Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by joconde 1599 days ago
On the other hand, if pre-iPhone Apple could invest into inventing the iPhone, I don't see why today's Apple could balk at a new effort of this kind, since today's Apple is vastly richer.

How much did the original iPhone and iPad cost to create? I imagine it would be an easy effort for 2022 Apple, and even a total failure would not dent their revenue by much. I can't imagine Cook being unable to do it.
2 comments
gumby 1599 days ago
> I can't imagine Cook being unable to do it.

…and he has: AirPods, M1, Apple Watch, cleaning cloth…

Also some failures that made it out the door, like HomePod…

I’d like a little more focus on quality and consistency but that would mean stepping off the annual treadmill. Which they could do everyone a service by being the first to do so.

link
cwaffles 1599 days ago
M1 was built by the PA Semi team, acquired in 2008 [0]. They build the A series chips in the iPhone, I would argue that M1 would not exist without them, furthermore, M1 was not a Cook endeavor. For the watch, it looks like the first key hire was in 2013, but there is a chance that it was not all Steve's work [1]

0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P.A._Semi 1. https://www.wired.com/2015/04/the-apple-watch/

link
ericmay 1599 days ago
If you’re going to do that in good faith remember then that this applies to any acquisition. How much of Nedella’s credit now gets to go to his predecessor? Or how about Google buying YouTube or Facebook buying WhatsApp.

Also to note an idea is great but you need execution. While PA Semi may be responsible for the existence of the M1, Apple and subsequently Tim Cook are responsible for getting it in people’s hands for a grand or so.

link
gumby 1599 days ago
It has not been the only semi acquisition, though I agree the most significant.
link
baby-yoda 1599 days ago
id attribute it to the maximizer mindset - take Meta for example. reports are metaverse development cost $10 billion so far. development came from zuckerberg himself so no one is getting fired, but say an apple VP sponsors a project that creates a $10 billion loss. very likely they hit none of their targets, have no bonus and are on their way out the door. reading between the lines, is this the cause for the constant turnover in the rumored apple car project?

maybe this is an over simplification but, who has license to consume large amounts of resources across the company, potentially all of it being a loss, and not be fired?

link