Slashdot Mirror


Tesla's Chief Vehicle Engineer Returns To Apple (theverge.com)

Doug Field, the former VP of Mac hardware who left Apple to become Tesla's chief vehicle engineer, has returned to Cupertino. Field is reportedly working on the company's secretive "Project Titan" self-driving car program. The Verge reports: Field ran Tesla's vehicle production and engineering, but CEO Elon Musk took over responsibility for production this year after the company failed to meet its initial first-quarter goal for the Model 3. Field then took a leave of absence in May, and subsequently left the company altogether in June. Project Titan has reportedly been scaled back considerably from its initial scope, with hundreds of people leaving the division as Apple is said to focus on seeking carmaker partners for its self-driving software. [Daring Fireball's John Gruber] speculates that Field's return to Titan suggests Apple could still have an interest in producing vehicles itself, while cautioning that employees do move between the two companies regularly.

8 of 130 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Use Crisco in Sodomy. by haruchai · · Score: 4, Informative

    "How does someone who was "VP of Mac hardware" at Apple, become the head of "vehicle production and engineering" at Tesla? How in the fucking fuck is that even possible? Maybe I am extremely naive, but I would expect Tesla to hire someone with, you know, extensive automotive experience"

    He worked for 6 yrs at Ford as a Dev Eng right after after getting his Mech Eng degree from Purdue

    --
    Pain is merely failure leaving the body
  2. Apple cars, really? by berchca · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maybe now that Doug is back at Apple, he should work on "Secret Project Working Keyboard".

    1. Re:Apple cars, really? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Funny

      He is too busy working on replacing the steering wheel with a touch bar.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  3. Re:Apple and Silly Valley's revolving door. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

    it's pretty well known that if you leave, for any reason, you'll never be allowed to come back.

    That is a foolish policy. My company keeps in touch with alumni, and we invite them to our annual picnic. We have rehired several "boomerangs", with good results every time. They already know our culture and procedures, so they can hit the ground running, without the typical 3-6 month learning curve. We also already know their capabilities, so we can put them into a team where they fit. They come back brimming with new ideas about how to fix our products and processes, and they have learned that the grass isn't greener elsewhere, so they rarely leave a second time.

    What possible justification is there for a "no rehire" policy? Do they really think it will dissuade people from quitting?

  4. Re:Could Apple fund Tesla going private? by Gavagai80 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Musk has paid his bills, hasn't been accused of screwing over contractors, and hasn't bankrupted even one company yet. Hardly comparable.

    --
    This space intentionally left blank
  5. Predictable Reaction to News by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, the big news today is that Tesla lost one employee! One who worked as an executive for four years, and managed the people who really designed the car. For someone like that to hold a job for only four years isn't unusual.

    This is met with a lot of totally unsubstantiated "Tesla will crash", "It's a really bad car", "Musk is going to jail". The shorts are still out there, or just trolls.

    As far as I can tell, lots of people want their cars, their home solar products, their industrial battery products, etc.

    I agree that Musk was probably just teasing the shorts. But Musk can say he's considering any thing he wants. And although it would be the largest stock buy-out ever, on paper, consider that the actual buying out is only for the people who decide to sell - while many would hang on - and he probably is able to line up the financing to handle a reasonable estimate of how many investors would sell out.

    Lots of companies go private, public again, and private again. It's more common these days, with more private money in the market. And right now, being public is a distraction for Tesla. Too much energy spent fighting FUD.

  6. Re:Could Apple fund Tesla going private? by Rei · · Score: 2

    Investors voted to take over SolarCity, with 85% of voting shareholders voting "Yes". Or was Musk using his mind control ray? It was taken over not for its loan-based solar install business (which is a dying model due to the continued declines in panel costs), but for the solar Gigafactory (Gigafactory 2) - which is what SolarCity accrued most of its debt on. It's not as far along the rampup as Gigafactory 1 (the battery / motor plant in Nevada), but I'm very much a fan of the potential of their solar roofing products, as they let you do a two-in-one install (aka installing a solar roof rather than installing a roof, then installing solar on it), and are aesthetically pleasing . Of course, the ultimate market penetration all depends on the price point they'll ultimately be able to achieve.

    --
    Assuming ethanol comes from murdered children and the hydrogen from magic, hydrogen saves 132% more lives than ethanol.
  7. Re:sounds like he spied for apple by Rei · · Score: 2

    4 years is actually a pretty reasonable length of time as an executive in a company these days. Particularly in a silicon valley growth company.

    --
    Assuming ethanol comes from murdered children and the hydrogen from magic, hydrogen saves 132% more lives than ethanol.