The real test, IMO, for GM is to see how many EV cars they actually sell. As it stands now, I have no interest in an EV vehicle. I'm not the only one.
You don't need to have any interest in an EV. They will happen, just as USB-C happened in iPhone. The change is due to climate goals, to make nations independent from those selling oil (Russia + Middle East), to reduce trade deficits, to health, driving experience, and simply due to total cost of ownership.
Surely you have the right to use Nokia and a CRT-monitor... but most people will move to an EV. Where I live +50% of new cars are electrified. Resale values for ICE cars have started to drop just as they did for CRT-monitors and Nokias.
With VW, Toyota, and the classic US brands stuck in the past, it seems Tesla and the Chinese are the winners. Apple should be there - now! At least with Jony Ive out of Cupertino the charging has been simplified. The initial design for charging the Apple car was based on the Magic Mouse
There is no way in hell that Apple is anywhere close to releasing their own car.
There are two main things here that many people online blur: electric vehicles and autonomous piloted vehicles.
Designing an electric vehicle is not a big deal.
Designing an autonomous vehicle is A VERY BIG CHALLENGE. One that requires tens of millions of miles of actual trials on actual public roads in a huge variety of real world situations and conditions. These are not miles that can be done on some secret test track out in the middle of some desert or in some large warehouse or stadium-sized facility.
And if they are done on public roads, they need to be logged with the DMV overseeing that jurisdiction. Apple does have test vehicles on California roads and you can see the summary (number of vehicles, number of drivers, number of miles logged, accidents, etc.) as a matter of public record.
Apple's California test program has relatively few miles compared to the heavyweights like Waymo (Alphabet-Google), Nuro, drive.AI (acquired by another company), and others.
There is no way that Apple can just call a press conference next week/month/year and say "we have an autonomous car ready for you to buy". They simply have not logged enough real world testing miles.
The fact of the matter is that it would probably be 5+ years *AFTER* they actively start extensive public road testing at multiple sites until a wide range of conditions when a production vehicle for public usage is viable. That means not just the Cupertino-Sunnyvale-Mountain View area.
Anyone who thinks Apple is imminently releasing an autonomous vehicle is completely detached from reality.
What a tale of woe! Hiring, firing, spending, cutbacks, alliances made and broken etc. and for what? To pursue a peculiarly U.S.A. aspect of culture - the automobile.
Cars are on their way out, at least privately-owned cars. First and foremost the focus has to be in reducing the need to travel. Covid was a catalyst for this transition but there is much further to go. Apple Vision will be a nudge in the right direction. There will be a need to distribute goods to people but getting in a car and going to a shop is about the least efficient way of doing it. Already 'department stores' and car-only shopping centres are slowly being replaced by distribution centres full of robot pickers and packers with fleets of combined delivery vehicles. Mass transportation along the lines of hub-spoke with the 'last mile' covered by yes, a shared electric vehicle, walking or cycling. Ultimately, other than for 'reserved occupations', any form of travel will only be for pleasure.
I return to the cultural pretext of even pursuing such an idea. Imagine how a self-driving car would behave when surrounded by a thousand bicycles brushing into it - certain paralysis and a real danger to other road users.
I think in around 20 years you will be able to pick up a self-driving vehicle for nothing - because it won't be legal to use them and the flakey, proprietary technology will have long since ceased to be supported.
That's a lot of words to say "Apple has been playing with somebody's pet projects that will never lead to a product for a decade."
There is no Apple car. There isn't going to be an Apple car.
If Apple got serious about wanting to become a car company today (and they are absolutely NOT serious about it now) it would take at least a decade for them to release a car, and given how bad Apple (and to be fair all software companies) are about fixing bugs and introducing new ones, probably never be safe to drive.
An oldie but goodie:
At a recent computer exposition, Bill Gates reportedly compared the
computer industry with the auto industry and stated: “If General
Motors had kept up with the technology like the computer industry has,
we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon.”
In response to Bill’s comments, GM issued a press release stating: “If
General Motors had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be
driving cars with the following characteristics:
For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.
Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to
buy a new car.
Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You
would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the
windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before
you could continue. For some reason, you would simply accept this.
Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause
your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would
have to reinstall the engine.
Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was
reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive – but would
run on only five percent of the roads.
The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all
be replaced by a single “General Protection Fault” warning
light.
The airbag system would ask “Are you sure?” before
deploying.
Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out
and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door
handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.
Every time GM introduced a new car, car buyers would have to learn
to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in
the same manner as the old car.
You’d have to press the “Start” button to turn the engine
off.
That's a lot of words to say "Apple has been playing with somebody's pet projects that will never lead to a product for a decade."
There is no Apple car. There isn't going to be an Apple car.
If Apple got serious about wanting to become a car company today (and they are absolutely NOT serious about it now) it would take at least a decade for them to release a car, and given how bad Apple (and to be fair all software companies) are about fixing bugs and introducing new ones, probably never be safe to drive.
An oldie but goodie:
At a recent computer exposition, Bill Gates reportedly compared the
computer industry with the auto industry and stated: “If General
Motors had kept up with the technology like the computer industry has,
we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon.”
In response to Bill’s comments, GM issued a press release stating: “If
General Motors had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be
driving cars with the following characteristics:
For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.
Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to
buy a new car.
Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You
would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the
windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before
you could continue. For some reason, you would simply accept this.
Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause
your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would
have to reinstall the engine.
Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was
reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive – but would
run on only five percent of the roads.
The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all
be replaced by a single “General Protection Fault” warning
light.
The airbag system would ask “Are you sure?” before
deploying.
Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out
and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door
handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.
Every time GM introduced a new car, car buyers would have to learn
to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in
the same manner as the old car.
You’d have to press the “Start” button to turn the engine
off.
"Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.
That's a mighty old clunker you're driving if it has an external antenna!
That's a lot of words to say "Apple has been playing with somebody's pet projects that will never lead to a product for a decade."
There is no Apple car. There isn't going to be an Apple car.
If Apple got serious about wanting to become a car company today (and they are absolutely NOT serious about it now) it would take at least a decade for them to release a car, and given how bad Apple (and to be fair all software companies) are about fixing bugs and introducing new ones, probably never be safe to drive.
An oldie but goodie:
At a recent computer exposition, Bill Gates reportedly compared the
computer industry with the auto industry and stated: “If General
Motors had kept up with the technology like the computer industry has,
we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon.”
In response to Bill’s comments, GM issued a press release stating: “If
General Motors had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be
driving cars with the following characteristics:
For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.
Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to
buy a new car.
Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You
would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the
windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before
you could continue. For some reason, you would simply accept this.
Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause
your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would
have to reinstall the engine.
Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was
reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive – but would
run on only five percent of the roads.
The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all
be replaced by a single “General Protection Fault” warning
light.
The airbag system would ask “Are you sure?” before
deploying.
Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out
and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door
handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.
Every time GM introduced a new car, car buyers would have to learn
to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in
the same manner as the old car.
You’d have to press the “Start” button to turn the engine
off.
#10 has come true for me. Push button to start (with foot on brake), push same button to power off.
That's a lot of words to say "Apple has been playing with somebody's pet projects that will never lead to a product for a decade."
There is no Apple car. There isn't going to be an Apple car.
If Apple got serious about wanting to become a car company today (and they are absolutely NOT serious about it now) it would take at least a decade for them to release a car, and given how bad Apple (and to be fair all software companies) are about fixing bugs and introducing new ones, probably never be safe to drive.
An oldie but goodie:
At a recent computer exposition, Bill Gates reportedly compared the
computer industry with the auto industry and stated: “If General
Motors had kept up with the technology like the computer industry has,
we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon.”
In response to Bill’s comments, GM issued a press release stating: “If
General Motors had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be
driving cars with the following characteristics:
For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.
Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to
buy a new car.
Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You
would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the
windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before
you could continue. For some reason, you would simply accept this.
Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause
your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would
have to reinstall the engine.
Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was
reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive – but would
run on only five percent of the roads.
The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all
be replaced by a single “General Protection Fault” warning
light.
The airbag system would ask “Are you sure?” before
deploying.
Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out
and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door
handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.
Every time GM introduced a new car, car buyers would have to learn
to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in
the same manner as the old car.
You’d have to press the “Start” button to turn the engine
off.
#10 has come true for me. Push button to start (with foot on brake), push same button to power off.
Hehe, something along the lines of number 9 occurs with Tesla Model 3. Every once a while, a new update changes the UI of the center screen, and I have to learn where things are again. Tesla still hasn't made it mandatory that every time I'm in reverse, the rearview cameras must be in view. There can be no circumstance where those cameras are covered when in reverse.
Number 8? Yeah, that happens too. The Model 3 uses a BT connection to my iPhone as a key. Every once in awhile, it doesn't connect and doesn't automatically unlock the car. Would have to flip the BT switch on and off, and one time I had to use the key card.
Number 5? Well I am waiting a on an EV with solar PV on it. Waiting, waiting, and waiting. If it is from Apple, awesome.
Number 4? Yup, Tesla's autopilot will very rarely do a steering correction for no good reason. There's a neighborhood intersection I used to go to a lot where for some reason, it felt that it needed to do a steering correction on a left turn. There aren't any lines on the road, just an intersection in a neighborhood. Maybe something something with light and shadows that confuses the image recognizer.
Number 3? There are two, maybe three, control loops. There is the inner loop that controls the basic functions of the car. There is an outer loop that controls the center display. The outer loop has crashed on me and I have to restart it by long pressing the dial-buttons on the steering wheel. You can still drive and everything, you just don't know how fast you are going, control wipers, etc.
Another thing I noticed from the article is that all the predictions were anticipating a release 3 years from the publishing date - almost as though their expected audience doesn't care about anything more than two years away.
I really don't know if we'll see an Apple Car; what little verified information we have tells us that there's something vaguely automotive being worked on. It could be anything at this point. It's interesting that the eye-tracking technology from the Apple Vision Pro could be adapted for use within a vehicle, and I'm sure that the image analysis systems from the headset are also applicable - heck, there's a LOT of overlap with the sensor suites on the iPhone and iPad and any possible automotive use.
If it does end up a real thing, we're going to look back and wonder how we missed the signs that are obvious in hindsight. But we don't know when that day will come; it's all speculation at this point.
To those who suggest that starting a car company is a ten year project I offer you Rivian, Licid, Fiskr, et al. Apple has the money to create a car company in the time it takes to build factories (a couple years) or to partner with an existing manufacturer. The hard part is figuring out what the ultimate goal should be and getting to that end. For sure Apple doesn’t merely want to be another EV brand. Apple will want to revolutionize transport in some manner, even differentiating from Tesla. I can’t say what that might look like, but the problem isn’t that Apple couldn’t fairly soon roll yet another line of EVs off some production lines.
I predict, that when it comes out, the power plug will be incompatible with everyone else's power plug.
And you'll need a bigger pentalobe screwdriver!
The air filter will need a special socket to get the cover off and will only be available from Apple for $150.
If people try to change the filter themselves or use a non-Apple filter people will scream about how dangerous it and the car might explode. Eventually Apple will loan you the required sockets for $100 but the air filters will be bar coded. Ostensibly this will be to prevent fakes and black market sales of stolen filters.
Curious how Apple could meet its carbon neutral pledge over the life of the vehicle. They will need to buy a lot more renewable energy for a car then a phone.
Comments
Surely you have the right to use Nokia and a CRT-monitor... but most people will move to an EV. Where I live +50% of new cars are electrified. Resale values for ICE cars have started to drop just as they did for CRT-monitors and Nokias.
With VW, Toyota, and the classic US brands stuck in the past, it seems Tesla and the Chinese are the winners. Apple should be there - now!
At least with Jony Ive out of Cupertino the charging has been simplified. The initial design for charging the Apple car was based on the Magic Mouse
There are two main things here that many people online blur: electric vehicles and autonomous piloted vehicles.
Designing an electric vehicle is not a big deal.
Designing an autonomous vehicle is A VERY BIG CHALLENGE. One that requires tens of millions of miles of actual trials on actual public roads in a huge variety of real world situations and conditions. These are not miles that can be done on some secret test track out in the middle of some desert or in some large warehouse or stadium-sized facility.
And if they are done on public roads, they need to be logged with the DMV overseeing that jurisdiction. Apple does have test vehicles on California roads and you can see the summary (number of vehicles, number of drivers, number of miles logged, accidents, etc.) as a matter of public record.
Apple's California test program has relatively few miles compared to the heavyweights like Waymo (Alphabet-Google), Nuro, drive.AI (acquired by another company), and others.
There is no way that Apple can just call a press conference next week/month/year and say "we have an autonomous car ready for you to buy". They simply have not logged enough real world testing miles.
The fact of the matter is that it would probably be 5+ years *AFTER* they actively start extensive public road testing at multiple sites until a wide range of conditions when a production vehicle for public usage is viable. That means not just the Cupertino-Sunnyvale-Mountain View area.
Anyone who thinks Apple is imminently releasing an autonomous vehicle is completely detached from reality.
Cars are on their way out, at least privately-owned cars. First and foremost the focus has to be in reducing the need to travel. Covid was a catalyst for this transition but there is much further to go. Apple Vision will be a nudge in the right direction. There will be a need to distribute goods to people but getting in a car and going to a shop is about the least efficient way of doing it. Already 'department stores' and car-only shopping centres are slowly being replaced by distribution centres full of robot pickers and packers with fleets of combined delivery vehicles. Mass transportation along the lines of hub-spoke with the 'last mile' covered by yes, a shared electric vehicle, walking or cycling. Ultimately, other than for 'reserved occupations', any form of travel will only be for pleasure.
I return to the cultural pretext of even pursuing such an idea. Imagine how a self-driving car would behave when surrounded by a thousand bicycles brushing into it - certain paralysis and a real danger to other road users.
I think in around 20 years you will be able to pick up a self-driving vehicle for nothing - because it won't be legal to use them and the flakey, proprietary technology will have long since ceased to be supported.
Number 8? Yeah, that happens too. The Model 3 uses a BT connection to my iPhone as a key. Every once in awhile, it doesn't connect and doesn't automatically unlock the car. Would have to flip the BT switch on and off, and one time I had to use the key card.
Number 5? Well I am waiting a on an EV with solar PV on it. Waiting, waiting, and waiting. If it is from Apple, awesome.
Number 4? Yup, Tesla's autopilot will very rarely do a steering correction for no good reason. There's a neighborhood intersection I used to go to a lot where for some reason, it felt that it needed to do a steering correction on a left turn. There aren't any lines on the road, just an intersection in a neighborhood. Maybe something something with light and shadows that confuses the image recognizer.
Number 3? There are two, maybe three, control loops. There is the inner loop that controls the basic functions of the car. There is an outer loop that controls the center display. The outer loop has crashed on me and I have to restart it by long pressing the dial-buttons on the steering wheel. You can still drive and everything, you just don't know how fast you are going, control wipers, etc.
I really don't know if we'll see an Apple Car; what little verified information we have tells us that there's something vaguely automotive being worked on. It could be anything at this point. It's interesting that the eye-tracking technology from the Apple Vision Pro could be adapted for use within a vehicle, and I'm sure that the image analysis systems from the headset are also applicable - heck, there's a LOT of overlap with the sensor suites on the iPhone and iPad and any possible automotive use.
If it does end up a real thing, we're going to look back and wonder how we missed the signs that are obvious in hindsight. But we don't know when that day will come; it's all speculation at this point.