Johar

I sincerely hope and believe that this isn't what Apple decides to do. It would reek of the inability of pre-Jobs Apple to develop a modern OS. It's one thing for Apple to refrain form competing with Google on regular ad-financed search. Giving up on providing Apple users with a well-crafted AI service with rock solid privacy would be a huge failing - completely unworthy of a resource rich company like Apple. If it does happen, I will never ever use a Google AI service.

StrangeDays said:

Johar said:

I think that focusing on the challenges of building plants is a bit misguided. I'm confident that if Apple had been able to create a concept they felt was ready for the market, they would have found manufacturing, distribution and service solutions - using some combination of building their own and outsourcing. 

The root problem is that they had to translate the Apple brand from the domain of screen devices to the domain of cars. And lacking the visionary leadership of Steve Jobs, they tried to design it by committee - a well known recipe for disaster. Most of the concept illustrations (of which I believe none actually came from Apple), show some kind of soft and slightly cartoonish car that would fit in a Pixar movie. That's a design language that we associate with Apple devices and user interfaces. But who would actually want to have a car like that? Certainly not people who like SUVs, roadsters, Italian sports cars, pickups, jeeps, vans or large luxury sedans.

Knowing Apple, we can be certain that they would want to target the premium segment, where a smallish and somewhat feminine looking car would have a very hard time to compete. So that's most likely the dilemma they faced, as soon as they realized that creating a new, fully autonomous, car category would be too hard. What segment to go after then? What should an Apple car, that needs to compete with every other car out there, look and feel like? I think that challenge proved to be too much for a committee of executives without strong product leadership and zero experience in the automobile industry.

A “feminine looking” car? Uh dude - you’ve never seen Apple’s design concepts, you’ve seen silly rumor site musings. Get real. You’re on the outside, you aren’t remotely on the inside, site name be damned. 

As for Jobs, he was not a design visionary. He was the first to try to remind people — it’s a team effort. Watch the old keynotes, he said it. The idea of him as one man product team is a myth. He may have acted as a Product Manager, but that isn’t (and he wasn’t) a designer. 

As I wrote: none of the concept illustrations came from Apple. My point was to highlight what the public expectations were for an Apple branded car. If an illustrator were tasked with envisioning a new car from Tesla, BMW, Ferrari or any other premium brand, do you think they would have looked even remotely like those sketches of an Apple car? I don't think so. And that's exactly the dilemma I think Apple wrestled with: Stay on brand and get mediocre sales, or launch a car that doesn't at all reflect people's perception of the Apple brand.

If Steve Jobs wasn't a design visionary, then why, when he took over, did Apples new products look radically different from both earlier Apple designs and everything else on the market? And why do the iPhones and Macs look pretty much the same today as they did when he passed away 13 years ago? (And please don't bring up "flat UI design" or "dark mode", since none of those trends were conceived by Apple.)

I think that focusing on the challenges of building plants is a bit misguided. I'm confident that if Apple had been able to create a concept they felt was ready for the market, they would have found manufacturing, distribution and service solutions - using some combination of building their own and outsourcing. 

The root problem is that they had to translate the Apple brand from the domain of screen devices to the domain of cars. And lacking the visionary leadership of Steve Jobs, they tried to design it by committee - a well known recipe for disaster. Most of the concept illustrations (of which I believe none actually came from Apple), show some kind of soft and slightly cartoonish car that would fit in a Pixar movie. That's a design language that we associate with Apple devices and user interfaces. But who would actually want to have a car like that? Certainly not people who like SUVs, roadsters, Italian sports cars, pickups, jeeps, vans or large luxury sedans.

Knowing Apple, we can be certain that they would want to target the premium segment, where a smallish and somewhat feminine looking car would have a very hard time to compete. So that's most likely the dilemma they faced, as soon as they realized that creating a new, fully autonomous, car category would be too hard. What segment to go after then? What should an Apple car, that needs to compete with every other car out there, look and feel like? I think that challenge proved to be too much for a committee of executives without strong product leadership and zero experience in the automobile industry.

I see your point, which is that we should live in the past and not consider the Apple App store as a valid part of macOS. To be more clear, what I don't like is having to install multiple app stores on all my Macs, (both mine and my families, since I support many people) so I don't bother with multiple app stores. If a company refuses to sell their product on the Apple App store, I will live without it. I'm a simple person who doesn't like complexity... some people enjoy complexity and that's great for them, but it isn't for me. If companies want money from me and my friends, they can sell on Apple's store. But I defend their freedom to sell only on obscure stores if that's what they want.

A number of developers consider apps delivered through the App Store as less functional or more restricted and thus choose to either not publish it there, or alternatively to also publish an unrestricted version on their own site. I would also say that defining Steam as an "obscure store" is kind of ridiculous, particularly in the context of gaming. We're all Mac fans, but let's face it, when it comes to computer games, the Mac App Store is the one that should be considered obscure.

I count myself as a sceptic, but I have found at least one show that I really like: "See", which has fantastic world building, great acting and a very enjoyable story. This show alone would almost make me consider paying for the service after the free trial runs out. I haven't yet watched "Foundation", but I'm looking forward to that as well as the coming "Invasion". I also found the first episode of Jon Stewart's show interesting. (Burn pits... what a terrible idea.)