humbug1873

NYC362 said:

I would love to see what processor technologies the car project developed and how they can be redeployed for use in AI.  Maybe we'll see an Apple competitor to Nvidia's H100 chip that has powered AI and that company's astronomical growth. 

Yes it's included in each Apple Silicon CPU on iPhones, iPads and Macs nowadays, it's called the neural engine. I seriously doubt they would spend extra on a specific car CPU.

A car was IMHO never a good fit to the Apple portfolio. Apple tends to 'revolutionize' existing industries by providing an 'insanely great' update to the way we think about these products, leading eventually to financial success.
What 'insanely great' feature could they offer for that car? Fully autonomous might be 'the thing' but it turns out that problem is much harder than people expected 10 years ago and by now I have serious doubt it will happen in the next 10 years. A revolution in the way we use cars!? Not on the horizon.
Talking price. Even Apple might have difficulties making a car in the USD100k+ price range a success, it's just way too expensive. (Yes they do exist but most of the time the high-end models are subsidized by lower end models in the industry and rarely financially successful) It also looks like they tried and failed to gain any car manufacturer as an OEM producer of the car.

That everybody now jumps on the AI train because it's probably at the high point of the hype cycle, is just sad. Apple has been incorporating AI for years in it's products and features and continues to do so. They are not behind in the AI field, they just don't show unfinished prototypes/products and that what it is we see right now. Mostly gimmicky features (cool but mostly useless), that makes the potential of AI clear to the uninitiated/non-technical press. Apple never sells 'techie' features but 'user' features and as long as they continue to concentrate on that I'll be happy with Apple (not jumping on every hype but producing solid results and effectively generating their own hype).

DMA Rules (which effectively were a Spotify Protection Racet) now this (again Spotify) ... there's your reason why Apple Hardware is so much more expensive in the EU than in the US. I mean on top of higher taxes, custom fees and other money grabbing schemes (e.g. for any kind of storys they have to pay a fee to a money collection racket in Germany - the GEMA - because you could potentially store music on that storage)

Btw. Spotify ... is actually losing money, even though they pay less money to the artists for streaming their material than for example Apple does. So they figured to use the EU as a tool to improve their situation. 

Yes and I will all those Apps on a 'dirty' old iPhone (for use only to generate costs to third party stores and nothing else) an make sure that Epic will have to pay their annual fees. (and I couldn't be bothered to even start their app ... just once per year make sure it get's downloaded)).

Apple testing can be tough. I can still remember an Apple Radar entry (internal) where en external QA Manager from a large Intel MoBo Manufacturer complained: In our company that board would have been on the market for the last six months ... but alas Apple still want's some more quality testing.  That was for the very first released Apple Intel Machine (not the Hardware Development Kit)

Why would that be any different with the foldable display nowadays which inherently has more failure modes even under regular usage?