What is wrong with MR (constructive feedback)

Discussion in 'Site and Forum Feedback' started by the8thark, Jan 5, 2012.

  1. the8thark macrumors 68040


    Apr 18, 2011
    I rarely if ever post outside the daily rumours topics. But I wrote this in one of these daily rumour topics and felt this deserved it's own topic.

    The quoted part is what I said in the other topic. And I do feel this is what is wrong with MacRumors. There is many things right about MacRumors I will say too.


    Link to the original post with this quote in it.
  2. MacDawg macrumors Core


    Mar 20, 2004
    "Between the Hedges"
    I'm not sure I understand the criticism completely
    This is a rumor site and a community of enthusiasts (pro and con) who all have varying degrees of interest

    Rumors are just that, rumors (or rumours if you prefer) :)
    And I think most realize that and discuss accordingly
    Sure, we all have our preferences and perspective
    But prognostication is a part of the rumor business isn't it?
    And part of the fun... "I was RIGHT!! I rock!" or "You were waaaaay off, you suck!!"

    Anyway, I try not to take anything here too seriously
    It is the internet after all
  3. miles01110 macrumors Core


    Jul 24, 2006
    The Ivory Tower (I'm not coming down)
    I'm positive I don't understand the quoted portion at all. All I got out of it is that rumors might not come true. Duh?
  4. maflynn Moderator


    Staff Member

    May 3, 2009
    I'm not sure what your point is, do you mind refining or explaining it. As MacDawg pointed out rumors are just that.

    What does an open mind have to do with reporting a given rumor?
  5. Macman45 macrumors G5


    Jul 29, 2011
    Somewhere Back In The Long Ago
    I don't get it at all?:confused:
  6. soco macrumors 68030


    Dec 14, 2009
    Yardley, PA
    I think the OP is suggesting that arn & co. shoehorn industry discussions and rumors to be Apple-related when it's possible they would have otherwise not been.

    For example, let's say a Korean forum has a post with a leaked part number for a 7" screen from Random Research Inc. The OP is suggesting that instead of letting this story be what it is on the surface, just a story about some company having a leak of their new 7" screens, MacRumors will shoehorn some sort of Apple relation into it. Maybe suggesting that the screen is the size that's rumored to be on the new iPad mini and that subsequently, Random Research Inc. is going to produce them.

    This turns into a story a week later that Random Research Inc.'s production manager was reported to leak info that the 7" screens, previously rumored to be the new iPad mini screens (but really never having had anything to do with Apple), are set to ship for new products around Q2 2012. Just in time for the rumored iPad mini announcement!?!? In the end, this screen turns out to just be your run-of-the-mill 7" tablet screen not made for anything in particular or made specifically for a future Android tablet.

    Look, my point is I think the OP is off-point and I don't buy any of this. I think the news community can sometimes see a lot more than is really there for the sake of having something to write, sure. All news, technology-related or not, does that from time to time. But MacRumors in particular isn't guilty of what I think the OP is suggesting.

    tl;dr: OP is suggesting MacRumors forces vague industry discussion to be Apple-related just for the sake of writing soemthing. OP is wrong.
  7. Macman45 macrumors G5


    Jul 29, 2011
    Somewhere Back In The Long Ago
    Agreed, if that's what he means. still a little confusing:)
  8. SandboxGeneral Moderator emeritus


    Sep 8, 2010
    I think that the writers of the articles do a fair job of reporting the rumors as they come out and oft times add that "grain of salt" with them based on questionable credibility of the source. Which to me says, that the writers are not slanting the piece to make it sound like they want it to be a certain way.

    I find the articles to be quite factually written, as far as a rumor can go, and not opinionated; and I like that style of reporting.

    So I have to disagree with the OP on his analysis of the article writing here.
  9. ejb190 macrumors 65816


    I think soco sums it up very well. But I'm not so sure the OP is wrong. But to confuse matters more, even if the OP is right, I'm not sure the tech media is wrong for adding speculation and conjecture to their articles. To me half the fun of following technology is to dream about I want in a new device. The other half is watching out for the unexpected - the things I didn't expect or figure were even possible.

    Apple has a wonderful reputation of creating products that we didn't even know we needed. Go back to the archives and look at the threads about the original iPod, iPhone, and iPad. Some of the posters were harsh. But on occasion, Apple does exactly what we expect. The camera on the iPhone 4s, for instance.

    But what these technology writers do for us is ground our dreams in reality, showing us where the cutting edge is and where the technology is heading. Wether Apple or some other company decides to use that technology exactly the way we expect or if they pull some unknown rabbit out of their hat is what keeps me following technology in general and Apple specifically.
  10. arn macrumors god


    Staff Member

    Apr 9, 2001
    Broadly, the original poster may have a point, but in specifics, he is wrong.

    Let's pull the post from context: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=14112058&posted=1#post14112058 which is talking about this 50" Apple television story: http://www.macrumors.com/2012/01/04...-televisions-as-content-talks-remain-stalled/

    The original poster claims this:
    The original poster is simply wrong. The USA Today article is about an Apple television set, not an improved Apple TV. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/story/2012-01-03/apple-tv-CES/52364952/1

    So, the MacRumors article is an accurate representation of the USA Today article. So there's no unwarranted speculation/bias from the MR author at all.

    Now, you could argue that the USA Today article introduces this bias/speculation, but it's clearly not.

    from USA Today:
    Eric and I briefly discussed the possibility that their source was just saying there was a non-Apple 50" TV in Apple's labs... but decided that would be an absurd interpretation, making the quote entirely useless. Based on context, it's clear that they are talking about a 50" Apple-made television set.

    bottom line: original poster may have a point, but that point is lost/wrong in the example given.

  11. marzer macrumors 65816


    Nov 14, 2009
    So where does the endless interpretation of all the probabilities end?

    An author could write for pages on what a 50" TV in an Apple exec's office could actually mean, as example. Droning on and on, aimlessly, unintelligibly without logical grounding or scope of plausible reality…oh wait…that would be the reply with comments section of the articles. :eek:

Share This Page