It's left for the market to validate whether it was the correct decision or not.
But I guess the keyboard design is a managment problem not a engineer problem.
"The mythical man month" should not be interpreted dogmatically.
The unstated truth in the "mythical man month" is that you can't rescue a project by throwing people at it if the project is out of control because of poor management.
Stellar management can do almost anything.
Mediocre management bumbles around creating failures.
Eventually. At first it makes matters worth. And that's assuming your predicate is correct, that the department is understaffed.
Maybe I'm missing something.
(Or did you mean the keyboard doesn't happen if number of engineers is doubled? I don't think it can be that bad.)
Automotive AI meanwhile is a future and they have to think about future with all the money they have now.
I'd argue the wholesome user experience will prove be more important for Apple in the long run than having a big profit margin on every product.
autonomous cars are so obvious and will eventually be so commodity
Apple's core business (smart phones) will be commoditized way before autonomous cars - we're already seeing smart phone improvements becoming more and more incremental, longer device lifetimes, people less willing to spend for the latest and greatestAutomotive "AI" is not a future, more than so than the automotive "cloud." It does not even takes one to have a computer science background to figure out that claims of artificial "intelligence" there are a joke.
The technology is 90% there, perhaps more, but the last percentages that it will required for this to be a mass market product is going to take 20 or 30 years to reach. The current solutions are built using ideas and research grounded in the field of "Artificial Intelligence", but they are not "true AI".
There's also no AI in your Huawei phone. There's software using machine learning, which is a discipline under the umbrella of "artificial intelligence" as a computer science discipline.
The idea of Mac was always “it just works”. You could go to the Apple Store and get everything you needed and know that while it wasn’t cheap, it was amongst the best you could buy. You pay the premium for that experience and you remember how nice it was and come back next time.
Now that experience is broken, you need to shop around and make it work yourself. And if you need to do that then the experience is no better than anyone else’s.
I don't see why Apple needs to stay within the bounds what what you think their "core" products are.
Apple does have the money to pull it off, if they want to. I would just question if they'd profit from the project.
Former CEO of Palm.
Autonomous Vehicle, is basically a Giant Mobile iPhone that you can sit in it. There will be lots of custom silicon doing software calculation, LiDAR making 10s to million of input every second, a gigantic battery, and lots of softwares.
Although I still think AV is at least another 5 - 10 years away in real world usage.
Ugh. What's next? It seems in the future everything will look like an iPhone and is built by one company. Why can't we have more modularization in the economy, i.e. smaller companies that do 1 thing well, which sell to potentially multiple other companies that do 1 thing well too? Perhaps we should set a hard limit on the number of employees working for a single company, e.g. 1k.
I wonder what is taking Tesla so long to get their factory up and running.
When work started on the iphone, phone weren't core, but there was a vision that it could be. Routers were killed because there was no future where routers would ever be core.
Apparently Apple sees (saw) a future where automotive AI might be core.
If a company decides not to produce wireless routers (which were class leading) or monitors etc anymore, all because they're non "core" to a computer/mobile hardware company then I don't see how building automotive AI is core to a computer/mobile hardware computer company that has zero core competency in either car manufacturing or AI.