Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Abandons Car Plans 'For Now,' Sets Late 2017 Deadline to Decide Fate of Self-Driving System
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't disagree with the concept you're conveying. I think there are certain demographics that could really stand to benefit for such products, but I think they will be largely out of reach for them. Heck, I consider myself middle class, and I think its largely out of my reach as well (not that I want a self driving car).
Off topic - but on average old people are the richest demographic for the reason they have had a life to accumulate wealth. On average
Has anyone seen Tesla, Toyota, Nissan, BMW, VW, Ford, GM, Hyundai... jumping into the personal computer or phone markets?
So what made Apple think it could build a car, faster and under budget than these!
Stay focused Apple!
So what made Apple think it could build a car, faster and under budget than these!
Stay focused Apple!
I've heard that before, but I don't see it in my travels, I'd also say those folks who have the most wealth probably don't need self driving cars as well
I might be missing something here, but I just don't see why or how the Apple ecosystem has some inherent benefit to a car. I get the current Apple integration to a car's head unit, which is great, but beyond that I can't see how Apple could make the car any better or different than competing products. It's not like you're going to work on a Numbers or Pages document through the car, the way that integration between iPhone, iPad and Macs makes so much sense.
Sure, an Apple-powered car could take you to the address of one of your contacts or to a business found in Maps, but that is what competing automakers and software developers are already working on / doing.
Last edited:
People didn't need a MP3 player, we did not need Apple.
Cell Phone carriers were doing their own thing and didn't need Apple.
People had access to MS tablets and didn't need an Apple to further the tech.
It would be part of the Car Play initiative. I can totally see this being built into cars seamlessly working with your phone and the car, keeping your eyes on the road etc.. Eventually a 'Health Kit' for cars.
IF they do anything.
Yeah right, this is to throw off their competitors. Magically it'll appear in 2019.
They are terrible liars. Like they denied OS X for Intel, iTunes for Windows, An Apple Phone and now an Apple Car.
What's next? Denial that they are dropping Intel CPUs.
They are terrible liars. Like they denied OS X for Intel, iTunes for Windows, An Apple Phone and now an Apple Car.
What's next? Denial that they are dropping Intel CPUs.
A great deal actually. It shows that just throwing clout and cash around does not produce an innovative car. Seems to better suited to a genuine, independent start up that is passionate and "hungry" for the particular product success and breakthrough. At this stage Apples scale and wealth are innovation inhibitors. They can't be the best at everything just and simply because they have succeed at a few at large scale.
I guess it could be different I other locations, but where I live I'm forever dodging old folks driving expensive big SUVs and trucks. They have these monsters with huge towing capacities and drive 20 mph in a 40 zone.
I remember when my grandparents started driving huge sedans when they got old. It was a "thing" back in the 1970's for old people to get big Cadillacs because if they hit anything or anybody with their atrocious driving, the size of their cars would give them a better chance of surviving. Ironically it was a bunch of crazy driving teens that got my grandpa in the only major accident of his life. The tough old coot survived with broken ribs. My grandparents ended up with a huge settlement from that accident. Grandpa was a great driver until cancer claimed his abilities.
I sometimes get the feeling Apple doesn't know what it wants to be anymore. Under Steve it was clear: Apple was a product company and the mission was to make great products people wanted to buy. That's less clear to me with Cook. When Wall Street became all obsessed with "services" (and iPhone sales weren't great) then Cook gets on an earnings call and starts pitching the idea that Apple a services company (even though the majority of 'other' revenue is App Store sales) only to essentially abandon that pitch on subsequent earnings calls when hardware sales didn't look as bad. Now Wall Street is all obsessed with AI and 'bots' and voice assistants so now Apple's all about AI and machine learning. Seriously Tim Cook should stop talking and start delivering. Oh and get back to the core mission of Apple: making great products.
Considering how unreliable the recent Mac Pros I've encountered have been I'd never buy something as life and death as a car from them. And the same company that makes siri? And even iTunes match? I trust them for basic computing stuff (when a crash and reboot isn't the end of the world) but that's about it.
Wall Street doesn't seem to have a problem with Google or Facebook whose majority of revenue and profits come from one thing: advertising.
You say Apple needs to roll out more products but every time they do or we hear they're working on something then people say that they've lost focus and complain about no new Macs.
I've been in these forums for over 10 years reading comments and the tone has changed considerably. It sounds like Apple is losing their core customers.
Have you taken a look at MacRumor's Buyers Guide lately? It's pathetic! Have you checked the Mac Pro? 1033 days after its last release. Pro users still have to pay no less than $3,000 for such an outdated machine! Very little respect for their loyal pro customers. Meanwhile, Apple daydreams with flying cars and wireless unicorns. It's frustrating and sad.
But they have multiple revenue streams from advertising. 'Advertising' as a whole is never going to collapse.
You could say Apple get the majority of their revenue and profits from one thing: consumer electronics.
But the point is, within that, it's only one product that Apple really earn from.
That's not true at all. Self-driving cars don't have to have a sense of morality. They "just" need to be significantly safer than human-driven cars.
You want self driving cars to avoid the situations where, e.g., either A or B dies, not make those choices.
Note: this is the same for human drivers. We teach people how to understand and obey traffic signals, how to adjust to weather and visibility conditions, how to signal your intentions to other drivers, when it's safe to merge and turn, etc. We don't teach people how to choose whether to crash into different groups of pedestrians or when to sacrifice ourselves. Did you get that kind of question on your driving test?
The idea that self-driving cars need to understand morality is pure nonsense.
How is this built into cars if Apple's not the one building the car? Apple didn't build software for someone else's PC, MP3 player or smartphone. Now we're supposed to believe they're going to build software for someone else's car? And these car manufacturers are all going to sign up to use the same Apple software? Or Apple is going to build custom interfaces for each auto maker so they have something unique to them? And they're going to market this as Apple software in their cars? I don't buy it for a minute. Also CarPlay only works with iPhone.
He approved Apple spending all that money - IE, he took a risk - and it didn't get anywhere. He refused to open the iPhone for the FBI.
I'd say he isn't afraid to take risks.
Edit: What am I saying? If you're giving up on Apple, maybe you'll leave this forum in peace. The negativity is crazy, even in the articles.
Lots. Just because Apple can't do it doesn't mean no one else on this planet can. Ever hear of Tesla.
Others have superior technical background and experience. You can't necessarily throw money at a problem and expect success.