Report: Apple Chose to Develop Apple Car Alone to Avoid Further Delays, Currently Selecting Suppliers

[klunernet]

Yeah except the Japanese were already building cars.

Don't forget, Apple doesn't manufacture anything themselves. With a car it might have to be different.

Neither do Japanese car makers. Most of their parts are made by others. Often tiny shops. They just bring it all together, not so dissimilar from what Foxconn does for apple. Just like apple: they design it, and have it put together according to their spec. They just mostly do the assembly part themselves, which apple rarely does. (Do they still build Mac pro’s in TX?)

 

[JKAussieSkater]

It would be such a joke if Apple released a car that wasn't self-driving. "That feature will come in an eventual update."

 

[burgman]

Not only that, but safety regulations alone must be a huge hurdle. It's as if Apple is aiming to be an LG or Samsung, with a portfolio that goes way beyond its original core business of computers. I wonder if home appliances will be next.

Consumers get to look for the next product launch, corporations making complex products operate on a different time scale. Computers, phones etc have become appliances today.

 

[Robert.Walter]

Except that isn’t the case here. A smartphone was pretty obvious for apple moving forward. Great fit. Nobrainer. This car rumor? It’s not apple at all. Money pit. Tim’s big fail.

LoL you really miss the big picture.

cars used to be heavy metal products but are evolving toward electric, electronic and software products in a metal/glass/plastic shell.

Apple products are e/e and s/w in a metal glass and plastic shell evolving to have 4 wheels.

much harder for car companies to move to BEV and AV tech than for an E/E s/w heavy company to outsource vehicle and component ED&T and assy to any of the great Tier 1 FSS companies out there.

Apple’s only disadvantage as I see it in the traditional sense is that their initial production volumes will be small compared to the top OEM’s so their costs will be higher there.

 

[cardfan]

Apple will be a very small part of the auto market for the first few years. They will sell a very limited set of options, at the very high end of whatever market segment they enter into. They will sell enough, but not many, units at first, to those who want the status, the prestige, and the interest of owning one of Apple's first cars. In addition, the Apple car will be able to do some things better, easier, and cooler than other cars on the market (e.g. using their proprietary battery technology and development of likely very efficient EV motors). Slowly, over the course of several years, they will diversify, offer new models, at different market segment points, foregoing the lower end of the market, to maintain large margins at fewer sales. This is what they did with the Mac, the iPhone, the iPad, the Apple Watch. Does anyone else remember "gold plated" Apple Watches that first year? Also, Apple (Tim Cook's specialty) has demonstrated that it has the capacity to develop incredibly tight manufacturing processes and supply chain and inventory logistics. This is essential to auto manufacturing success, and why Tesla has never made a profit on making cars (all of its profits are for selling carbon footprint credits to other companies). Apple will succeed, and might even be a dominant player by 2035. Remember, there are going to be massive tax incentives to move to RVs in the next few years. Infrastructure for EVs will also ramp up quickly, matching gas stations in the not-too distant future.

Apple's obligations to its shareholders almost dictates its attempt to get into the auto industry. With apple so huge in the market segments it currently dominates, real growth options are pretty limited. Cars are "the next big thing" and they will be a natural extension of its overall ecosystem, becoming an integral part of how you use technology from when you get up in the morning to when you go to sleep at night, integrated with your communications technology, home technology, etc. It is also very possible that Apple will create a new way of "selling" cars, by developing fleets that it owns and maintains, with users leasing cars as needed, thereby lowering per use cost. I am guessing auto ownership will be far less common in twenty years. Think Apple's version of an Uber that has no driver.

Tim will be retired before you ever see anything apple car related. New ceo will can the whole thing. This always started out at as Tim’s desperate “what do we do with all this capital” answer. We have to show the analysts were more than iPhone. Oh I know. Cars. They’ll eat it up.

Then services got more press as the dumb car thing dragged on. Tim then gets another idea. Let’s do a services event. From this we got the money pit number two known as atv+. Now the lawsuits are piling up threatening their 30%.

Back to the idiot car rumors we go. Poor Tim. I hope I’m around for one more new product release he says. . (Cough. AR glasses). Certainly not this train wreck of a car. It’s absolutely astounding that anyone takes this car nonsense seriously.

 

[Rogifan]

I thought Apple was just going to concentrate on the software for the car with its AI etc and then they can licence it to other companies for use as they will have all the data already collected etc.

As above says building cars is harder than building a mobile phone.

I‘ve never understood why some people think Apple would be capable of building the software needed for autonomous/self driving vehicles but not an actual vehicle. Has there ever been a time (I’m starting when Steve Jobs came back to the company) when Apple’s software was better than it’s hardware?

 

[trash eighty]

I wonder if Apple might look to buy a smallish-medium sized car company to give them the kick start with production capacity and manufacturing expertise, Jaguar Land Rover sized for example.

 

[swingerofbirch]

"Why they would want to go down this car path and what they think they could add is beyond me."

For the same reason Apple decided to get into the cellular handset market when that was OWNED by Motorola, Ericsson, and Nokia - the giants in cellular telecom, collectively known as MEN in that industry.

I remember the same pushback from tech forum "experts" that we're seeing here today. And all the reasons why Apple would fail in that market.

Thank god for American companies willing to take chances rather than sitting in comfortable stasis.

There are some markets companies enter because if they don't they think they will be left behind. (See Microsoft entering virtually every tech niche to ensure its dominance wasn't thwarted by some sort of disruption.)

Apple has done this move with Apple Music (Spotify), HomePod (Alexa), Apple TV Plus (Netflix), etc., to fend off disruption.

And there are some markets, such as the iPhone, that a company creates that is the disruptor.

All I said is that is beyond me what they could do with a car that would add beyond what is available. It doesn't mean there isn't something . . . something like an iPhone.

But it very well could be a me-too product like the others I mentioned.

 

[velocityg4]

How will Apple resolve the continuing chip shortages that are plaguing other car companies?

Given the time frame. It probably won't be such a big deal by then. Right now there is a massive amount of funding to increase manufacturing capacity around the world. With a lot of new fabs being built. By the time Apple is ready. Those fabs should already be online.

 

[rpmurray]

I'm wondering if carOS will be on a yearly update cycle and the cars will go to vintage status after five years and no longer be supported with parts and updates.

 

[mannyvel]

The barriers to entry in the car market have been overstated. There are plenty of new car companies out there. Sure many of them aren't selling into the US market, but that's relatively easy to handle. Prepping for the US safety stuff is something hobbyists and the rich do.

 

[BvizioN]

I love the comment section here with all the failure predictions of forum users, which usually end up all being so wrong to the point that it is hilarious to go back and read them after few years. Apple would not invest so heavily in something they did not have enough confidence.

 

[darcyf]

Dude, don't compare the complexity of the first iPhone, to what the first Apple Car would be.

Given Apple secrecy, developing this thing isnt exactly going to be a piece of cake once they start hitting prototypes which they will have to test on public roads at some point - just like every other manufacturer does. Buying some former automotive proving ground isnt a replacement for that.

So basically what you’re saying is because it’s going to be difficult, apple won’t be able to do it and so they shouldn’t try. To which I’ll just say it really doesn’t sound like you understand apple at all.

 

[PlainviewX]

You apparently never worked for an OEM.

Sorry, it's not making earbuds off the technology of a company you bought such as Beats, which took more than five years to bring the first true incarnation to market. It's a bit more involved than that

 

[nt5672]

Apple does things to innovate. At least that was the old Apple.

So what are Apple's innovations.

1. Smaller cars - Not seeing this there are already some really small cars and Ive is gone.
2. Smarter cars - Not seeing this, Apple's AI is so far behind the curve that I would not drive one.
3. More energy efficient - Tesla is pretty far ahead in battery technology.
4. Better looking - Could be, American made cars all copy each other in design and have not innovated in years.
5. Easier to drive - Don't see anything here.
6. ?

What do you think?

 

[cardfan]

Now that's a real knee-slapper! A no-brainer, even! Bet you've never worked in that industry.

Please, not so early in the morning when I'm drinking milk. Not pretty.

Guess you don’t know history or you weren’t around then. It’s fine. Moving on. Lol

 

[Rogifan]

IMHO, I think this could be Cook's Folly. Apparently their talks with other manufacturers has failed and now they're going to try and go on their own.
As much as I love Apple and have been embedded in their ecosystem for years, I have found that I no longer jump on the latest and greatest anymore. As far as I can see, there are still too many inconsistencies in their software. It's somewhat acceptable ( but not totally) to have your iPhone, iMac, iPad shut down or crash. Just not reasonable or acceptable for a car.
Not sure why Apple din't choose Magna Steyr as they have a solid background in automotive engineering. About the only reason I can think of is that Cook put on his bean counter hat and din't like the margins the others offered. From what I remember from working in the auto industry, that margins aren't all that great. As others have mentioned, I think Apple is going way outside their core business and that, to me, is a potential for failure.

It’s interesting that you reference software inconsistencies since whenever the Apple car discussion comes up everyone seems to focus on the physical car. I’m not sure why people think Apple would nail the software but not the hardware. If anything I’d have more concerns about them getting the software right.

 

[sully54]

Although Doug Field, Apple's vice president of special projects, recently left the project to join Ford, the company is still believed to have hundreds of engineers working on the vehicle.

I just find this statement so hilarious. I mean, of course Apple has more than one engineer working on this project. They just hired 2 other engineers days before Field left for Ford.

 

[laptech]

In my opinion no car makers wants to team up with Apple because any Apple car would be in direct competition to the car makers own car.

Since 2016, Car makers in Europe have slowly been pulling out, Honda, Nissan, Ford and General Motors (source: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/15/business/cars-brexit-europe-technology.html)
This would mean that there are empty ready to go car manufacturing plants in Europe to be used. it would not have taken Apple long to take over one of these plants and use it to make their own cars. The advantage of this is that they would not require the use of an existing car plant which would have impacted the production of who ever the car maker was going to be. I cannot see why a car manufacturer could not give Apple some technical help to get them started running the plant and then walk away when everything is set up and running.

Apple going it alone means they are going to be in direct competition with car manufacturers for the same parts. who gets the engines, who gets the batteries, who gets the wheels..etc etc, does Apple or does BMW or Ford or Nissan or Toyota? will be interesting to see how that plays out.

 

[AltecX]

I love the comment section here with all the failure predictions of forum users, which usually end up all being so wrong to the point that it is hilarious to go back and read them after few years. Apple would not invest so heavily in something they did not have enough confidence.

Job's Apple I'd agree. Tim's Apple we've seen almost nothing more than just taking steps past what seems to be a "next logical step' on already established tech/devices under Jobs.

Great example is MacOS. Other than some small UI/icon changes its VERY much like using 10.5/10.6 was. It's even identical in its limited multi-tasking abilities. Every iteration to me just feels like more and more iOS looking stuff that I'll never use getting stuffed into it. I mean at LEAST give me a version of Snapping like Windows 10 has. 11's is even better. Mac only recently got Side by Side limited to 2 things side by side or just 1 large thing.

 

[citysnaps]

Guess you don’t know history or you weren’t around then. It’s fine. Moving on. Lol

I know the history and worked in that industry, engaging with Motorola, Ericsson, Nokia, and others. You?

 

[skitidetdu]

64 million? Shouldn't it be billion?

Or trillion 🤪

 

[bobcomer]

I'm all up for Apple car but I think that they won't be able to compete once Tesla sorts out its production issues

I don't really understand Apple's motive in this one, they're getting into a very crowded industry with not as much margin as they are used to. Even Tesla still has problems anywhere else but big cities and most of california. We just don't have the number of charging stations or tesla repair capabilities here in the south. I'd love to own a tesla, but it's just not a smart thing to do for me. Apple would have all those same problems and more.

I drive a prius prime, so I, at least, get some miles driving EV.

 

[kemal]

Imagine the trouble Apple will have trying to get the body panels to fit as tight as the bottom of a MacBook Pro.
(See Tesla QC)

 

[cardfan]

I love the comment section here with all the failure predictions of forum users, which usually end up all being so wrong to the point that it is hilarious to go back and read them after few years. Apple would not invest so heavily in something they did not have enough confidence.

Except that’s not the case either. Remember HomePod. How’s that atv+ doing. News+? Ping? Siri? iAds? Gold watches? Apple hit some home runs but more fouls. It’s stupid to keep saying “well remember iPhone”?. Apple can do anything. Lol. But there’s many more failures to remember that say the opposite.