At some point in the future I'm sure the truth will surface. It always does. The reason cited for his departure almost always translates to being forced out. This should prove interesting.
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 Car' Project Lead Steve Zadesky to Leave Apple
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Too small of a computer. They can't make a hand-sized iPhone anymore, but than they cram all that stuff in a 38mm watch case? Of course it was bound to be super slow with mediocre battery life and not much utility. And Apple Watch 2 will be exactly the same, a fashion statement at most. People might disagree, but I think it was a waste of time. Sure somebody has to develop the technology so that we can have useful smartwatches in 10 years maybe. But right now it's too soon.
MacSubstantiatedRumors is three doors down the hall on your left.
Fixed that for you.
Volkwagen has already addressed that issue by stating they'll accept responsibility. http://fortune.com/2015/10/07/volvo-liability-self-driving-cars/
Apple can follow suit. Furthermore if self-driving cars are safer it'll be cheaper for insurance companies so they'll step in as well.
As for Steve Jobs, your negativity is exactly the opposite of his vision.
You are 100% rewriting history. The only reason you see Apple as a successful consumer electronic company is because they took a risk entering the cell phone market (from the pc market). And that same principle applies to going into the car market.
Apple could make Siri, Apple maps, and many other services could be greatly improved using quantum computing methods. For example, the traveling salesman problem is easily handled my quantum computers and Apple's traffic directions would be far better.
They could also use neural networking chips (like IBM's TrueNorth) on smartphones integrated with the camera sensor, which would make it possible for the camera to have almost perfect facial recognition, voice recognition (the current voice recognition for pretty much everyou service like Siri and Google Now is awful). Even bigger, they could create massive convolutional neural networks and add genuine artifical intelligence with Siri. Imagine having your smartphone be able to truly understand complicated speech, and formulate truly novel responses. Engaging in conversation, predicting your needs, etc.
Apple has been designing it's own chips. It's not a stretch to imagine Apple also innovating and creating entirely new CPU substrates, such as carbon nanotube computing, which would be tremendously superior to traditional silicon. If Apple were to make this crucial innovation, it would be able to essentially own the entire computer industry for years to come.
The future is in AI, quantum computing, carbon nanotube computing, NOT self driving cars. Self driving cars are not the future of computing, and Apple simply isn't paying attention to these other crucial areas of innovation.
[doublepost=1453690111][/doublepost]
Volkswagen will accept responsibility...? Are you serious? You have completely and entirely missed the point. It doesn't matter if Apple will 'accept responsibility' or not. A huge number of people will feel unco,for table with the idea of putting their lives in the hands of a computer, regardless of who will 'accept responsibility'. This will not be an easy fear to overcome, even though it is irrational in nature.
A smartphone is essentially a small computer. You cannot seriously be trying to act like the cell phone industry is as different from the computer industry as the automotive industry is, because it's not. The automotive industry is VERY different from anything Apple has ever dealt with before, even just from an engineering perspective.
Let me ask you. How on earth is Apple going to beat Tesla when it comes to making an affordable car? How will Apple source enough lithium for batteries? Because if this is not an affordable car, Apple will lose the middle class, and most of their profits will go along with it. Tesla has the gigafactory and Apple doesnt. It really is that simple.
Last edited:
Self-driving cars will not work reliably before Siri understands your every word.
This is far beyond Apple's capability - regarding AI they're years behind, even in supposedly simple things like search or recommendation systems. And it's not their business model, as Apple spends almost nothing on frontier research. User experience, hardware design, making existing things better - that's what they're good at.
where is Applerella ????His first prototype failed crash tests.
Probably a very talent person. But I don't see anything that I couldn't make better and faster, including directing all the people involved. With me the project would probably be almost completed.
The exact same arguments can be used against the Apple Car. They have zero experience in electric engines, building an ungodly amount of high performance batteries, etc.
Speaking as someone who builds facial recognition neural networks for fun, it's not as difficult as you might think. At least AI has enormous, almost unimaginable potential to generate profits, while the Apple Car is...just another car. With the amount of cash Apple has on hand, I see no reason why talented engineers can't use the latest technology, such as IBM's neural network chips, as a framework to create true AI. Then again, the fact that Apple leadership actually thinks the car is a good idea tells me they don't really know what they're doing, so maybe you're right and it is completely outside of their abilities.
People always think AI is something for the distant future, or even just the plot of badly scripted sci fi movies, but all the evidence is telling me it's a lot closer than anyone realizes. It would be a shame for Apple to completely miss where the future of tech is really headed.
Last edited:
This is macrumors. You must have momentarily confused this site for macnews. I know, we all do it once in a while.
I just don't think this is a space that Apple should go into. The automobile industry needs a lot of manpower and resources that I believe Apple's culture just doesn't jive well with. They should take the energy that their putting into the car thing to make current products (see Apple TV and Watch) and software better and to come up with other tech innovations. Dear Apple, please stay out of the car business.
Bro you are completely clueless.
Tesla got the EV technology from AC Propulsion. Just like how Apple licensed cpu technology from ARM. It's the exact same business model.
Speaking of business model. Apple doesn't do research or at least not on the same level as Google. Google is the type of company that'll spend billions on facial recognition software. In fact this would be Apple's biggest problem when it comes to a self-driving car because Google is years ahead on that technology, the same is true for Tesla too.
I think you need to do some research yourself because you are completely clueless of these companies business models and are advocating Apple do unApple things.
Too long didn't read what's wrong with the surface?
Side note, I tried the Dell XPS 15 9550, it's decent but the actual laptop body/screen had some physical issues.
Windows OS isn't optimized for the power saving features of Skylake because of legacy support. MS said only modern OS will support new CPUs and that'll stop these types of problems in the future.
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/16/0...n-of-windows-will-support-new-cpu-generations
Yes. In fact that's yet another point I made earlier in this thread, that Google and Tesla are both much further along than Apple is. And Tesla has a lot more EV patents.
If Apple isn't willing to spend billions on R&D then I would agree they shouldn't go into promising fields like AI. But the same goes for electric self driving cars, which would also take billions of dollars of R&D. So yeah, you've pretty much destroyed your own argument.
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.
Don't forget shattered windshields!
But, Automobiles are extraordinarily complicated machines and pieces of technology. Not saying that a company as large as Apple can't handle it, but expecting a company such as Apple to swoop in and pull the curtain off a vehicle that completely blows the likes of Toyota, GM, Ford, or Tesla out of the water is lofty expectations at best. Not to mention the amount of risk the company and brand would be exposing itself to if something were to go wrong. Can you imagine how damaged brand loyalty would be if there were a serious recall? Who would manufacture these cars? I sure wouldn't buy a Chinese made. I could go on but I think you get the point. It's still very unlikely Apple would produce a full-fledged vehicle. That strays too far from their core business. But it's likely they will make a larger stab at vehicle infotainment than just CarPlay.
-Doomtomb
How does Apple do that without controlling the entire widget? It's not like you can build the "brains" of a car and just hand it off to a car company to put in their cars. So would Apple work specifically with one car company? I can't imagine any auto maker would want the same interface as one of their competitors. Also Apple doesn't really have a good history of licensing their software for others to use. We had the Mac clones but that was a disaster and something Jobs killed when he came back to Apple. CarPlay works because it's essentially just projecting UI. How does Apple go beyond that without being more intimately involved in the actual design and engineering of the vehicle?
Great point. They cant.
Since the idea of a fully featured self driving Apple Car is so preposterous, Apple should simply stay out of the automotive industry altogether . They're making the same mistake they made in the late 80s, getting in to too many industries and supporting too many product lines.
They should be using those billions of dollars of R&D money and talented engineers to make their existing products (iPhone) more compelling. Adding features like AI would make it even more compelling, and would be such large breakthroughs that they could make billions just by licensing out the technology (yes by this point I do realizing that horse that I am beating on is dead). Unless they can think of an entirely new consumer technology product, this really is the only logical move. Physical devices are likely to become less and less profitable over time as more innovation occurs in the cloud, which is why Microsoft is pouring so much investment into it (albeit in an unintelligent manner)
Last edited: