Caiwyn said:
Okay, look. It's not just that the url read "apple_g5_powerbook." It's that if you check out the Internet Archive back in May, that entire section didn't even exist.
The Powerbook line has not been updated in that time. So why was the page changed?
In fact, that section still doesn't exist on the iBook page. So somebody added this section to the page just recently, in anticipation of a new release.
Yes, it's possible that it's a typo. But considering that this section exists on the PowerMac G5 page, the iMac G5 page, and NOT on the iBook page -- especially when the iBooks were updated more recently than either of those -- it makes for a pretty hefty rumor. So everybody complaining that this is "ridiculous" and "belongs on page 2" hasn't bothered to read the original discussion that led to this rumor.

What happened Caiwyn? I'm on your side... What I was saying was that I didn't believe that the "PowerBook G5" on the
French page was significant.
I DO believe the html code on the US PowerBook page
is something significant and that it
does mean something, most likely that we will be seeing a new PowerBook in the coming weeks.
In fact, I've been trying to convice others that have probably not been following the whole thread, that the "g5" on the source code was NOT a simple typo, because:
1. A few weeks or months ago, the whole section of the code that says "AVENUE A", "apple_g5_powerbook" , etc. did not exist.
2. Wednesday night (actually it was already Thursday) someone on MacRumors that was looking at the code found a part of the html that referred to a PowerBook G5.
3. Thursday afternoon The Register published it as news, and a about a couple of hours later, the html code that unmistakenly read "apple_g5_powerbook" was changed to "apple_g4_powerbook" on Apple's website. Which means that someone in Apple was listening to either MacRumors or The Register.
So...
I think the "apple_g5_powerbook"
DOES mean that we are about to get a new PowerBook. On the other hand, I believe that the "g5" on the French page is nothing more than a typo.
What I was trying to say is that people are making the initial "leak" look like just a rumor, because it begins to lose credibility when compared to a mere typo.
I hope I explained myself right.
