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

WWDC Rumor Wrapup: Winners and Losers

Re: Re: Here's to MacBidouille....!!!

Originally posted by fpnc
So, MacBidouille got some things right and other things wrong. They were certainly among the first to begin the build up for WWDC and I think they did have some real information on the motherboard design.
Click to expand...

I have been thinking about the motherboard design specs that various rumor sites posted and I wonder how much of that was based upon guesswork and how much was based upon real information.

As I see it, the motherboard design has six distinguishing traits: dual channel DDR 400, USB 2.0, AGP 8x, Hypertransport, Serial ATA drives and PCI-X slots.

In my opinion, dual channel DDR 400 and USB 2.0 were a given. Going with single channel DDR or RAMBUS would not have been too bright. Also sticking with USB 1.1 would be pretty stupid.

I don't think AGP 8x and Hypertransport are all that big of a leap. The top end PCs already have AGP 8x so the cards are there. The FSB on the PPC 970, while not labeled Hypertransport, has almost the same description. It seems logical to me that Apple would pick it.

The two traits that I feel are difficult to guess, SATA and PCI-X, were missed by (almost) everyone. In my opinion, these two are what separate those who had real information and those who were just guessing based upon technology.

Since the rumor sites got the stuff right that I think was guessable but missed the other stuff, I am starting to believe they were just guessing and had no special information access.
 
Originally posted by deepkid
Are you with a particular rumors site?
Click to expand...

No, I'm just doing the public disclosure about my mistakes. I promised I would do that and this seems like a reasonable thread to make that known. I was challenged many times concerning my predictions so I'm just making good on my promise to "fess up" or "eat crow" if I was wrong about any major part of the intro.
 
Re: Re: Re: Here's to MacBidouille....!!!

Originally posted by ktlx
I have been thinking about the motherboard design specs that various rumor sites posted and I wonder how much of that was based upon guesswork and how much was based upon real information.
Click to expand...

I agree, some of the motherboard specs could have been assumed (or guessed). However, MacBidouille did (apparently) identify some form of optical port on the motherboard. They guessed that it might have been fiberchannel, but it could have been the optical audio ports.

Also, I think one of the sites (possibly MacBidouille) said that the motherboard had eight SDRAM slots but that four of them were covered with a label that said do not use. I wonder whether that was a prototype for the low-end (1.6GHz) G5 that apparently only supports 4GB of RAM (one half of what the other two models support).
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: WWDC Rumor Wrapup: Winners and Losers

Originally posted by deepkid

I'm just concerned about the increased clawing that I'm seeing on MacRumors and I don't think its necessary in giving an account of what actually transpired.
Click to expand...

The intention of the wrap up is not to try to put down other sites. In fact, I don't think MacRumors is in direct competition with many of the other rumors sites.

As exampled - ThinkSecret gets a lot of attention from this site, and a lot of credence when they post a rumor. The reason is that they have traditionally been very accurate. So, _please_ visit ThinkSecret.com - visit regularly and often. I encourage you to do so.

AppleInsider has also received a lot of recent attention - because they had real info surrounding this event. I'm optimistic that they will represent accurate sources of information in the future.

Also - if eWeek or CNet posts a rumor. Believe it. Visit it. Send them money. Whatever you'd like. Pay attention to them.

The flip side to this is... if you are a rumor site, and you start posting things that are consistently wrong. You're done. There is no reason why MacRumors, or anyone interested in accurate rumors to pay any further attention to them.

If you want to enjoy them for entertainment value, that's up to you... but the point of this site is the try to track/report accurate rumors.

It's not about being petty. It's not about trying to put down sites. Like I said - I will broadcast accurate reports and sites. The only catch is you have to be accurate -- at least some of the time.

On the same note - if an individual keeps sending me info that is consistently wrong - I will ignore their submissions.

arn
 
Originally posted by Gakusei
I think MacWhispers can't be crucified just yet...we'll have to see what happens when the new 15" is announced. If it's not G5 based, then we can nail them up.
Click to expand...

Yes, MacWhispers can be crucified. MacWhispers is a thinly veiled advertising vehicle for the owner's other companies, such as MacMice.com and DVForge

As such, MacWhispers absolutely fabricated every single one of their stories in a shameless attempt to drive traffic there, and expose people to ads for his related company products.

We've all seen SpyWare before, and the hidden advertising it brings, well MacWhispers has ushered in a new age in computing with their advertising technique: LieWare

It's rather simple. Mac users are interested in rumors about the upcoming products from Apple, so he puts up a web site that shamelessly fabricates stories about Apple's forthcoming products, and sticks ads on there, knowing that he'll get a huge amount of traffic and exposure to his ads for free.

Remember, not a single one of the stories MacWhispers published was accurate. Not one.

I don't think MacRumors should publish MacWhispers reports anymore, because I see no reason for MacRumors to join this rather disingenuous marketing machine of MacMice.com/DVForge

More info on the MacMice.com/DVForge owner is here: http://www.Macintouch.com/mactable.html

MacBidouille got a number of things wrong as well, but at least they got some (fairly obvious) things correct, and they also were not doing it to drive sales for their products. There's a world of difference between the over-enthusiasm of MacBidouille and cold, calculated fabrication of stories that MacWhispers published to sell the owner's other products.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: WWDC Rumor Wrapup: Winners and Losers

Originally posted by deepkid
As a stockholder and journalist, I can tell you that rumors cause more harm than good for Apple. Some of the speculation you read is completely insane -- in a bad way.

Click to expand...

The LAT(rine) is an example of a newspaper that harmed Apple with its "Universal- Vivendi" rubbish. Wall Street had a fit and SJ was forced into having to clarify something that neither he nor Apple asserted in the first place, while Apple share prices fell.
I still wonder how the booboo occurred last Thursday and what has happened to that person/people.
 
C'mon Jack's got a sense of humor over the entire thing, everyone else is taking the site way too seriously.

By the way, I figured out where the PPC 970 Powerbooks are located.

They're sitting in the same warehouse as are Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. When Bush's crew finds those, they'll also find the Powerbooks.

Promise.
Posted by MacWhispers at June 25, 2003 11:35 AM
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Sun Baked
C'mon Jack's got a sense of humor over the entire thing, everyone else is taking the site way too seriously.
Click to expand...

So now MacWhispers is a *humor* sight? I agree that Jack is a joke to the majority of people familiar with his various exploits... but there's nothing really funny about it. :confused:
 
Originally posted by Flowbee
So now MacWhispers is a *humor* sight? I agree that Jack is a joke to the majority of people familiar with his various exploits... but there's nothing really funny about it. :confused:
Click to expand...
It's people's reactions to him that are amusing, you know his track record and yet people still go back for more.

Though it's looking more and more like Jack is quickly becoming the web equivalent of a mime, people either love it -- or hate it.

But the interesting show isn't the mime, but the crowds reactions to the mime. ;)
 
Originally posted by moki
Yes, MacWhispers can be crucified. MacWhispers is a thinly veiled advertising vehicle for the owner's other companies, such as MacMice.com and DVForge

As such, MacWhispers absolutely fabricated every single one of their stories in a shameless attempt to drive traffic there, and expose people to ads for his related company products.
Click to expand...

I guess I thwarted that effort in not even knowing that they were intertwined. :p

All I was trying to convey is that it seems premature to use libel if their chief rumor had yet to be disproven. Of course, with today's posting about the new G4's possibly being in PowerBooks, it seems that it would change from libel to truth in very short order.
 
I'd like the thank macrumors, for the great job of coverage of rumors for the ipod and keynotes presentation. Great job!

I'd also like to thank MacB, for an incredible job on the G5 rumors.

I think it is funny people posting that MacB got alot wrong, but some obvious stuff right.

MacB said there would be a apple G5 computer that will blow away any peecee out there. And that is exactly what apple delivered. That is accurate enough for me.

MacB staked there whole reputation on this rumor, and got flamed to hell for it on many boards including this one. With any rumor they got a few details wrong, fibreports...don't care, claims of benchmarks being faked....., and shipping dates (don't think apple is even sure when they are shipping ). These are small fries, they got the biggy apple super computer lives, and thats what matters.

They stated this with confidence before the other rumor sites jumped on the bagon wagon. And deserve accolade for it.

Congrats MacB great job.

PS: obvious yeh right, i remember when there rumor was first posted here, people where saying we wouldn't see G5 till next year.
 
Originally posted by Rai
I think it is funny people posting that MacB got alot wrong, but some obvious stuff right.
Click to expand...

Obvious stuff like the G5 Macs were in production in May, and would be available at the show, and at Apple stores on the 23nd for purchase?

Originally posted by Rai
MacB said there would be a apple G5 computer that will blow away any peecee out there. And that is exactly what apple delivered. That is accurate enough for me.
Click to expand...

Yes, and anyone who looked at the SPEC scores IBM published last year could safely make that assumption as well.
 
macwhispers turned off their forums again, so here's my past post

(An open letter to the webmaster at macwhispers.com)

Dear Mr. Campbell:

It has come to my attention that you are in need of some assistance with your news web site, macwhispers.com. I have a distinguished career at a top national newspaper and I believe I have the credentials and experience to give your site the credibility it deserves.

My assosciate, Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf, is also now free to aid your cause as he is no longer employed as Information Minister by the former Iraqi government. He will be accompanied by his personal bodyguards, US Special Operations Task Force 20.

As a financial bonus, I can report from:
* 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino, CA,
* Hsinchu, Taiwan, or
* Hendersonville, TN,
all from my studio here in Brooklyn, saving you costly travel expenses.

Please contact me at your earliest convenience.

Sincerely,



Sir Jayson Blair, B.A., M.S., Ph.D, M.D, Esq. E.A.S.I.
 
MacWhispers has now taken its comments system offline, after taking a thorough shellacking by users. (Note to self: Comments systems that don't require registration are trollbait.)

I swear, that site is like a car wreck -- it's unpleasant and unfortunate and just plain wrong, and I want to look away, but I can't.
 
fred said:
The e week article "64-Bit Macs May Outpace 'Panther'" was penned by Nick Ciarelli and Matthew Rothenberg
and Think Secret constantly refers back to that article....given the fact that Matthew Rothenberg has in the past collaborated with Nick dePlume... I conclude that Nick Ciarelli and Nick dePlume are one and the same person
Click to expand...

How amazingly spot-on you were.
 
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