'Apple Car' Project Lead Steve Zadesky to Leave Apple

[bunnspecial]

This prototype utilized unsold recycled Apple watch straps.

I know this was tong-in-cheek, but I'd be over the moon if Morgan could start importing cars to the States again. Forget the $100K+ price-I just want one!

Just make mine a +8 please and not a 4/4, please.

Now you may return to your regularly scheduled speculation on the Apple Smart Car. I'll save my ranting about Morgan not being able to import cars anymore for another day

 

[Yelmurc]

Could be nothing, or maybe even that the Car project is scaling past his abilities. It happens.

 

[Nuvi]

That's 100% unApple like. Apple created a cell phone and decieded to compete directly with Motorola and RIMM. Why would they go the Google route now and simply focus on software for smartcars?

Good question. However, by its DNA Apple is a computer company. Mac is a computer, so are the phones and pads. Heck, even their watch is a computer. Apple even wants to make a brain for every TV set available aka Apple TV. So what if Apple is making a "computer for cars" and not the car itself. Think about it, in the future every single car will be driven by "black box" which is running CarOS. All that metal around the black box are not part of the computer. They are just "peripherals" and Apple has never been big on manufacturing that stuff.

 

[AxoNeuron]

Have you ever worked on a car? They are half electronic nowadays. and an electric car is even more electronic.

Back in 2007 the cellphone industry was completely separate form the pc industry. Virtually no overlap.



Apple would hire Foxconn to open a plant in Mexico to build automobiles. Apple has billions in the bank so money in no problem. As for experience manufacturing cars, look at the videos of manufacturing process, it's comparable, machines do the hard work and people do the finishing touches.


Upgrade cycle is a moot point. Apple is a growth stock. Investors want to see growth. Apple would go from no marketshare to possibly a lot of marketshare. So stock prices would go up for a long time until Apple finally plateaus.


Electric cars are 10x better for a lot of people.


Self-driving tech is AI.

There is a reason that Google is about to surpass Apple as the most valuable company on the planet. It's because Google leadership is smart and doesn't try to do foolish things like entering the automotive industry. They will just sell their tech to established players.

Apple just doesn't understand the automotive industry. The biggest problem is that the very first incident where their autonomous car kills someone will essentially DESTROY their entire marketing strategy. It will be so widely publicized that few people will buy it. People are OK with danger when they feel like they have some control over it (ie driving a car), but when they have no control over it they get terrified. It's the same reason people are afraid of airplanes, they don't have any control. Psychological studies have shown this effect many, many times. Apple can't fight basic human psychology.

Apple will try to do all of it. With smartphones and computers it's OK, since apple has been slinging electronics gear since the 70's and it knows what it's doing.

You just don't get it. The manufacturing isn't the biggest problem at all, it's just one of the MANY enormous problems. Trying to source enough lithium will itself be a gigantic problem and that aspect alone will ensure that this car is so expensive that most consumers won't buy it. Unlike a $600 phone, most middle class people simply won't buy a $40k car. And the middle class is where all the money is.

Here's how I see it. Apple will make a nice but expensive car. Google will produce better autonomous software, since they've been mapping the world much longer and have way more experience. Google will license this tech at low prices to established players. So you can either pay thousands of dollars more for the fruit logo or get a good deal. In the computer industry, where the difference between 'expensive' and 'cheap' is a few hundred to a thousand dollars, most consumers can opt for the Macbook. But in the car industry, the difference is enormous, and most people will just get the cheaper option.

So Google is essentially guaranteed to own a vastly greater market share. But unlike PC's, having an autonomous car market share advantage means you get more data about where people are driving, so Google's autonomous cars will improve at a vastly greater rate. This, combined with all the other factors, essentially guarantees that Apple has lost this battle before the fight even began. It just can't win.

 

[ToroidalZeus]

There is a reason that Google is about to surpass Apple as the most valuable company on the planet. It's because Google leadership is smart and doesn't try to do foolish things like entering the automotive industry. They will just sell their tech to established players.

Apple just doesn't understand the automotive industry. The biggest problem is that the very first incident where their autonomous car kills someone will essentially DESTROY their entire marketing strategy. It will be so widely publicized that few people will buy it. People are OK with danger when they feel like they have some control over it (ie driving a car), but when they have no control over it they get terrified. It's the same reason people are afraid of airplanes, they don't have any control. Psychological studies have shown this effect many, many times. Apple can't fight basic human psychology.

Apple will try to do all of it. With smartphones and computers it's OK, since apple has been slinging electronics gear since the 70's and it knows what it's doing.

You just don't get it. The manufacturing isn't the biggest problem at all, it's just one of the MANY enormous problems. Trying to source enough lithium will itself be a gigantic problem and that aspect alone will ensure that this car is so expensive that most consumers won't buy it. Unlike a $600 phone, most middle class people simply won't buy a $40k car. And the middle class is where all the money is.

Here's how I see it. Apple will make a nice but expensive car. Google will produce better autonomous software, since they've been mapping the world much longer and have way more experience. Google will license this tech at low prices to established players. So you can either pay thousands of dollars more for the fruit logo or get a good deal. In the computer industry, where the difference between 'expensive' and 'cheap' is a few hundred to a thousand dollars, most consumers can opt for the Macbook. But in the car industry, the difference is enormous, and most people will just get the cheaper option.

So Google is essentially guaranteed to own a vastly greater market share. But unlike PC's, having an autonomous car market share advantage means you get more data about where people are driving, so Google's autonomous cars will improve at a vastly greater rate. This, combined with all the other factors, essentially guarantees that Apple has lost this battle before the fight even began. It just can't win.

Your mentality is glass half-empty, negative nancy, non-visionary. I could go line by line and refute each point but it suffices to say that everything you are saying right now mirrors what was said about Apple and smartphones.

Lastly Google tries everything under the sun (rmb google glass) and waits to see what'll stick. Apple has also had a massive selloff in the last month so Google isn't about to surpass Apple's max. Similarly Google Android isn't even close to surpassing Apple's iOS revenue.

 

[Fishticks]

I know which one I'd rather have.

None of these two cars exist on the streets.
Nor the Apple, nor the Ford. They are just make believe.

 

[Burger Thing]

Hoo haa.

The price of oil has dropped tremendously and is set to carry on doing so in the short term. This will put a considerable barrier up to the adoption of electric cars, and that adoption is still tiny after many decades—over 100 years—of electric technology. We've made some great advances in technology, but battery life is still a huge barrier to mass market adoption of electric cars. There is simply no chance of electric competing with gas (petrol or diesel we call it in England) for many, many years; decades, realistically.

People comparing the car market to the smartphone market are mistaken. Smartphones were universally clunky before the iPhone, which changed everything. The rest is history. Cars? A very mature market, with beautifully designed cars that people love to drive. There is no great yearning for an easy to use car like there was for an easy to use smartphone.

As others have surmised, it seems to me that Apple are trying to keep the growth story going by diversifying into new areas. I'm not convinced this is a wise market to get into. They need to stick to their bread and butter lest they are swallowed up by their lust for profit.

I associate Tim Cook with grey. Grey is over.

I have to agree. Furthermore if you take the watch market as an example, the lukewarm Apple Watch hasn't created a real stir here.
Therefore I have a hard time to imagine Apple could come up with anything ground braking. Designing a car is an even further departure from Apple's usual playing field.

I would be perfectly happy if Apple would just release macs with descent processors and dedicated graphic cards inside them

 

[CyberBob859]

"His impending departure from Apple is said to be for personal reasons, rather than an indication of his performance at the company"

"The project has encountered some challenges internally due to a lack of clear goals"

Umm.....these might be related.

 

[Yojimbo007]

He's a 16 year veteran who ran iPod and iPhone engineering before allegedly moving to this car project. He's got 108 granted patents and 172 patent applications to his name.

How about MR waits for a confirmation from Apple before pushing that headline?

The rumored leader of the rumored project is rumored to leave ... How informative...

 

[Tech198]

believed to be .... maybe the source of that got it wrong me thinks.

What are the chances that people who who have spend time working on projects, secret or otherwise, even currently (like iPhone and iPad), leave the company, then the new tech he goes off to will know what APple is working on because this guy told em.?

 

[AxoNeuron]

Your mentality is glass half-empty, negative nancy, non-visionary. I could go line by line and refute each point but it suffices to say that everything you are saying right now mirrors what was said about Apple and smartphones.

Lastly Google tries everything under the sun (rmb google glass) and waits to see what'll stick. Apple has also had a massive selloff in the last month so Google isn't about to surpass Apple's max. Similarly Google Android isn't even close to surpassing Apple's iOS revenue.

Bud, I would love to see the Apple car be a success for the same reason I was one of the first people to buy an iphone back in 2007. But there are so, SO many deep and fundamental problems with the idea that there's just no way Apple can pull it off. The iPhone didnt face anywhere near the number of fundamental problems the Apple Car is going to face. You forget, not only do they have to manufacture the car profitably (at an initial cost of well into the tens of billions), they also have to do it WHILE competing with all of the currently established players like Ford, Toyota, and also new players like Tesla and Google.

Not to mention, the first fatal accident that kills the driver will be such a gigantic mountain of awful publicity that it will likely kill off the Apple Car before it even hits a million sales. It's basic human psychology: people are afraid of things they can't control, even if the chance is unlikely. It's why people feel safer driving their car than riding on an airplane, even though the airplane is so much safer. I would say this is the biggest challenge. Apple cannot overcome fundamental psychology. The fact that they are even attempting it tells me that this idea was conceived after Steve Jobs died, because he would have seen how impossible these problems are.

Apple can maybe overcome a few of these almost impossibly difficult problems. But they simply can't overcome basic human psychology and fundamental business strategy. There are simply so many enormous problems that Apple will never be able to overcome all of them AND still be profitable. And they've got so much competition that they're simply never gonna become mainstream at the enormous prices they will need to charge.

Apple has had failed/flopped products before. But none of them will be such an incredibly expensive and risky bet. I will say it again. Apple should stick at what it's always been good at: consumer electronics.

 

[Bruce Oksol]

He's a 16 year veteran who ran iPod and iPhone engineering before allegedly moving to this car project. He's got 108 granted patents and 172 patent applications to his name.

How about MR waits for a confirmation from Apple before pushing that headline?

LOL. That's why it's called MacRumors.

 

[normanfox]

Apple making a self driving car would be an absolute disaster. An incredibly expensive disaster that would take years to recover from if it were even possible.

What a truly horrendous idea.

so Elon Musk created Tesla to build car and Spacex to launch rocket successfully. and Apple can't do it? Apple has more money and influence than Musk. and I am sure Apple can hire people that are as smart as Musk.

Remember CEO Michel Dell and MS Steve Ballmer making comments about Apple, just like you do now?

Apple is great at consumer electronics. It's what they've always done. They have literally zero experience in the automotive industry, which is an entirely different beast. Worst of all, several other companies are already working on it, and since Google has SO much more data about users driving habits, they will have an enormous advantage over Apple.

Apple had zero experience in making phone back then. MS and Blackberry were way ahead of Apple.

Rarely a company making consumer electronics ONLY can survive/lead long. Sony used to be a king of electronics but not anymore. Apple needs to get out of their comfort zone and innovate with new products that can change people live or change the industry, like they did with music and phone.

It seems to me like a bunch of clueless MBA executive drones at Apple have no idea what they should do next, so they read about self driving cars on some website and decided it sounded like a great idea.

for you to make this comment, you got to be a smarter MBA than those at Apple?

Self driving cars are a fantastic idea, but NOT for Apple. Companies like Google and Tesla have a natural advantage in this field that will be impossible for Apple to catch up with.

Tesla almost went bankruptcy years back, and they came back. Apple is in a much much better financial situation than Tesla. What natural advantage does Tesla have that Apple does not? beside taking a huge risk years ago and build electric car from scratch.

 

[Bubba Satori]

The rumored leader of the rumored project is rumored to leave ... How informative...

MacInformative is two doors down the hall on your right.

 

[AxoNeuron]

so Elon Musk created Tesla to build car and Spacex to launch rocket successfully. and Apple can't do it? Apple has more money and influence than Musk. and I am sure Apple can hire people that are as smart as Musk.

I never said Tesla would be successful either, but they've got such a huge head start that I don't think Apple can catch up. There are some advantages that money can't buy, such as a reputation for building great cars. Tesla also has the Gigafactory. That ONE advantage is enough to beat apple.

Remember CEO Michel Dell and MS Steve Ballmer making comments about Apple, just like you do now?

Ah, you're the religious fanboy type aren't you? Apple can do no wrong, they will never fail, etc. Etc....

Apple had zero experience in making phone back then. MS and Blackberry were way ahead of Apple.

that's a pretty bad analogy. Apple had already been building computers for years by the time they built the iPhone, and phones are just miniature computers. But cars are different. They need engines. That's something Apple has never done. I'm sure they can do that, but it's yet another gigantic problem added to an already long list of issues that will ensure Apple won't succeed.

Rarely a company making consumer electronics ONLY can survive/lead long. Sony used to be a king of electronics but not anymore. Apple needs to get out of their comfort zone and innovate with new products that can change people live or change the industry, like they did with music and phone.

yes, and look at what happened to Sony once they lost focus and tried to do everything, they started losing lots of money because they forgot what they are good at. Same exact thing happened to Apple in the 80's and 90's, they didn't stay focused and built way too many different product lines. What a short memory you have.

for you to make this comment, you got to be a smarter MBA than those at Apple?

I've met many Apple MBA's. Nothing impressive really. It's the engineers that are great. In fact, the MBA'S tend to screw things up.

Tesla almost went bankruptcy years back, and they came back. Apple is in a much much better financial situation than Tesla. What natural advantage does Tesla have that Apple does not? beside taking a huge risk years ago and build electric car from scratch.

Tesla has experience In the automotive industry, and reputation and an established customer base. Those are things that money can't buy. The Gigafactory alone is such a huge advantage that even if most of the other problems facing the Apple Car went away, simply trying to make an affordable car with lithium batteries would be an insurmountable challenge.

This means it will be very, very expensive. That means they won't be selling it to the middle class, which means the Apple car is essentially dead on arrival.

 

[Glideslope]

I wonder if Apple will provide AppleCare for their cars.

Yes. It will be called "iCare. "It will extent your Basic Bumper to Bumper from 3-36,000 to 5-50,000 not including coverage for Lost of Submerged vehicles.
[doublepost=1453608358][/doublepost]

I've met many Apple MBA's. Nothing impressive really. It's the engineers that are great. In fact, the MBA'S tend to screw things up.

Especially, once they have the "Corner Office with a view."

 

[thelookingglass]

I'm reminded of what Elon Musk said when commenting on the Apple car. He said basically that it's great that they'll provide more competition, but it's not easy to start from scratch and build a car, and then have it ready for mass production. I'm as curious as anyone about this, but I'm not expecting something mind-blowing in v.1

 

[doelcm82]

Good question. However, by its DNA Apple is a computer company. Mac is a computer, so are the phones and pads. Heck, even their watch is a computer. Apple even wants to make a brain for every TV set available aka Apple TV. So what if Apple is making a "computer for cars" and not the car itself. Think about it, in the future every single car will be driven by "black box" which is running CarOS. All that metal around the black box are not part of the computer. They are just "peripherals" and Apple has never been big on manufacturing that stuff.

Anything is possible and we don't know anything for certain right now. But I doubt your scenario will be the right one. Apple doesn't license Mac OS to run on anything but Macs, and you can't buy a Nokia or Sony Ericsson-branded phone running iOS. I suspect Apple will want control over the drive train and the heated/vented seats and the next-generation instrument display panel.

The TV brains project isn't going so well, and CarPlay has quite a few holdouts. It isn't just Apple that wants control of the drive train. The existing auto manufacturers are going to want control of, well, the car. Apple could develop Drive OS and find that BMW wants their own system controlling the car, and Ford wants its own, and GM and Hyundai have teamed together on a black box to control all of their vehicles.

Maybe it will evolve into Apple controlling all the cars from all manufacturers (that's not a prediction, just a "maybe"), but I think it will start with an Apple Car (and that is a prediction).

 

[MuppetGate]

I never said Tesla would be successful either, but they've got such a huge head start that I don't think Apple can catch up. There are some advantages that money can't buy, such as a reputation for building great cars. Tesla also has the Gigafactory. That ONE advantage is enough to beat apple.

Apple is never first to market, so in essence, they're always coming from a disadvantageous position. They weren't first weren't first with the phone, the tablet. What Apple tends to do is spend several years watching the competition; studying their mistakes before releasing their own product. Reputation is a question of perception, not the actual product itself. There were plenty of naysayers when Apple said it was going to build a phone, a tablet, a luxury watch; when they said they were going to design their own processors and open a chain of retail stores. Apple didn't have a great reputation for any of these; they had to build one.

Ah, you're the religious fanboy type aren't you? Apple can do no wrong, they will never fail, etc. Etc....

Name-calling? Always the last refuge in a lost argument.

that's a pretty bad analogy. Apple had already been building computers for years by the time they built the iPhone, and phones are just miniature computers. But cars are different. They need engines. That's something Apple has never done. I'm sure they can do that, but it's yet another gigantic problem added to an already long list of issues that will ensure Apple won't succeed.

I can just picture you sitting on Apple's Board of Directors:

'What? Make our own processors? Madness! There'll be too many problems! We should just buy something off the shelf, even if it doesn't give us what we need.'

'Open a retail chain? No! Madness! We have no expertise in retail There'll be too many problems. We should just carry on selling stuff in shops that don't really want us there.'

Maybe that "Can't do, mustn't try" attitude works well for you in your own life. That's great. Unfortunately, Apple is in the business of consumer innovation; that's an attitude they just can't afford to carry with them.

yes, and look at what happened to Sony once they lost focus and tried to do everything, they started losing lots of money because they forgot what they are good at. Same exact thing happened to Apple in the 80's and 90's, they didn't stay focused and built way too many different product lines. What a short memory you have.

Here's a quote from the New York Times concerning Sony's failure.

What went wrong is a tale of lost opportunities and disastrous infighting. It is also the story of a proud company that was unwilling or unable to adapt to realities of the global marketplace.

"Sony's gravest mistake was that it failed to ride some of the biggest waves of technological innovation in recent decades: digitalization, a shift toward software and the importance of the Internet.

"One by one, every sphere where the company competed - from hardware to software to communications to content - was turned topsy-turvy by disruptive new technology and unforeseen rivals. And these changes only highlighted the conflicts and divisions within Sony.

So the reason that Sony failed is that they followed the policy that you're advocating for Apple: stick to what you know; don't try to reach beyond your existing markets, even if you're existing market is contracting. Sony failed because they failed to learn new tricks.

I've met many Apple MBA's. Nothing impressive really. It's the engineers that are great. In fact, the MBA'S tend to screw things up.

Throwing out the box-standard 'MBAs all suck' line doesn't actually prove your point. That's just something folk say. MBAs are good, and they're bad. We just only hear about the bad ones because they fun to read about.

Tesla has experience In the automotive industry, and reputation and an established customer base. Those are things that money can't buy. The Gigafactory alone is such a huge advantage that even if most of the other problems facing the Apple Car went away, simply trying to make an affordable car with lithium batteries would be an insurmountable challenge.

This means it will be very, very expensive. That means they won't be selling it to the middle class, which means the Apple car is essentially dead on arrival.

'Insurmountable.'

You know what's worse than a bad MBA? Managers who look at a challenge, and give up.

 

[Yojimbo007]

MacInformative is two doors down the hall on your right.

Lol..

 

[mariusaz]

Apple VP of Product Design Steve Zadesky, who was believed to be leading Apple's electric vehicle development efforts since 2014, has informed colleagues that he will be leaving the company, according to The Wall Street Journal. He remains at Apple for now.

Zadesky, a former Ford engineer, joined Apple in 1999 and worked on the iPod and iPhone during his 16-year career in Cupertino. He is also named on several U.S. patents and documents related to Liquidmetal, a malleable alloy which Apple owns the exclusive rights to.

His impending departure from Apple is said to be for personal reasons, rather than an indication of his performance at the company, and marks a setback for Apple's electric vehicle plans:Apple has aggressively recruited engineers and other talent from Tesla, Ford, GM, Samsung, A123 Systems, Nvidia and elsewhere to work on the rumored "Apple Car" project, which has allegedly been called "Project Titan" internally. Just days ago, Tesla CEO Elon Musk even called the "Apple Car" an "open secret."

Last year, Apple also had discussions with a secure Bay Area testing facility for connected and autonomous vehicles, and met with the California DMV to review self-driving vehicle regulations. Further speculation arose when Apple registered a trio of auto-related domain names, including apple.car, apple.cars and apple.auto, earlier this month.

Apple's electric vehicle could be approved for production by 2020, but some employees reportedly believe it "might take several more years" for the iPhone maker to develop a truly differentiated electric vehicle. The project has encountered some challenges internally due to a lack of clear goals, according to the report.

Article Link: 'Apple Car' Project Lead Steve Zadesky to Leave Apple

[doublepost=1453617411][/doublepost]Apple can't even get maps to route right there's no way I'd sit in a self driving car of theirs.

 

[AxoNeuron]

Apple is never first to market, so in essence, they're always coming from a disadvantageous position. They weren't first weren't first with the phone, the tablet. What Apple tends to do is spend several years watching the competition; studying their mistakes before releasing their own product. Reputation is a question of perception, not the actual product itself. There were plenty of naysayers when Apple said it was going to build a phone, a tablet, a luxury watch; when they said they were going to design their own processors and open a chain of retail stores. Apple didn't have a great reputation for any of these; they had to build one.



Name-calling? Always the last refuge in a lost argument.



I can just picture you sitting on Apple's Board of Directors:

'What? Make our own processors? Madness! There'll be too many problems! We should just buy something off the shelf, even if it doesn't give us what we need.'

'Open a retail chain? No! Madness! We have no expertise in retail There'll be too many problems. We should just carry on selling stuff in shops that don't really want us there.'

Maybe that "Can't do, mustn't try" attitude works well for you in your own life. That's great. Unfortunately, Apple is in the business of consumer innovation; that's an attitude they just can't afford to carry with them.



Here's a quote from the New York Times concerning Sony's failure.



So the reason that Sony failed is that they followed the policy that you're advocating for Apple: stick to what you know; don't try to reach beyond your existing markets, even if you're existing market is contracting. Sony failed because they failed to learn new tricks.



Throwing out the box-standard 'MBAs all suck' line doesn't actually prove your point. That's just something folk say. MBAs are good, and they're bad. We just only hear about the bad ones because they fun to read about.



'Insurmountable.'

You know what's worse than a bad MBA? Managers who look at a challenge, and give up.

The biggest problem with the Apple Car is this: the human brain. The human brain is a remarkable biological machine, but it only runs on 10W of power, and takes many shortcuts. One of these shortcuts is called the availability heuristic, a well known psychological shortcut. Essentially, people are more likely to fear things that they have heard about in the news, for example.

When Apple releases the Apple Car, the very first person to die in a fatal car crash is going to make worldwide news. It will be a huge story. Every local news station in the country will report on it. And from that moment onwards - another, even worse, psychological 'shortcut' will take effect - probability neglect. People are far more likely to fear things that they cannot control. This is why people are far more likely to fear flying on airplanes than driving in cars, even though rationally it should be the other way around.

So now you have two, very strong psychological defects that will cause a large number of people to be actively uncomfortable and afraid of the idea of a driverless car.

If that were the only problem though, I can see Apple somehow surviving it. After all, people still fly on airplanes. But it's not the only problem, it's just one problem on a gigantic list of BIG problems that Apple will have to overcome in order for the Apple Car to be a success. There just weren't this large of a number of problems going against the iPhone. The iPhone didn't even have a tenth of the number of problems the Apple Car had. They will need to make the car cheap enough for your average middle class family to afford - something that just isn't possible with how expensive lithium ion batteries are. So it will remain a niche luxury item that won't ever produce many profits compared to the amount of investment it will take just to get it off the ground.

I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm just saying it's impossible to do it profitably. Apple should really pick an industry with less competition where they can actually make a big difference. After all, they already have experience with AI (with siri). The first company to integrate physical neural networks with their sensors (Such as cameras) will be truly revolutionary. But no, Apple is set on building some ridiculous expensive car that will be one of the most expensive product flops in history.

 

[wozmatic]

maybe they should focus on those skylake macbook pros instead of this electric car stuff.

 

[Rogifan]

maybe they should focus on those skylake macbook pros instead of this electric car stuff.

Yeah because all those problems Microsoft is having with Surface totally makes me want to go out and get Skylake notebook right now.

https://www.thurrott.com/mobile/microsoft-surface/64095/welcome-to-surfacegate

 

[maxsix]

With all of these IOS and OS glitches, Let us pray Apple does NOT make a driver less car.

It's hard to imagine an Apple car anyway, given the challenges they're currently having just trying to debug the current products. One minute the company is creating gadgets like Apple Watch, the next minute the rumors suggest a completely different project of much larger scale.

Perhaps this is the beginning of the end for their computers. That's one way to ease the focus away from one product line to make room for another. They can easily let computers coast and split their primary focus between the current cash cow as well as the upcoming car. They'll certainly command a very high premium for a people mover and position the company as a leader in electric vehicles. Even if they're not, that won't stop the hard core fans from claiming they are, and that's probably enough.

With all the attention Apple gets for the slightest of rumors, this might be the real deal going forward.