Reuters Pulls Story on Phil Schiller's iPhone Comments Following 'Substantial Changes' to Source Article [Updated]

[MacRumors]

Yesterday, a report from the Shanghai Evening News including comments made by Apple marketing chief Phil Schiller about Apple's refusal to build "cheap" devices was widely re-reported throughout both the Apple-focused rumor scene and in mainstream media.

Schiller's comments were viewed by some as a direct rebuttal to recent rumors from The Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg that Apple is working on a less expensive iPhone for launch as soon as later this year, although he actually appeared to simply be noting that any product Apple releases would not sacrifice quality in order to grab market share at lower price points.

Reuters has now issued a brief statement retracting its re-reporting of the Shanghai Evening News piece, citing "substantial changes" to the source article. Reuters will not be publishing an amended version of its story.

It is unclear exactly what changes Reuters is referring to, as the online version [Google translation] of the Shanghai Evening News piece appears to be essentially the same as when it was first covered by English-language media.

Still, the retraction by Reuters casts significant uncertainty on the original report and raises questions about whether Schiller's comments were mistranslated or misinterpreted.

Update 12:30 PM: Reuters has now published an explanation for its retraction, citing the changes made to the original Shanghai Evening News article.

[I]n a new version of the story published after the original, the Shanghai Evening News removed all references to cheaper smartphones, except for a mention of a "cheaper, low-end product." It also amended its original headline from "Apple will not push a cheaper smartphone for the sake of market share," to "Apple wants to provide the best products, will not blindly pursue market share."

Apple confirmed the interview had taken place and that it had contacted the Chinese newspaper about amending its original article, but had no further comment and declined to provide a transcript of the interview.

Article Link: Reuters Pulls Story on Phil Schiller's iPhone Comments Following 'Substantial Changes' to Source Article [Updated]

[Eadfrith]

You're using google translate to verify the story?

[mabaker]

Originally Posted by Eadfrith

You're using google translate to verify the story?

I know. should have used BabelFish.

[Allenbf]

Interesting that they are choosing not to reprint the article with the "changes." Surely Schiller/Apple didn't reach out to anyone on this?

[needfx]

press charges -or- charge presses

[iAco]

Why are people still talking about this?

No plastic. No more market share. That's it!

[JaySoul]

The original quotes seemed very heavy on the profit margains, not product quality.

[WildCowboy]

Originally Posted by Eadfrith

You're using google translate to verify the story?

No, our original article used a partial human translation provided by The Next Web. We're simply including a Google translation link so that readers can look for themselves and get a general idea of the piece if they're so inclined.

We simply don't see that anything much has changed since the original version of the article was published...a couple of minor additions and tweaks, but the basic text and Schiller's comments seem to be the same.

[ifij775]

I want to know what Digitimes has to say about this...

[troop231]

They got Schiller'd

[paulold]

Couldn't releasing the iPad mini without a retina display be seen as Apple "sacrific[ing] quality in order to grab market share at lower price points"?

[Compile 'em all]

Apple got angry as it seems.

[Chupa Chupa]

This is why I laugh when I read quotes from "old media" journalists at established news organizations whining that bloggers and online news isn't true journalism. I can't tell the difference. In both instances it seems to be publish first, fact check later. Simple case of pot calling kettle black.

[croooow]

Originally Posted by paulold

Couldn't releasing the iPad mini without a retina display be seen as Apple "sacrific[ing] quality in order to grab market share at lower price points"?

Did they lower the price by not using a "retina display"? The next generation may have it but I would bet a lot of money that the price will not go up. That is not an example of Apple making a "cheaper product" in order to lower the price.

In fact the iPad mini could have been made more cheaply by simply making a smaller version of the iPad2, but they spent money designing an all new device that is just based on the iPad (when they could have just shrunk it and saved money on R&D)

[Tiger8]

A lower cost version of the iPhone is coming.

Probably now 'lower end market', more like 'mid range'

[KPOM]

Originally Posted by paulold

Couldn't releasing the iPad mini without a retina display be seen as Apple "sacrific[ing] quality in order to grab market share at lower price points"?

Yes and no. The margins are still pretty high, and the build quality is definitely up to snuff. I think the black iPad Mini I have is more durable and less susceptible to scratching than the white iPhone 5.

----------

Originally Posted by Tiger8

A lower cost version of the iPhone is coming.

Probably now 'lower end market', more like 'mid range'

Perhaps. I don't see Apple putting out a cheap piece of plastic. However, a 3.5" mid-range version might help in markets where there aren't subsidies. Two possibilities are a 4S shell with iPhone5 internals, or perhaps even a 4" version with 4S internals and a 5 shell to reduce costs.

[koban4max]

those type of web news are bunch of fat, lying...lazy azz, not doing their homework.

[DanielSw]

Originally Posted by paulold

Couldn't releasing the iPad mini without a retina display be seen as Apple "sacrific[ing] quality in order to grab market share at lower price points"?

No. It was a functional issue. A retina display would have required a larger battery making it heavier and thicker thus violating the concept of "mini". The draw of the Mini for me at least is in no small part due to its thinness and light weight.

[JaySoul]

Originally Posted by Tiger8

A lower cost version of the iPhone is coming.

Probably now 'lower end market', more like 'mid range'

Honestly think now is the time for Apple to put out 3 iPhones:

1) A 'budget' 3.5" one for emerging markets

2) The 4" iPhone

3) A new 5-5.5" iPhone

That's it, just 3 options. Sink or swim.

[Allenbf]

Does anyone have an educated guess - would liquid metal be a cheaper manufacture process than say, the current iPhone 5 (milled aluminum) or even the glass front/back of the iP4/4s?

----------

Originally Posted by DanielSw

No. It was a functional issue. A retina display would have required a larger battery making it heavier and thicker thus violating the concept of "mini". The draw of the Mini for me at least is in no small part due to its thinness and light weight.

No to mention, yields on retina displays. Apple's suppliers have only recently caught up with demands.

btw, hello from across the Bay. :-)

[Yvan256]

Budget = 3.5", 320x480 non-retina display (like the first versions of iPhones)
Regular = 4.0", 640x1136 retina display (iPhone 5 and up)

No fragmentation, no headaches for developers.

[KdParker]

Maybe Reuters is converting to a rumors site.

----------

Originally Posted by Yvan256

Budget = 3.5", 320x480 non-retina display (like the first versions of iPhones)
Regular = 4.0", 640x1136 retina display (iPhone 5 and up)

No fragmentation, no headaches for developers.

I hope not.

I would rather they move to a new form factor instead of continuing the 3.5 size.

[Tiger8]

Originally Posted by JaySoul

Honestly think now is the time for Apple to put out 3 iPhones:

1) A 'budget' 3.5" one for emerging markets

2) The 4" iPhone

3) A new 5-5.5" iPhone

That's it, just 3 options. Sink or swim.

Maybe 3 will be too much for apple, but I agree with you. Apple has to diversify to maintain a healthy market share. Since they already got the top-end of the market, it's time to target the mid-range at least.

For those who say it will never happen I say look at the iPad Mini

[Rogifan]

Originally Posted by paulold

Couldn't releasing the iPad mini without a retina display be seen as Apple "sacrific[ing] quality in order to grab market share at lower price points"?

I thought releasing mini without retina was so the tablet could be thin and light with great battery life.

[JaySoul]

Originally Posted by Tiger8

Maybe 3 will be too much for apple, but I agree with you. Apple has to diversify to maintain a healthy market share. Since they already got the top-end of the market, it's time to target the mid-range at least.

For those who say it will never happen I say look at the iPad Mini

Exactly.

Tim Cook is a smart guy, he'll see the way certain things are going.

Just one choice was fine for a few years, but the market and consumers are growing up, and require a bit more choice.