Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple PR: Latest Steve Jobs Email Exchange is Fake
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Seeing that it was most likely a spoof, why would anyone want to waste time commenting on a nothing story? At the time I read the comments, I did not see a single person questioning its authenticity.
As for calling people liars and hypocrites, that's your opinion, and you are welcome to have it. However, it indicates a poor attitude toward others on your part.
Very observant, as resident trolls consistently refer to an iPhone as an Iphone - classic indeed.
Yet shameful, nonetheless.
No, the MacRumors writer called it a problem. I think it is a problem; a PR problem, after Gizmodo and a few other blogs began looking for anything negative they could throw at the iPhone during the launch. (Motivation, what could that be?)
They found... something, which they started to make sound as though it was on the order of the new iPhone causing brain cancer. The AnandTech review, which I highly recommend, says this: it's real, but it's way less important than people seem to be saying it is. In fact, it is only a cause of dropping calls when the signal is already low. In a good reception area, you will lose bars, but it won't matter. In fact, in the real world, the iPhone 4 is much better about dropping calls. It hangs on in much weaker areas than the 3GS. And when it's connected, it's very fast. 7.2 mbps download. 4x the regular upload speed.
So, it's not a huge problem, and it is eliminated by using a case. Quit the opera.
I don't know. Wovel questioned it immediately as he did the BGR report of an alleged leaked memo from Applecare service or whatever.. That news also needs to be taken with a huge grain of salt now.
As a matter of fact, it's always been one of the irritating things about Apple stock, but it makes perfect sense: when Steve announces something, the market goes UP on the analyst's opinions. Sometimes WAY up. And then, on launch day, the stock goes down. They call it "profit-taking," because the people who bought before the announcement sell at the top, and the value comes down.
And, of course, there's a bit of a stock market dive going on now overall. Some of that decline could be people putting their money in mattresses.
Anandtech also said this in that same review,
The main downside to the iPhone 4 is the obvious lapse in Apple's engineering judgment. The fact that Apple didn't have the foresight to coat the stainless steel antenna band with even a fraction of an ounce worth of non-conductive material either tells us that Apple doesn't care or that it simply doesn't test thoroughly enough. The latter is a message we've seen a few times before with OS X issues, the iPhone 4 simply reinforces it. At the bare minimum Apple should give away its bumper case with every iPhone 4 sold. The best scenario is for Apple to coat the antenna and replace all existing phones with a revised model.The ideal situation is very costly for Apple but it is the right thing to do. Plus it's not like Apple doesn't have the resources to take care of its customers.
No one seems to quote that part. Its all a big pro-Apple conspiracy...
Hey You have a picture, so I believe you.
On another note...
Nearly everyone posting on this thread saw through it. I see 5 or 6 people here who made fun of the people who were going to return their phone or suicide or whatver.
I have a very short post history. Please search it and point out where I even commented on the email. I just sat back and laughed at the over reaction and the troll bashing.
Fortune is blowing smoke.
"on the record" and "off the record" have legal status. If something is "on the record" it is attributed to a real person and is sanctioned by the company. If something is "off the record" then it can not be attributed and is not sanctioned by the company.
From the above quote from the Fortune article the author states that "Asked on the record ... a top Apple spokesman emphatically denied it." If it was asked "on the record" what is the top Apple spokesman's name? What is the top Apple spokesman's position and title. Where is the official press release to all news organizations?
At the very least have some common sense, nothing about what Fortune has said is "on the record". It is all hearsay from an unattributed source that is supposedly a top Apple spokesman. Why would this top Apple spokesman make these anonymous statements and on top of that single source this "emphatic denial"?
If Apple really said this it would be released as a general press release made by a real Apple employee that has a name, a title and a means to be reached at the company.
Someone is playing head games and it looks like it is CNN/Money - Fortune - Apple 2.0 that is doing it.
edit: hmm. I emailed the author and his email address is ped@mac.com. So at the very best he is a free lancer for CNN Money without his own cnn.com email address, and at the worst he is a paid shill for Apple.
"on the record" and "off the record" have legal status. If something is "on the record" it is attributed to a real person and is sanctioned by the company. If something is "off the record" then it can not be attributed and is not sanctioned by the company.
From the above quote from the Fortune article the author states that "Asked on the record ... a top Apple spokesman emphatically denied it." If it was asked "on the record" what is the top Apple spokesman's name? What is the top Apple spokesman's position and title. Where is the official press release to all news organizations?
At the very least have some common sense, nothing about what Fortune has said is "on the record". It is all hearsay from an unattributed source that is supposedly a top Apple spokesman. Why would this top Apple spokesman make these anonymous statements and on top of that single source this "emphatic denial"?
If Apple really said this it would be released as a general press release made by a real Apple employee that has a name, a title and a means to be reached at the company.
Someone is playing head games and it looks like it is CNN/Money - Fortune - Apple 2.0 that is doing it.
edit: hmm. I emailed the author and his email address is ped@mac.com. So at the very best he is a free lancer for CNN Money without his own cnn.com email address, and at the worst he is a paid shill for Apple.
You are really reaching. The PR department does not need to issue a press release for something to be on the record for the press. It is not an unnamed source. They named the PR department. They contacted the company for an official statement. There is no need for them to name the person. You are confused. Had BGR done the same thing, by simply calling the media helpline and asking if these statements came from Steve Jobs, they could have saved themselves from looking so stupid.
You are confusing a source left out for word count versus a source name left out to conceal it. Email the guy at Fortune, he will give you the name. r call the media help line and ask yourself. Just because you hate to believe you were so easily duped, does not mean everyone else on earth is playing games.
*** ring - ring *** "Hello, Apple press relations I am asking about those Steve Jobs emails" ... "Why yes I would like to state for the record that we emphatically deny these emails" ... "Great, just what I needed for my article, who are you" ... "Why I am a top Apple spokesman"
Geeze, who's reaching, be serious. If he talked to a top Apple spokesman, on the record, he would have named him.
I have emailed the author, he does not have a cnn.com email address, it is ped@mac.com. I think he is an Apple shill!
edit: oh yeah, the whole article is about 200 words. Are you saying he would have run out of web-ink if he had used a name instead of "top Apple spokesman". haha
As I indicated write the fortune writer, he will give you the name. There are no games other than BGRs and the ones in your head. You apparently never , ever read the newspaper or watch the news. It is much more common to see a company spokesman referred to by title than name. It is just easier.
Company Spokespeople speak on behalf of the company. They put the company on the record. Not themselves. This is really not hard. A person known to the writer to be authorized to speak on behalf of Apple made an on the record statement of Apple's position regarding the emails. Really not difficult. There is only some sort of conspiracy because your ego needs it. You'll recover.
I added to my post but just to be clear. A corporation is an entity. This entity has people that are authorized to make on the record statements for it. These people are generally Officers and Authorized Spokespersons. You are being intentionally obtuse. Hearsay has nothing at all to do with this. It is a legal concept you completely misused.
It's corroborated hearsay http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/01/apple-pr-says-recent-steve-jobs-emails-are-fake/
Haha best part is that no one, not the email fakes, not BGR not anyone is claiming he actually said that now
I think you will be surprised when you read the post that was made while you were typing. You would still be a skeptic even with the name. You have no idea what the editor knows. It is completely proper for a corporation to make a public statement on its own. The title of the person indicates they are authorized to do so. Their name is irrelevant and would in fact be confusing because it might appear they were speaking for themselves.