6 ms·

As a fellow Mac user, I get it. Especially after the (to put it lightly) dry spell that was 2016, I understand wanting Apple to focus on the Mac and on making t

As a fellow Mac user, I get it. Especially after the (to put it lightly) dry spell that was 2016, I understand wanting Apple to focus on the Mac and on making their current devices best-of-breed. And given what we just saw at WWDC, I'm inclined to think they're moving in that direction again. But the way Tim is framing this, they're looking at it as an AI problem. He doesn't go into the feel of driving or the wonderfully bad user interfaces of current cars, he describes it as "the mother of all AI projects." So while this is "something that's never been in [their] wheelhouse", they're approaching it from the AI side. And AI, given WWDC, is something they are very much trying to make their wheelhouse. And it sounds like they're doing it in a very Apple-like way: work on the hardest problem they can, then take what they've learned and apply it. Even if they don't make a car, or even a driving platform they can sell, the AI things they'll learn will show up in Siri, iOS, and everywhere else. So yeah, I want them to focus on Mac hardware. But I also want them to learn and grow. And I think they might, might, be starting to do both.

blktiger 9y ago
+1 - AI is becoming fundamental to our computing experiences whether it's in a car, on your phone, or on your desktop. Good AI is probably the next big leap in usefulness on any device, whether it's a car or a desktop. So it makes sense for Apple to focus on it now, in order to make their devices better in the future. That said, Apple is big enough to have multiple focus areas, just because this is a focus to them doesn't mean they don't have other teams properly focusing on the Mac or iOS.
- PayForPeenus 9y ago
  fundamental <--- not true. It's becoming an enabler, yes. Fundamental, no. Plus AI is terribly subjective, unfortunately. It's neither thought producing or augmentative to the process - but that's my OWN 2c on it. However, it _is_ important from an enabler for technology to be more "natural" to the way we interact with our technology.
numerlo 9y ago
Did we watch the same WWDC? macOS is in maintenance mode no mater how they try to mask it and still somehow I keep experiencing more bugs with every release. At least they are going to update their hardware this time around huh? Is that what passes for "being focused on macs" these days? Last year was like they completely forgot about us, this year they are throwing us breadcrumps. EDIT: Since I keep getting the same replies, I'm gonna edit it here too: 1. When you are in maintenance mode and you still manage to introduce more bugs than you are fixing then your are doing something wrong (usually that's a result of limiting the budget of a department and as a consequence hiring less experienced developers) 2. Every new feature the last few years has been ported from iOS and without much care. I still can't believe they have yet to make Siri and Spotlight one unified product (at least make Spotlight more powerful, I can't even set a timer with it). And to add to this, being in maintenance mode doesn't have immediate effects. If Apple continues like this somewhere down the line macOS is gonna end up quite behind (and a big mess due to points 1. and 2.)
- chaostheory 9y ago
  I prefer macOS being in maintenance mode instead of becoming bloated with new but unimportant features especially given the 16 GB limit. The lack of hardware refreshes wouldn't have been horrible if Apple's hardware was easily upgradable like pre-retina models
  - PayForPeenus 9y ago
    "... given the 16 GB limit." Can you explain that? I mean, as a 64bit operation system, that doesn't jive. Are you talking about physical memory in machines that are being sold now? I've swapped out tons of memory and never heard about this. - this isn't a jab either. I seriously am not sure what you mean. (no insult intended)
    - kogepathic 9y ago
      > "... given the 16 GB limit." Can you explain that? They are referring to the fact that Apple portables ship with soldered memory and max out at 16GB while PC manufacturers are shipping systems which support 32 and even 64GB in laptop/mobile workstation form factor. So they are referring to the physical memory (RAM) limit of Apple devices, not any logical limitations of the OS.
na85 9y ago
>But the way Tim is framing this, they're looking at it as an AI problem. He doesn't go into the feel of driving or the wonderfully bad user interfaces of current cars, he describes it as "the mother of all AI projects." So while this is "something that's never been in [their] wheelhouse", they're approaching it from the AI side. And AI, given WWDC, is something they are very much trying to make their wheelhouse. I agree, but I think their approach is flawed. A car is more than an AI with wheels and a seat. Tons and tons of engineering expertise goes into making a roadworthy car, and even more goes into making a truly good car. Apple quite simply does not have automotive engineering experience, and the jump from computers to iPhones pales in comparison to the jump from consumer electronics to automobiles. Cook has never struck me as a man with a vision. I think this is just Keeping up with the Joneses.
- oddevan 9y ago
  > I agree, but I think their approach is flawed. A car is more than an AI with wheels and a seat. Tons and tons of engineering expertise goes into making a roadworthy car, and even more goes into making a truly good car. Apple quite simply does not have automotive engineering experience, and the jump from computers to iPhones pales in comparison to the jump from consumer electronics to automobiles. I agree with you, and I think Cook and Apple do to! The article just says they're focusing on "an autonomous system." When asked if they were going to commit to a full automobile: > "We’ll see where it takes us," Cook said. "We’re not really saying from a product point of view what we will do." In other words, they're not making a car, just the AI for it. Granted, Apple rarely makes 'components'; they make Products. It doesn't really jive with the Apple we know to make part of something without making the _whole_ thing. But I think these comments from Cook are telegraphing that they are--at least for right now--just making a component. edit to clarify: Based on this and previous rumors, I think the "Apple Car" project (that totally existed, no joke!) has been refocused on the autonomous AI project. Cook and Mansfield realized that a car was big and complicated, and the market was inevitably moving toward self-driving cars. In realizing that without the self-driving component, they wouldn't have a car at all, they refocused the project to see if they could even build such a component. Once they have that, they'll go from there.
  - 9y ago

blktiger 9y ago

+1 - AI is becoming fundamental to our computing experiences whether it's in a car, on your phone, or on your desktop. Good AI is probably the next big leap in usefulness on any device, whether it's a car or a desktop. So it makes sense for Apple to focus on it now, in order to make their devices better in the future. That said, Apple is big enough to have multiple focus areas, just because this is a focus to them doesn't mean they don't have other teams properly focusing on the Mac or iOS.

PayForPeenus 9y ago
fundamental <--- not true. It's becoming an enabler, yes. Fundamental, no. Plus AI is terribly subjective, unfortunately. It's neither thought producing or augmentative to the process - but that's my OWN 2c on it. However, it _is_ important from an enabler for technology to be more "natural" to the way we interact with our technology.

numerlo 9y ago

Did we watch the same WWDC? macOS is in maintenance mode no mater how they try to mask it and still somehow I keep experiencing more bugs with every release. At least they are going to update their hardware this time around huh? Is that what passes for "being focused on macs" these days? Last year was like they completely forgot about us, this year they are throwing us breadcrumps. EDIT: Since I keep getting the same replies, I'm gonna edit it here too: 1. When you are in maintenance mode and you still manage to introduce more bugs than you are fixing then your are doing something wrong (usually that's a result of limiting the budget of a department and as a consequence hiring less experienced developers) 2. Every new feature the last few years has been ported from iOS and without much care. I still can't believe they have yet to make Siri and Spotlight one unified product (at least make Spotlight more powerful, I can't even set a timer with it). And to add to this, being in maintenance mode doesn't have immediate effects. If Apple continues like this somewhere down the line macOS is gonna end up quite behind (and a big mess due to points 1. and 2.)

chaostheory 9y ago
I prefer macOS being in maintenance mode instead of becoming bloated with new but unimportant features especially given the 16 GB limit. The lack of hardware refreshes wouldn't have been horrible if Apple's hardware was easily upgradable like pre-retina models
- PayForPeenus 9y ago
  "... given the 16 GB limit." Can you explain that? I mean, as a 64bit operation system, that doesn't jive. Are you talking about physical memory in machines that are being sold now? I've swapped out tons of memory and never heard about this. - this isn't a jab either. I seriously am not sure what you mean. (no insult intended)
  - kogepathic 9y ago
    > "... given the 16 GB limit." Can you explain that? They are referring to the fact that Apple portables ship with soldered memory and max out at 16GB while PC manufacturers are shipping systems which support 32 and even 64GB in laptop/mobile workstation form factor. So they are referring to the physical memory (RAM) limit of Apple devices, not any logical limitations of the OS.

na85 9y ago

>But the way Tim is framing this, they're looking at it as an AI problem. He doesn't go into the feel of driving or the wonderfully bad user interfaces of current cars, he describes it as "the mother of all AI projects." So while this is "something that's never been in [their] wheelhouse", they're approaching it from the AI side. And AI, given WWDC, is something they are very much trying to make their wheelhouse. I agree, but I think their approach is flawed. A car is more than an AI with wheels and a seat. Tons and tons of engineering expertise goes into making a roadworthy car, and even more goes into making a truly good car. Apple quite simply does not have automotive engineering experience, and the jump from computers to iPhones pales in comparison to the jump from consumer electronics to automobiles. Cook has never struck me as a man with a vision. I think this is just Keeping up with the Joneses.

oddevan 9y ago
> I agree, but I think their approach is flawed. A car is more than an AI with wheels and a seat. Tons and tons of engineering expertise goes into making a roadworthy car, and even more goes into making a truly good car. Apple quite simply does not have automotive engineering experience, and the jump from computers to iPhones pales in comparison to the jump from consumer electronics to automobiles. I agree with you, and I think Cook and Apple do to! The article just says they're focusing on "an autonomous system." When asked if they were going to commit to a full automobile: > "We’ll see where it takes us," Cook said. "We’re not really saying from a product point of view what we will do." In other words, they're not making a car, just the AI for it. Granted, Apple rarely makes 'components'; they make Products. It doesn't really jive with the Apple we know to make part of something without making the _whole_ thing. But I think these comments from Cook are telegraphing that they are--at least for right now--just making a component. edit to clarify: Based on this and previous rumors, I think the "Apple Car" project (that totally existed, no joke!) has been refocused on the autonomous AI project. Cook and Mansfield realized that a car was big and complicated, and the market was inevitably moving toward self-driving cars. In realizing that without the self-driving component, they wouldn't have a car at all, they refocused the project to see if they could even build such a component. Once they have that, they'll go from there.
- 9y ago