
Apple Gears Up to Challenge Tesla in Electric Cars - tysone
http://www.wsj.com/articles/apples-titan-car-project-to-challenge-tesla-1423868072
======
phkahler
A couple months ago I was contacted by a recruiter from Apple on LinkedIn. He
claimed my skillset was a great match for some new thing they were doing but
wouldn't explain. I thought WTH, I'd been doing EVs for the last 6 years and
non-EVs for longer than that. Maybe they need to get some official vague news
out so they can actually hire the people they need?

~~~
fiatjaf
What's an EV? How do you know they don't want an EV specialist?

~~~
chm
Electric vehicle? If I was an engineer in the automobile industry, I'd be
surprised to be contacted by Apple too.

------
beloch
Apple hardware is generally beautiful and feels extremely well built, but
usually makes a few key compromises of function for the sake of form, with the
result that some of their gear is prone to failure after a surprisingly short
period of time. Take pretty much every Apple cable ever made for example. They
lack stress relief and, hence, tend to fall apart where they are stressed.
Some of this can be blamed on Steve Jobs. Reportedly, it was Jobs who hated
the look of stress relieved cables so much that he prevented Apple from
adopting sensible cable designs. Hopefully Cook is less dogmatic in pursuing
form over function.

Even so, I'd be wary of a buying a new car from a first-time auto
manufacturer, especially one with Apple's track record of compromised
function. I'd be afraid that Apple, in trying to set their car apart from the
competition, would build a car that is either unsafe or doomed to early
failure. I'm sure people will line up to buy the iCar just like every other
iProduct, but it may well prove sensible not to be amongst the first!

~~~
Avitas
...be wary. Hell yes. This is a product that, with a hidden bug or quirk, will
kill, maim or hurt you and others around you.

On the other hand, Apple has the capital to do this correctly. Even if they
later decide to limit the scope of the project, it will pay dividends with
their existing automotive control group. A project like this will take many
years. But, with their best project managers, there's no doubt that they can
do it. Who knows, with the kind of money they have now, I'd say even 5 years
is doable.

But, be mindful that the existing existing players such as BMW, Ford, GM,
Honda, Hyundai, Mercedes, Nissan, Tesla, Toyota and VW are all getting better
too. Electric cars aren't rocket science, but with all the regulations and
bureaucratic red tape surrounding the automotive industry, it may as well be.

Here's another kicker--Apple may be thinking about integrating some new
thing(s) that are novel. It could be that Apple engineers have thought of some
great way to combine X (and Y...) in some novel way with the automobile that
will revolutionize the industry. If that's the case, you can expect even
greater and more fanatical secrecy than the existing wall of silence.

Here's the nice thing about a project like this as I see it. Cars are fun.
They're sexy and lots of kids dream about driving, building, fixing and/or
designing them. This is the type of thing that gets the public eye and can
rally existing employees and potential employees. Who wouldn't want to work on
a car?

Lastly, just like the moonshot project of the 60's, you never know what
technologies and ancillary benefits will come about because of something as
complex and far-reaching as this appears to be.

~~~
bosky101
Some of my friends who develop for android say that API's and functionality
can sometimes just get dropped from version to version especially in things
the Nexus. Without warning. To the extent that there are threads with
100/1000's of developer woes going to deaf years wrt un-planned
degradations/api changes/ and deprecations. Bugs/defects leading to phones
getting bricked are also not un-common.

Apple api's and documentation and deprecation - are more deliberate. and gives
me more confidence that i won't end up with a bricked phone.

tldr; i'd still trust an apple EV over a google/android one.

~~~
sangnoir
I don't understand why you would inject a hypothetical Android EV into this
discussion. I feel that Apple/Google partisanship is off-topic when GP was
talking about Apple v. GM/BMW/other established automakers

------
prawn
I think eventually minivans will be a quite popular format for autonomous
vehicles. Full size buses are inconvenient for suburban streets, while
vehicles for single occupants may be priced out in on-demand situations for
many trips.

Already, minivans are very popular in unofficial public transport systems in
many less-developed countries. In Morocco, grand taxis are old Mercedes sedans
that leave when full - they're cramped and reckless, and I bet minivans would
be preferred if they were more readily available.

I think we'll see many people commuting in the near future by shared transport
decided by efficiency algorithms and based on demand and prediction. Minivans
could get 5-10 people into the CBD quite effectively in peak hour rather than
the 1-2 people/car we see now, and without waiting for a bus or walking 3-5
blocks to the stop.

A minivan with swappable internal components could easy convert to sleep four
people (a family on a roadtrip), or have bench seats facing a card table (like
a train), or have four reclining seats (like a plane, watching movies on VR
headseats).

~~~
acgourley
I like your point about in-car leisure. As autonomous driving unlocks it in a
new way, I would expect our for forays into autonomous vehicles to attempt to
highlight the luxury of this. It certainly seems more appealing than tightly
gripping the arm rests while you observe how the robot is doing.

I would add that interchangeable parts are probably not going to be a focus.
The auto industries are pretty efficient at managing large supply chains to
service several different models. If convergence was economically important it
would happen more often.

~~~
prawn
More so a convertible interior than interchangeable parts. As with how RVs
convert dining areas to beds, or how an SUV's rear seats fold down to provide
more cargo space.

I think a comfortable, self-driving car would be a quite pleasant alternative
to flying in many cases, especially if you're likely to be hiring a car at the
other end anyway and have a good amount of gear to stow on a trip.

------
yanose
In the 1910's Ford revolutionized operations management and it dominated the
automotive industry.

In the 1960's Toyota revolutionized operations management and it dominated the
automotive industry.

In the 2010's Apple revolutionized operations management and ...

~~~
fiatjaf
Toyota never dominated anything.

~~~
troymc
"Toyota was the largest automobile manufacturer in 2012 (by production) ahead
of the Volkswagen Group and General Motors." [1]

For example…

"Introduced in 1966, the [Toyota] Corolla managed to become the best-selling
car worldwide by 1974 and has been one of the best-selling cars in the world
since then." [2]

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota)

[2]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Corolla](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Corolla)

~~~
fiatjaf
These facts do not imply that Toyota dominated the industry. Some car always
must be the best-selling, right?

------
mrmondo
While I praise more competition in the ecar market - I do wish Apple would
return to concentrating on build quality, stability and performance optimising
OSX - 10.10 has been a nightmare and if it isn't fixed soon or if 10.11 is a
repeat they'll lose their reputation for building high quality, stable
products. I do worry slightly that they may be trying to do too many things.

~~~
ido
Apple currently has about 100,000 employees. They can improve OS X while also
coming out with new products.

~~~
therockhead
Exactly, only so many developers can work on OS X.

------
kpierce
[https://www.google.com/search?q=c...www.wsj.com/articles/app...](https://www.google.com/search?q=c...www.wsj.com/articles/apples-
titan-car-project-to-challenge-
tesla-1423868072#q=www.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Fapples-titan-car-project-to-
challenge-tesla-1423868072)

Click on the google news result to get past the paywall.

~~~
anarchitect
Thanks for this. I went to the trouble of registering an account but kept
being sent in a circular route back to the homepage.

------
Norante
Apple, I think, has seen the incoming wave of transformation for the transport
industry and decided it would be worth getting prepared for it. The upcoming
increase in automation on both passenger and commercial cars will open up new
perspectives on what's valuable on a car. When you longer can appeal to a
consumer about the pleasure or ease of driving, what else is there? Comfort,
security, style and design. If Apple already has a good grasp on how many
people create, manage and consume information and media, if they are making a
move to shine new light on fitness and health, and on managing a smarter home,
the missing link would be transportation.

------
vermontdevil
Might explain Musk weird press conference earlier this week.

Said he would need massive amounts of cash soon. Maybe he knew what's going on
with Apple.

Or just that he needs money for the battery factory.

~~~
kemiller
He was asked in an interview not too long ago if he'd recommend to Apple that
they get into the car business, and he said, "Yes, they should!" Odd response
if he's expecting competition. I think an acquisition is much more likely, and
it would also fall under the explanation of "we need a ton of money". I.e. we
agreed to get bought by Apple because of their massive cash engine and
operational expertise.

[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/b/1df875df-
fb0c-4020-be...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/b/1df875df-
fb0c-4020-bec7-e1f36cf299e3)

~~~
maged
Apple has ~200 billion in cash. Tesla's market cap is 25 billion. It
definitely could be.

------
archagon
I'm a little miffed that people don't express more skepticism about self-
driving cars on tech sites. Given what I know about AI research and the
technical limitations of LIDAR etc., I find it unlikely that fully self-
driving cars will be available at any scale in our lifetimes — if at all. I
wish people wouldn't talk about them like they're already de facto the future
of transport.

I think if Apple is working on a car, it's going to be a mass-consumer
competitor to Tesla, not anything to do with self-driving.

~~~
funcSoulBrother
Could you elaborate on this? What do you know about AI research and technical
limitations of various components that leads you to be skeptical of the
realization of autonomous vehicles?

I'm with you on predicting that if Apple is getting into it, it will be non-
autonomous, but I'm curious as to how you have reached your other incredulous
conclusion.

~~~
archagon
My skepticism has to do with the following:

* People talk about how automatic cars have been extensively tested. That's not really true. There's only a handful of them on the roads and they've been tested in limited conditions, with particular limits placed on suburban driving (slow speeds, etc.). I suspect there will be entirely new classes of bugs when there are hundreds of different AIs competing on the road, especially when mixed with normal human traffic.

* LIDAR does not work in poor weather conditions, including ice on the road.

* In terms of AI, getting to the 90% point is relatively easy, but it seems like the last 10% would require something resembling true intelligence. How do you deal with a lack of markers on the road? Dangerous situations in shady areas? Sensor equipment getting damaged and feeding your car wrong information? Animals and children running out last-second into the road? Severe obstacles at a distance? Tiny, cramped residential roads with non-sidewalk pedestrian traffic? Accommodating emergency vehicles and police? We shut off our brains when driving 90% of the time, but that last 10% does require human levels of intelligence. Furthermore, unless _every_ car on the road is automated, the AI in automatic cars will need to deal with the idiosyncrasies of other human drivers. Sudden merges. Speeding. Road rage. Unexpected emergencies. Tailgating. An AI can't send and receive feedback to other human drivers and pedestrians; it can only use its model of human behavior to predict likely outcomes. (And this is saying nothing of other AIs on the road, who might behave completely unlike human drivers.)

* People say that automated cars only need to drive better than human drivers, not perfectly. I don't know if that's true. If automated cars drove perfectly 99.9999% of the time but then crashed _horribly_ that remaining 0.0001% — taking some poor pedestrians or bicyclists along with them — I wouldn't get into one. And I don't think they'd be street-legal. Most people don't want to think about human lives in terms of numbers; they'd rather have control over their actions and accept the inevitability of occasional accidents, rather than having a machine that's practically guaranteed to eat up human lives every so often.

* Speaking of which, how does the car decide who gets to live in a life-or-death situation? Are there situations where the car would elect to kill the _driver?_ Which programmer gets to make that decision? I'd like to know this information before getting into my car, please. The idea of offloading split-second moral decisions to an AI seems like it should be _severely_ legislated.

* People talk about mesh networking improving traffic and whatnot. I can't even get my USB devices to work across OSes half the time, and we're talking about sophisticated traffic control across multiple manufacturers? Especially given the quality of software that car companies tend to put out?

* Self-driving technology is extremely expensive, and most cars on the road are pretty cheap. You'd have to have some sort of insane subsidy program to get more than the 1% driving automated cars.

* People want to get in their self-driving cars drunk, but I think there will be severe legal hurdles in the way of that.

I think semi-automated and AI-augmented driving are certainly possible.
Highways are easy enough to tackle. I could see some expensive cars getting
that capability over the next few decades, as well as maybe cargo trucks. But
endpoint to endpoint driving, where you could snooze on your way to work? I
don't think so.

~~~
danmaz74
> If automated cars drove perfectly 99.9999% of the time but then crashed
> horribly that remaining 0.0001% — taking some poor pedestrians or bicyclists
> along with them — I wouldn't get into one

Thousands of human drivers crash horribly every day and over a million people
die every year by car accidents in the World. If humans "crashed terribly"
0.0001% and a self driving car did so 0.00005%, it would already be a great
improvement.

I don't have solid data about this, but I think LOTS of the current accidents
are due to drivers being reckless, distracted. high or emotional. Self-driving
cars would introduce some new risks, but they would take away lots of the
current ones.

And for many of the situations that you list, there is a simple solution: the
car should have two modes, self-driving and human-driving. Self-driving will
only work when conditions are normal. Incompatible weather conditions? Broken
sensor? The car parks itself, and you need to drive yourself or wait for
assistance.

~~~
archagon
> _And for many of the situations that you list, there is a simple solution:
> the car should have two modes, self-driving and human-driving. Self-driving
> will only work when conditions are normal. Incompatible weather conditions?
> Broken sensor? The car parks itself, and you need to drive yourself or wait
> for assistance._

That would be a good solution, but many people who talk about self-driving
cars don't want that. They want to sleep in the car. They want to "drive" home
drunk. In both cases, a manual override would be disastrous and probably
illegal. (We can already get a DUI just for _getting_ into a car while drunk!)
They also want to be able to "fetch" their cars without a driver, which
wouldn't work.

~~~
danmaz74
First of all, "many people" will just go along with what is offered, even if
it isn't their ideal solution.

Regarding the sleeping and "fetching" your car, those would still be
compatible: simply, if the conditions aren't good, the car would respectively
park and wake you up, or inform you that it can't respond to your fetch
request at the moment.

Regarding a drunk/high person, it would still be an improvement to the current
situation: most of the times you wouldn't drive yourself.

------
mcmancini
I find it more believable that these Apple car rumors are actually test mules
for their CarPlay system and future extensions.

~~~
etrautmann
That's unlikely given the hires that they've been making. I know of a number
of engineers working on drivetrains, motor controllers, etc. who've been hired
into that group.

~~~
mcmancini
Doesn't mean that they're building a car; maybe they're building OBD3 for
electric cars and need people with domain knowledge. With Apple's NDAs and
general secrecy policies, it's not like your colleagues would be able to even
hint at what they're working on at Apple.

------
Keyframe
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_C5](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_C5)
part deux! :)

------
leereeves
Possible downside: Apple could end up bidding against Tesla for employees,
factories, and rare materials; increasing the price of electric cars and
slowing Tesla's production and growth, while not producing many cars itself
for some time.

~~~
TulliusCicero
Musk mentioned the other day that Apple frequently tries to poach Tesla
employees, but hasn't been very successful.

~~~
dhagz
Yeah, isn't it the other way around? I remember reading somewhere that Tesla
poaches a good number of employees from Apple.

~~~
danfinlay
No, these are compatible statements. They both try to poach, and Tesla can be
having more luck at it.

~~~
dba7dba
Why join a company where you have to work on fake projects for sometime before
you are allowed to work on a real project, when you can join a company where
such waste of time is not happening?

------
r00fus
On one hand, Apple is clearly not in their wheelhouse when it comes to
vehicles - even Google has more experience than them.

On the other hand, I would kill for an electric (or even hybrid) minivan. The
Model-S with 2 extra seats just isn't enough room.

On the gripping hand, look at how Apple played the industry and pundits on
sapphire. Where is WSJ getting their info - they didn't even describe their
sources.

~~~
notatoad
Google only has experience in vehicles because they started up a vehicles
program. If apple wants to get into vehicles, they have to start somewhere
too. "they haven't done it before" is not a good reason why they aren't doing
it.

~~~
matthew-wegner
The Google Maps ground truth projects gave them quite a lot of vehicle
experience too (at least tangentially)...

------
niels_olson
Available via Nasdaq

[http://www.nasdaq.com/article/apple-is-gearing-up-to-
challen...](http://www.nasdaq.com/article/apple-is-gearing-up-to-challenge-
electriccar-maker-tesla-20150213-00712)

------
calvintennant
"Apple would be looking to make such an enormous leap from its core competency
— building great consumer electronics".

Don't electric cars fall into the category of consumer electronics?

~~~
pbreit
No.

~~~
Alterlife
No? Could you explain?

Did the old film cameras fall under consumer electronics? I don't think so.
What about analog telephones from the 90's? What about overhead projectors and
phonograph players (I hope that's what they were called)?

Those devices have changed. I have to imagine the umbrella of 'consumer
electronics' is constantly expanding. In the long term, why would cars be any
different?

~~~
agumonkey
A car is still in a different device category. It has to be a lot more
dependable and secure then a phone, with deeper social implications (life
critical). Jobs managed to slip the antennagate under the rug, you can't do
that with cars. IMHO this is not the kind of knowledge you can imprint in a
company in a few years safely.

------
larssorenson
I dislike Apple, their products and their "you're unique just like everyone
else" mentality but i honestly want them to make this move and do it well.
They might make an over priced, marginally better EV but more importantly they
will drive interest in the technology and the products, leading to faster and
greater adoption as well as serious industry commitment which will push for
research and development and massive improvements in the industry. Just like
they did with mobile phones. I love Tesla but they're the Palm pilot or
BlackBerry of EV. Trend setters who will maybe get overshot.

------
MBCook
Could this be a form of concept car for Apple to test hardware/software on
without any real intention of making their own car?

Maybe it's a demonstration platform to show partners what a well integrated
system could feel like. Perhaps Apple wants to make the guts of the car
control/infotainment system instead of just projecting an image over the OEM
system.

Early reports on CarPlay from various vendors said that they varied widely in
hardware speed/quality (I believe Ferrari's was said to be pretty bad). Apple
doesn't like relying on third parties for their user experience (see: Moto
ROKR).

~~~
es09
This doesn't square with the report that says they are looking at
manufacturing processes and materials. I agree with you though that this is
the most likely explanation.

------
pasta_2
Nice of Elon Musk to open source Tesla's patents, will make things easier for
Apple.

~~~
click170
Who would you rather buy from though? The innovator, or the imitator?

Price may be the differentiating factor, but I think most ppl would choose the
innovator.

~~~
ForHackernews
Are you kidding me? Almost Apple's entire product line has been very polished,
stylish imitations (Xerox Alto -> Apple PC, Diamond Rio -> iPod, Blackberry ->
iPhone, Microsoft Tablet PC -> iPad) with some incremental improvements, and
they've been extremely popular.

I think history has shown that most people will choose the imitator, if the
imitation is a good one.

~~~
dougabug
The Mac was not an imitation Alto. Xerox tried and failed subsequently to
commercialize the Alto. The iPod was not an imitation Diamond Rio; the iPod
could fit in your pocket and hold most people's entire music collection,
rather than a few dozen songs. IPhones are not Blackberries; the latter were
black & white email centric keyboard centric non-touch business centric
devices with modest compute and consumer media features and no comparable app
& music ecosystem. iPads are not Microsoft Tablet PC's. Microsoft has launched
generations of tablets going back to the late 80's/early 90's, none of which
were very successful.

------
melling
I tried to make this point a couple of weeks ago:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8962872](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8962872)

Basically, Apple, Google, and Microsoft have so much money, they could take on
a huge problem and "invent" the future.

~~~
ams6110
1997-2000 showed us that having a lot of money is no guarantee you'll build
something that anyone wants to use (or at least, that they want to pay for).

~~~
melling
Who said anything about any guarantees? Hopefully, we're all a little smarter
and if all three companies each tried a few moonshots, we'd get a few really
big advances.

------
pj_mukh
Also, given their hiring practices which include aggressive recruiting of
people in autonomous vehicles, this car, or later versions of it is going to
have significant autonomy. I say this would be a GREAT step for Apple.

------
pokstad
Very interesting, but what is Wall Street Journal's success rate with Apple
rumors? I know it's higher than most, but that was probably due to Walt
Mossberg (who has left WSJ in recent times).

~~~
culturestate
The Journal is traditionally Apple's outlet of choice when they want to leak
something, but they've been a little bit hit-and-miss lately. Maybe
something's changed since Katie Cotton left.

------
Geee
It's probably 10 years off, but I bet it will be a self-driving one. That
isn't a car anymore, but a moving computer, which makes it a natural fit for
Apple.

~~~
foobarian
I'm skeptical. Self-driving systems are extremely software heavy, and Apple is
not a software house. It just doesn't make sense.

~~~
snowwrestler
Apple is not a software house? They produce two OS's with development tooling
and applications, they run some of the largest online services on the
Internet, and they just released their own new programming language. What
would a software house look like?

~~~
ams6110
Software for a self-driving car has to be built to a standard that's entirely
different from anything they've had to build to before. Lives are at stake.

~~~
epistasis
Based on my experience with desktop software, I'd take the Apple software over
pretty much any other vendor every day of the week. Funnily enough, nobody
seems to question Google's chops when it comes to making self driving cars.
Yet I have more problems with bad software decisions from Google than I do
from Apple.

------
bronz
OK, I have done a little Googling. The evidence boils down to only a few
verifiable facts.

In the Bay Area, a van registered to apple was spotted. The van was mounted
with hardware that is unmistakably designed for car automation, namely
spinning cameras at the front and rear. It is basically conclusive that the
car is a self driving prototype and not something for apple maps. There is
video of that van linked below. This is not conclusive evidence that Apple has
intentions to enter the EV market, though.

Recently, Apple has hired people from the automotive industry, including some
from Tesla (Articles that state this as fact cite linkedin, so I am assuming
it is true). Basically, based on the qualifications and expertise of these
hires, it can be concluded that Apple is not assigning them to work on
CarPlay, which is the only known alternative. (I have not verified this myself
but feel that it is OK to accept as true for the time being).

As far as I could tell everything else out there is speculation or not
verifiable. There are various instances of bloggers and reporters claiming
that they have gotten word from Apple employees that Apple is exploring the
possibility of entering the EV market. These employees have all remained
anonymous and there is no evidence that their claims are genuine or accurate.

My own conclusion is that there is a strong possibility that Apple is
attempting to enter the EV market in some way. Let us ignore the evidence that
has come to the surface as of late. The EV market has a lot of growth left and
a lot of unclaimed territory. Apple has a lot of cash sitting around, a
relative familiarity with power electronics and most importantly a very strong
leader, Tim Cook. Apple is large and old but it does not appear to be
fragmented and it is, IMHO, still capable of pouncing on new opportunities and
markets. The means, motive, and opportunity all seem to exist in the case of
Apple and EVs. And bringing the recent observations back into the equation
only appears to strengthen the hypothesis.

video of van:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lhU54nhyyk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lhU54nhyyk)

[http://www.macrumors.com/2015/02/04/mysterious-apple-
car/](http://www.macrumors.com/2015/02/04/mysterious-apple-car/)

[http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/apple-is-working-
on-a...](http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/apple-is-working-on-a-car)

[http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-employee-well-give-
tesl...](http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-employee-well-give-tesla-a-run-
for-its-money-2015-2)

[http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-more-evidence-that-
appl...](http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-more-evidence-that-apple-could-
be-working-on-a-car-2015-2)

[http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-testing-street-view-
com...](http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-testing-street-view-
competitor-2015-2)

------
chvid
What if Volkswagen decided they wanted to do smart phones?

And had recruiters call random people at Google, Samsung and Apple ...

I cannot quite get my head around this - Apple is an excellent engineering,
sales and design company with gigantic wealth - but the leap from computers
and phones into automobile is very big. They have little in common wrt. sales,
technology and support.

Why would this work out? And does noone question the sanity of it?

~~~
etrautmann
They have several key advantages that apply to this space: 1) unparalleled
industrial design credibility, 2) a limitless money hose. If they decide to do
this, they do have the ability to make the hires they need to give it an
honest shot.

------
3327
I would say apple has no domain expertise and they should focus on what they
focus on. This is positive news for the "future" no matter how it is seen.

It might very well be the largest mistake Apple has ever done and seal its
demise or the smartest move and they will be a global dominant company even
more so than today...

~~~
hmottestad
The only domain expertise they had on phones was the itunes phone with
motorola. And then they launched the iphone.

Same goes for the ipod.

Only thing they had expertise in was computers. And with computers becoming
extremely important for cars, they might just have a chance. Just as much as
google, and they don't have any particular domain knowledge either (ie. they
have never sold a car before).

~~~
aetherson
Computers aren't that important for cars.

I'll gladly believe that Apple will produce a car with a completely amazing
user experience for its center console.

But I'll take a car with a less amazing user experience for its center console
if it drives better, gets better mileage, has lower maintenance, costs tens of
thousands of dollars less, and looks good on the outside. Apple has no
expertise there, and it's a complicated business.

We like to sort of claim Tesla as our own, but it's not a computer company,
it's a car company. Maybe Apple can create a car company ex nihilo, but that's
a lot less in their wheelhouse than producing a rectangle with a touchscreen
on it.

~~~
debaserab2
Computers aren't important for cars the same way phone apps weren't important
to phones 10 years ago: they were gimmicky, prone to failure, and too locked
down to target by developers.

What if you change those facts? It's not too hard to imagine a world where
computers could have greater effect on your car driving experience than just
simple things like a music player or voice recognition.

------
trhway
DMCA - the law to protect platforms - has very interesting implication of
silo-ization of the tech. Any tech, like in "tech"nology civilization.

Marching into the brave new world of silos, a car is an easy addition to Apple
platform, while GM would need to build a platform to add to their cars.

~~~
orbifold
I think you are deluding yourself, if you believe that an average person would
choose their car based on the entertainment system.

~~~
trhway
>I think you are deluding yourself, if you believe that an average person
would choose their car based on the entertainment system.

who said entertainment system? Design is among, if not the, main aspects when
people decide on tech choice. With cars being electric - simple commoditized
drivetrain - design will become even more important.

~~~
orbifold
I'm pretty sure design wise the entertainment system would be the only thing
they could beat the designers of Porsche, Mercedes etc. at, I have less doubt
that they might be able to kill off some of the American car manufacturers.

~~~
trhway
>the only thing they could beat the designers of Porsche, Mercedes etc.

i think electric cars for some segment like "Millenial urbanites" would be a
market where Porsche and Mercedes don't have any starting advantage in car
design over Apple as all their established design themes of high
power/dynamics, masculinity, posh-ness, etc... wouldn't resonate that much
there.

------
brianbreslin
I think we need to think of this strategically. Apple isn't going to want to
build an equivalent substitute for a run of the mill car. They have the cash
on hand to burn a billion trying this, and write it off as a line item on r&d
and the investors wouldn't flinch.

------
jusben1369
Cars are going to dictate what technology silo you end up joining. The car
that works the best as a communicationpod/office will win the next major
consumer battle just as Apple won the smart phone war. This is about Google
not Tesla.

~~~
pmontra
There is a trend of not owning a car, at least in Europe, thanks to companies
like car2go, moovel and many others. Uber too. Autonomous cars will further
the trend. Cars are going to become a B2B product, not exactly Apple's
playground. But this is in the long run so it could not matter even
strategically.

About winning the smartphone war, if Apple won it, that was the war for cash.
Android won the war for usage, same way IE won the browser wars. I wonder
what's the margin on a car. If you have to make low margin products to keep
selling high margin ones you end up low margin overall. So, if Apple goes for
$50+k cars, it will still be a high margin business but even more biased
towards the richest consumers. If it goes for 10k cars, that will be a big
change in strategy.

~~~
jusben1369
I'm not too worried about ownership structure. Just usage (which isn't going
away)

------
bsurmanski
If anything comes out of this, maybe electric cars will be seen as _cool_ now
that Apple is in on the market. Although I am not a fan of Apple itself and
likely wont get an iCar, I hope this isn't a rumor.

~~~
kemiller
I think Tesla has already done a great job of making electric cars cool.
They've gone from being dismissed as golf carts for kooks and granola-eaters
to being derided as overpowered playthings for the rich. That's a huge change!

------
orand
At first I thought this was crazy. Then I realized it's all about extending
Apple's ecosystem of hardware + software + services. Better together. Plus,
they make their profits off hardware.

~~~
orand
Wow, two downvotes in ten minutes! I'm honestly at a loss as to why. If anyone
could clue me in, I'd be grateful. Thanks.

Edit: very funny, you mysterious downvoters. Now the downvotes are on _this_
comment, and the original one has been upvoted 4 times. And I still haven't
learned how/why I should change my behavior in the future. The only thing I've
learned is that up/down voting seems to be random.

~~~
ohquu
Stop caring so much.

~~~
orand
I don't care. And I'm not offended or upset in the slightest. I'm simply
curious. And mildly amused.

~~~
bsdetector
Karma actually has a real value on HN because it prevents some people from
downvoting. If an Google fan keeps an Apple fan below the karma threshold then
the Apple fan won't be able to shape future discussions. The system encourages
people to downvote even reasonable comments that are from the "other team".
You ran into somebody like that.

~~~
Udo
To do that, "the other team" person would have to make a calculation based on
keeping a certain account they don't like below 500 points. I don't think it's
even possible to achieve that if anyone tried, and the probability of an
account being _just_ at that limit is pretty low to begin with.

~~~
bsdetector
Then why does HN have a 500 karma limit on voting? Why was it raised? If karma
doesn't work to exclude people with unpopular opinions then there's no point
to the limit. If it does work and helps shape the discussion in a certain way
then it can be used by others to tilt the discussion toward their viewpoint.
Surely you must have noticed how cliquey HN is.

~~~
Udo
> _Then why does HN have a 500 karma limit on voting?_

Occasionally getting downvoted not withstanding, a user's karma tends to only
go up over time, as long as the account isn't flagged in any way. It's
generally not a battle between negative and positive karma - getting downvoted
is more of a short-term signal that others found the _quality_ of your post
wanting. So in an environment where there are many more upvotes than
downvotes, a 500 karma limit is merely a means to stop novice users from
dishing out punishment until they become more experienced users.

Downvoting a comment sends a harsh signal to the commenter that you believe
their comment is so bad it shouldn't be there, but it's an unsuitable tool to
influence the discussion at large.

> _Why was it raised?_

I've been here a few years and to my knowledge the limit wasn't raised during
that time.

> _If karma doesn 't work to exclude people with unpopular opinions then
> there's no point to the limit._

As someone who mostly only posts if he has something contrarian to say, I
don't think it's about unpopular opinions. Yes, I receive some downvotes, but
mostly people just ignore me, so my average comment karma is very low. That's
what you can expect for having unpopular or boring opinions. Reaching the
karma threshold necessary for downvoting on the other hand isn't really that
big of a deal, nor is it really a challenge.

HN's primary exclusion mechanism is flagging, not downvoting. In a way it's
more insidious because you may not even notice it's happening. People get
shadowbanned, even. Or, as apparently happened to me yesterday for the first
time as far as I can tell, a moderator steps in and forcefully pushes your
comment below the much older "green newbie" comments where the thoroughly grey
content goes to die.

Downvoting is at least an overt signal, like I said. And personally I think
the capability to issue a downvote is probably overrated.

> _tilt the discussion toward their viewpoint_

Discussions on HN are generally not happening on the razor's edge of opinions.
Instead, they tend to be carried out by people who are very certain of their
own viewpoint. There is so much momentum, tilting these things is not an
issue. But if you can voice a coherent minority opinion, that comment might
still get to the top of the thread.

> _Surely you must have noticed how cliquey HN is._

It depends, I think there are several big blocks of people here who think
alike, but I noticed the biggest influence on how a post is received often
seems timezone-related.

------
cgusto
Wow, this rumor is out of control.

I guarantee they are not working on a complete vehicle. Probably battery
systems and some type of autonomous control, if anything.

I think this is just a moonshot program to attract engineering talent.

~~~
leereeves
That's what I thought at first too, but as I thought about it, I began to
wonder.

They certainly have the chutzpah to try, and they have an ocean of money to
spend overseas. A longshot bet on building another trillion dollar product
might be preferable to paying corporate and personal income tax on dividends.

~~~
aerovistae
No, I totally agree with cgusto. Building a vehicle manufacturing base is a
mammoth undertaking. Tesla's been at it for 12 years and is only now putting
out 35,000 cars a year. It really doesn't make that much difference how much
money you start off with; that was never Tesla's obstacle. Elon has said as
much on more than one occasion, that they're spending money as fast as they
can and the only real limit is the amount of work that can feasibly be done
per unit time.

Apple may have almost $200 billion but where would they get the batteries, to
focus on just one aspect of it? Tesla found there literally wasn't enough
battery supply and decided to build the largest battery factory in the world
from scratch to provide what they needed, and it's been in planning for years
and won't be ready for a few years to come. And again, money isn't the
blocking issue. It would be laughable to suggest that Apple could just conjure
up a comparable factory out of nowhere....it would take them just as long.

And given their penchant for overseas labor, it would take even longer. Don't
even get me started on that. It's like Elon has said: importing phones in bulk
is one thing; importing cars or large heavy things is wholly another. They
would really have to do it in the US, which could hardly be done in secrecy.
Car manufacturing plants tend to be large and obvious.

My point: maybe they'll get into it, but it won't come out of nowhere and it
will certainly take a LOT of time regardless of their bank account. Tesla will
be many years ahead of them for the long-term foreseeable future.

~~~
graffitici
Right, but the article's point is that they started working on cars. You are
making the point that it would take them a long time to build it.. They have
the cash and I don't see why they would be in any rush, if driverless cars are
expected on the streets in 2020, or potentially 2023..

As a matter of fact, Apple's last quarterly profit was $18bn, while Tesla's
valuation, is $25bn. They could buy a company like Tesla every two quarters..

Furthermore, maybe what they are trying to do is to create some in-house
talent, in preparation for future purchases. Perhaps so that they can have
their own employees join those of the acquired company..

------
nemothekid
With $200B in cash, I'd be surprised if Apple "X" wasn't also producing
rocketships and quantum computers - all the while being very quiet about it.

------
skc
Apple's playbook is seems very clear to me.

Fashionable utility.

They get this better than anyone. Cars would seem like such a logical next
step in that regard.

------
matdrewin
A "minivan-like" vehicule?

I sure hope this is just a red herring Apple threw at the media to have them
trip on their shoelaces.

------
gear54rus
As negative as it may sound, there's really no need to extend their closed
ecosystem once again into something that only began to grow (electric
vehicles). I hope this scattering approach will be their ultimate demise.

What I like about Musk an his company is that he's not _evil_ (yet?) and so
for now the private space industry and electric vehicles are looking really
nice.

------
bcolb
Reading the title I thought to myself "Why not just link the WSJ article
then?"

Answer: Paywall

~~~
Dotnaught
Enter WSJ headline into Google News search box. The corresponding link
bypasses the paywall.

~~~
bcolb
Right you are!

Here's the link for anyone interested:

[http://www.wsj.com/articles/apples-titan-car-project-to-
chal...](http://www.wsj.com/articles/apples-titan-car-project-to-challenge-
tesla-1423868072)

~~~
notatoad
this one should work.

[https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd...](https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB4QqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Fapples-
titan-car-project-to-challenge-
tesla-1423868072&ei=_JveVIeAMcq0oQSJxYKQBA&usg=AFQjCNFSnuEADDX0xPbswEMF-f9lqscQYw&sig2=8JYgfDH-b2Ivq03pWZMKdg&bvm=bv.85970519,d.cGU)

------
hmate9
I'm excited to see Elon Musk vs Apple. _grabs popcorn_

~~~
closetnerd
I would have loved to see Elon Musk vs. Steve Jobs. Personalities are quite
contrasting.

~~~
godzillabrennus
Steve Jobs up ended multiple industries. Musk is no small player but Jobs
basically reinvented the way the game was played when he entered an industry.
Musk wouldn't have had a chance.

~~~
jacquesm
Sure, Musk is so limited. Let's see: Rockets, Cars, Payment systems.

~~~
closetnerd
It hasn't yet had the same impact that Apple has though.

------
visarga
No log in. It was nice while it lasted, for 1-2 phrases though.

~~~
stingrae
search for the article title on google and you'll get a free link to view it,
[https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCEQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Fapples-
titan-car-project-to-challenge-tesla-1423868072&ei=eObeVJOPE9PYoAT-
gYGQBg&usg=AFQjCNFSnuEADDX0xPbswEMF-f9lqscQYw&sig2=l_-ODqRYaJ-
po21Kw0Geaw&bvm=bv.85970519,d.cGU)

------
ullrich
Finally I'll be able to call my car from my watch!

