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 Car History - Where Did Development Go Wrong?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I used some spare Apple parts to make my own Apple Car
Estimates range from one billion to three billion dollars a year.
So, over it's estimated 10 years of development, 10-30 billion dollars.
The Apple Car Is Finally Dead, Shrouded In Mystery Until The End: Report
After a decade and a reported $1 billion spent annually, Apple's infamous
insideevs.com
People underestimate just how great Apple thinks they are.
It depends on what happens to the car they upgraded from
The cost of a car includes its disposal or transfer to someone else
And from people i know who have Tesla, they actually think they are poor quality vehicles compared to many other car makers.
Yeah.... have to agree. When rumors first surfaced about the Apple Car, I always figured it would wind up more of a project where Apple would provide some sort of infotainment system to existing auto-makers who wanted to license it. Either that, or more optimistically? They'd come up with their own self-driving system they'd sell to other auto-makers to incorporate in their vehicles. (Could see this integrating tightly with Apple Maps so you tell it where on the map you want to go, etc.)
Actually marketing a complete vehicle seems way out of scope for what Apple does and what its expertise is in. That was always a bad idea.
I'd calm down about the "environmental catastrophe" hyperbole on that..... Realistically, cars that go to the "scrap heap" typically wind up in "pick and pull" type junk yards where people find them useful for years to come as sources of spare parts they need to keep another similar vehicle on the road.
Do we need to get better at making the battery recycling process cost-effective and available for everyone? Yes. But all in all, a scrapped EV isn't nearly as big a problem with "waste" as a lot of other things we dispose of that don't get a chance to be used as spare parts for others.
Too bad … Apple did start in a garage.
After spending a decade developing an autonomous car, Apple this week decided it was time to pull an AirPower and shut down the project. The Apple Car is no more, and Apple is no longer planning to release an Apple-branded electric vehicle.
The hundreds of engineers and car experts who were working on the vehicle will be laid off or distributed to other teams within Apple, including the AI team. The Apple Car is one of the longest running rumors that we've been reporting on without a product materializing, so we thought we'd take a look back at some of the key moments in the Apple Car's history to provide some insight into what went wrong.
2015 - Early Development
In early 2015, a van leased to Apple surfaced on the streets of Concord, California with LiDAR equipment on its roof. Apple had been using vans like this for mapping purposes, but the hardware looked similar to hardware being used by companies testing self-driving software. This one vehicle sighting ended up sparking a slew of rumors.
That same month, an unnamed Apple employee told Business Insider that Apple would "give Tesla a run for its money," and Financial Times claimed that Apple was recruiting automotive technology and vehicle design experts to work in a "top-secret research lab." The Wall Street Journal then broke a story with in-depth details on the hundreds of employees working on an Apple-branded minivan-like electric vehicle.
There were a number of other key headlines and details shared in 2015.
- Apple CEO Tim Cook reportedly approved the self-driving car project in 2014.
- At the time, the project was led by Steve Zadesky, Apple VP of Product Design and a former Ford engineer. It was overseen by Dan Riccio, Apple's SVP of hardware engineering.
- In 2015, Bloomberg said that Apple was hoping to produce the car by 2020. Later, the WSJ said it could be ready as soon as 2019.
- Apple was said to be meeting with Magna Steyr, BMW, and automotive companies as it sought a partner.
- The Guardian published a report that Apple wasn't just working on an electric vehicle, it was working on an autonomous vehicle. The report also said that Apple had prototypes ready for testing, which wasn't accurate.
- Former General Motors CEO Dan Akerson said that Apple was underestimating the difficulty of operating in the car business. "They have no idea what they're getting into," he said.
- Apple hired a ton of vehicle experts from automotive companies and from companies with expertise in autonomous vehicles.
- Apple's "secret" car headquarters were located in Sunnyvale, California, close to the Infinite Loop campus.
2016 and 2017 - First Signs of Strife Lead to Major Upheaval
The first hints of trouble with the Apple Car project surfaced in January 2016, with Apple Car lead Steve Zadesky departing the company. Around this time, Apple registered several domain names, including apple.car and apple.auto.
Former Apple SVP of technologies Bob Mansfield came out of retirement to head up the project, and under his direction, rumors suggested that Apple was focusing on an autonomous driving system with the aim of partnering with a car manufacturer in the future. Apple kept aggressively hiring, and at this time, split development into the hardware for the car and the software that would run on it.
With the transition to Mansfield's leadership, hundreds of employees were fired or reassigned, and in late 2016, there was a major upheaval. Apple "abandoned" plans to build its own vehicle and gave Mansfield's team a 2017 deadline to prove the feasibility of a self-driving system.
In early 2017, white Lexus RX450h SUVs outfitted with LiDAR equipment and piloted by Apple employees were spotted in the Bay Area, and Apple has used these vehicles to test its autonomous driving systems up until now. Apple was also rumored to be testing its self-driving technology at a facility in Arizona.
Apple at this time was also working on building an autonomous shuttle in partnership with Volkswagen to ferry employees to the Infinite Loop campus, but that was nixed.
Tim Cook made the unusual decision to confirm that Apple was working on autonomous driving. "We're focusing on autonomous systems," Cook said. "It's a core technology that we view as very important." He went on to say that it was the "mother of all AI projects," describing it as "o... Click here to read rest of article
Article Link: Apple Car History - Where Did Development Go Wrong?
I wonder if the AppleCar would have been announced & marketed like the AVP …
• Welcome to the era of spatial driving
• AppleCar seamlessly blends Siri assistance with your risk-taking habits
• You navigate simply by using your voice, your laptop, or your phone
• So you can use AppleVision Pro in a place never before possible
Apple's operating margin is around 33%, so to sell a car for $100K, they would need to limit their BOM to around $66K.
They thought about what they would need to do to sell a car at that price point and what they could have built (by a contract manufacturer) for that price and realized it would never work.
Tesla's operating margin is 8%, they currently have a higher profit margin due to rebate revenue.
They thought about what they would need to do to sell a car at that price point and what they could have built (by a contract manufacturer) for that price and realized it would never work.
Tesla's operating margin is 8%, they currently have a higher profit margin due to rebate revenue.
Apple should have started with a self-driving vacuum cleaner or lawnmower.
That just wont work like it used to…. The parts on new cars are not as exchangeable as they used to be in the past… and all that sensitive electronics will perish quickly out in the elements.
I think its a pipe dream thinking that you willhave people scavenging off older EV like that
They need bespoke recycling facilities for EV. Being able to deal with battery disposal, electronics and misc metal and other waste.
Its true there is a whole other issue of wastes we need to deal with… EV are just part of a huge problem.
The world needs policy and action on all of this… but they are too busy making this quarters results. Long termism is not on many people's radars.
The 27" iMac I was referring to was the cancelled/rumored Apple Silicon version.
Both Steve and Tim have both said that Apple only gets into a category if they believe they can contribute something transformative.
Self driving proved far more difficult a problem to solve than what the industry has thought it would be. Making just another car you drive wouldn’t contribute much.
I’ve long seen Project Titan as a reimagining of the concept of personal transportation, a service, not a car you buy for yourself. On average, cars are in use 5% of their ownership time, parked the other 95%. Self driving pods summoned from an iPhone or Watch, could help to start putting a dent in excessive cars and ultimately, in partnership with other brands, eliminate traffic by having cars communicate with one another.
Apple has enough cash to outright acquire Rivian. It’s a fantastic place to start, with greats cars that people love and with a similar company culture.
Self driving proved far more difficult a problem to solve than what the industry has thought it would be. Making just another car you drive wouldn’t contribute much.
I’ve long seen Project Titan as a reimagining of the concept of personal transportation, a service, not a car you buy for yourself. On average, cars are in use 5% of their ownership time, parked the other 95%. Self driving pods summoned from an iPhone or Watch, could help to start putting a dent in excessive cars and ultimately, in partnership with other brands, eliminate traffic by having cars communicate with one another.
Apple has enough cash to outright acquire Rivian. It’s a fantastic place to start, with greats cars that people love and with a similar company culture.
Your take on Titan is where I thought Apple was headed, not just another car in the traditional sense, but an innovative urban/suburban vehicle reimagining. As for acquiring Rivian, I don't know what that achieves seeing as how Volvo, who know a thing or two about cars, just ended funding for Polestar.
Volvo Will Stop Funding Polestar EV Brand but Keep Collaborating
Geely—the two automakers' Chinese parent company—will now fully support Polestar, which has two new EVs on the way.
Last edited:
Why is the slant that something went wrong? I think that's unnecessarily negative. Companies are constantly investing in research and development towards an initial goal that doesn't pan out. In fact, considering the amount of money Apple generates, they'd be fools to not do that. And one can't ignore the hundreds of patents that Apple published with this work which have tremendous potential for bringing them many billions in the future. One could either say that Icarus flying too close to the sun was a failure, or rather that when he reached the sun it was the apex of his success with that endeavor. Matter of perspective I guess.
This -- their software is just too buggy and lacking of critical features, and gets messed up by their often irreversible "updates," to give me any confidence in their ability to get a car right.
I also think the idea of a fully-autonomous cars is a lot harder to create than some would think. It's easy enough to get it to work 80% of the time, but getting it as perfect as it would need to be to operate correctly in all possible conditions is extremely difficult.
That's exactly what Tesla does, and it's lead them to having the world's best selling vehicle in 2024...
Tesla test drives starts and ends at the mall (or wherever the Tesla location is) and just spends about 30 minutes driving around streets/highways around it.
There was a lot Apple was going to need to figure out, but stores and test drives could have probably been handled using their existing stores pretty well. Service and Delivery Centers would be a massive issue - Tesla's smallest locations need space for at least 100 cars (about how many the small locations deliver to customers on peak days), and they have several larger locations that have space for 1000+ cars.
And of course how were they going to build the car? It's insane that Apple thought they would somehow manage to build tens of thousands of cars in 4 years when they had made zero progress towards having a factory. Was the plan for someone else to build the cars? That may have been the thing that really killed the project - Tesla is in talks with other car companies about licensing FSD, which has actually been demonstrated to be successful at massive scale, vs Apple is all talk with nothing to show. Why partner with Apple for a flop, like the Motorola Rokr, when Tesla is an easier partnership for FSD?
I’m not sure how Tesla’s showrooms are a good example here because it took them a decade to roll out with the scale they currently have, and I’m not sure Apple would be capable of doing more than about 2x that speed. Tesla still isn’t even in all 50 states. I don’t think any but a few of the existing Apple stores would be useful for car demos, so they would have to pre announce this then begin showroom/factory construction and it would take years before they could even have a car on the road.
All of that to produce and sell less cars than the Model S for years. Only software licensing makes any sense for Apple in this market.
To be fair, no one has designed an AI that works reasonably
Lots of people really hate on Apple for trying something new here, but I really think Apple wasn’t crazy to try.
I think that in 2012-2014, the idea that a computer & software company could make a better car than traditional brands was actually not a stretch. Tesla showed it first by demonstrating that a car with well-designed tech was not only desirable, but highly in demand. With the industry on the cusp of upending its core technologies by abandoning combustion, why not give it a try?
Nobody does UX better than Apple—it’s the “je ne sais quoi” that keeps people hooked on iPhone even despite amazing advancements in android. The story repeats for all their products. Say what you will about features, bugs, and walls, their systems just make sense. It the root of the “…but it’s android” vibe that keeps people loyal—not their advertisements as some suggest.
Was it crazy for Apple to think they could apply that same magic to a car? Not at all. Was it crazy for them to try to be one of the first to market on autonomous driving in the 2010’s when everyone was so bullish on it? No! Was it a long shot? Heck yeah, but it was well worth a try.
Their biggest mistake was probably holding on to it too long; trying to salvage their progress so as not to waste it. In hindsight I’m sure they wish they dropped it sooner, but I’m also sure they’re glad they tried.
I think that in 2012-2014, the idea that a computer & software company could make a better car than traditional brands was actually not a stretch. Tesla showed it first by demonstrating that a car with well-designed tech was not only desirable, but highly in demand. With the industry on the cusp of upending its core technologies by abandoning combustion, why not give it a try?
Nobody does UX better than Apple—it’s the “je ne sais quoi” that keeps people hooked on iPhone even despite amazing advancements in android. The story repeats for all their products. Say what you will about features, bugs, and walls, their systems just make sense. It the root of the “…but it’s android” vibe that keeps people loyal—not their advertisements as some suggest.
Was it crazy for Apple to think they could apply that same magic to a car? Not at all. Was it crazy for them to try to be one of the first to market on autonomous driving in the 2010’s when everyone was so bullish on it? No! Was it a long shot? Heck yeah, but it was well worth a try.
Their biggest mistake was probably holding on to it too long; trying to salvage their progress so as not to waste it. In hindsight I’m sure they wish they dropped it sooner, but I’m also sure they’re glad they tried.