1. Welcome to the new MacRumors forums. See our announcement and read our FAQ

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

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Jan 11, 2013.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    #1
    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]
    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.


    Article Link: Reuters Pulls Story on Phil Schiller's iPhone Comments Following 'Substantial Changes' to Source Article [Updated]
     
  2. macrumors 6502

    #2
    You're using google translate to verify the story? :eek:
     
  3. macrumors 65816

    mabaker

    #3
    I know. should have used BabelFish.
     
  4. macrumors 6502

    #4
    Interesting that they are choosing not to reprint the article with the "changes." Surely Schiller/Apple didn't reach out to anyone on this?
     
  5. macrumors demi-god

    needfx

    #5
    press charges -or- charge presses
     
  6. macrumors regular

    #6
    Why are people still talking about this?

    No plastic. No more market share. That's it!
     
  7. macrumors 65816

    JaySoul

    #7
    The original quotes seemed very heavy on the profit margains, not product quality.
     
  8. Administrator/Editor

    WildCowboy

    Staff Member

    #8
    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.
     
  9. macrumors regular

    #9
    I want to know what Digitimes has to say about this...
     
  10. macrumors 603

    troop231

    #10
    They got Schiller'd
     
  11. macrumors 6502

    #11
    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"?
     
  12. macrumors 601

    Compile 'em all

    #12
    Apple got angry as it seems.
     
  13. macrumors G4

    Chupa Chupa

    #13
    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.
     
  14. macrumors 6502a

    croooow

    #14
    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)
     
  15. macrumors 68020

    #15
    To me this confirms it

    A lower cost version of the iPhone is coming.

    Probably now 'lower end market', more like 'mid range'
     
  16. macrumors G4

    #16
    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.

    ----------

    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.
     
  17. macrumors 68000

    #17
    those type of web news are bunch of fat, lying...lazy azz, not doing their homework.
     
  18. macrumors 6502

    #18
    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.
     
  19. macrumors 65816

    JaySoul

    #19
    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.
     
  20. macrumors 6502

    #20
    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?

    ----------

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

    btw, hello from across the Bay. :)
     
  21. macrumors 601

    Yvan256

    #21
    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.
     
  22. macrumors 68040

    KdParker

    #22
    Maybe Reuters is converting to a rumors site.

    ----------

    I hope not.

    I would rather they move to a new form factor instead of continuing the 3.5 size.
     
  23. macrumors 68020

    #23
    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
     
  24. macrumors G5

    Rogifan

    #24
    I thought releasing mini without retina was so the tablet could be thin and light with great battery life.
     
  25. macrumors 65816

    JaySoul

    #25
    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.
     

Share This Page