Mansfield was among the car skeptics at Apple. His task, as he saw it, was to find out what could be salvaged from the effort. After a few months of evaluation, he decided to focus more attention on the self-driving system than on a car itself. Autonomous software, he argued, could benefit Apple in other areas, even if the company never made an actual vehicle.
Agree with bolded words. In fact, that’s what happened.
For Field, Mansfield and others on the team, Cook’s indecision was frustrating. “If Bob or Doug ever had a reasonable set of objectives, they could have shipped a car,” says someone who was deeply involved in the project.
Yes, blame failure on the supply chain guru.
Around the beginning of 2024, Cook, who’s known for making decisions based on consensus, began seriously considering shutting down the project.
Shutting down the project is mooted by Peter Lynch, the software guy from Adobe…
When asked, he made clear that true autonomy might be another decade off. He seems to have finally convinced Apple’s leadership that that was a problem without an affordable or reliable solution in the foreseeable future.
(Some internal estimates pegged Apple’s cost to produce the car at about $120,000, far more than the $85,000 the company had wanted to charge for it.)
F… it… No go.
Some employees would immediately get shifted to Apple’s AI division, and some would move over to software engineering. A chunk of the team, though, was immediately without a job. Hardware engineers would have the opportunity to apply for roles in other groups, but there aren’t spots for everyone. Other employees, such as the hundreds of car-specific engineers, test track technicians, self-driving car testers and automotive safety experts, received emails with their severance packages.
This makes more sense than the original reporting that 2000 staff to join AI group.
There would be no steering wheel and no pedals, just a video-game-style controller or iPhone app for driving at low speed as a backup. Alternately, if the car found itself in a situation that it was unable to navigate, passengers would phone in to an Apple command center and ask to be driven remotely.
Good idea but unfortunately Level 5 is at least a decade away. IMHO, Level 5 cannot be achieved with 100% safety records… at least for all traffic and environmental conditions.
Thinking Aloud:
Steve Jobs 1.0: Desktops and Laptops
Steve Jobs 2.0: Handhelds
Tim Cook 1.0: Wearables
Vehicles are much larger than above devices. The logistics, distribution and sale processes are very different. Is a completely new business. It should be a new company run by an entrepreneur, not a manager. I have advocated for a new company not in Apple org is the correct way. Can get suckersinvestors to pay for the R&D. IMHO, should buy Rivian as a standalone company i.e. not in Apple org. Introduce CarPlay and send ex-SPG car specific engineers to Rivian. Take your time to develop level 5.
What about the next, then next, then next, then next… get the picture 
… any1 who complain is expensive, are cheap or just poor… please don’t make it publicly known.
. Don’t know is intentional or bad memory. One last time, there are two products in simultaneous development: Apple Vision Pro (Mixed Reality) and Apple Glass (Augmented Reality). Rumors have indicated Apple will release AVP first and release AG few years later… is happening according to rumors… I have linked these rumors here in previous posts… Btw, somewhere in this thread, some moons ago, I express I prefer AG, however, having read and think about it more, AVP is good too and will be here to stay because of a. Privacy b. Large display or multiple-displays. They serve different purpose… your need may not be met by AVP though.