First rule about working with Apple - you don’t talk about working with Apple.
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.
Nissan Denies Reports of Apple Car Partnership Discussions
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If Apple is going to work with an existing car company to make "iCar" - something that fuses a century of car knowledge with 40 years of computer and interface knowledge - they wont be offering software patches to allow other cars to use the features of "iCar".
And recharging the car is going to require a specialised plug...
Then it sounds like someone got out of the stock too early and is missing out.
Elon broke down when SpaceX and Tesla were hours away from going bankrupt in 2008. They're both are much healthier now. Elon gained unhealthy weight and mentioned he had trouble sleeping back in 2018-2019 (Model 3 production hell). Most recent interview shows Elon lost some of that fat (but is still overweight), back to working out, and he mentioned that he gets 6 hours of sleep now. I don't see your prediction coming true.
Spread FUD all you want, but Tesla and Elon are here to stay.
the thing with the Apple car is
What is Apple offering at user experience level in their cars?
Cars aren't like watches, when you go to a wedding you dress up with your best watch, no the one which is flashing with your whatsapps.
Tesla cars are something special right now, beautiful, electric, semi autonomous… in a future (10 years) with all companies enjoying those aspects, Tesla would be another one more, and Apple… another one?
1-User experience
Would software be so so so awesome in the Apple car in driving terms that people would want buy one? ( I'm not talking about siri play this song…)
"siri drive to my house and play Spotify"
Vs
"Mercedes/Honda/Tesla/ drive to my home and play spotify"
both would be common, of course you can argue making similar comparison with Android but is not, Android and iPhone are completely different in many aspects, (and iPhone was the first) you use them daily, but with cars you can do only one thing.
Right now you buy a car for thousand aspects, Apple car can be very strong in USA, and have some representation outside, but I don't see that device as something everyone would buy or competition would copy.
I mean, a car can't do much more than driving safety and playing music/video.
Would Apple car be more safety than a Tesla or Google car? I doubt it.
2- Apple and Design
Well… this can be tricky, cars aren't watches, phones or computers... and I can't see everybody driving same white/dark/golden car…
3- Hardware
Safety stuff, chassis, sensors and wheels. ALL regulated by LAWS. Patents for important hardware are complicated in the car industry. Those are regulated and mandatory.
(Ey! Honda can't use rounded wheels, I patented those!!)
Computer industry is a 5 guys game that play as kids (intel, microsoft, apple, AMD and ARM???)
But Car market is were grown ups play, dozens of big companies competing and differentiate mainly by car design. I've own several car brands, cant say which one is better. The most important thing was very similar.
So there is room for Apple to be successful in car market? of course!!! but it is a very expensive market, full of competition and with very tight margins. Just weird move.
What is Apple offering at user experience level in their cars?
Cars aren't like watches, when you go to a wedding you dress up with your best watch, no the one which is flashing with your whatsapps.
Tesla cars are something special right now, beautiful, electric, semi autonomous… in a future (10 years) with all companies enjoying those aspects, Tesla would be another one more, and Apple… another one?
1-User experience
Would software be so so so awesome in the Apple car in driving terms that people would want buy one? ( I'm not talking about siri play this song…)
"siri drive to my house and play Spotify"
Vs
"Mercedes/Honda/Tesla/ drive to my home and play spotify"
both would be common, of course you can argue making similar comparison with Android but is not, Android and iPhone are completely different in many aspects, (and iPhone was the first) you use them daily, but with cars you can do only one thing.
Right now you buy a car for thousand aspects, Apple car can be very strong in USA, and have some representation outside, but I don't see that device as something everyone would buy or competition would copy.
I mean, a car can't do much more than driving safety and playing music/video.
Would Apple car be more safety than a Tesla or Google car? I doubt it.
2- Apple and Design
Well… this can be tricky, cars aren't watches, phones or computers... and I can't see everybody driving same white/dark/golden car…
3- Hardware
Safety stuff, chassis, sensors and wheels. ALL regulated by LAWS. Patents for important hardware are complicated in the car industry. Those are regulated and mandatory.
(Ey! Honda can't use rounded wheels, I patented those!!)
Computer industry is a 5 guys game that play as kids (intel, microsoft, apple, AMD and ARM???)
But Car market is were grown ups play, dozens of big companies competing and differentiate mainly by car design. I've own several car brands, cant say which one is better. The most important thing was very similar.
So there is room for Apple to be successful in car market? of course!!! but it is a very expensive market, full of competition and with very tight margins. Just weird move.
Last edited:
Lol...the media created this “discussion” and then MADE Nissan end it...Apple executives must get some good laughs out of the media shenanigans...”hey look they got us with Nissan now”(laughter ensues)
Look at new cars. Typically you'll have a choice of just a few colours per car model. So - yep, could totally see Apple offering a choice of 5 colours.
Yes, cars have a lot of mechanical things that are required, and regulated - that's where paring with an existing player makes a lot of sense. They could work together to ensure the car meets regulations, but also allows Apple to do "their" thing.
I am guessing that Apple's push will be in the automation side of things. If they get there first, with a fully automated car, plus push the legislation needed (cos at the moment a driver must be able to take control) - and their car is fully integrated with your iPhone and your every other thing Apple... and you can sit in the iCar watching AppleTV or listening to Apple Music...
Yep.
Yes, cars have a lot of mechanical things that are required, and regulated - that's where paring with an existing player makes a lot of sense. They could work together to ensure the car meets regulations, but also allows Apple to do "their" thing.
I am guessing that Apple's push will be in the automation side of things. If they get there first, with a fully automated car, plus push the legislation needed (cos at the moment a driver must be able to take control) - and their car is fully integrated with your iPhone and your every other thing Apple... and you can sit in the iCar watching AppleTV or listening to Apple Music...
Yep.
Question is whether Tesla would want to do that. In automobile field Tesla doesnt need Apple.
Isn't Mercedes the logical/natural choice? If you think of quality, reputation, lifestyle, image, innovation, tradition.
And I am not a Mercedes fanboy. I've been driving, Daihatsu, Opel, Citroen, Opel (again), Ford, my parents always had Audi, before switching to Kia, because you get all the extras and pay 10k less.
And I am not a Mercedes fanboy. I've been driving, Daihatsu, Opel, Citroen, Opel (again), Ford, my parents always had Audi, before switching to Kia, because you get all the extras and pay 10k less.
By the time an Apple car hits the market there will be many more electric cars and far more charge points (and hopefully not in a "network" but free for everyone just like every frikking gas station)
So?
Hint: Lots of SW with lots of updates in every car.
Sure, but they are still small in absolute numbers and Nissan (or Hyundai) plants can it will be converted to electric in a few years
*shrug* just because Apple is 100% carbon neutral doesn't mean that Foxconn will also be for non Apple products.
Now you can dance the Tesla-Fanboy-Tango as much as you want and we can for discuss their quality or how far ahead of established brands the really are, in the end its about synergy and here an Apple-Tesla venture falls short for both sides.
All the things that are good about Tesla are the the things that Apple would want to supply (and control).
All the things that are lacking with Tesla are the things that Apple can't provide.
Replace Tesla with a midrange manufacture like Nissan/Renault, Hyundai/Kia or even ChyrslerFiatPeugeot and it can be a massive win for both sides.
That would never happen. Musk would clash with Apple's style of things. It would not be a good relationship.
And in all honesty, we need Musk to focus on innovation not on arguments with Cook
))
And in all honesty, we need Musk to focus on innovation not on arguments with Cook
))You are forgetting tons of details here. What you've described is typical sing of a "innovator". Apple even made great commercial about that.
Not long ago everyone was laughing at Musk for trying to do the SpaceX thing. Even Neil deGrass Tyson was against him and called him crazy. Now, that program works and its the most advanced there is. Even Nasa partners with SpaceX now.
So, why in the hell would he listen to all those that you have mentioned? People that pushed the boundaries do exactly the opposite. Its like the saying: "People who say something is impossible should stand in the way of those that are already DOING IT!"
Jobs was like that too (tons of stories about this behaviour) and look where he pushed Apple. Musk is like Jobs or any other "innovator" that progresses the civilization
Not long ago everyone was laughing at Musk for trying to do the SpaceX thing. Even Neil deGrass Tyson was against him and called him crazy. Now, that program works and its the most advanced there is. Even Nasa partners with SpaceX now.
So, why in the hell would he listen to all those that you have mentioned? People that pushed the boundaries do exactly the opposite. Its like the saying: "People who say something is impossible should stand in the way of those that are already DOING IT!"
Jobs was like that too (tons of stories about this behaviour) and look where he pushed Apple. Musk is like Jobs or any other "innovator" that progresses the civilization
It would fly - just not with Elon. The only constellation this could work out was if Elon went 100% Space X - but then, there's a lot of "sharing" between SpaceX and Tesla (and probably all the other companies he's running in his spare-time), too, to a lesser degree), so it doesn't quite work that way.
If you think about all the controversial, cringe-worthy, facepalm-inducing or just borderline crazy or illegal (or criminal) tweets of this man in the last two years alone - does that strike you as somebody who would ask a PR guy (or girl) for advice before tweeting?
And that doesn't even include the recent Bitcoin "episode".
Apple is too late in the game - they probably underestimated the trajectory this whole BEV-thing took in the last two years and thought they had more time. Now, time's running up.
I'm sure a lot of people at Apple and Tesla would love to cooperate - but at the same time, they probably know deep down in their heart each one is better off without the other one.
Based upon a car manufacturer denying (knowing what happens to potential partners that leak confidential Apple conversations) they're in discussions with Apple?
Huh, a car company that puts “Alexa” in the advertising for their upcoming Aria electric vehicle. They need all the help they can get.
Apple is expected to partner with a third-party car maker to build its rumored self-driving car. In January, reports surfaced that Apple was eyeing Hyundai to be the official partner for Apple Car, and subsequent reports suggest Apple is actively pursuing all of its options.
In the latest round of speculation, Apple reportedly approached Nissan in the last few months about a potential partnership for a self-driving car, according to a paywalled Financial Times report. The report states that negotiations between the two companies were "brief" and that discussions did not make their way to higher executive or leadership levels in either company due to disagreements over the specifics of the Apple Car.
It's worth noting that an older report by Nikkei Asia cited Nissan as at least one of six Japanese automakers that Apple is eyeing for the Apple Car. The report however didn't provide specific details as to the progress of any talks, or if Apple is ultimately siding with one carmaker more than others.
Nissan and Apple reportedly clashed over how a partnership would actually play out. Nissan reportedly was concerned that a deal with Apple would downgrade it to simply a "hardware supplier." The Apple Car is expected to be fully branded by Apple, including Apple software, and design. While Apple holds the in-house ability to design its own software and hardware, it's not positioned to build the actual hardware at a mass scale, which is why a partnership is considered to be a hallmark of the project itself.
During an earnings presentation, Nissan's COO Ashwani Gupta stated that Nissan is open to partnerships, but only if the opposite party adapts to Nissan's services, not vice versa. The COO said that Nissan has its own customer base to satisfy and that it will not "change the way" it makes cars.
Earlier in the year following reports of a potential tie-up with Apple, Hyundai's shares surged by more than 25% but remained volatile after negotiations came to a standstill. Attempting to veer away from a similar scenario, Nissan quickly and unequivocally confirmed in a statement that it's "not in talks" with Apple but remains opens to working with other companies.
Apple remains a tightly secretive company that never confirms the existence of unreleased products and projects. The statement by Hyundai earlier in the year confirming it's in negotiations with the tech giant likely upset executives as it was seen as a confirmation that Apple is pursuing a partnership for a potential self-driving car. The statement was quickly reworded to remove mention of Apple. Soon after, talks between the two came to a screeching halt.
Despite the plentiful amount of reports about Apple's self-driving car, sources suggest that we won't be seeing it on the road until at least 2026. Bloomberg reports that the Apple Car is "nowhere near production stage," and that a release is at least half a decade away. Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo, one of the most reputable analysts for Apple, still believes that despite Hyundai's mishap, Apple will ultimately side with the carmaker as the official partner for its self-driving car ambitions.
Article Link: Nissan Denies Reports of Apple Car Partnership Discussions
Building and selling am EV car involves a lot of different things:
Manufacturing facilities
Dealer network and show rooms
Maintenance/repair facilities
Spare parts
Charging stations accessibility
The list goes on from there. Apple has never really made anything for sale larger than a small suitcase. A car is a very different product. Apple products are sold in a lot of stores today, but virtually none are setup for anything like a car.
Some years ago the rumor area was making large TVs for home consumers. That one rattled around for some years and nothing ever came out. They just continued to make new versions of their Apple TV setup top box. They still lag Roku in sales today.
With the push towards green, many counties, states and companies are headed away from ICE and towards EVs. Laws may likely make this mandatory. Apple moving slowly means they will be further behind companies already making millions of cars a year. Right now Tesla is king of EVs in the US and many parts of the world.
Apple’s past has been to make high end products that are more expensive than other similar products. iPhone, iPad, Mac laptops fall into this category. They are all great products (it’s what I use in every category).
What is missing in the EV market today is a reasonable priced car for the masses. That’s the empty hole today. While self driving cars is a great concept, it’s not the need for most...and the laws really don’t allow it now anyway. I’m not convinced that Apple will ever market a car.
Manufacturing facilities
Dealer network and show rooms
Maintenance/repair facilities
Spare parts
Charging stations accessibility
The list goes on from there. Apple has never really made anything for sale larger than a small suitcase. A car is a very different product. Apple products are sold in a lot of stores today, but virtually none are setup for anything like a car.
Some years ago the rumor area was making large TVs for home consumers. That one rattled around for some years and nothing ever came out. They just continued to make new versions of their Apple TV setup top box. They still lag Roku in sales today.
With the push towards green, many counties, states and companies are headed away from ICE and towards EVs. Laws may likely make this mandatory. Apple moving slowly means they will be further behind companies already making millions of cars a year. Right now Tesla is king of EVs in the US and many parts of the world.
Apple’s past has been to make high end products that are more expensive than other similar products. iPhone, iPad, Mac laptops fall into this category. They are all great products (it’s what I use in every category).
What is missing in the EV market today is a reasonable priced car for the masses. That’s the empty hole today. While self driving cars is a great concept, it’s not the need for most...and the laws really don’t allow it now anyway. I’m not convinced that Apple will ever market a car.
True -- and there are a lot of fools in the world. As Sami noted in yesterday's Volkswagon article, a strikingly similar scenario played out when Apple first started approaching cellular carriers to partner up. The standard expectation of the day was that all cell phones would be physically branded with the carrier logo, no exceptions. When Apple was preparing to enter the market and made it known that they fully expected that this standard rule would not be applied to them, they were practically laughed out of conference room after conference room. Of course, we all know how that turned out: AT&T took the plunge, and got a pretty decent windfall out of their initial exclusivity contract, and now the iPhone is pretty much a worldwide household name.
A car manufacturing agreement would obviously be different in a plethora of ways, not the least of which is a high probability of a permanent exclusivity contract... so the stakes are actually quite a bit higher, in the current scenario. So is it a gamble? Yeah, probably -- but one with an extraordinary potential payout. And yet, it still sounds to me like Gupta is using the same logic, and making the same mistake that the rest of the cellular carriers made, back in 2006.
The world changes, whether we want it to or not.
Does Tesla even have the capacity to manufacture for anyone else and themselves?
I think the problem with this comparison is you are downplaying the complexity and dynamics of cellphones versus cars. In addition to the manufacturing and technology, cars also have to undergo a lot more rules & regulations (i.e. safety -- both electrical and mechanical) that far exceed those in cellphones. The EV space is already getting very competitive and crowded. To have a factory have to also support the supply chain for a partner's car(s) seems disruptive for their own growth. Yeah, you would think Apple can throw endless money to solve this issue, but realize most of the major car companies (esp. German/Japanese) are actually very proud of their cars.
Aside from bringing the Apple experience, I am not sure what else will an Apple car provide as a benefit to the company.
Pride kills Incumbents.
Remember Nokia, they went from No.1 to almost non-existence. If I were auto maker, I would be very afraid. I would spend a lot of resource on making self driving car.
Granted, name brand partnership never goes well with Apple.
Remember Nokia, they went from No.1 to almost non-existence. If I were auto maker, I would be very afraid. I would spend a lot of resource on making self driving car.
Granted, name brand partnership never goes well with Apple.
Imagine if Foxconn was notorious for missing their production goals, making promises they couldn't keep and had shoddy work on various iPhone production lines. Why would Apple choose them?