I'm still getting all caught up on various items since WWDC. Bear with all of us while we handle the transition from WWDC to working full speed again.
The more and more I think about it, the more and more I think the C|Net article on Apple switching to Intel was a planned leak. Planned as in it was orchestrated by the Apple PR machine. Now, before you paint me as a paranoid-conspiracy-theory-lovin' coot, hear me out.
C|Net released the article after the market closed on Friday, June 3rd. This could have been planned so that the sudden announcement on Monday didn't spook investors and analysts into reducing the target price on Apple's stock thus causing it to crash suddenly (which should have happened anyways, more on that later). It also could have been pre-leaked so that developers that would be at WWDC on Monday had time to absorb the possibility of this information being true. And it'd give them a chance to cry out all their angries before the keynote so they wouldn't go completely psycho on Jobs right there and then.
Furthermore, only once before while Steve Jobs was at the helm of Apple since his second coming has he commented on a rumor. Namely when the G5 specs were accidently released on the Apple store online and Steve Jobs called it a "Premature Specification". Otherwise, even if past rumors have been true, they were never mentioned in the keynote. With this Intel thing, Jobs gave credence to the "rumor" sites by stating "It's True" which seems extremely unlike him. Unless it was a planned thing after all.
Also odd about how the Intel thing was leaked was the fact that Apple still hasn't filed any lawsuits trying to find the sources of this leak. Odd considering that Apple's been filing lawsuits (or trying to gather information to file lawsuits) against everyone left and right. And yet nothing was filed against C|Net or the like.
The reasons why this entire thing now seems like a PR stunt to me has a lot to do with the language of the original C|Net "article". People said it couldn't be true before since the language and the things that were said were lacking any real technical information whatsoever. The article said that Apple was switching from IBM to Intel chips and then cited Portables and consumer based Macs such as the Mac mini would be the first to sport the new Intel chips. But none of those machines use IBM's G5s. They all use the G4 which is made by Motorola/Freescale. You'd think that any "executive" would know the difference. But they wouldn't if they were in the marketing department.
The article also is very favorable to Apple's past switch from the 68k to the PowerPC. "Apple successfully navigated a switch in the 1990s from Motorola's 680x0 line of processors to the Power line jointly made by Motorola and IBM." Rather than stating the more expected, "Apple also attempted a rocky transition in the 1990s from Motorola's 68k line of microprocessors to IBM's Power based line of PowerPC chips. A transition that was never completed as much of the code in the Mac OS pre-OS X days was still 68k based." Or something like that... But I don't even remember that line being in the original draft of this article. Am I going insane?
Basically Apple had nothing to lose by "leaking" this story. They ensured that it wouldn't be as harmful to Apple Employee's bodies or Apple's stock price as it could have been if it were a complete surprise. Even without that, the article reads as if it were written by a marketing droid.
Posted by rosyna at 06:42 PM
| Comments (10)
| TrackBack (0)
Related:
- Betas, Twitter and WTF - Feb 16, 2010
- Quick Status Update - Feb 12, 2010
- It's Winter, Right? - Jan 26, 2010
- Hiya Kids, it's Theming Time! - Oct 06, 2009
- Mighty Mouse with Some Theme Sauce - Jun 02, 2009
The timing of the article and the rumor-oriented slide during the presentation made me think this as well, but I didn't make as many connections...
I mean, the rumors sprung within a week or so of his keynote, which means he would have been up all night the day before working on it, and it looked much too nice for that kind of rush :)
Posted by: Ryan Govostes on June 18, 2005 7:44 PMAre there any plans to fix the many problems with FruitMenu? I see lots of talk on this site about this and that, but no response to any of the complaints about FruitMenu. The Support page has no FAQ at all for the program!!
Posted by: on June 19, 2005 7:51 AMThat Fruitmenu comment made me feel your pain, Unsanity. HI! I SENT U AN EMAIL WHY DIDNT U CONTACT ME LOL. Anyway:
I was reading this with a bit of skepticism, but when you made the connection of Jobs acknowledging the "rumors" so conveniently with his keynote, you convinced me. Eh. Marketing.
Posted by: on June 19, 2005 11:12 AMall i know is that i puked 2 times 6 hours before the announcement, i knew it would be the end of the world as we know it.
Posted by: rudy on June 19, 2005 4:21 PMWe are probably seeing the beginning of the end of Apple designing, manufacturing, and selling its own hardware. Apple seems to be heading the media content delivery route and an OS. Maybe Bang & Olfusen will make a unit that runs Mac OS? I can only hope...
Posted by: CREB on June 20, 2005 9:42 AMApple wasn't needlessly honoring "rumor sites" as much as the Wall Street Journal (and C|NET, of course). Steve even joked about that later in the keynote, even if he referred to Marklar by acknowledging the rumors about it.
That said, it's certainly possible that it was planted. It thwarted a lot of the rumors for new products, which I for one more or less expected from Apple this year (since most of the lineup was already freshly updated), and may have overshadowed the usual "aw, that's all?" stock decline.
Posted by: Jesper on June 21, 2005 10:41 AMIndeed. and isn't it just a whee bit odd that it was WSJ and C|Net that broke this "rumor" and not any of the rumor sites that usually handle it?
Posted by: Rosyna on June 21, 2005 11:36 AMThe earlier lawsuits were to keep the rumor sites from reporting the Intel news -- or more likely, to make Apple employees who knew about it think twice about talking to rumor sites. The reason Apple has not filed suit against the Wall Street Journal and C|Net is because they have no reason to; the Intel switch has already been announced. Apple may or may not have leaked it to the press but even if they didn't, the fact that they're not suing the outlets that pre-announced the surprise doesn't mean anything.
Posted by: Jerry Kindall on June 23, 2005 10:30 PM