> They design the manufacturing process to squeeze out nickels on the dollar and using CM means they avoid legacy overhead that weighs down behemoths like GM, V

> They design the manufacturing process to squeeze out nickels on the dollar and using CM means they avoid legacy overhead that weighs down behemoths like GM, VW and Toyota. GM's legacy overhead was discharged during their bankruptcy. As to DFM and manufacturing costs, the auto market is viciously competitive, and I don't see how newcomer Apple and their CMs are going to do something that the existing manufacturers haven't done already to maintain competitiveness in the current market. > They also don't have any legacy overhead tied to engineering around ICE. As we've seen with Tesla, they had to reinvent almost everything because most of the problems traditional car companies had been working on don't exist in an all-electric vehicle. Don't know what you mean by legacy overhead wrt. ICE. As to Tesla, that statement reads bombastic given previous efforts by others in battery electric vehicles. Beyond previous efforts by others, I'd say that BMW has done more innovation with their i sub-brand than Tesla has done, especially wrt. vehicle weight. Tesla does cool stuff, but the evangelism is tiring. > Apple designs the buying process, which for cars is nightmare fuel for most people. I completely agree that the current car purchasing process sucks, even for "no hassle" dealers, but how much can Apple do here? So much of the pain is finance- and paperwork-related, and even if Apple brings in their own financing, that can't get around the legal requirements for the paperwork. > Carplay I haven't used but I think you may be selling this short too… I agree that CarPlay sounds like a great idea, so much so that I unceremoniously ripped out my car's stock headunit to put in an aftermarket Pioneer unit with CarPlay a year ago. The problem is in the execution. Some stuff is almost magical, like automatically offering to navigate to the next appointment in my calendar; mostly though it's frustrating because it isn't reliable (especially in cell coverage-poor areas) and requires too much cognitive load to use. I have no doubt that Apple could improve it, but I don't know that the will is there because I think they would need to acknowledge that their current look and interaction paradigm aren't suited for in-car use. > You talk about Apple's materials being shoddy but that is not the impression I have (outside of charging cables). My iphone 3gs and 4s have held up very well and metal frame ipads, macbooks and iphones seem to do even better. I too have had good experiences with the metals, although the stuff using 6000-series aluminum is a bit dent-prone; I have no experience with the 7000-series containing Apple devices but would naturally expect that they would do much better. I was however specifically thinking of their PU and leather iPhone and iPad accessories: they look disgusting after only a week's use in the lighter colors, and I was mentally picturing the touch surfaces of a car using the same materials. > There is plenty of room for technical gimmicks here in the auto industry and I fully expect a video of Jony Ive explaining how revolutionary it is for safety when the entire carframe is milled from a single piece of aluminum. Sounds a little expensive to insure.