nolamacguy

birko said:

Smart move. If someone finds that they can fly with their device but can get a new Samsugg galaxy on the spot, more may do this than get money back and switch brands. 

rogifan_new said:

flaneur said:

rogifan_new said:

zoetmb said:

lkrupp said:

Blathering speculation. Rumors of changes to a rumored plan, rumored to be behind schedule. No facts, no confirmation, no evidence, no nothing, just rumors from “sources.” This is either just pure fantasy invented by tech bloggers with too much time on their hands or leaked propaganda from Apple to direct away from their real objective. Either way it’s baloney. But baloney sells doesn’t it. I had a baloney sandwich yesterday.

And what’s with the dumbass conceptual picture of Apple’s rumored vehicle? More fantasy dreamed up by some wannabe graphic artist?

Baloney?  So all those people didn't get laid-off or left?   That was pretty specific information.

I never personally thought Apple would pull off a car for all the obvious reasons:  very large capital investment, not core competency, supplier issues, high labor cost, low margins except perhaps at the luxury end of the market, different state and country regulations, and high liability costs if a car has a "bug", especially a self-driving car.  

I still maintain (although almost no one agrees with me) that 20 years from now, Apple will be an A.I. and robotics company.   

What experience does Apple have in AI and robotics? IMO the part of Apple that is lacking is not hardware, it's software. 

Yeah, like Apple doesn't have experience in the software/hardware integration business (like Google doesn't), or Apple hasn't been buying up machine-sensing and AI companies right and left, or like they haven't been pursuing AR. 

I can't resist — just because you refuse to have an open mind and evolve actively, doesn't mean that Apple remains dug in to the staus quo like you. You are projecting, if you're not just looking for another topic to be negative about.

Not saying Apple can't evolve. But others are far ahead in this space. And Apple's magic is integrating hardware, software and services.  Not being the Android of cars.

fmalloy said:

The key point here is about the automotive supply chain. Apple is used to bullying and pushing around parts suppliers - as well as the music industry - to get the control they want at the cheapest prices. Too bad it's not working on the movie industry or on the automotive industry. That's why AppleTV isn't going anywhere, and same for cars. They know Tesla is delivering (even if not financially) and they don't want to get in the game unless they can take over. They don't play well unless they're far in the lead. Boo hoo - Apple is going to have to play by the rules for once and not act like the spoiled 800lb gorilla they're used to being.

sirlance99 said:

sog35 said:

Personally I always thought building a car was a stupid idea.

Risks are massive.
Margins are slim.

Just look at the 'success' story of Tesla who is losing $30k on every car they sell. There isn't much profit to make in the industry.

Apple should just concentrate on making CarPlay much better. Or team up with a specific car company or several and build a better CarOS.

Right now CarPlay is not even close to perfect. 

And yet, Tesla just sold more Model S cars than BMW and Mercedes combined in the same segment.  Tesla is doing just fine.