Decade-old Apple Car project may be completely dead

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 74
    k2kw said:
    Cooks Apple either doesn't have guts for Risk or vision .
    So the Apple Vision Pro was neither an example of guts for risk or vision?  I think most people would disagree.
    No. He’s right. The Vision Pro? What vision? It’s just another headset but with higher specs. That doesn’t take guts. And the vision was laid out by others. 

    Risk? It’s a niche market and Apple seemed to go in prepared for that reality. The Vision Pro is CD about as gutsy/risky as the Apple Watch. 

    The car however… that would be insanely gutsy and risky. 

    I think the most risky/gutsy thing apple has followed through on in the last 10 years is Apple Silicon. 
    avon b7muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 22 of 74
    M68000 said:
    jas99 said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    i think this was just too big of a challenge for apple

    maybe those staff can have another go on the AirPower 
    No. This was an excellent decision. Apple should stay as far away from the automotive industry as possible.
    Perhaps they should have made “decision” 10 years ago.  It seems pretty clear that electric car sales have stalled along with possibly interest in them from large majority of consumers.  Cold weather battery issues and heavy tire wear of EV’s are just 2 of their problems. The hybrid approach is gaining ground while current ICE cars are not going anywhere anytime soon and other fuel technologies could be available to more consumers soon?  It seemed that Apple would only have been interested in a full electric vehicle, correct?  If so, could these latest market trends have been the final straw so to speak for Apple to end whatever they have been doing?
    Somewhat surprisingly your post is the first to discuss what’s been going on in the EV market over the last 6 months. Apple is canceling the car because reality just set in across the EV auto landscape: all the rich people who want one have largely bought one, government subsidies have mostly run out, repair costs are abysmal on an EV because even the slightest accident can cause fire risk in the battery, leading to increased insurance costs, and public charging costs have gone up.  Of course there’s the ever-present issue of long charge times/range anxiety/charge station availability. EV’s are the first large scale product that the public is having to deal with and consider in their economic choices in the government mandated “green revolution”, and the EV’s are losing.
    rbnetengrwilliamlondontmay9secondkox2watto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 74
    jdwjdw Posts: 1,387member
    Finally!!!

    Throughout all these years, even while reading article after article about it, I knew deep down in my heart that this "rumor" was little more than that.  It made no sense whatsoever that Apple, a computer and iPhone company, would make a car.  It seemed so crazy to me.  And then today, we see this article saying the idea is all but dead.  That makes the most sense of all.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 74
    jas99 said:
    This is a very good thing. I was very relieved to read this article.

    Having a great deal of experience in the auto industry over decades, I can tell you this is a field that Apple should stay away from.

    It could be the worst of all businesses, bettter only than the hospitality industry. The auto industry has incredibly low margins, is highly capital intensive, has a great deal of exposure to lawsuits, and the list of negative attributes goes on and on. 

    The ability to say, “No.” is one of Apple‘s greatest strengths. 
    It could have been worse. Apple may have been trying to start an airline. How does one become a millionaire? Start with a billion$ and start an airline.

    I am not sure what Apple could have brought to the table here that was so different. I think a few years ago, tech types did not see cars as cars, but holding pens for humans while a car drove them from A to B and thus consumers of whatever infotainment the owners of the screen content management could present to their eyeballs. It turns our automatic driving us harder than everyone thought and you can't service a car without a network of expensive service centres (those pesky dealers that somehow insist on making a living fixing cars). This turns out to be a very different business model and maybe not worth it for Apple at this time?
    rbnetengrwilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 74
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,432member
    EV are just fine.  They're not going anywhere.    All the issues (aside from cold weather and that's easily fixable)  will be rectified with Solid State batteries which will produce either double the power for a given weight or today's power in half the weight which eliminates much of the weight issues of EV as well as thermal runaway. 

    Apple is smart to get out of cars because it's not a core competency.    Apple barely does a good job repairing their computers and car repairs are another level of stress.  I think they should continue to embed their IP into the nervous system of a car and the user interaction with the driver.  That's what Apple excels at. 
    rbnetengrwilliamlondon9secondkox2watto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 74
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 3,097member
    toddzrx said:
    M68000 said:
    jas99 said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    i think this was just too big of a challenge for apple

    maybe those staff can have another go on the AirPower 
    No. This was an excellent decision. Apple should stay as far away from the automotive industry as possible.
    Perhaps they should have made “decision” 10 years ago.  It seems pretty clear that electric car sales have stalled along with possibly interest in them from large majority of consumers.  Cold weather battery issues and heavy tire wear of EV’s are just 2 of their problems. The hybrid approach is gaining ground while current ICE cars are not going anywhere anytime soon and other fuel technologies could be available to more consumers soon?  It seemed that Apple would only have been interested in a full electric vehicle, correct?  If so, could these latest market trends have been the final straw so to speak for Apple to end whatever they have been doing?
    Somewhat surprisingly your post is the first to discuss what’s been going on in the EV market over the last 6 months. Apple is canceling the car because reality just set in across the EV auto landscape: all the rich people who want one have largely bought one, government subsidies have mostly run out, repair costs are abysmal on an EV because even the slightest accident can cause fire risk in the battery, leading to increased insurance costs, and public charging costs have gone up.  Of course there’s the ever-present issue of long charge times/range anxiety/charge station availability. EV’s are the first large scale product that the public is having to deal with and consider in their economic choices in the government mandated “green revolution”, and the EV’s are losing.
    Ha. All supposition and unsupported conjecture. I see no evidence any of this is true. 
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 74
    I wonder how much of the R&D that went into developing the car spilled over into the AVP. Hopefully a good amount of the developed car AI finds its way into other products too. I can't imagine all of the car R&D is siloed and now just goes poof. In any event, welcome news. Get those engineers and R&D funds redirected and focused on to other things.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 74

    Apple is far behind at Generative AI. 


    Source(s)??
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 29 of 74
    1348513485 Posts: 360member
    toddzrx said:
    Somewhat surprisingly your post is the first to discuss what’s been going on in the EV market over the last 6 months. Apple is canceling the car because reality just set in across the EV auto landscape: all the rich people who want one have largely bought one, government subsidies have mostly run out, repair costs are abysmal on an EV because even the slightest accident can cause fire risk in the battery, leading to increased insurance costs, and public charging costs have gone up.  Of course there’s the ever-present issue of long charge times/range anxiety/charge station availability. EV’s are the first large scale product that the public is having to deal with and consider in their economic choices in the government mandated “green revolution”, and the EV’s are losing.
    You're largely right. Of course on the ElecTrek web site it's still all sunshine and lollipops.
    williamlondontmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 30 of 74
    I never understood the motivation behind such a huge undertaking as building a passenger vehicle.  Even though Apple has more wealth than Elon Musk, and could more easily finance the development of such a vehicle, the target market is just too small to make it viable.  Ten years ago there were very few EVs on the market, the technology was developing in leaps and bounds, and the early products were quickly outdated.

    Now, the EV market is currently at a stage where most of the early adopters have owned an EV or two, and some have owned succeeding generations of EVs.  And there are many more players in the EV industry, with China pushing to dominate the market, at least outside the USA.

    But the EV market is suffering from huge value depreciation, and flattening or declining sales.  It is definitely not the time for a novice automotive startup company like Apple to bring a $100k+ EV to a stagnant market, especially since the technology development cycle means they need to freeze a design in order to produce it.  The biggest changes coming in the next few years relate to battery composition and capacity, so coming out with an expensive vehicle using “old” lithium ion battery technology, just prior to new designed vehicles with solid state batteries (or something else more advanced) would really kill most sales potential for an Apple Car.

    And don’t ignore all of the safety standards, environmental standards, sales, service, support, etc., associated with any passenger vehicle.  They would be starting from ground zero here as well.
    tmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 74
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,534member
    The big auto makers thought they were “too big to fail.” Then they failed.

    If anything, Apple probably thought that they were “too smart to fail.” Sounds like they didn’t want to press their luck any longer.

    Until the charging infrastructure reaches critical mass and can support carefree driving for risk averse Ma and Pa drivers, and governments no longer feel a need to subsidize electric vehicles, it’s going to be slow going and a house of cards.


    edited February 27 watto_cobra
  • Reply 32 of 74
    I was really interested to see how that Fine Woven upholstery would have looked.
    retrogustowilliamlondon
  • Reply 33 of 74
    k2kw said:
    Cooks Apple either doesn't have guts for Risk or vision .
    So the Apple Vision Pro was neither an example of guts for risk or vision?  I think most people would disagree.
    Not really. Would you say the same thing about the Meta goggles?
    edited February 27 williamlondon
  • Reply 34 of 74
    2000 more people available to work on emojis.
    zeus423williamlondondewme
  • Reply 35 of 74
    cornchipcornchip Posts: 1,954member
    Oh, ‘dthey read that Toyota report too? 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 36 of 74
    They should double down on battery technology R&D, which is key to so many of their most important products, and if they have a major breakthrough, they can always revisit the car idea to take full advantage. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 37 of 74
    So many experts in the comment section. Apple should scroll through this page to find its next Chief Strategy Officer.  What a parade of know-nothing keyboard warriors. 




    williamlondonrcomeauwatto_cobra
  • Reply 38 of 74
    cg27cg27 Posts: 220member
    Not surprised.  I respect Apple for not throwing more good money after bad.  The car business is absolutely difficult and brutal.  To all those comparing Apple taking on Nokia and Blackberry this is Apples and Oranges, night and day different.  Apple’s products hardly have moving parts.  Even in EVs there are dozens if not hundreds of moving parts.  Apple is right not to go down this path.
    edited February 27 williamlondontmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 39 of 74
    If Apple is focusing upon markets with larger margins that is great news. Apple might want to disrupt the Hearing Aid market next, I know someone who paid handsomely for some recently that are pretty poor quality despite costing thousands. 
    cg27badmonkwatto_cobra
  • Reply 40 of 74
    Good thing they gave it up. Could you imagine...7 years of the same style car from Apple. With the only difference between model years being the color options and size of the tires. Every year they'll claim the windshield is twice as crack resistent as last year, yet not 1 person would notice cause it'll still crack easily. They'll remove the lighter socket cause, why the hell not. You don't need it. That's courage, mother f'r! They'll have a proprietary charging port that won't work with the existing infrastructure. They'll have a speed limiter set at 70 mph cause "they" feel that's the optimal operating speed. The center console would be called the "Dynamic Island." They'll claim every year you'll get 3 more hours out of your battery per charge yet not 1 person would notice that, either.

    Oh, and they'll have an SE model, a Plus, a Max, a Pro, a Pro Max, an Ultra, an Ultra Pro, and Ultra Pro Max and an Ultra Pro Max Plus. 
    williamlondon
Sign In or Register to comment.