Bickering like you are doesn’t obfuscate the fact that your position on this intentionally ignores critical data in order to make a misleading claim about Tesla’s market share. Therefore this “discussion” is over.
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 Lays Off 600+ Employees After Canceling Car Project
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Bickering like you are doesn’t obfuscate the fact that your position on this intentionally ignores critical data in order to make a misleading claim about Tesla’s market share. Therefore this “discussion” is over.
"Win is a loss, a loss is a win" is more about tactics vs strategy rather than a "pyrrhic victory".
An Orwellian "doublespeak" is much more complicated than you seem to give it credit for.
That’s the point. It’s not about market share, it’s about which manufacturer produced the most sold car on the planet.
Now this “discussion” is over.
Last edited:
I did say one of the reasons. It’s no secret that it’s damn tough to increase market share or just maintain it in China if you’re a foreign company. Just ask Tim. The political climate in China played a role as well. I just read an article the other day how companies are relocating from China to Japan and one of the reasons cited was how employees and their families were reluctant to relocate to China. Years ago, that wasn’t the case.
Apple car failed, 600 people lose their job, Tim Cook takes out almost 200 000 Apple shares.
And some people still defend Apple's greed and incompetence.
Only 18% of the US power comes from coal and that has fallen dramatically over the past decade and likely to continue to fall. Wind and Solar are growing rapidly. Yes, nuclear reactors would be helpful but no one is building them.
The thing is, Apple wasn’t trying to build a car, they were trying to build an autonomous vehicle. Ten years ago, that seemed like something that could be done and would have a big impact. As we have seen since then, autonomous is much, much harder to do. Once they decided that they couldn’t have an impact from that, just doing another car seemed rather pointless.
Last edited:
What Apple car? I wasn’t aware Apple made a car. Oh you mean they terminated research….
And what constitutes a fail (other than your comment)? Do you have knowledge on what they learned and may use from their research? No? So basically, you know nothing about Op Titan and you have no knowledge on their product strategies. The only thing I’ll give you, is you have a pretty good understanding of incompetence.
If you actually read at least the title of this topic, then maybe you will learn and gain some knowledge.
Due to EV efficiency, if you power an EV from a power grid powered 100% by coal, the CO2 output would be about the same as a 50mpg ICEV. In reality out power grid is much cleaner than that and getting cleaner. It is also adding capacity as the conversion happens. When you buy an ICEV is starts dirty and just gets more so. When you buy an EV, it starts clean and gets cleaner as the grid moves more to renewables.
“Disposal” is the wrong term to use. “Reuse” and ”recycle” and more appropriate.
Toyota Places Recycled EV Batteries On Grid
Toyota Places Recycled EV Batteries On Grid - CleanTechnica
One of the big “gotchas” anti-EV people on social media like to pull out is the future of your battery. In their heads, an expensive EV battery pack isn’t going to last very long and is utterly unrecyclable. So, the thinking goes, an electric car isn’t very green, is it? ... [continued]
cleantechnica.com
Are EV Batteries Recyclable?
Are EV Batteries Recyclable?
Many people are working to ensure EV batteries are being reused, repurposed, and recycled
blog.ucsusa.org
Here's What Happens To Dead EV Battery Packs
Here's What Happens To Dead EV Battery Packs
Lithium-ion battery recycling is a necessity in a market rapidly shifting towards electrification. Here's what happens with old lithium-ion batteries.
insideevs.com
Here’s what Redwood learned in its first year of EV battery recycling
Here’s what Redwood learned in its first year of EV battery recycling
The company recycled 500,000 lbs of material from 1,268 EV battery packs.
arstechnica.com
I'm curious where people think the heat produced by nuclear plants (which are ultimately steam engines) goes and how that has no warming effect. There's no free lunch.
EVs don't "start clean" -- first you have to move a tremendous amount of materials to produce the ~ 900 lb battery packs, using all kinds of fossil fuels. Petroleum-based plastics and rubbers are used all throughout. They still release heat and tire dust (quite a bit of it, too).
An improvement perhaps but to pretend EVs are impact-free or even low-impact to the environment is certainly nowhere near the case.
It will take quite a bit of time before the electrical grid can support mass adoption -- pretty much top-to-bottom upgrades for most of it. While we're at it I'd love to see the upgrades more resilient to natural events, especially if we're going to rely on it more than ever.
Yes. EVs also rely on slave labor to mine the rare earth materials, destroying their natural environments.
Not so clean and green after all. A quality hybrid car like Lexus NX is far more longlasting and superior.
Apple have never actually made a car though. How about you deal with facts instead of making crap up. They apparently had development on a car, but they have development on many things. The tech they developed during this research phase would have been far greater and broader than how to make something that already exists. This just received more press than other stuff. People are soooo gullible to believe everything on a "Rumours Site"!
Knowledge does not equal believing rumours. Do you believe everything in a title on Macrumors? 🤦🏻
Because Lexus (Toyota) are free from using slave labour? Love your hypercritical argument.
"Automakers including Toyota Motor, General Motors, Tesla and Volkswagen could be exposed to forced labor in Xinjiang through a key metal used in their cars, according to a new Human Rights Watch report." Read here
So much misinformation. That YouTube should entitled “the big lie about the ev lie”.
Speculation. Go search the CEDD and find out there is nothing available about layoffs, which are routinely published. German, a former 9to5Mac blogger hired by Bloomberg isn't knee deep into the information as everyone here wants to believe.
Bloomberg routinely speculates on what may or may not be happening in the world of finance as that is Bloomberg's stock in trade.
Wake me when the news starts actually citing reports on the breakdown. Instead, it's a constant barrage of driving narratives.
When the Department of Labor and Statistics publicly states month job numbers they follow it with an actual report.
Apple wasn't building an EV to ship to the public. They wanted to build a fully autonomous vehicle that would be fully compliant in all 50 states and around the globe on technology that is still decades away. They can build an EV. That's not their goal.
We don't know what they were or weren't building, and I get the impression neither did they.
They were if you read Bloomberg. Apple realized Level 5 was out of reach, settled for Level 2 EV (upgradable to Level 4), but still failed to deliver.
This sounds like a bad joke, but it's real. Remember this
electrek.co
Over the years, there have been a handful of fatal crashes involving Tesla’s Advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) features, more commonly referred to as their brand names: Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD) Package.
The families of the victims have taken the accidents to trials for wrongful death at times, but Tesla always won.
That’s because, in virtually all cases, Tesla was able to show that the driver was not paying attention at the moment of the accident or leading up to it. When using Autopilot or FSD Beta, Tesla tells drivers that they need to pay attention at all times and to be ready to take control at all times.
If drivers are not doing that, they are misusing the system.
However, some have argued that Tesla should take more responsibility for creating an exaggerated level of confidence in its ADAS systems and to limit the misuse by better ensuring that drivers are paying attention.
9to5mac.com
As reported by Bloomberg this week, however, Tesla is turning to Apple in the wrongful death lawsuit from Huang’s family. Tesla hopes that Apple – Huang’s former employer – will be able to help prove that Huang was actively playing the game when the crash occurred.
According to filings this week, Tesla obtained a sworn statement from James Harding, an Apple engineering manager, who analyzed data from Huang’s phone. That data, according to Harding, “suggests possible user interaction, which might be a screen touch or button press.”
Lawyers for Huang’s family say that Apple is “secretly” working with Tesla. The family allegedly asked Apple to provide additional information, but Apple is “pushing back” and arguing that it “shouldn’t have to hand over confidential material.”
=====
Yes Tesla is trying to use distracted driving as a means to blame the driver of the fatal Tesla for the accident in court. The part about trying to convince Apple to help them out using a users confidential data is a all time low for lawyers.
This is a perfect example for why Apple would never get involved directly with the automotive industry with a car. Its also sets a bad precedent where other companies could approach Apple to ask for confidential data to prove that someone was distracted using a Apple Device involved in a accident.
Another fatal Tesla crash on Autopilot goes to trial, but with new evidence this time
Another fatal crash on Tesla Autopilot is going to trial, and while Tesla has won all of them in the...
electrek.co
Over the years, there have been a handful of fatal crashes involving Tesla’s Advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) features, more commonly referred to as their brand names: Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD) Package.
The families of the victims have taken the accidents to trials for wrongful death at times, but Tesla always won.
That’s because, in virtually all cases, Tesla was able to show that the driver was not paying attention at the moment of the accident or leading up to it. When using Autopilot or FSD Beta, Tesla tells drivers that they need to pay attention at all times and to be ready to take control at all times.
If drivers are not doing that, they are misusing the system.
However, some have argued that Tesla should take more responsibility for creating an exaggerated level of confidence in its ADAS systems and to limit the misuse by better ensuring that drivers are paying attention.
Tesla asks Apple to help prove driver in fatal Autopilot crash was distracted - 9to5Mac
Tesla is set to go to court next week as part of a long-running lawsuit over the safety of its...
9to5mac.com
As reported by Bloomberg this week, however, Tesla is turning to Apple in the wrongful death lawsuit from Huang’s family. Tesla hopes that Apple – Huang’s former employer – will be able to help prove that Huang was actively playing the game when the crash occurred.
According to filings this week, Tesla obtained a sworn statement from James Harding, an Apple engineering manager, who analyzed data from Huang’s phone. That data, according to Harding, “suggests possible user interaction, which might be a screen touch or button press.”
Lawyers for Huang’s family say that Apple is “secretly” working with Tesla. The family allegedly asked Apple to provide additional information, but Apple is “pushing back” and arguing that it “shouldn’t have to hand over confidential material.”
=====
Yes Tesla is trying to use distracted driving as a means to blame the driver of the fatal Tesla for the accident in court. The part about trying to convince Apple to help them out using a users confidential data is a all time low for lawyers.
This is a perfect example for why Apple would never get involved directly with the automotive industry with a car. Its also sets a bad precedent where other companies could approach Apple to ask for confidential data to prove that someone was distracted using a Apple Device involved in a accident.
Last edited:
How would Bloomberg know, and why are you believing unsubstantiated chatter? Sounds more like conspiracy theories than fact, but we all have our threshold and many believe what they want regardless of actual evidence or verified reporting.
Blind faith, the evidence for those without evidence.
Bloomberg, Forbes are examples of online press that constantly speculate about unsubstantiated stories aka rumors with the tech industry.