Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPhone 16 Rumor Report Card: Here's Which Leaks Were Right or Wrong

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
67,488
37,763


Apple this week unveiled the iPhone 16, iPhone 16 Plus, iPhone 16 Pro, and iPhone 16 Pro Max. As always, there were many rumors leading up to the event that gave us an idea of what to expect from the devices, with some proving accurate and others not.

iPhone-16-Rumor-Report-Card.jpg

Below, we have recapped some of the bigger hits and misses from the iPhone 16 rumor mill.

Hits


Mixed


Misses


With so many rumors leading up to the iPhone 16 event, this list is not comprehensive.

Article Link: iPhone 16 Rumor Report Card: Here's Which Leaks Were Right or Wrong
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2024/09/12/iphone-16-rumor-report-card/
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Jumpthesnark, SFjohn, spartan1967 and 2 others
msackey said:
Could MacRumors also do a tally of how correct the big name leakers were this time, like Gurman and Kuo? It would be interesting to keep a tally over the years of their accuracy and display that as a chart.
Click to expand...
This is easier said than done. For example, sometimes a source will say something in March, then something different in August, ahead of iPhones launching in September. And sometimes a source was likely accurate, but whatever they leaked never progressed beyond internal testing at Apple. Things change. It's simply too complicated, in my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shirasaki, Jovijoker, cherr7 and 6 others
MacRumors said:
2TB storage rumor proved to be wrong yet again
Click to expand...
I was always skeptical at this because QLC NAND would be the only way to do it, and it has its own trade-offs (speed, performance and long-term reliability). Also gets hotter and operates in higher voltages.

As a 1TB phone owner who would like 2TB at some point, I think I'd rather stick to 1TB and use external storage while taking improved performance.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Shirasaki, Jovijoker, pianophile and 3 others
Joe Rossignol said:
This is easier said than done. For example, sometimes a source will say something in March, then something different in August, ahead of iPhones launching in September. And sometimes a source was likely accurate, but whatever they leaked never progressed beyond internal testing at Apple. Things change. It's simply too complicated, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I was thinking

Remember when Gurman claimed that the iPad Pro would come with the M3. A lot of analysts disagreed with him. Then at the very last moment he said it was the M4 all along

That’s a huge fail in my books
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Shirasaki, Jovijoker, Chuckeee and 4 others
Newgoblin49 said:
Exactly what I was thinking

Remember when Gurman said that the iPad Pro would come with M3 all along when a lot of other analysts disagreed with him. Then at the last moment he said it was the M4

That’s a fail on my books
Click to expand...
Reporting might be difficult but it could be fun and still feasible with some work. But yeah, maybe the site isn't interested to put in that kind of effort to track.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
BelgianChoklit said:
I don't get why so many people still regard Gurman as a reliable Apple leaker, let alone thé Apple leaker. It's been about 6-7 years he's been very off with his predictions. And when he does get it right it's a very easy prediction.
Click to expand...
Yeah, so I know Gurman and Kuo are names that keep popping up. I don't really follow these rumors (it's an in one ear out the other situation for me) but I do know their names keep coming up. As someone not too interested in the rumors though, I am curious about each leaker's accuracy. So in other words, less interested in the rumors, much more interested about the one leaking the rumor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
Joe Rossignol said:
This is easier said than done. For example, sometimes a source will say something in March, then something different in August, ahead of iPhones launching in September. And sometimes a source was likely accurate, but whatever they leaked never progressed beyond internal testing at Apple. Things change. It's simply too complicated, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Understood, it would be interesting ti see all predictions in like a table of what/when they said it and also the actual outcome…
 
  • Love
Reactions: msackey
Joe Rossignol said:
This is easier said than done. For example, sometimes a source will say something in March, then something different in August, ahead of iPhones launching in September. And sometimes a source was likely accurate, but whatever they leaked never progressed beyond internal testing at Apple. Things change. It's simply too complicated, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s necessarily that complicated; so long as they’re compared on the same criteria, it would still be a valid and interesting comparison.

A miss in March would still be a miss, and a hit in August still be a win. At each point the leaker made a claim, so each claim can be scored as such.

Even Apple testing a feature that never gets released doesn’t really matter, from a comparative point of view; it was still a miss if it was predicted for a particular year and didn’t happen. If the feature then makes it into a later model, that rumour could also be marked as a hit at that point, even if the rumour was a year or two early.

You don’t have to account for all possibilities in the comparison; so long as the methodology of the comparison is made clear, readers can interpret the results as they like.

And then you’re also free to manually note any interesting information you like, like the things that might make the comparison too complicated if you did try to account for them in some way. Perhaps noting any leakers with unique leaks, or how one leaker is likely more accurate because they rely on more reliable supply chain leaks, vs one who leaks internal testing that’s a more interesting insight but less reliable.

The point is that the comparison need only be as complicated as you choose to make it, and even a relatively basic one would still be of interest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect, ZZ9pluralZalpha and velkr0
Soon they'll be hiring Downgrade Architects for SE 4. Hope for once it will fail to disappoint
 
I'm thankful they did not do a polished finish. Looks like the finish is closer to what is on the watch Ultra which is perfect. My Ultra has held up amazingly well and is totally fingerprint resistant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SantaFeNM and Saturn1217
vertsix said:
I was always skeptical at this because QLC NAND would be the only way to do it, and it has its own trade-offs (speed, performance and long-term reliability). Also gets hotter and operates in higher voltages.

As a 1TB phone owner who would like 2TB at some point, I think I'd rather stick to 1TB and use external storage while taking improved performance.
Click to expand...
Yes, 2TB would be really handy, but maybe next year. I'm sure it will be rumored for next year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fatTribble
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back