I would note that an analyst stated that Apple will generate $45 B off of Pokemon Go; let me know when Tesla starts generating income from its car manufacturing operation.
I think you might be off a decimal point there. Apple's entire services business is not (yet) to that level per year. I get your point though, and agree that most people always value the "what could be" rather than put any value on "what is".
Indeed, perhaps yet another reason that Apple needs to eventually transition their Mac line (or create a new line) that utilizes their own in-house A-series chips. While Apple can't change the fundamentals of transistor technology, what they can do is add more functions into a SoC that provides new functionality beyond the general CPU/GPU, as they already do with their iOS devices. Image & video manipulation/editing, compression, secure components, supporting biometric sensors, etc. And/or they can have more than one SoC package, since the costs can be much lower than paying Intel.
Waiting a couple of years for a 10-20% improvement in performance isn't going to get anyone to upgrade.
Apple would like to kill of x86 sooner than later. Look for Apple to "chip" away at Intel's market, and other ARM licensees to "chip" away at the server market.
I'm still waiting for MS to pivot in some way to ARM, but they seem to have lost their way in mobile.
Bob is the engineer's engineer. This is good news. Do the naysayers out there...one company (Tesla) cannot build all the EVs the world will need & the major automakers don't have the innovative chops for radical change.
I get it. If Cook cant deliver in 18 months the board should hire the guy who still hasnt managed to execute on his first master plan after 10 years. The guy who has never run a profitable company other than a shitty online payments one. The guy who has to go to the stock market every year asking for money, and uses sharholder money to bail out his other failing businesses. It makes PERFECT sense. Why wouldnt a board that makes 40 billion in profit a year want a guy like that in charge?
Mr Musk reminds me of a 19th Century Industrialist. Far too many fingers in far too many pies. He needs to sell off at least half of his enterprises and concentrate on one or two at most. His 'Cunning Plan' for the future was very easy to fortell. IT was (IMHO) full of FUD to demoralise the competition. There is no way he can get into the truck manufacturing biz given the size of his operation. That means he has to take over an existing builder. etc etc etc. Don't forget his entire reputation will fall if he fails to deliver the model 3 on time and for the agreed price AND make money for the company. That is a tough ask. He needs to make sure that it happens. Diverting his attentiion to Space and everything else puts his reputation at risk. IF that goes then so does the money he needs from Wall St to grow the biz.
I could go on at length but I won't but Industrial history is littered with people like Musk who lost it all because they took their eye off the ball at criticam moments.
Designing and building cars is easy. There are tons of people who do it everyday in F1, Indy, Nascar, and NHRA. The hard part is the software for autonomous driving. Bob is a hardware guy and arguably a pretty good manager as well, however I don't know how a hardware guy is going help all that much in the software aspect of the project. It has been reported that Apple has hired lots of really talented automobile engineers and clearly they already have some pretty savvy software people. It just seems odd to me that they are going to depend on a guy who obviously wants to retire, to head up a department that presumably, won't have a product release until 2021 at the earliest.
Designing and building cars is easy. There are tons of people who do it everyday in F1, Indy, Nascar, and NHRA. The hard part is the software for autonomous driving. Bob is a hardware guy and arguably a pretty good manager as well, however I don't know how a hardware guy is going help all that much in the software aspect of the project. It has been reported that Apple has hired lots of really talented automobile engineers and clearly they already have some pretty savvy software people. It just seems odd to me that they are going to depend on a guy who obviously wants to retire, to head up a department that presumably, won't have a product release until 2021 at the earliest.
Apparently, he is intrigued and no longer wants to retire...
And perhaps they want a better "hardware" guy at this stage. I don't think building great cars is easy at all. So many cars out on the roads are really poorly designed and built pieces of crap
The next 18 months are going to be critical for Tim Cook. I really want him to succeed -- he's a nice, smart guy and he's accomplished a great deal over his career at Apple. I respect him tremendously.
But.
I'm becoming increasingly nervous about the pace of product improvements at Apple. There is a whiff of staleness throughout the lineup. It's particularly bad with the Mac, but it's not just the Mac.
In addition, the electric / autonomous car market is going to be extremely competitive. When the iPhone came out, it was significantly ahead of the competition. I'm not sure Apple can pull that off with a car, particularly given the staleness of their existing products. After reading the Tesla Master Plan part 2, I'm feeling pretty skeptical that Apple is going to have any better ideas that Tesla.
My hope is that 18 months from now, I'll look back and see a slew of groundbreaking product introductions. I'll realize that the staleness that I'm perceiving now was due to a slight delay in the launch of multiple groundbreaking products that re-established Apple's leadership in all its markets. And perhaps then I'll feel more confident that Apple can be a leader in cars.
However, if in 18 months those hopes are not realized and the product lineup continues to seem stale, then I will reluctantly conclude that Apple needs new leadership, and that a Tesla acquisition or merger might be something for the board to seriously consider, bringing Musk in as CEO.
I really hope it doesn't come to that.
I would note that an analyst stated that Apple will generate $45 B off of Pokemon Go; let me know when Tesla starts generating income from its car manufacturing operation.
For the record, EV penetration is less that one percentage point in the U.S. and there are few barriers to entry for manufacturers. I'm not seeing any insurmountable lead that Tesla will have in the market for any determined new entrant.
As for the Mac's, they aren't being refreshed because there is so little real performance benefit from Intel releases of late. Apple will wait until it gets Intel parts that support the various features that they are pushing; I'm guessing Kaby Lake will be a design in for the next future Mac Book Pro updates.
I think you're off by an order of magnitude on Pokemon Go.
Regarding EVs -- the key question in my mind is whether Apple is capable of introducing a car in 2021 that is as far ahead of the competition as the iPhone was in 2007. The answer *should* be "yes" because Apple has the resources necessary to pull it off. But when I look at the current product lineup, I'm not so sure.
Blaming Intel for the staleness of the Mac lineup suggests that the only thing that matters about Mac hardware is the Intel processor. There are a lot of ways to improve hardware that don't depend on the CPU. But even if we were to define Macs entirely by their CPU, Apple hasn't even kept up to date with Intel's processor releases. The most egregious example is the Mac Pro, which is still running on Ivy Bridge.
Apparently, he is intrigued and no longer wants to retire...
And perhaps they want a better "hardware" guy at this stage. I don't think building great cars is easy at all. So many cars out on the roads are really poorly designed and built pieces of crap
That is why I mentioned racing organizations as they are the best of the best, but I don't really know which crap cars you are referring to, since even the cheapest economy cars from Korea have some of the longest warranties in the business. Most new cars today don't even need oil changes or tune-ups for 100K miles. Tires and brakes are about the only things that gets replaced in the first ten years. I do think it is pretty easy to build cars as I have helped build a few hot rods with my dad while I was a teenager and I have read a number of books about building electric cars, which is a project I have considered doing using off the shelf components. I don't think Apple is going to do anything super revolutionary with the chassis or body. It is all about the software and the battery charging circuitry. At least by 2021 the charging station and solar infrastructure should be more built out which will do a lot to make EV more attractive.
The other thing I fear is that if Apple's project leaders start retiring/leaving, they don't seem to have a deep enough roster to lead any projects its working on. If Apple had to ask someone to come out of retirement (seems like this happened before with Bob) to lead a major project they're working on then they must not have anyone at Apple that can lead these different departments sufficiently should someone leave the company. One person cannot do it all. We can't have Dan Riccio leading every single hardware project Apple is working on. Its simply too much. Or, we can't have Craig Federighi lead every single piece of software Apple is working on. Product development will start to linger on far more than it should an the end result may not be worth the wait. I know its hard to find really good people, but I think Apple needs to start looking for more leadership type people if they can't rely on someone internally.
apple's a pretty secretive company. famously so. how on earth do you know that they dont seem to have a quality roster in place?
I'm just basing my post on the fact they have to keep hiring Bob back for these projects. This isn't the first time (more like the 2nd or 3rd). Why can't someone else at Apple do it then if they have so many quality people at Apple?
This is just another sign of why project Titan will wreck Apple . Cook should be canned.
How exactly is it yet another sign it will wreck Apple? What do you want Apple to do? It can't sit there and rely on the product line it has forever. It has to keep pushing forward with different areas of technology. Apple isn't going to be selling Macs and iPhones forever, or at least as its primary source of revenue.
I would note that an analyst stated that Apple will generate $45 B off of Pokemon Go; let me know when Tesla starts generating income from its car manufacturing operation.
I think you might be off a decimal point there. Apple's entire services business is not (yet) to that level per year. I get your point though, and agree that most people always value the "what could be" rather than put any value on "what is".
Indeed, perhaps yet another reason that Apple needs to eventually transition their Mac line (or create a new line) that utilizes their own in-house A-series chips. While Apple can't change the fundamentals of transistor technology, what they can do is add more functions into a SoC that provides new functionality beyond the general CPU/GPU, as they already do with their iOS devices. Image & video manipulation/editing, compression, secure components, supporting biometric sensors, etc. And/or they can have more than one SoC package, since the costs can be much lower than paying Intel.
Waiting a couple of years for a 10-20% improvement in performance isn't going to get anyone to upgrade.
Moving the Mac to their own A-chips is exactly the kind of thing that would substantially boost my confidence. It doesn't have to be that, but that would certainly be a good example.
And perhaps they want a better "hardware" guy at this stage.
Manufacturing automobiles is not exactly rocket science but it does take a lot of specialized knowledge. Being a great engineer doesn't automatically mean you can easily switch industries, especially between those that are so radically different. I think Bob was probably given the job because of his management skills rather than actually getting involved with the engineering part.
I would note that an analyst stated that Apple will generate $45 B off of Pokemon Go; let me know when Tesla starts generating income from its car manufacturing operation.
For the record, EV penetration is less that one percentage point in the U.S. and there are few barriers to entry for manufacturers. I'm not seeing any insurmountable lead that Tesla will have in the market for any determined new entrant.
As for the Mac's, they aren't being refreshed because there is so little real performance benefit from Intel releases of late. Apple will wait until it gets Intel parts that support the various features that they are pushing; I'm guessing Kaby Lake will be a design in for the next future Mac Book Pro updates.
I think you're off by an order of magnitude on Pokemon Go.
Regarding EVs -- the key question in my mind is whether Apple is capable of introducing a car in 2021 that is as far ahead of the competition as the iPhone was in 2007. The answer *should* be "yes" because Apple has the resources necessary to pull it off. But when I look at the current product lineup, I'm not so sure.
Blaming Intel for the staleness of the Mac lineup suggests that the only thing that matters about Mac hardware is the Intel processor. There are a lot of ways to improve hardware that don't depend on the CPU. But even if we were to define Macs entirely by their CPU, Apple hasn't even kept up to date with Intel's processor releases. The most egregious example is the Mac Pro, which is still running on Ivy Bridge.
Yep, my error; Apple is closer to $3B in revenue from Pokemon Go.
Intel is the primary driver for TB and a major driver for USB 3 and Intel has been late integrating these into their chip families; anybody using it had to roll their own. Apple prefers not to do that, but more to the point, when it is delivered, we will get 40Gbit TB and 10Gbit USB, and even then, Intel will still be lagging on monitor support beyond 4k.
But I'm becoming increasingly nervous about the pace of product improvements at Apple. There is a whiff of staleness throughout the However, if in 18 months those hopes are not realized and the product lineup continues to seem stale, then I will reluctantly conclude that Apple needs new leadership, and that a Tesla acquisition or merger might be something for the board to seriously consider, bringing Musk in as CEO.
I really hope it doesn't come to that.
I get it. If Cook cant deliver in 18 months the board should hire the guy who still hasnt managed to execute on his first master plan after 10 years. The guy who has never run a profitable company other than a shitty online payments one. The guy who has to go to the stock market every year asking for money, and uses sharholder money to bail out his other failing businesses. It makes PERFECT sense. Why wouldnt a board that makes 40 billion in profit a year want a guy like that in charge?
Given the resources available to him and the challenging goals he has set for himself, I think Musk is doing an amazing job with Tesla -- better, in fact, than Steve Jobs did with NeXT.
Meanwhile, Cook has access to vastly greater resources but he seems to be having some difficulty making good use of those resources.
Putting Apple's resources behind Musk's vision is something that the board might want to start thinking about in 18 months if the Apple product lineup is still kind of stale.
My hope, though, is that the product lineup won't be stale and that Cook will have proved doubters like me totally wrong.
I think you're off by an order of magnitude on Pokemon Go.
Regarding EVs -- the key question in my mind is whether Apple is capable of introducing a car in 2021 that is as far ahead of the competition as the iPhone was in 2007. The answer *should* be "yes" because Apple has the resources necessary to pull it off. But when I look at the current product lineup, I'm not so sure.
Blaming Intel for the staleness of the Mac lineup suggests that the only thing that matters about Mac hardware is the Intel processor. There are a lot of ways to improve hardware that don't depend on the CPU. But even if we were to define Macs entirely by their CPU, Apple hasn't even kept up to date with Intel's processor releases. The most egregious example is the Mac Pro, which is still running on Ivy Bridge.
Yep, my error; Apple is closer to $3B in revenue from Pokemon Go.
Intel is the primary driver for TB and a major driver for USB 3 and Intel has been late integrating these into their chip families; anybody using it had to roll their own. Apple prefers not to do that, but more to the point, when it is delivered, we will get 40Gbit TB and 10Gbit USB, and even then, Intel will still be lagging on monitor support beyond 4k.
Apple rolls their own for the iPhone and iPad, why not for the Mac? If Apple provided functionality in Macs that the rest of the world had to eat for Intel to provide, then Apple would clearly have a nice competitive advantage.
The next 18 months are going to be critical for Tim Cook. I really want him to succeed -- he's a nice, smart guy and he's accomplished a great deal over his career at Apple. I respect him tremendously.
But.
However, if in 18 months those hopes are not realized and the product lineup continues to seem stale, then I will reluctantly conclude that Apple needs new leadership, and that a Tesla acquisition or merger might be something for the board to seriously consider, bringing Musk in as CEO.
I really hope it doesn't come to that.
I sure hope Tesla and Muck come nowhere close to Apple ! What a disaster that would be for Apple!
So basically everyone just needs to cede the electronic vehicle market to Tesla because nobody can have a better/different idea than Musks grand plan? Or implement something at scale that he can't? It's amazing how people squawk about the need for competition except when it comes to EV, there Musk is untouchable.
The Tesla is a financial failure. Doesn't appear to have a chance of be making money in the future either. It's living on a rich man's toy bubble.
As someone who may have retired too early and now finds himself bored a lot, I get Mansfield's decision. This is good news. He is imbued with the Steve-brand of Apple ethos, and is a hardware guy. Now I know computer hardware and auto hardware are very different, but engineering basics apply to both. He can certainly bring in experienced auto guys to assist. Is that an old picture? I always thought of him as older.
I would note that an analyst stated that Apple will generate $45 B off of Pokemon Go; let me know when Tesla starts generating income from its car manufacturing operation.
For the record, EV penetration is less that one percentage point in the U.S. and there are few barriers to entry for manufacturers. I'm not seeing any insurmountable lead that Tesla will have in the market for any determined new entrant.
As for the Mac's, they aren't being refreshed because there is so little real performance benefit from Intel releases of late. Apple will wait until it gets Intel parts that support the various features that they are pushing; I'm guessing Kaby Lake will be a design in for the next future Mac Book Pro updates.
I think you're off by an order of magnitude on Pokemon Go.
Regarding EVs -- the key question in my mind is whether Apple is capable of introducing a car in 2021 that is as far ahead of the competition as the iPhone was in 2007. The answer *should* be "yes" because Apple has the resources necessary to pull it off. But when I look at the current product lineup, I'm not so sure.
Blaming Intel for the staleness of the Mac lineup suggests that the only thing that matters about Mac hardware is the Intel processor. There are a lot of ways to improve hardware that don't depend on the CPU. But even if we were to define Macs entirely by their CPU, Apple hasn't even kept up to date with Intel's processor releases. The most egregious example is the Mac Pro, which is still running on Ivy Bridge.
Yep, my error; Apple is closer to $3B in revenue from Pokemon Go.
I thought it had been determined that the analyst's numbers were far from accurate, vastly overstating the current Pokemon Go revenues flowing thru the App Store and using exceptionally rosy overall expectations going forward to come up with $Billions in profit. Could be mistaken.
Comments
I'm still waiting for MS to pivot in some way to ARM, but they seem to have lost their way in mobile.
I could go on at length but I won't but Industrial history is littered with people like Musk who lost it all because they took their eye off the ball at criticam moments.
Apparently, he is intrigued and no longer wants to retire...
And perhaps they want a better "hardware" guy at this stage. I don't think building great cars is easy at all. So many cars out on the roads are really poorly designed and built pieces of crap
Regarding EVs -- the key question in my mind is whether Apple is capable of introducing a car in 2021 that is as far ahead of the competition as the iPhone was in 2007. The answer *should* be "yes" because Apple has the resources necessary to pull it off. But when I look at the current product lineup, I'm not so sure.
Blaming Intel for the staleness of the Mac lineup suggests that the only thing that matters about Mac hardware is the Intel processor. There are a lot of ways to improve hardware that don't depend on the CPU. But even if we were to define Macs entirely by their CPU, Apple hasn't even kept up to date with Intel's processor releases. The most egregious example is the Mac Pro, which is still running on Ivy Bridge.
How exactly is it yet another sign it will wreck Apple? What do you want Apple to do? It can't sit there and rely on the product line it has forever. It has to keep pushing forward with different areas of technology. Apple isn't going to be selling Macs and iPhones forever, or at least as its primary source of revenue.
Intel is the primary driver for TB and a major driver for USB 3 and Intel has been late integrating these into their chip families; anybody using it had to roll their own. Apple prefers not to do that, but more to the point, when it is delivered, we will get 40Gbit TB and 10Gbit USB, and even then, Intel will still be lagging on monitor support beyond 4k.
Given the resources available to him and the challenging goals he has set for himself, I think Musk is doing an amazing job with Tesla -- better, in fact, than Steve Jobs did with NeXT.
Meanwhile, Cook has access to vastly greater resources but he seems to be having some difficulty making good use of those resources.
Putting Apple's resources behind Musk's vision is something that the board might want to start thinking about in 18 months if the Apple product lineup is still kind of stale.
My hope, though, is that the product lineup won't be stale and that Cook will have proved doubters like me totally wrong.
Does anyone actually know what this Apple car project involves?
I don't know !
What a disaster that would be for Apple!
It's living on a rich man's toy bubble.