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.
Hundreds of Apple Employees Working On Apple-Branded Electric Vehicle
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Tesla is a public company (TSLA). Apple does not need Elon Musk's permission to buy a majority share and effectively own the company.
You don't seriously think that Apple is unable to deliver a new Apple TV? Everyone can nowadays develop a STB. It is now a matter of contracts and contents and it has for a while been very clear that Apple is working on this. Anyone (including Walmart) can or has released devices now.
In addition, this is about priority setting. The rollout schedule and success of a product on one category does not have anything to do with that of another product in an entirely different maturity phase and product category.
Last edited:
That only matters in that it will affect the price. I have complete confidence in Apple's ability to manufacture products of the highest quality, regardless of what imaginary lines the factory is built within.
Well if you buy the Subaru in the next year or two, I bet the electric car that you want will be available a few years after that. Electrics seem a bit too expensive now, but I bet that changes dramatically in two or three years. By then, as you say, the Tesla X should be out. That may still be too expensive, but the 2019 version of the Toyota's electric car is probably going to be very affordable.
It will be telling what the major automotive companies decide to do. Tesla and Toyota had an agreement to make an electric RAV4, but Toyota pulled the plug on it.
Much like Blu-ray and HD DVD, Fuel Cell and Electric motors are in direct combat, and it's up to the major manufacturers to decide which one will become standard. At first, it seemed obvious electric was going to happen, but now fuel cell is making a big push.
Well, he is not wrong. What you meant (I hope) was that batteries and fuel cells are in direct competition. Both serve as the energy source for electrical engines to propel the vehicles.
This. The proponents of electric battery vehicles are trying their best to kill fuel cells (see recent Elon Musk comments)
You completely missed the point. Tesla v. Fuel Cell. Tesla was winning (with Toyota building a RAV4 with an electric battery) but recently fuel cell has taken big steps forward.
Just a few thoughts:
I don't know if Apple is able to do this, but in many ways I think Apple is more likely to do this than traditional car makers.
100 Years of heritage making cars with internal combustion engines are not just a benefit. Traditional car makers are pretty much trapped in old school thinking. Look at GM, Toyota, BMW, VW etc. They all fail bringing the car to the next level. True innovations were made by 'newcomers' (Tesla, Google, possibly Apple).
Apple does not have facilities to build cars in large quantities (yet). But they do have the ability to think the car ( or even transportation in general ) in a new way.
At some point in the future you ask siri to buy tickets for the concert. Whatever you do on that day, a self driving car will be there to bring you to the concert. On time. If the car breaks down, another will pick you up within minutes. No stress. No problems.
Christian
I don't know if Apple is able to do this, but in many ways I think Apple is more likely to do this than traditional car makers.
100 Years of heritage making cars with internal combustion engines are not just a benefit. Traditional car makers are pretty much trapped in old school thinking. Look at GM, Toyota, BMW, VW etc. They all fail bringing the car to the next level. True innovations were made by 'newcomers' (Tesla, Google, possibly Apple).
Apple does not have facilities to build cars in large quantities (yet). But they do have the ability to think the car ( or even transportation in general ) in a new way.
At some point in the future you ask siri to buy tickets for the concert. Whatever you do on that day, a self driving car will be there to bring you to the concert. On time. If the car breaks down, another will pick you up within minutes. No stress. No problems.
Christian
You are absolutely correct. This is the definition of breakthrough innovation. And in almost all cases it is not the incumbents that make these innovations but newcomers.
It is not only "old-school thinking" thinking but also organization and contract structure that will work against a new car paradigm from established manufacturers.
A real world example: 10 years ago German car manufacturers refused to invest heavily into hybrid and electric cars because they were of the opinion that they could optimize their combustion engines to equal efficiency. They have now been proven wrong and are pushed to invest through competition.
But the efforts that they are making now are being fought actively within the company and outside, as many of the strategic suppliers for normal cars would lose their contracts (who needs a gas tank, or a transmission?). Current hybrids of German cars are lacklustre implementations that would be far more advanced, efficient and better designed (check out the BMW i3) if they would have been developed independently.
There'S a problem here. There is a distinct difference between innovative breakthrough and actually making money off it. ID, call it a chasm.
Even if in many case, innovation comes from small companies, mostly because taken as a whole they can hit a broader set of targets and are by definition more focused (its their only focus) and they and their investors take more risks.
One example of this: Cisco. They have bought hundreds of small firms that have had innovative and breakthrough ideas over the last 20 years. That's also how the pharmaceutic industry works as a whole and increasingly how the whole tech industry work.
The chance of Tesla being able to totally bypass the auto makers is dire. He's just too small basically compared to them. He may make a lucrative niche; but unless a miracle happens, he'll stay there.
If you look the last 25 years and which firm has emerged with big revenues and profits, you'd see that from a tech point of view, there is only Apple and Google (maybe Qualcom) that have really increased their fortune through innovation. One is a company started in late 1997, the other in 1976. Most of the big tech firms are not on the consumer side, but on the business side; using tech as a support for their vastly most lucrative operations (like most financials/insurance companies).
Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, Ebay, all other social-media organisation are as much a product of timing and current average tech field than any innovation and they're way way way down the totem pole.
I went through the top 500 world companies on Forbes and basically, 70% are energy and financials related. About 5% are tech related. About 10% are in heavy industry and business tech (like GE, Siemens). A lot are in Pharmaceutics.
Tech has a high profile by it is a distorted view. In the whole scheme of things, it is but a blip in the global economyé
I agree with most of what you are saying here. There is definitely a chasm to bridge from a developed car concept to a global mainstream car. Like Tesla any new electric car effort will be a niche product first.
But Apple has the capital and experience to scale up quickly. Of course many people woulk say "but that's in electronics not in car manufacturing", but that is OLD thinking. One of the success factors for a new company in this field is to leave the conventional silo thinking behind and focus on the entire experience (driving, design, IT, usability, integration etc etc). Both Tesla and Apple are great at integrating all these aspects, whereas old-school car manufacturers suck at mostly the IT, usability and integration aspects. All things that matter a great deal to consumers nowadays.
In addition, a new manufacturer should redefine the supply chain in much the same way that Tesla is doing. Forget about thousands of suppliers that together build one car. They all take a bit of the profit margin away. An electrical car is a great invitation to simplify this whole setup, because the car itself is more simple. More profit margin to share with less suppliers.
Apple can do all these things. They have the capital to build a manufacturing capability or invest in a contract manufacturer in the same way as they do with their electronics. They also have the capital to scale it up to global and eat some losses due to setbacks in the process. It looks like the process has started with the acquiring of some experienced Mercedes and other engineers. Interesting times.
You're forgetting the standard Apple price points, it'll be $1900 for extra cables and $6900 for the Apple Magic Charger
IF this is actually a real thing that they are working on, it doesn't necessarily have to be a minivan. These Ram vans were probably the best choice for existing production vehicles that they can cram all of their test equipment into and on top of.
It's true.
What's more is I don't see how the obvious ton of cameras on the roof has a single thing to do with electric cars.
They're clearly up to something, but it has more to do with the cameras and less to do with the iCaravan.
You are ignoring the fact (fact not rumor!) that Apple has hired a number of car engineers from e.g. Mercedes. These vans with cameras might not be related to the car work that Apple is doing, but it is clear that Apple is working on something that is much more than just carplay.
Maybe you should think again have a look at the I8 from BMW.
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2012/08/bmw-i8-spyder-to-bow-at-la-auto-show.html
Presently used models are selling for 50 percent more than new because the demand outstrips the supply.
It's quite difficult for me to believe too! However, we know that:
(1) Steve Jobs wanted Apple to build a car, and now they have the funds to do whatever they like.
(2) As indicated in the previous story, some of the people they've hired from Tesla are automotive engineers whose specialties have nothing to do with electronics or software.
I'm still having a hard time believing this, but maybe they'll be an automotive design house and just license technology and designs to actual manufacturers. Like a more technological version of Pininfarina. Similar to what you suggest, plus a little bit more.
Interesting stuff. As a shareholder I don't know what to think.
It's gonna take deep pockets to upend the auto business. Would be good to see more players there than just Tesla.