Apple Hires Engineer From Digital License Plate Company for Car Project

[kdarling]

You mean the success of the Apple Watch becoming the most successful smartwatch on the planet and outselling every other smartwatch maker combined?

Sure sounds like a failure.

He didn't say "failure". He said "Apple Watch-level success."

In other words, it won't be "iPhone level success", or even "Mac level success".

 

[NMBob]

Even though face value Apple building a car seems a bit preposterous, the more I think about it there's a chance it makes sense. They won't be the first player in the EV/Self Driving/Connected Car space and as a result are letting the likes of Google & Tesla do the heavy lifting up front in terms of manufacturing and R&D.

What Apple could do is use their immense influence and iOS platform to make a meaningful impact on areas other car makers aren't yet considering. Imagine being able to eliminate EZ-Pass (or the equivalent of other automated toll systems), ugly registrations and inspections stickers, and any type of gate scanners from your car and manage them all through your iPhone.

The possibilities of a complete integration of iOS into our cars is daunting yet exciting to think of what may be.

Can you really see Timmy and Jony up to their elbows in bering grease? Remember all of the success stories where the CEO was someone who worked their way up from the bottom? Didn't know T & J ever worked at Jiffy Lube.

 

[NMBob]

All license plates are digital.

All license plates are digitized.

 

[nunes013]

They said they wouldn't post numbers 9 months before launch. Time you change your disk, it's skipping.

During the earning call he said all growth in the other category was because of the Apple watch (1.776B (that would give about 4.5M watches), considering both the AppleTV and the Ipod had heavily falling sales prior to refresh (apple tv prices were even slashed), the number is certainly much higher than that. It has been estimated at around 7M.

Why is that plausible?
During the first earning calls 3 month earlier, he said it sold faster than the Ipad up to that point; considering the number of Ipad sold at that point is known and around 3.2M, that was a pretty good indication that it's significantly more than that once actual presence in store began.

Why believe him? Because he can be held personally liable for what he says in those earning calls, unlike all the two bit commentator all over the internet.

Considering the watch has now a much wider distribution both in outlet and in countries, the chance that it has reached 7M already is damn pretty good.

Plus I can't wait to see what the numbers do after the holidays. I see watches all the time now since about July when I saw maybe a few every few weeks. Obviously if this a car it won't sell a ton in the first year and people have to be looking for a new car. However it has the potential to be huge and has the potential to flop miserably. Time will tell!

 

[OldSchoolMacGuy]

He didn't say "failure". He said "Apple Watch-level success."

In other words, it won't be "iPhone level success", or even "Mac level success".

You can never have that level of success with cars or most other products because an Apple Car wouldn't be the only player. When the iPhone first hit the market, the couple other smartphones out there were nothing at all like it. It created the smartphone for the masses. You can't do that with cars.

And what is Mac level success? Apple hasn't had a huge success of a Mac product since the first iMac back in 1998 and even then it didn't own the market, it was just the first really popular consumer Apple product.

 

[ctdonath]

so this car is really happening. I can't wait to see what Apple does.

Rather answers the recurring question of "disruptive takeover of the PC, notebook, phone, tablet, and watch markets turned out great, but isn't coming up with anything new so it's going to rapidly stagnate and die if it can't innovate any more." Making a freaking car proves has no problem moving out to other markets and disrupting & commandeering them. I'm still flabbergasted at the non-sequitur idea of CAR, but seems it's a thing that has Jobs' blessing. Forward-thinkers may do well to predict what other industries might just jump into.

 

[ctdonath]

You can't do that with cars.

Well...not sure about that. At the time, everyone DID have a cell phone. Nobody who had one imagined how great it would be to have a flat glass screen with a supercomputer & HDTV crammed in behind that touch screen ... but once it hit, everybody switched when they had the choice.

Yeah, everyone has a car now. I got an electric vehicle last year ... trust me, it has the potential to be disruptive. Nissan did a great job with the LEAF, Tesla is seeing how far it can be taken. Solve a few problems, throw a Jonny Ive-like designer at it to break thru the generic sedan styling and eradicate entrenched user interface mistakes, and we could have something that disrupts the industry.

 

[farmboy]

That's exactly my point, he should put them back.

Did you join MacRumors just to tell me that interesting fact about the Irish language? I am hono(u)red.

It went "whoosh" as it sailed over his head.

I think we need an emoji that says "The previous statement/s have been presented for their potentially humorous effect. Any connection with actual facts is purely coincidental, and no feelings real or imagined have been harmed in the making of this comment. Please stay calm and go about your previous affairs as if this had been a pleasant break in your day."

 

[rivalius13]

It's not called Gaelic. It's called Irish, or gaeilge.

Source: I learnt Irish for 12 years.

Considering he was typing in English it's called Irish. It's only Gaeilge if you're typing in Irish. It would be like saying "Angela Merkel speaks Deutsche" rather than "Angela Merkel speaks German".

 

[b-dogg]

Whàt thè frìck ìs úp wìth thè àccènts?

He's Irish I'm guessing - and he's using the traditional spelling of his name. They're called fadas. They extend the vowels. Some people are christened with the anglicised versions of their names, others choose to use the Irish spelling and pronunciation.

 

[pelowj]

It's not called Gaelic. It's called Irish, or gaeilge.

Source: I learnt Irish for 12 years.

Correct. Irish is a Gaelic language. Other Gaelic languages include Scottish Gaelic and Manx. Usually if someone said Gaelic you'd assume they were talking about Scottish Gaelic.

Americans and English people in particular seem to refer to all varieties of Gaelic as if it were one big language, but that isn't the case.

-Jp

 

[kingtj]

More and more, the *only* reason new product or service development ideas are "unworkable" is due to lack of sufficient funding to make them happen. Apple is one of the few companies sitting on enough cash to pull off pretty much any project it wishes to focus on.

There was a time, not that long ago, where it was assumed space travel was SO costly and massive an undertaking, nobody but governments could pursue it. Then came the likes of SpaceX.

I was just talking to some disgruntled, former eBay users about the real need for alternative auction sites that have similar reach/scope. The sad fact is, there are over 1,500 auction sites out there that have either failed or are in the process of failing -- and it's almost always because they didn't have enough funds behind them to make a serious dent in eBay's market-share. You can build the best auction platform in the world right now, but you've got to have the money to MARKET it constantly to the whole world, so you can slowly educate eBay users that your alternative exists and offers them better value.

So could Apple launch a successful electric car? Yeah, I don't see why not? But they've got to really WANT it to succeed, as in dumping a lot of money into it over the long haul -- and not just giving up if the first one to market flops.

Even though face value Apple building a car seems a bit preposterous, the more I think about it there's a chance it makes sense. They won't be the first player in the EV/Self Driving/Connected Car space and as a result are letting the likes of Google & Tesla do the heavy lifting up front in terms of manufacturing and R&D.

What Apple could do is use their immense influence and iOS platform to make a meaningful impact on areas other car makers aren't yet considering. Imagine being able to eliminate EZ-Pass (or the equivalent of other automated toll systems), ugly registrations and inspections stickers, and any type of gate scanners from your car and manage them all through your iPhone.

The possibilities of a complete integration of iOS into our cars is daunting yet exciting to think of what may be.

 

[neutralguy]

So, sell 12-15M the first year and crush the competition in profit,, and revenue... Well guess so...
Even if they sold 1/10 that they'd still be the size of Mercedes...

10-12M the first year. They are cars.. not some iPhones.. You have no idea how cars are made, do you? If it is so easy to make 10-12M cars as you are entering into the market, Tesla would be selling 100M cars by now. And don't think that Apple will sell cars at 25-30K range. And I have a doubt that Apple will float the idea of opening a auto finance arm to lease/finance the cars. Before making such wild thoughts, just think rational first. Being a fan is a different thing, making absurd guesses just makes you look more.. you know.

 

[neutralguy]

i really feel like this forum should be renamed Apple Haters. Seems like no matter what the subject is, it has to turn into a discussion about how lame Tim Cook is, or how Apple steals, or does not innovate since SJ passed.

You'd think in a forum that focuses on rumors, stories like this would spark interesting conversation about what Apple might be able to do if they build a car. Or how it's cool that we seem to be getting more confirmation that a car project seems to be real. But not. Instead I see debate about Apple Watch numbers and other silly statements that have nothing to do with a car.

No. This is not apple hate. It's just the weird feeling. How many companies have you seen they have made products that spans across extreme ranges? It's weird. Have you forgotten the saying: Jack of all trades, master of none"? Apple is good at making smart phone, they should just keep making iPhones. I know AW sold considerably good amount, but you just have to think that keeping it dependent on iPhone, they lost out a vast majority of watch owners. So that itself says that their thinking is not outside of the box. They are always thinking inside of the box. It feels like they are building a pyramid of products with iPhone as the base. And you know what happens when you reach the top of the pyramid. Nothing much to create and then all come crashing down.

 

[dojoman]

What a BS way to advertise yourself on Linkedin. If you're really working on a secret project you shouldn't even list yourself working for a particular company. Secret agent my ass.

 

[neutralguy]

Well...not sure about that. At the time, everyone DID have a cell phone. Nobody who had one imagined how great it would be to have a flat glass screen with a supercomputer & HDTV crammed in behind that touch screen ... but once it hit, everybody switched when they had the choice.

Yeah, everyone has a car now. I got an electric vehicle last year ... trust me, it has the potential to be disruptive. Nissan did a great job with the LEAF, Tesla is seeing how far it can be taken. Solve a few problems, throw a Jonny Ive-like designer at it to break thru the generic sedan styling and eradicate entrenched user interface mistakes, and we could have something that disrupts the industry.

I live in SF bay area. A lot of people own Tesla cars. I have asked many whether they take their Tesla for a long drive like to LA (5 hours drive) or Tahoe (2-1/2 hr drive). Their answer: "Hell No". Tesla is still more like a hobby car. A secondary car. Nobody can depend their life on Tesla car to be the only car in the household. Tesla is also running on hype. It does not matter even if they release Model 3. People still need to buy a car that runs on gas that can take them on their long trips. And I don't see what more Apple can do to make car more dependable than Tesla.

 

[joueboy]

You do realize that it is different engineers working on different projects, right? This guy is from the automotive industry, you wouldn't want him touching the software on the watch.

Yes I do! Can you imagine he come up with an idea that will turn the iWatch into iCar! WOW!

 

[ctdonath]

Tesla is still more like a hobby car. A secondary car. Nobody can depend their life on Tesla car to be the only car in the household.

Used to be you couldn't really get along without a Windows computer on hand either. learned to build ecosystems people could live in exclusively.

I drive a LEAF. Yes, we do have to keep the SUV on hand for long drives. (My lease does include ability to free-rent a car for trips.) Yes, there is a range problem - but that's the only problem (cargo & trailer hauling aside) with EVs at this point. Range is a solvable problem; is if nothing else positioning to leverage that solution when it arrives.

 

[farmboy]

I live in SF bay area. A lot of people own Tesla cars. I have asked many whether they take their Tesla for a long drive like to LA (5 hours drive) or Tahoe (2-1/2 hr drive). Their answer: "Hell No". Tesla is still more like a hobby car. A secondary car. Nobody can depend their life on Tesla car to be the only car in the household. Tesla is also running on hype. It does not matter even if they release Model 3. People still need to buy a car that runs on gas that can take them on their long trips. And I don't see what more Apple can do to make car more dependable than Tesla.

And back 100 years ago, you would have said the same thing about automobiles instead of horses. You had to bring your own fuel because gas stations were about as rare as Tesla power stations, tires went flat every time a cloud went overhead, and there were no roads to speak of. Nobody would have considered a long trip in a car. That's what horses & buggies and trains were for. Must have just been hype.

And since you personally can't see what Apple could do better than Tesla, then I guess the case is closed. Shut 'em down.

 

[jlc1978]

It's not called Gaelic. It's called Irish, or gaeilge.

Source: I learnt Irish for 12 years.

Good point. Gaelic is a broader term for all the languages originating from the Celtic language tree; although it is often used to refer to Irish.

 

[kdarling]

You can never have that level of success with cars or most other products because an Apple Car wouldn't be the only player. When the iPhone first hit the market, the couple other smartphones out there were nothing at all like it. It created the smartphone for the masses. You can't do that with cars.

Thus, as he said, Apple Watch level success.

In other words, not a failure, but not taking the world by storm either.

Apple's penchant for huge profit margins means it likely will not be a mass affordable automobile. But perhaps that's not their purpose. Who knows? Maybe their plan is build a next generation self-guided taxi cab.

 

[NickD73]

Find this article, I want to listen to it too, (or at least read it)

I actually tried to find it, but since all the news lately of a car has come out it's almost impossible to locate. I'll try again.

 

[ninjasareso80s]

Good point. Gaelic is a broader term for all the languages originating from the Celtic language tree; although it is often used to refer to Irish.

"...although it is often used to refer to Irish"... by Americans and British people.

The language is called Irish. People who call it Gaelic are incorrect.

I guess it's like someone saying people for the US speak American. They don't, they speak English...

 

[jlc1978]

"...although it is often used to refer to Irish"... by Americans and British people.

The language is called Irish. People who call it Gaelic are incorrect.

I guess it's like someone saying people for the US speak American. They don't, they speak English...

That's also an interesting point. Descriptive terms, even if they are incorrect, if widely enough used become the defacto way of describing something. Language's evolve an what once was incorrect usage or terminology becomes accepted through common usage. Thus, we have small minorities and large majorities; as someone who battles against such usage (and have lost), I can appreciate your conviction. I won't even get started on hackers. As for Irish, I stand corrected.

As for American vs English, an interesting question is when does a dialect differ enough from it's root language to be referred to distinctly from its roots? Irish, it seems, has different enough from other languages with Gaelic roots, such as Scottish Gaelic, to be considered a separate language when referring to it. Latin has long since gone down that road. Chinese is a good example where referring to the langauge as Chinese could be confusing since two native speakers might not be able to understand each other, thus we us terms such as Mandarin or Cantonese to refer to the spoken language.

The real question, I would guess for Irish, is will it survive as a living language or eventually reach the point where only isolated populations use it for regular conversation.

 

[ninjasareso80s]

The real question, I would guess of rIrish, is will it survive as a living language or eventually reach the point where only isolated populations use it for regular conversation.

It's already there. The British were very successful at killing it off. The Irish government are trying very hard to keep it alive, but it's too late.