs-trolls seem to think miraculously develop themselves, springing forth from the factories with nary an ounce of innovation....its total bullshit. if you've ever been involved with product design or development you'd know that. you overlook the innovation because its not a revolutionary new product like the iPhone. well news flash -- products like that are decades apart. see Macintosh.
as for your troll trope on the Watch sales -- what apple-published numbers are you referring to that indicate its underwhelming? by all accounts its an overnight success, a multi-billion-dollar product line.
http://carlhowe.com/blog/apple-watch-an-overnight-multi-billion-dollar-business/
It's been a decade since the iPhone debut and indications of market saturation appear to be here.
http://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2016/1/19/apple-is-moving-beyond-the-iphone
The team working on Apple's car project has encountered problems with setting and meeting "clear goals," while executives push for overly ambitious deadlines.
Ambiguous goals I think is the key here. If you are tasking someone to create the next big thing (self-driving electric car) and your company is entirely new to that space, you need to have a leader with a clear goal that can drive the entire team and grind them into the dust until they accomplish it. This is why Steve Jobs was so good at this, he had the personality to drive people beyond what they thought was possible. Elon Musk has a very similar personality to Jobs, he will push people past their limit to get things done and doesn't mind being an asshole in the process if that's what it takes. Apple currently doesn't have anyone with this sort of personality. Although they have great talent, the personalities are too soft to accomplish great things that push past the edge of what we think is possible.
Ebay was responsible for Paypal's success, not Musk. He's been out of there for 13.5 years!
He has no engineering background, he's good at selling himself more than his products.
I'll admit that he's a resilient peddler of his wares despite his slow progress;
that's the mark of a good salesman and entrepreneur. And in that capacity, he is "Jobs like"...
But, he's more like iteration 1 jobs, than the one after 1998.
The post 1997 jobs was laser focused in his vision and profits were very important to him.
Why? Because he knew that it allowed him to carry his vision to fruition.
Anyway, I'm not even sure anything Musk done has ever turned a profit anywhere!!
That's more the mark of someone like the real "Tesla",
fantastic inventor, poor businessmen.
I don't agree with your premise. And since its complexly subjective there's no right or wrong.
I agree, although it's not the 'assholness' of Jobs or Musk hat does the trick, it's having a vision, people listening, and being right.
In this case it's certainly possible for Apple to do it again, but at least to my knowledge, no one at Apple is a Jobs or Elon.
Engineers tend to have a difference of opinion about everything, even the facts, that will certainly bring you no further.
I could help them by giving my take on the matter and I'll be right, but no one will listen: use wheel hub engines with carbon wires (will make the unsprung weight similar to that of a normal rim) but take the control logic out of it on the frame, maybe combine the wheel with the suspension and steering. Use some form of Air battery in the longer run (so work together with a university (in Japan) and li-ion in the meantime (but some researchers have almost ready solutions you should use), make sure that battery pack cooling is passive (otherwise it defeats the purpose), keep the weight low (like a normal car), so this means choose an advanced metal combination (maybe even liquid metal for some parts) or carbon, make the car more or less dent free (big plus if you have that) and keep the price low (so use complete automation), use augmented reality for the (front) window (all of it), so you have night vision and so on and make the car a bit self driving in a sense that its capabilities must enhance that of the driver (not replace them, if you do that it will be a big failure!). And do not make the battery replaceable (no battery swap, big failure if you do!).