Car? I don’t think so. There is something so cool in a company that can sell high margin items in tiny little boxes that can be shipped via ups and fed ex and returned the same way vs something that has so many liabilities, needs tires, upholstery, brakes and servicing in garages and all the headaches that go with that. Yeah no way. This is the Apple TV all over again.
Let’s remember Ford is stopping car production to focus mostly on trucks and commercial vehicles. Tesla is not making any money really. A car factory? Where? China? The US?
It just sounds like a terrible idea all the way around.
Concur. I am highly skeptical of an Apple Car. I can accept that Apple would be interested in tech associated with cars - maps, infotainment systems, even luxury interiors like seats, lighting systems, HUD displays ot AI safety systems, or even performance monitoring systems. A whole car? As granpaw usta say: "no money in that."
Apple hasn’t even built an Apple TV... as in a real TV. What they have is connectivity device to connect to Apple services.
Apple’s not building a “car” they’re building a platform to connect to Apple services. One of those “services” could be autonomously driving you to work. That service might cost you $2 each way, or be bundled into a subscription. It might even be ad supported.
Other Example: You’ll be passing a Starbucks in 5 minutes... Would you like me to reroute, and order you your usual? Paid for with Apple Pay of course.
Apple would have multiple revenue streams from this... Starbucks pays them, you pay them, ad companies pay them. Example: The temperature will be 30 degrees next week. Can we interest you in a new coat for 20% off... People in cars are a captive audience.
Intriguing and possible. There are some rather innovative things involving auto services, including car shares. I am also skeptical of self-driving, autonomous cars in general. I can see a case for self driving trucks - a fleet of point to point trucks on interstates, with their cargo stations essentially on the interstate highways (and analogs in other countries seems be a logical system to build. And the driver unions will *really* oppose them.
If Apple does move to A Series on the Mac, loss of virtualization becomes a real concern for the 3-5% of Mac users who need it. Could Apple offer a Pro model with a dual CPU configuration? Probably. But it would greatly complicate the MacOS needed to run such a thing. Would such an OS be worth Apple’s time and effort to maintain? Not at all sure about that.
Where did you source that percentage? What about Windows having been ARM-based for a long time so that apps like Parallels and VMWare could jump on that, not to mention Linux offerings?
anome said: Maybe he isn't a person, Ming-Chi Kuo is an alias used to conceal the real identity of one of the industry's most elite analysts. You know, like James Bond. Every few years the old one retires and gets replaced by a new one. Imagine the furore if they ever picked a female Ming-Chi Kuo.
I refuse to believe Kuo is like the Dread Pirate Roberts.
Let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves here. I agree that if Apple would do this, 2020-2021 would be about the right time. If you read anandtech’s deep dive into the A12, you’d get some idea where Apple is on this. Two more years could give the cores another 50% boost.
at Adobe’s conference, Shiller made a statement about the new iPads coming up which sounded pretty interesting.
it isn’t required that Apple would change all of their devices to ARM. The Macbook would be the obvious choice, as it uses the low power, low performance M series. Past that, who knows? A lower priced iMac? Maybe. I doubt Apple would want to overturn the applecart (clever, if I say so myself) for this.
Let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves here. I agree that if Apple would do this, 2020-2021 would be about the right time. If you read anandtech’s deep dive into the A12, you’d get some idea where Apple is on this. Two more years could give the cores another 50% boost.
at Adobe’s conference, Shiller made a statement about the new iPads coming up which sounded pretty interesting.
it isn’t required that Apple would change all of their devices to ARM. The Macbook would be the obvious choice, as it uses the low power, low performance M series. Past that, who knows? A lower priced iMac? Maybe. I doubt Apple would want to overturn the applecart (clever, if I say so myself) for this.
1) I think doing this at any time makes sense, and I think the hold up isn't the performance of their HW but where their rewriting of their OS, drivers, apps, and developer tools for a smooth transition for users.
2) I agree with it coming to the low-end first, but I think that it's possible that the MacBook Air still existing yet not having been updated in such a long time would be a more ideal place to put an ARM-based Mac. I think it's a good demarcation between a dual architecture line up out of the gate.
If Apple does move to A Series on the Mac, loss of virtualization becomes a real concern for the 3-5% of Mac users who need it. Could Apple offer a Pro model with a dual CPU configuration? Probably. But it would greatly complicate the MacOS needed to run such a thing. Would such an OS be worth Apple’s time and effort to maintain? Not at all sure about that.
Apple isn't going to replace all Mac Models with ARM, so it won't be an issue. Think of a Mac Book with ARM that doesn't support Boot Camp or virtualization. There are a lot of people that want a basic notebook running only Mac Apps, or repurposed iOS Apps; this would be for them.
Who is going to put an Apple service in their car? CarPlay is projected UI it doesn’t replace anything. Why would BMW, Mercedes, etc. go with an Apple system when they have their own (and are probably further along than Apple when it comes to autonomous/self driving)? And why would Apple just want to be a service or a piece of technology in someone else’s product. They’ve never done that before. Apple isn’t putting tvOS in other people’s TVs, they have a self contained box that connects to a TV via a cable. Apple didn’t ask Hermés or Nike to make a watch and stick watchOS in it. Because Apple likes to control the whole widget and whole consumer experience.
anome said: Maybe he isn't a person, Ming-Chi Kuo is an alias used to conceal the real identity of one of the industry's most elite analysts. You know, like James Bond. Every few years the old one retires and gets replaced by a new one. Imagine the furore if they ever picked a female Ming-Chi Kuo.
I refuse to believe Kuo is like the Dread Pirate Roberts.
No, not like the Dread Pirate Roberts. That's wholly a self-selecting thing where the previous one chooses someone to carry the legend forward. This is more about secretive organisations using an identity as a front for their top agent. If a previous Ming-Chi Kuo dies in action, or becomes compromised in the field, they simply go to the next nameless analyst on their list. Rather than assuming the identity of Ming-Chi Kuo, Ming-Chi Kuo is kind of an anti-identity. Once you become Ming-Chi Kuo, you cease to exist as an individual, and become part of the gestalt.
There may even be the original Ming-Chi Kuo somewhere in the background, manipulating things. Lurking in the shadows while others carry out unspeakable things in his name...
OK, I may have been up all night reading League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Although the idea of Bond being an agency alias rather than an individual predates that by a long way. It was even in the original film of Casino Royale.
If Apple does move to A Series on the Mac, loss of virtualization becomes a real concern for the 3-5% of Mac users who need it. Could Apple offer a Pro model with a dual CPU configuration? Probably. But it would greatly complicate the MacOS needed to run such a thing. Would such an OS be worth Apple’s time and effort to maintain? Not at all sure about that.
Apple isn't going to replace all Mac Models with ARM, so it won't be an issue. Think of a Mac Book with ARM that doesn't support Boot Camp or virtualization. There are a lot of people that want a basic notebook running only Mac Apps, or repurposed iOS Apps; this would be for them.
I'm cautiously optimistic when it comes to Apple replacing Intel on Macs with ARM. I still see Marzipan as nothing more than a way for Mac users to run iOS / iPad apps on their Mac.
Let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves here. I agree that if Apple would do this, 2020-2021 would be about the right time. If you read anandtech’s deep dive into the A12, you’d get some idea where Apple is on this. Two more years could give the cores another 50% boost.
at Adobe’s conference, Shiller made a statement about the new iPads coming up which sounded pretty interesting.
it isn’t required that Apple would change all of their devices to ARM. The Macbook would be the obvious choice, as it uses the low power, low performance M series. Past that, who knows? A lower priced iMac? Maybe. I doubt Apple would want to overturn the applecart (clever, if I say so myself) for this.
1) I think doing this at any time makes sense, and I think the hold up isn't the performance of their HW but where their rewriting of their OS, drivers, apps, and developer tools for a smooth transition for users.
2) I agree with it coming to the low-end first, but I think that it's possible that the MacBook Air still existing yet not having been updated in such a long time would be a more ideal place to put an ARM-based Mac. I think it's a good demarcation between a dual architecture line up out of the gate.
I don’t think doing it right now makes sense. There’s not enough differential between the M series and Apple’s A series to overcome all of the software issues that will occur. I know some people seem to think there’s no issue there, but there is. This goes to what you say in #2 as well. I’m pretty sure Apple has been working with this for several years. Maybe as far back as the 64 bit A7.
I think people forget that the X86-64 specification can be licensed. Apple could simply be licensed by Apple and integrated into A series chips for the Mac. Then that would take care of the compatibility issues and virtualization issues
I expect Apple is more interested in transportation as a service, rather than a car to sell to an individual. There’s a lot of room for Apple to develop services around such an offering as a relates to the ease of use their clientele expect.
The reason I don’t use Uber, Lyft, taxis or buses is the same reason I like having my own car. I’m an adult who can afford it and using any of those alternatives usually involves a dirty, smelly or slow vehicle.
What do you do on business/vacation? I work from home and drive myself 99% of the time, but for the handful of times that I have to fly around the country for work, I rely on Uber/Lyft. It's convenient, fast and gets the job done.
Not only that, cars spend on average something like 95% of their time parked in the driveway. The cost of car ownership, whether you can afford it or not, is wasteful. Driving and parking is a drag if you live in an urban setting. If you really love driving, I mean for real... go to a race track. The most fun that can be had on four wheels
Who is going to put an Apple service in their car? CarPlay is projected UI it doesn’t replace anything. Why would BMW, Mercedes, etc. go with an Apple system when they have their own (and are probably further along than Apple when it comes to autonomous/self driving)? And why would Apple just want to be a service or a piece of technology in someone else’s product. They’ve never done that before. Apple isn’t putting tvOS in other people’s TVs, they have a self contained box that connects to a TV via a cable. Apple didn’t ask Hermés or Nike to make a watch and stick watchOS in it. Because Apple likes to control the whole widget and whole consumer experience.
iTunes on Windows? Who knows? I’d like to see an Apple car. My wife wants an autonomous Apple car.
i also don’t think that other car companies would want a third party that controls the entire interface, and doesn’t allow them to collect their own customers data. QNX controls the car, but manufacturers build their own systems on top. Apple doesn’t have an OS to control the car that we know of at this point. We don’t know what they’re doing, or how they’re doing it on their test vehicles.
mercedes said that they didn’t partner with Apple, after talks, because they didn’t want Apple to have too much control over the process. Apple has held talks with BMW too. Their partnership with WW is interesting, and possibly WW did it in part because they said they were getting rid of diesel in favor of electric, in the wake of the scandal. Possibly partnering with Apple will give them credibility, in their thinking. But we don’t know how the partnership works.
I expect Apple is more interested in transportation as a service, rather than a car to sell to an individual. There’s a lot of room for Apple to develop services around such an offering as a relates to the ease of use their clientele expect.
The reason I don’t use Uber, Lyft, taxis or buses is the same reason I like having my own car. I’m an adult who can afford it and using any of those alternatives usually involves a dirty, smelly or slow vehicle.
I’m hoping Apple offers lease or buy luxury autonomous vehicles.
What does being an "adult who can afford it" have to do with owning an automobile? Cars have a wide range of prices, including teenagers being given one or paying just a few hundred dollars for one and they probably can't afford to use cabs or ride sharing services too often. Would someone who lives in a major city, like NY, not be an adult or have less money than you because they don't drive in the city because there's no convenient place to park? What about those that take trains in Europe? What about people that responsibly will take a cab or ride share to meet friend for drinks instead of driving while potentially over the legal limit? I'd say these people were "adult" for being responsible and willing to fork over the extra cost to being driven over driving their own vehicle.
I agree with you Soli, but I just want to point out one thing which I know you are aware of, that in most cases, owning your own car is much more expensive than using other forms of transport as you outline. Also, in many parts of the civilized world using public transport is not a 'class thing', it is an environmentally friendly decision that has the added convenience of not having to deal with a car all day. Not a lesser expensive decision, just more practical.
I expect Apple is more interested in transportation as a service, rather than a car to sell to an individual. There’s a lot of room for Apple to develop services around such an offering as a relates to the ease of use their clientele expect.
Transportation Service make a lot of sense. I think we all know that there are reports that Apple is designing a car without a steering wheel ("An interior without a steering wheel or pedals [which would mean the car would have to be fully autonomous]" Macworld UK). Tony Seba (book: Clean Disruption) beautifully outlines the revolutionary benefits of automated electric subscription transportation as a business model innovation ( @20:07).
Apple hasn’t even built an Apple TV... as in a real TV. What they have is connectivity device to connect to Apple services.
Apple’s not building a “car” they’re building a platform to connect to Apple services. One of those “services” could be autonomously driving you to work. That service might cost you $2 each way, or be bundled into a subscription. It might even be ad supported.
Other Example: You’ll be passing a Starbucks in 5 minutes... Would you like me to reroute, and order you your usual? Paid for with Apple Pay of course.
Apple would have multiple revenue streams from this... Starbucks pays them, you pay them, ad companies pay them. Example: The temperature will be 30 degrees next week. Can we interest you in a new coat for 20% off... People in cars are a captive audience.
I could see that being where Google would head with their self driving efforts but not so much Apple. Maybe the Starbucks element if you have the Starbucks app installed and it's set up through Siri as a feature.
As far as you being a captive audience for advertising though this isn't how Apple rolls...
I think people forget that the X86-64 specification can be licensed. Apple could simply be licensed by Apple and integrated into A series chips for the Mac. Then that would take care of the compatibility issues and virtualization issues
If Apple were inclined, they could put X86 architecture on the same piece of silicon as the A Series architecture. It would horribly complicate the bus architecture, power management, memory management, plus 20 other things I can’t think of at the moment. But I’m sure they could do it.
However, I don’t think they will for the simple reason that it would be a most inelegant solution to a problem that could be solved in other ways.
If Apple does move to A Series on the Mac, loss of virtualization becomes a real concern for the 3-5% of Mac users who need it. Could Apple offer a Pro model with a dual CPU configuration? Probably. But it would greatly complicate the MacOS needed to run such a thing. Would such an OS be worth Apple’s time and effort to maintain? Not at all sure about that.
If Apple does move to A Series on the Mac, loss of virtualization becomes a real concern for the 3-5% of Mac users who need it. Could Apple offer a Pro model with a dual CPU configuration? Probably. But it would greatly complicate the MacOS needed to run such a thing. Would such an OS be worth Apple’s time and effort to maintain? Not at all sure about that.
Where did you source that percentage?
I pulled it out of my virtualized rear end. But considering that Tim Cook said there were around 100 million Mac users last year, ask yourself what kind of unit sales you think Parallels and VMWare have had. I’m thinking that the 3-5% number I used was generous.
I expect Apple is more interested in transportation as a service, rather than a car to sell to an individual. There’s a lot of room for Apple to develop services around such an offering as a relates to the ease of use their clientele expect.
The reason I don’t use Uber, Lyft, taxis or buses is the same reason I like having my own car. I’m an adult who can afford it and using any of those alternatives usually involves a dirty, smelly or slow vehicle.
Nah, you just made that up. There are age requirements and I’ve never had a smelly or dirty car. They’d be voted out.
If Apple does move to A Series on the Mac, loss of virtualization becomes a real concern for the 3-5% of Mac users who need it. Could Apple offer a Pro model with a dual CPU configuration? Probably. But it would greatly complicate the MacOS needed to run such a thing. Would such an OS be worth Apple’s time and effort to maintain? Not at all sure about that.
Apple isn't going to replace all Mac Models with ARM, so it won't be an issue. Think of a Mac Book with ARM that doesn't support Boot Camp or virtualization. There are a lot of people that want a basic notebook running only Mac Apps, or repurposed iOS Apps; this would be for them.
I'm cautiously optimistic when it comes to Apple replacing Intel on Macs with ARM. I still see Marzipan as nothing more than a way for Mac users to run iOS / iPad apps on their Mac.
Then you’re viewing it wrong. It’s been discussed ad nauseum, but it’s a unified API for UI controls native to the platform they’re on, not a way to run little iOS apps on your mac.
Comments
I refuse to believe Kuo is like the Dread Pirate Roberts.
at Adobe’s conference, Shiller made a statement about the new iPads coming up which sounded pretty interesting.
it isn’t required that Apple would change all of their devices to ARM. The Macbook would be the obvious choice, as it uses the low power, low performance M series. Past that, who knows? A lower priced iMac? Maybe. I doubt Apple would want to overturn the applecart (clever, if I say so myself) for this.
2) I agree with it coming to the low-end first, but I think that it's possible that the MacBook Air still existing yet not having been updated in such a long time would be a more ideal place to put an ARM-based Mac. I think it's a good demarcation between a dual architecture line up out of the gate.
No, not like the Dread Pirate Roberts. That's wholly a self-selecting thing where the previous one chooses someone to carry the legend forward. This is more about secretive organisations using an identity as a front for their top agent. If a previous Ming-Chi Kuo dies in action, or becomes compromised in the field, they simply go to the next nameless analyst on their list. Rather than assuming the identity of Ming-Chi Kuo, Ming-Chi Kuo is kind of an anti-identity. Once you become Ming-Chi Kuo, you cease to exist as an individual, and become part of the gestalt.
There may even be the original Ming-Chi Kuo somewhere in the background, manipulating things. Lurking in the shadows while others carry out unspeakable things in his name...
OK, I may have been up all night reading League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Although the idea of Bond being an agency alias rather than an individual predates that by a long way. It was even in the original film of Casino Royale.
will Apple kill the Air? No one seems to know.
iTunes on Windows? Who knows? I’d like to see an Apple car. My wife wants an autonomous Apple car.
i also don’t think that other car companies would want a third party that controls the entire interface, and doesn’t allow them to collect their own customers data. QNX controls the car, but manufacturers build their own systems on top. Apple doesn’t have an OS to control the car that we know of at this point. We don’t know what they’re doing, or how they’re doing it on their test vehicles.
mercedes said that they didn’t partner with Apple, after talks, because they didn’t want Apple to have too much control over the process. Apple has held talks with BMW too. Their partnership with WW is interesting, and possibly WW did it in part because they said they were getting rid of diesel in favor of electric, in the wake of the scandal. Possibly partnering with Apple will give them credibility, in their thinking. But we don’t know how the partnership works.
I agree with you Soli, but I just want to point out one thing which I know you are aware of, that in most cases, owning your own car is much more expensive than using other forms of transport as you outline. Also, in many parts of the civilized world using public transport is not a 'class thing', it is an environmentally friendly decision that has the added convenience of not having to deal with a car all day. Not a lesser expensive decision, just more practical.
As far as you being a captive audience for advertising though this isn't how Apple rolls...
If Apple were inclined, they could put X86 architecture on the same piece of silicon as the A Series architecture. It would horribly complicate the bus architecture, power management, memory management, plus 20 other things I can’t think of at the moment. But I’m sure they could do it.
However, I don’t think they will for the simple reason that it would be a most inelegant solution to a problem that could be solved in other ways.