backtop


Print 118 comment(s) - last by Black1969ta.. on Feb 24 at 3:01 AM

Apple gave an exclusive interview with CEO Tim Cook to The Wall Street Journal instead

Apple is not a huge fan of The Big Apple's main newspaper right now.

The New York Times blasted Apple's ego and reputation hard last month with its second installment of the iEconomy series, which focused on the poor treatment and harsh working conditions of employees at Apple's suppliers' factories in China. Now, the Times is paying the price.

Apple is currently preparing for the release of its latest operating system, OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. With such a release comes previews of the OS, which are typically granted to only certain media outlets. The Times used to be on that list, but it appears Apple refused to grant it that access to Mountain Lion.

According to The Washington Post, the Times ended up having to cite Apple's press releases as well as other publications for its OS X 10.8 review. To top it off, its report hit the internet late, which was described as an embarrassment for the Times.

"They are playing access journalism," said an anonymous source at The New York Times. "I've heard it from people inside Apple. They said, look, you guys are going to get less access based on the iEconomy series."

To add insult to injury, The New York Times also lost out on a crucial interview with Apple CEO Tim Cook. However, The Wall Street Journal's Jessica Vascellaro was able to score that interview, where Cook described the meshing of the functionality of Apple's mobile iOS and Mac's OS X operating systems.

"We see that people are in love with a lot of apps and functionality here," said Cook in the interview with The Wall Street Journal. "Anywhere where that makes sense, we are going to move that over to Mac."

Cook made sure to throw a jab at Microsoft in the interview too, saying that nothing Microsoft does "puts pressure on Apple."

The New York Times, on the other hand, had no original quotes for its write-up on Apple's upcoming operating system.

"We're never happy with our access to Apple," said Damon Darlin, The New York Times' tech editor. "Apple is a difficult company to report on. Talking to the CEO of one of the largest technology companies, the highest-valued company of the world? Yes, we would like to do that. They know that."

The New York Times published a report last month detailing the harsh conditions that Apple's suppliers' workers are forced to deal with on a daily basis. The Times cited problems like long hours, exhaustion, lengthy overtime, unsafe working environments, underage employment and crowded living conditions at supplier factories in China. These acts, such as working over 60 hours per week, are direct violations of Apple's supplier code of conduct. While Apple has been warned of these violations repeatedly on an annual basis since 2007, the Times wondered why Apple has never done anything about it.

Cook was outraged by the claims, and sent an email to all Apple employees saying that Apple cares about each and every one of its employees whether they're in the United States or overseas.

Apple also had the Fair Labor Association (FLA) defending it in a recent report, where FLA President Auret van Heerden made a visit to one of Apple's main suppliers in China, Foxconn Technology Group. Upon entering the factory, van Heerden was surprised at how "tranquil" the setting was compared to others in China, like garment factories. He described Foxconn as a "first-class" facility, and said the workers were committing suicide and acting up out of boredom and homesickness rather than harsh and exhausting conditions.

Apple's treatment toward The New York Times mirrors similar behavior the company directed at Gizmodo back in 2010. Gizmodo got its hands on a lost iPhone 4 before its release, and kept it to investigate the device and write a report on it. Former Apple CEO Steve Jobs contacted Gizmodo personally to ask for the iPhone 4 back, but the publication refused because Apple had been "cold" to the tech news outlet previously, affecting its iPad coverage at launch. Gizmodo said it was forced to take more aggressive action to report on Apple's products.

Sources: The Washington Post, Apple Insider



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Yippee
By Denigrate on 2/17/2012 1:59:13 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Cook made sure to throw a jab at Microsoft in the interview too, saying that nothing Microsoft does "puts pressure on Apple."


Really? I suppose this would be mostly true because Apple is a gadget manufacturer as their main business, while Microsoft's main business is still selling the dominant desktop/laptop OS. So Microsoft dominates Apple on one front, and can't compete on the other.




RE: Yippee
By grandpope on 2/17/12, Rating: 0
RE: Yippee
By michael67 on 2/18/2012 9:30:25 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
don't tell me that the Windows Phones are actual competition for the iPhone

Not ever owned a iPart (hate the company, but they are nice products), me and my daughter (how dose own a lot of iCrap), compared phones.

After some hefty debating, she admitted that WP was the better OS, whit mouths better integration, and easier to learn.

After using Galaxy for 3y, I now have a Titan, and really like it a lot more then Android 2.3, and after the comparison with the 4S, i also like WP7.5 more then iOS 5.

Anyone saying that WP is no competition to iOS, has clearly never used it, because i would say WP made a leap forwards wit its mobile OS, and "I" think MS is at least 2y ahead of its competition.


RE: Yippee
By Just Tom on 2/18/2012 9:53:45 AM , Rating: 2
I would agree that WP is significantly better than iOS, but if it cannot get mindshare it will not be competition to Apple. WP needs a killer app, or a knockout phone and it has neither yet.


RE: Yippee
By FXi on 2/18/2012 12:46:42 PM , Rating: 2
I've also used IOS and WP 7.5 and WP is truly much better, easier to use and far more informative than IOS. Everyone I show it to (IOS owners primarily) truly likes WP quite a bit. We just need some better hardware (bigger/higher pixel screens, OLED, LTE, etc.) and you'll see a very fast adoption rate. I have to add that WP is night and day more stable than any Android version I've used as well.


RE: Yippee
By TileGuyJesse on 2/18/2012 12:56:21 PM , Rating: 2
Ditto. After having every incarnation of Android including ICS, my next smartphone is definitely a Windows phone. Now that Nokia is stepping up to the plate we should have quite the selection of quality hardware devices coming to all carriers. (Except Sprint of course.)


RE: Yippee
By Samus on 2/18/2012 4:08:50 PM , Rating: 5
All that really matters is Microsoft has 8.4 billion shares and Apple has less than one billion shares. Since Apple trades at a ridiculously inflated $500+ per share and Microsoft is a stable $32 per share, Apple can make one bad move and millions shareholders, some with thousands of shares and hundreds of millions invested, will be feeling suicidal.

It's technically impossible for Microsoft's stock to lose half its value over a long period, where its entirely possible for Apple's stock to lose half its value overnight. Mark my words. Apple will at some point have its mobile devices/iCloud globally hacked, have an industry-wide defect that affects a majority of its products causing wide-scale personal injury or personal financial damage, or they will simply fail to innovate, which is what they are currently affraid and is the very cause of these ridiculous lawsuits against competitors.


RE: Yippee
By Tony Swash on 2/19/12, Rating: 0
RE: Yippee
By jonmcc33 on 2/20/2012 10:21:27 AM , Rating: 1
It's not the apps or the quality of phones. WP has both. It's complete lack of advertising and cell provider support. Apple makes it's own phones. Microsoft does not. Companies like AT&T, HTC, LG, Nokia, etc haven't done any advertising. Microsoft has the money to do that, as evident with their Windows 7 push. They need to do the same with their phones.

I have an HTC Arrive and love it. I won't use any other smart phone OS. WP7 is by far the best phone OS available from my experience with all 3.


RE: Yippee
By Tony Swash on 2/19/12, Rating: -1
RE: Yippee
By Tony Swash on 2/19/12, Rating: -1
RE: Yippee
By Camikazi on 2/20/2012 9:01:48 AM , Rating: 3
No the "i" business generates more revenue then the Windows Phone business ATM, but Mac does not in any way generate more revenue then Windows.


RE: Yippee
By mellomonk on 2/17/12, Rating: -1
RE: Yippee
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/17/2012 8:24:08 PM , Rating: 3
Win 7 is legacy? LOL


RE: Yippee
By Jeremiah Derringer on 2/17/12, Rating: -1
RE: Yippee
By StevoLincolnite on 2/18/2012 1:11:56 AM , Rating: 5
Windows 8 is still Windows 7 at heart, which in turn has roots going all the way back to Windows NT.

The tile lay-out is also something Apple doesn't do... So I have no idea how you can claim Microsoft is copying Apple in this regard.

At-least Microsoft is more open than Apple and works closely with both hardware and software developers via it's various API's and channels to push technology in a uniform way.

Without Microsoft I would think that 3D acceleration would continue to still be disjointed and a mess with a half dozen competing standards. - Glide, OpenGL, PowerSGL, DirectX... Matrox even went as far as to make developers program directly for it's chips and nVidia's first attempt wasn't even compatible with DirectX when it launched the NV1 core.

Yeah nah. I'll pass on that, I remember those days.


RE: Yippee
By michael67 on 2/18/12, Rating: -1
RE: Yippee
By JeBuSBrian on 2/18/2012 11:00:32 AM , Rating: 5
I signed up just to reply to your comment, as an actual game developer, to tell you that you're talking out of your rear end. I needed only to see the word "phew" to be sure of it.


RE: Yippee
By michael67 on 2/18/12, Rating: -1
RE: Yippee
By JeBuSBrian on 2/18/2012 6:21:28 PM , Rating: 5
If I was the one talking out of my ass, I wouldn't have had to qualify my statements with decade old quotes.


RE: Yippee
By michael67 on 2/18/12, Rating: -1
RE: Yippee
By michael67 on 2/18/12, Rating: 0
RE: Yippee
By GuinnessKMF on 2/18/2012 4:19:16 PM , Rating: 2
Are you even trying? You said mouths several times over much, fail on there/their usage.

The problem isn't that 70% of the world doesn't speak English, the problem is that you're trying to speak English and failing. It's one thing to have a spelling or grammar mistake occasionally, but it's another to intentionally change "few". If you want to be taken seriously, you're going to have to at least get that right.


RE: Yippee
By gunzac21 on 2/18/2012 5:42:22 PM , Rating: 3
If english isn't his first language what is the big problem. He is learning, no need to be mean about it.


RE: Yippee
By michael67 on 2/19/2012 3:13:21 PM , Rating: 1
I wonder about the people here that always are bitching about spelling or grammar mistakes.

How many of them can actually write in a foreign language?


RE: Yippee
By poi2 on 2/19/2012 3:52:12 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
by Jeremiah Derringer on February 17, 2012 at 10:09 PM It is now, thanks to the revolutionary iOS. That's why Microsoft is copying it with Windows 8.


Steve Job is not an APPL CEO anymore.


RE: Yippee
By StormyKnight on 2/19/2012 12:37:10 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Love him or hate him, Steve always kept Apple on the edge of change.

Even when he wasn't at Apple?


RE: Yippee
By B3an on 2/17/2012 3:38:12 PM , Rating: 5
But MS will have Windows 8, which is looking vastly superior to any OS Apple have.

It will also break in to Apples tablet market in a big way. And who will want an iPad when you have a full PC OS inside a tablet with all the peripheral support that Windows has, and compatibility with things like USB sticks, external hard drives, mice, keyboard, gamepads and the million other thing that Windows work with. All this with a new touch UI that is also easier to use. Theres just no comparison.

Apple are obviously worried, which is why Mountain Lion is coming out a lot sooner than the usual release cycle. Cook IS worried.


RE: Yippee
By EnzoFX on 2/17/2012 4:11:40 PM , Rating: 2
I think you're seriously over estimating what they yet still need to accomplish.


RE: Yippee
By wifiwolf on 2/17/2012 8:59:31 PM , Rating: 1
The only mistake M$ can do with this is rush it. If they do it right, Apple is in serious trouble trying to get the same figures it did this year.


RE: Yippee
By AkuPyro on 2/20/2012 3:17:53 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed, If you don't get it right or close the first time, it would almost result in a Vista like release. No one wants that...aside from Apple. Apple makes decent products, but what it does more so is makes a customer experience. M$ has to complete with both and rely on hardware vendors to pick up the physical half. I am looking forward to Windows 8 to see what it will do, always trying to keep up with the times. Going to be interesting with the WOA version. I'm an IT guy, always like options to see what fits best when the need arises.


RE: Yippee
By michael67 on 2/18/2012 9:53:06 AM , Rating: 1
You cant compare Win8 and Win8 tablet with one other
Its not like all legacy x86 programs are gone run on the tablet version

Everything that runs on WP and tablet will run on Win x86, and a lot of smaller programs properly can be fairly easily converted to tablet, but don't expect miracles!


I'm liking Apple more and more...
By Jeff7181 on 2/17/2012 1:17:07 PM , Rating: 3
"Oh, you don't like our business? Ok, then I guess you won't be interested in looking at our newest OS. kbai!"




RE: I'm liking Apple more and more...
By BZDTemp on 2/17/2012 6:36:32 PM , Rating: 5
I hope you're being ironic because to me this retaliation by Apple looks to just as the tactics the dictators of this world use. Which btw. is not so different from how small children behave.


RE: I'm liking Apple more and more...
By wifiwolf on 2/17/2012 9:02:20 PM , Rating: 2
of course it's sarcasm


RE: I'm liking Apple more and more...
By testerguy on 2/18/12, Rating: -1
RE: I'm liking Apple more and more...
By StevoLincolnite on 2/18/2012 6:12:07 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If someone published defamatory (and now disproved) comments about your brand I'm sure you'd be a little reluctant to hand them that golden interview too.


I don't completely agree.

For instance in the case of reviewers... If the product is crap, I wanna' know.
If the product is good... I wanna' know.

If companies start blacklisting reviewers because they didn't give it a glowing review... I expect the reviewers to fight back, not lie to it's readers and fool them into buying that product.


By Just Tom on 2/18/2012 9:57:48 AM , Rating: 2
Every reviewer can get a copy of software after it is released. While I dislike companies' picking and choosing who gets access it is hardly unusual. Apple is not the first company to do so, it won't be the last.


RE: I'm liking Apple more and more...
By Reclaimer77 on 2/18/2012 10:18:37 AM , Rating: 1
Since when was the New York Times a software reviewer though? I don't know about you, but I think most people would go to a website or magazine more geared for computing to get the authoritative word on an OS.

Besides it's not like people who purchase Apple software do so because of some objective analysis. There IS no objective argument for using OSX over Windows.


RE: I'm liking Apple more and more...
By TakinYourPoints on 2/18/12, Rating: 0
By jRaskell on 2/21/2012 10:01:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Really? Tell that to my engineer friends at Google, none of whom touch Windows, or my web developer friends who work in OS X and run Windows in a VM for debug purposes (Apache/PHP/Rails is all built into it, and you've got the Terminal, there are reasons why it is so widely used for that sort of thing), or my ex-IBMer friend who now works in security for major corporations. This is before we even get to the motion picture business that I'm in, it is obviously huge for content creation.


I'm not sure you understand the meaning of the word objective.


By StormyKnight on 2/19/2012 12:44:23 AM , Rating: 2
Unfortunately, this is what happens when a major news outlet shines the cold harsh light of reality for all to see. Apple, being the huge successful tech giant, doesn't want their dirty underwear on display for all to see. The more successful the company, the dirtier the underwear. It doens't matter if other companies do the same thing, but when you're Apple and your stock is trading ~$500/share, you don't want stories of borderline slave labor in some third world country cropping up.


By ShangoY on 2/20/2012 1:37:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If someone published defamatory (and now disproved) comments about your brand I'm sure you'd be a little reluctant to hand them that golden interview too.


Exactly what has been disproved? Oh, the facilities are first rate, because the FLA president visited them? Of course the facilities are clean. The main problem isn't the physical conditions, it is the MENTAL conditions. Per the other story,

quote:
About 30 FLA employees will be spending the next three weeks at Chinese Foxconn factories in Shenzhen and Chengdu to interview 35,000 workers. Each Apple Foxconn worker will be given iPads to complete a survey, which asks them the following series of questions: how were they hired, were they paid a fee, what are the conditions of their dorms/food, were their complaints acted upon, what is their emotional well being, and were they offered/did they sign any contracts and did they understand them.


So they are going to run around and get surveys from people there? While they are at the facility? Yeah, they are going to get non biased surveys. It's like OSHA and FDA inspections, practically everyone knows they are coming, and things get cleaned up for a day, you only find out what is actually happening when someone dies and the police are involved so people aren't allowed to gerrymander the results.

When Tim Cook actually shows up at a plant unannounced in the middle of the night, then you can try to tell me they have some clue, not some bs survey.


By Jeff7181 on 2/18/2012 7:20:27 PM , Rating: 3
Haha, yeah, it's the equivalent of "I'm taking my ball and going home!"


Cheap spoiled child Apple reaction
By wildcatherder on 2/17/2012 2:53:32 PM , Rating: 2
Ooooh, a memo: we care about everybody. How much does that cost, $.50? Let's jump into action by....blacklisting the messenger. Is this really the behavior of a multi-billion dollar international corporation?




RE: Cheap spoiled child Apple reaction
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/17/2012 8:28:14 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Cook was outraged by the claims, and sent an email to all Apple employees saying that Apple cares about each and every one of its employees whether they're in the United States or overseas.
Key words, everyone of it's employees , they don't employee Foxconn workers, Foxconn does.


By Icebain on 2/19/2012 10:48:02 PM , Rating: 2
They do have a choice in who they use to manufacture their hardware though. Nothing says that they have to use Foxconn which has been proven on more than a few occasions to have questionable business practices, even in China. If they wanted to, they could re-source their manufacturing and blame it on the human rights violations. That would have every iDiot in ecstasy.


Journalistic Integrity or Profits
By JediJeb on 2/17/2012 2:29:48 PM , Rating: 2
If the New York Times worries more about getting access to Apple than writing news then should they even be called a "News" Paper?

This isn't a jab at the NYT, it is just a statement that any news outlet should put true journalism above the whims of large corporations or anyone else. In the past journalists wrote articles now being concerned if it made someone upset if it was the truth. Not pandering to those that would feed them cash and access at the cost of their integrity. Now days it seems almost all "news" agencies have become not much better than the likes of the National Enquirer and other such tabloids. Maybe the Enquirer is actually better since it is willing to make people upset, though it is often only to gain readership through vastly sensationalized content.

I guess today news agencies have to depend more on corporate sponsorship than paid readership to survive which goes a long way towards explaining why the quality of journalism has declined. Consumers want their news for free, and it is looking like we get what we have paid for.




RE: Journalistic Integrity or Profits
By FXi on 2/18/2012 12:49:52 PM , Rating: 2
NYT should stick to it's guns imo. Expose Apple's behavior for what it is, but let it be at that. Apple really can't afford to do this to the media, because it's a two way street and Apple needs media more than the other way around.


Interesting discussion
By hiawatha on 2/18/2012 8:36:23 AM , Rating: 3
Interesting discussion, made me think about: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_media_effect

I've enjoyed the iEconomy articles. I'm not particularly invested in Apple and perhaps that's one reason why I didn't see the NYT coverage as an unfairly biased hit-piece on the company. If that coverage is doing anything it's tweaking the noses of the consumers who don't know or care about the vast (and pretty heartless) machinery that makes possible their easy access to affordable high-tech products.

Why try to distance Apple from the darker aspects of life at Foxconn? Sure, many other companies employ Foxconn, but Apple is undoubtedly one of their biggest and most important partners. Apple places great value in Foxconn for Foxconn's ability to do what it does better than any other company in the world. And Apple's customers, in turn, value Apple for doing what Apple (with Foxconn's help) does better than any other company in the world. Eg. churn out tens of millions of well-designed/-constructed yet fairly affordable gadgets day and night, for our pleasure. In the end, consumers reward Foxconn for being Foxconn, and it's good to occasionally get a glimpse of all the things we're really buying with our gadget-money. It could be worse; just look at what weed-money is buying in Mexico :)

Cook isn't naive, like many gadget-addicts are; he knows as well as any corporate leader that Foxconn is what you get when you subject an organisation to such high pressure in the quest to maximise [HUGE] profits. Lower costs every year, increased production every year, higher profits every year... all without any corners being cut or anything breaking? Pfft. Wasn't he instrumental to Apple's decision to relocate so much of their work to China and to Foxconn in the first place, and for precisely the reasons that ultimately make Foxconn such a wonderful employer?? Well no wonder he's annoyed by people finding out more about what that relocation really meant.

But fair's fair; he and Jobs and Apple have all been thoroughly rewarded for their good accomplishments, so they can probably deal with being chastised for their less good accomplishments.




Meh
By adrift02 on 2/17/2012 1:59:03 PM , Rating: 2
It's funny when these "blacklist" articles come out -- like it's anything new or uncommon. It's PR's job to ensure that their client and its products receive as soft of a landing as possible. That means keeping track of who is praising and who is bashing. Exclusives, interviews, early-access, etc -- that's all currency in PR (if it were Marketing, that's the "budget"). Of course those items are going to wherever it's going to make the largest positive impact. The NYT dug itself into a position (justified or not) where Apple no longer felt its image was being positively represented, end of story.




Is there anyone actually...
By Motoman on 2/17/2012 6:57:24 PM , Rating: 2
...pretending to be surprised by this?

The NYT dared to break ranks with the Apple propaganda machine. And then look what happens.

The worst possible thing Apple can have happen is for anyone - especially in the media - thinking about and discussing Apple in a realistic manner. It shatters the illusion they've created, brainwashing the dipsh1ts of this world into loving the emperor's new clothes.

...if someone snaps them out of it, and they see that the emperor actually has no clothes, the game will be over. Can't let that happen.




oh wow
By tamalero on 2/20/2012 10:55:22 AM , Rating: 2
Every time I see Apple actions and other stuff..
I can only imagine a whinny spoiled brat child.
complaining that other kids are doing the same as him after he found a "magical way" to play better with mud.
so he demands everyone pay him for said mud and demand mommy stop the others from copying him. (which he loves to do to others hypocritically) then goes wildly as trowing a tantrum when someone calls him when he is behaving badly.




NY Times being punished by Apple.
By fteoath64 on 2/23/2012 9:33:54 AM , Rating: 2
Apple could have used the excuse that Foxconn is a subcontractor and their employees are not Apple employees. But still, it has the obligation to ensure fair working conditions better than average for the Chinese counterparts.

The main catch is that with huge profits and high margins on their products, their customer and the public in general will have a "bad taste" when reading the report. As it screams greed and indifference to people in general.

In terms of working long hours to 60 or more a week. One has to contrast that doing these hours in the factory environment versus home or office environment are a major difference in effort and energy levels for each person.




Break out the popcorn!
By cpeter38 on 2/17/2012 1:17:07 PM , Rating: 1
Is there anything better than watching a gutter fight between 2 sanctimonious corporations that need to be taken down a notch?




By Beenthere on 2/17/2012 4:27:38 PM , Rating: 1
That would be UN-American. Obviously theses CEOs do this out of kindness to "enrich the lives" of the Chinese slaves. /s

The word is DENIAL . Look it up!




Truth In Between
By Pixelpusher66 on 2/18/2012 7:17:33 AM , Rating: 1
I find that issues are never black and white, rather shades of gray. I do believe Foxconn definitely took advantage of the labor situation in China in the past. But they eventually made changes to improve the conditions at these factory campuses. Do these conditions compare to conditions at what is left of American factories? No, but considering most of the Chinese workers come from poor rural areas they are a hell of a lot better than what they came from. This is the price we pay if we want relatively cheap consumer products and the companies that make them to post huge profits. Welcome to a global economy. While I don't agree with Reclaimer77's distorted view that liberals are to blame for everything, I do agree with his assertion that the New York Time's article was a hit-piece released during an election year aimed at the "bad" corporations. This was not breaking news since much of the information had already been available, I remember even reading an in depth article about the situation a while back on one of the tech sites, might have been on here. And like another poster stated the NYT article completely ignored the fact that Foxconn produces components for many companies besides Apple. I like to think of myself as an independent that leans to the left and I'd really like to see Ron Paul win, however unlikely it is.




iPhone Sales
By hiscross on 2/18/12, Rating: 0
Nooooo, really?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/17/12, Rating: -1
RE: Nooooo, really?
By Flunk on 2/17/2012 12:44:33 PM , Rating: 5
Don't try and black and white this. This is a complex issue that can't be broken down into a worthless two-sided political debate.

This entire thing has nothing to do with that, this is a simple matter of Apple's media control system shutting down an outlet that has displeased them. Apple has been controlling the media (quite well I might add) for a long time and they are fighting very hard to make sure that there are no news stories that don't paint them in the best possible light.

Issues about freedom of the press aside this really has nothing to do with politics.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/17/2012 1:03:29 PM , Rating: 2
Freedom goes two ways. Freedom of the press doesn't mean a private corporation has to grant you access. Sorry, as much as I hate Apple, I can't convince myself the New York Times is standing on solid ground here. They knew exactly what they were doing when they rolled out those smear pieces, and what the consequences might be.

Apple isn't "controlling media". Every company has a PR department and makes decisions that paint them in the best light possible. Are you serious with that angle?

If we allow our discourse with Apple's patent war spill over and taint us on EVERY issue regarding the company, we'll just be mindless haters. I'm not willing to go that far, sorry. I just can't do it.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By xytc on 2/17/2012 1:40:10 PM , Rating: 3
Let's not forget that all those that buy Apple products are in fact helping those that produce those Apple products to commit suicide which is in fact one of the highest sins which ironically resembles Apple's logo.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By kleinma on 2/17/2012 2:06:28 PM , Rating: 2
Like or hate Apple, just keep in mind that Foxconn plants where people are committing suicide make stuff for LOTS of companies.. here is a list of major ones from wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxconn#Major_custome...


RE: Nooooo, really?
By xytc on 2/17/2012 2:23:00 PM , Rating: 4
But you can't deny the fact that Apple logo symbolizes the primordial sin, so everything that Apple does is a sin that's why they won't be successful in any markets. They have failed in the OS business back in the days they will fail in the mobile and tablets too.
It's inevitable sooner or later Apple will fail.
They are DOOMED from the start. hehehe


RE: Nooooo, really?
By MrX8503 on 2/17/2012 3:36:30 PM , Rating: 1
.....I want what he/she's having


RE: Nooooo, really?
By xytc on 2/17/2012 4:15:47 PM , Rating: 5
That's what Steve Jobs said I guess that's why he got cancer because he asked for it. LOL


RE: Nooooo, really?
By xytc on 2/17/2012 4:23:59 PM , Rating: 2
Cancer is the cure for madness here get some.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By TakinYourPoints on 2/17/2012 7:30:33 PM , Rating: 1
Same. When I think that some of the people here can't get any more retarded, they keep setting new benchmarks.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By xytc on 2/18/2012 3:54:57 AM , Rating: 1
And a BIG FUCK YOU.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/17/12, Rating: -1
RE: Nooooo, really?
By ClownPuncher on 2/17/2012 2:26:05 PM , Rating: 4
Wouldn't you go to jail if you're wrong?


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/17/2012 3:21:22 PM , Rating: 2
/shrug

Perhaps a better analogy could have been found. But I digress. The press doesn't have the freedom to violate your privacy or force you to patronize their business if you do not wish it.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Black1969ta on 2/18/2012 4:10:46 AM , Rating: 3
No, since he called the press instead of the Police, it would be a civil tort, knowingly reporting to the police a false claim is a criminal tort.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Schrag4 on 2/17/2012 1:28:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
This entire thing has nothing to do with that, this is a simple matter of Apple's media control system shutting down an outlet that has displeased them.

Why wouldn't they shut down access?
quote:
Apple has been controlling the media (quite well I might add) for a long time...

I don't agree with you. Perhaps media outlets have promised to write favorable pieces about Apple in exchange for access. I wouldn't call that "control." If the media outlets agree to those terms, isn't it their own faults? Am I missing some story about Apple employees infiltrating media outlets?
quote:
...and they are fighting very hard to make sure that there are no news stories that don't paint them in the best possible light.

Again, why wouldn't they?

Look, I don't like Apple either, but why should they allow access to media outlets that they know won't give them what they consider fair coverage? The Times is still free to write whatever they want about Apple. This actually has nothing to do with "Freedom of the Press".


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Solandri on 2/17/2012 3:22:38 PM , Rating: 2
This is not a new debate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism

There's an expectation among the public that the media be objective and as unbiased as possible. Stuff which clearly introduces bias is frowned upon, even if the public still buys it up. There are no laws or official standards governing this. And for the most part self-regulation has worked (certain publications are considered respected, others considered to be jokes).

I guess what I'm saying is just because Apple can restrict access doesn't mean they should. Otherwise they risk news coverage of them being considered less respectable and thus less reliable. It sounds like Apple's PR branch is gambling that their enormous brand loyalty and current popularity will minimize any damage.

FWIW, I actually agree with Apple on the NYT pieces. Apple has many faults, but this is not one of them. The suicide rate among Foxconn workers is lower than the suicide rate for the same demographic in the U.S. (young assembly line workers). But the way to fight that sort of mischaracterization is by opening up access so other news outlets can see and compare for themselves. Not but cutting off the ones who write bad stories about you.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/17/12, Rating: -1
RE: Nooooo, really?
By Keeir on 2/17/2012 4:56:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I guess what I'm saying is just because Apple can restrict access doesn't mean they should. Otherwise they risk news coverage of them being considered less respectable and thus less reliable.


I think maybe this is a symptom of getting news from for profit media companies for so long.

As I understand it... all Apple is really doing is stopped providing free preview copies of software and granting "exclusives" with executives. In other words, they are treating the New York Times like any private citizen (maybe even not to that level). I can't even call this "restrict"ing access. That would be if Apple held a press conference in a public place or public event and then purposely kept New York Times repersentatives from attending.

Apple has stopped providing the same level of increased access to the New York Times. The high level of access is not the "normal" state. I'd consider relatively high levels of access, even if provided to all/most media, to be a significant problem in assessing yellow journalism.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Schrag4 on 2/17/2012 5:06:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I guess what I'm saying is just because Apple can restrict access doesn't mean they should. Otherwise they risk news coverage of them being considered less respectable and thus less reliable.

quote:
There's an expectation among the public that the media be objective and as unbiased as possible. Stuff which clearly introduces bias is frowned upon, even if the public still buys it up.

But my point is that nothing that Apple does (restrict access, promise other incentives, etc.) can have any impact on a media outlet's coverage unless the media outlet lets it have an impact! What you're saying is that people or organizations who take bribes shouldn't bear any responsibility, because, ya know, nobody can say no to a bribe, right?!


RE: Nooooo, really?
By testerguy on 2/18/2012 3:10:19 AM , Rating: 2
Apple haven't 'shut down' the outlet anyway - the 'outlet' can continue to spout whatever journalism they want.

In fact, Apples alienation of the NYT may well encourage them to write non-flattering articles.

As Reclaimer said, Apple has every FREEDOM to decide which publications it gives its information to, just like every other company can and does.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By retrospooty on 2/17/2012 2:58:00 PM , Rating: 4
"To a Liberal the story writes itself"

Damn, not only is every negative thing that happens politically and financially the liberals fault, but now its journalism too. Damn, those liberals sure do get around. They are everywhere!

Really, did a liberal drop you on your head as a child? You seem to have both brain damage and an intense hatred for liberals. Maybe mean abusive stepfather was a liberal? Seriously, what is it?


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/17/12, Rating: -1
RE: Nooooo, really?
By retrospooty on 2/17/2012 3:23:45 PM , Rating: 3
I am not saying the media isn't mostly liberal, just still wondering why you think everything negative that happens in the USA is the liberals fault. You cant look at any situation without blaming a liberal for it.

You know, the conservatives have had the vast majority of power in the past 30 years. It cant ALL be liberals fault, They simply havent been in charge 1/2 as much as conservatives. The argument cannot be made.

Really though, did a liberal drop you on your head as a child?


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/17/12, Rating: -1
RE: Nooooo, really?
By retrospooty on 2/17/2012 4:03:16 PM , Rating: 3
What do you mean "what am I talking about" ?

You blame everything that happens on libs. It's all over AT/DT in every political article, and now, it's even in an Apple article. That is VERY relevant to the topic at hand.

"Do yourself a favor and examine what your agenda is here. "

I dont have any agenda here, other than I am calling you on your gross bias. I dont give a crap about Apple, the New York Times, liberals or conservatives. I just find it hilarious that in every article you blame everything that happens on liberals, like you are on a vendetta. You remind me of Yosemite Sam. Replace the word Rabbit with Lliberal, and he's you!. I can see you jumping up and down stomping your feet "oooooooooooooooh, I HATE librals!!!"


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/17/2012 4:59:52 PM , Rating: 2
LOL you need to relax. There is no issue here. This is the New York Times we're talking about. All I'm saying is of course they would write the article in that way. Is anyone actually surprised?

You're getting WAY too defensive about this kid. If you have a problem with how I see things, don't read it.

The only problem you have is that my world view conflicts with yours. If that wasn't the case, you wouldn't waste over half your posts crying about it.

This is a smear piece aimed at Apple. NOTHING you've wasting your time telling me has even bothered denying it. I WANT to talk about the article, you're the one that caused this deflection from a kneejerk whinefest. You DO have an agenda.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By retrospooty on 2/17/2012 5:41:15 PM , Rating: 3
On my way home to relax now =)

You are something else man... Have a good weekend.

May your daughter marry a handsome and kind young hippie and the govt. teet grant you all the free treasures you desire in life. ;)


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/17/2012 3:54:48 PM , Rating: 2
Also you seem to be so confused that you associate Liberalism and Conservatism with politics. These are not political beliefs per say, but a general ideology.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By mars2k on 2/17/2012 4:28:37 PM , Rating: 2
You're not wiser just nuttier. Older maybe but dumb dumb dumb. Blather, Blather, Blather.
If you had any spare braincells you'ld notice that when Republicans accuse anybody of something, they themselves are doing it.
Class warfare? Separating America? You hate mongers are dellusional. Its the Republicans that have made war on the middle class, its the Republicans that call anybody that disagrees with them a solialist or a "Califoria Liberal" or Massachusetts Liberal on a Saul Alinsky this or that.

You know how to tell when a Republican is lying? You don't have to tell you just know it. They'll say anything.

Google Alinsky and tell me if Newt isn't the one who is following Alinsky's playbook. Not Obama
And by the way. R-77 all you're doing is repeating what you've picked up off of Fox there is nothing new there come back with an original thought if you ever get one.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Dorkyman on 2/17/12, Rating: -1
RE: Nooooo, really?
By sprockkets on 2/17/2012 6:26:34 PM , Rating: 2
Humans have been a disaster for this country. If you say otherwise you are very delusional.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By teacherlee on 2/17/2012 6:35:42 PM , Rating: 2
People like you (low information voters) who don't think critically, have been a disaster for this country.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/17/2012 6:50:13 PM , Rating: 2
Obama voters? Yup.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By TakinYourPoints on 2/17/12, Rating: 0
RE: Nooooo, really?
By TakinYourPoints on 2/17/12, Rating: 0
RE: Nooooo, really?
By retrospooty on 2/17/2012 7:04:17 PM , Rating: 4
"Libs have been a disaster for this country"

Hold on there buddy. When Obama took office in Jan 2009, the economy was in a tailspin. The stock market had been pummeled, the DJIA had been dropping 500+ points in a day on several occasions, and unemployment was rising fast. At that time the republicans had the white house for 20 of the previous 28 years and had the congress for 12 of the previous 14. We can’t act like all of our problems are because of liberals, because they just havent had the power. The Republicans have had nearly all of the power in modern history. You just can’t blame all of this on the left, the argument just cant be made.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/17/2012 7:36:39 PM , Rating: 1
Retro you already admitted you voted for Obama. If I were you I would have hung myself already. But you make it doubly worst by trying to defend the sheer disaster this administration has been.

NO, this does not mean we're saying Republicans are always better and Democrats are always bad. But no matter what objective numbers you use, ANY, Obama has been a terrible President. He quadrupled the deficit over the last President in HIS administration. What does it matter how long Republicans have had power in modern times? Exactly what does that have to do with anything?

Obama has shown us one thing and one thing only. It doesn't take 20+ years to push a country over the edge and into the abyss. It takes 3 years and a majority in Congress.

End of discussion. Link something that proves otherwise please, or shut up.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By TakinYourPoints on 2/17/2012 7:40:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If I were you I would have hung myself already.


?_?


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/17/12, Rating: 0
RE: Nooooo, really?
By wifiwolf on 2/17/2012 9:52:42 PM , Rating: 1
Although I don't support your political point of view, I usually find you very logical, but AFAIK, Obama won with outstanding majority. That would mean majority of americans should suicide.

Probably you mean people that will vote again on him, should.
You never know what the president will actually do after being elected.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By TakinYourPoints on 2/18/2012 2:04:48 AM , Rating: 2
I didn't vote in 2008, couldn't bring myself to.

How do you feel jumping to conclusions and sperging all over this forum like a child?


RE: Nooooo, really?
By retrospooty on 2/17/2012 8:42:34 PM , Rating: 2
"Retro you already admitted you voted for Obama. If I were you I would have hung myself already. But you make it doubly worst by trying to defend the sheer disaster this administration has been."

I told you I voted for him, and I REGRET it. I will NOT vote for him again. As fas as hanging myself for it, you are talking about 58% of this country you claim to love.

"NO, this does not mean we're saying Republicans are always better and Democrats are always bad."

Have you ever read your own posts? That is exactly what you have been saying for years. This is a tech site, but any regular here will tell you exactly what I just said. You deny that and you are a straight up liar.

" He quadrupled the deficit over the last President in HIS administration. What does it matter how long Republicans have had power in modern times? Exactly what does that have to do with anything?"

You tell me, I wasnt talking about him. I said when he took office the country was already in the crapper and the reps had the majority of power in our lifetime. YOU are the one who blames everything on the liberals, even though the conservatives have had all of the control. You still have never successfully explained that, you just gloss over it on a platitude, or just insult me and avoid the subject.

"Obama has shown us one thing and one thing only. It doesn't take 20+ years to push a country over the edge and into the abyss. It takes 3 years and a majority in Congress"

No, when he took office we were already over the abyss and falling fast. I dont think Obama is doing a good job, I think he sucks. He is doing a crappy job with the horrible mess he inherited from the conservatives that ruined my country.

You know, sometimes, you are alright, and sometimes you act like a complete narrow minded jackass. I actually enjoy the debates when you are acting human. Hopefully that guy shows back up.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Keeir on 2/17/2012 7:46:35 PM , Rating: 3
That's a pretty good arguement as far as it goes.

One could also say

"The Democrates have controlled the White House for 11 of the past 20 year!"

Your division lines are picked for a statistical reasons.

Lets try to be a little more sensical. One could probably make an argument that Great Depression and WWII marked a drastric change in the US as a nation. Both as we view the role of Government and the US's place in the world.

Since WWII's conclusion

1946-2011 -> 66 years

30/66 years a Democrat President and 36/66 years a Republican President.

46/66 years, the Senate Majority Party was Democratic.

48/66 years, the US House Majority Party was Deomocratic.

Years when a Political Party Controlled the House, Senate, and White House

Republican- 6
Democrat- 21

The Democratic Party has over the modern politcal period (defined as post WWII 1945-Present) had a significant political power advantage over Republicans. Controlling both branchs of Congress while leading the executive branch a staggering 33% of the time.

While I don't think this supports the view that "liberals" are all to blame, I find

quote:
The Republicans have had nearly all of the power in modern history.


Is hilarously untrue.

I find is especially funny when you consider the make-up of the 111th Congress.

In the Senate, Democrats had a nearly 60-40 advantage. The same was true of the House.

This is a level of unheard of political power. The 83rd, 108th, and 109th Congresses were in no way as unbalanced.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/17/2012 7:51:21 PM , Rating: 2
Keeir I've tried to help him understand how government works, and that's it's not a game of Checkers where whoever has the most pieces always wins, but it's hopeless. He just doesn't understand how our Government works and has boiled his argument down to "majority always rules regardless of position (House/Senate) or circumstance."

quote:
Years when a Political Party Controlled the House, Senate, and White House
Republican- 6
Democrat- 21


Interesting isn't it?


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Keeir on 2/17/2012 8:13:14 PM , Rating: 2
That is a good point. Even when a party has the nominal majority, it doesn't have the mandate to do what...

But I think its hard to get over the 111th Congress.

Controlling 59% of the Senate, the House, and a freshly electric president who won 53% of the Popular Vote and 68% of the electral college is well.. a clear political signal.

Yet looks the Acts passed? The short term effect has clearly been diasterous and unintended... which doesn't even get to the balantly illegal activies promoted (and I am not talking unconstitutional)... my personal favorite being taxing tourist to "increase" tourism.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Black1969ta on 2/24/2012 3:01:36 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
quote: Years when a Political Party Controlled the House, Senate, and White House Republican- 6 Democrat- 21 Interesting isn't it?


A better statistic would be what bills are passed when, what I mean is, I remember vividly the fact that Democrats had a 51% majority in House and Senate in 1992, Clinton(Congress) couldn't get anything done his first two years, everything was Vetoed or didn't even make it out to the President, then in '94 Republicans took over a small majority and suddenly things started getting done! many bills were signed and even the budget was balanced in his next term, but while the Demo's had the majority they could agree enough to pass anything over the Republicans!


RE: Nooooo, really?
By retrospooty on 2/17/2012 8:53:15 PM , Rating: 2
"While I don't think this supports the view that "liberals" are all to blame, I find
quote:
The Republicans have had nearly all of the power in modern history. Is hilarously untrue."


I get what you are saying, but we really aren't dealing with the economic fallout of Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy etc... We are dealing alot with policy fallout from Reagan on up.

"I find is especially funny when you consider the make-up of the 111th Congress"

I agree, and if your assertion is that they were aweful, one of the worst ever I agree with that as well. They suck bad, and so does Obama. MY point isnt defending the aweful job they are doing, my point is that when Obama took office, we were in the crapper and falling fast. It hasnt been seen that bad in our lifetimes. NOw, with that - in recent history reps have had the vast majority of power. My only point is that reclaimer blaming any and all problems on the liberals is a load of crap. Both sides are screwing us here, and this yoyo is stuck in the blame game ignoring the real issues.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By Keeir on 2/18/2012 3:25:52 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
but we really aren't dealing with the economic fallout of Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy etc


What?

Don't we have this huge National Insterstate System? How about NASA?

Sorry, this just doesn't wash.

Now, if you can think of a great reason to "break" at Regan, I will give it to you...

quote:
It hasnt been seen that bad in our lifetimes.


Your lifetime hasn't been very long I guess. In 2008 and 2009 things weren't that bad. 2010 and 2011 were simply awful.

quote:
My only point is that reclaimer blaming any and all problems on the liberals is a load of crap


Well, I think your barking up the wrong tree though. "Liberals" does not mean Democrats. Though Democrats often take the "liberal" point of view, that doesn't mean that Republicans don't ever take that point of view.

For example, one of the reasons we are in such trouble is the amount of sub-prime mortgages issued to people who didn't deserve the trust. Both Democrats and Republicans had a hand in creating this mess. Both acted out of liberal point of view that things should change so that Home Ownership was more widespread and "Fair". As a financial conservative, some of the machicinations make me sick and I freely admit that many were sourced from the Republican party.

Maybe a better way would be to point out that the Constitution set up a government where its hard for any particular group or viewpoint to gain the type of massive advantage required to ram through their agendas. The liberals may have led many of the "wrong" government actions of the recent history, the checks and balance system ensures that the conservates were at least complacent and at worst compliant.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By retrospooty on 2/18/2012 7:27:02 AM , Rating: 2
"Don't we have this huge National Insterstate System? How about NASA? Sorry, this just doesn't wash."

We are talking about current economic fallout.

Your lifetime hasn't been very long I guess. In 2008 and 2009 things weren't that bad. 2010 and 2011 were simply awful.

I am 40... And I think you completely forgot 2008 and 2009. Market crashing, housing crisis etc. It started in 2007. Unemployment lags by 6-9 months when things go south, and it lags by the same when things get better, it always does - and that crashed too in the year that followed. 2010 and11 were bad, but bad because we were dealing with the crash that happened from 2007-2009.

"Well, I think your barking up the wrong tree though. "Liberals" does not mean Democrats. Though Democrats often take the "liberal" point of view, that doesn't mean that Republicans don't ever take that point of view. For example, one of the reasons we are in such trouble is the amount of sub-prime mortgages issued to people who didn't deserve the trust. Both Democrats and Republicans had a hand in creating this mess"

I'll give you that, and you are correct, it was caused by both parties.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By teacherlee on 2/17/2012 6:32:16 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry that I'm older, wiser, and have more first hand knowledge than you do. But don't make this out to be a wacky conspiracy, it's not. This is how the game gets played.

You sir, are a f@ucking moron.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By mars2k on 2/17/2012 4:13:53 PM , Rating: 1
Can't you paranoids give it a rest. Who cares? Liberal/ Conservatives. Relax this isn't some liberbal conspiracy. I'm sick to death of you right wing lunatics going at every issue through that paranoid filter.
Really, Apple has the right to do what they want but this is just bad PR. The Times gets to wright what they want as well, who cares? Hey Reclaimer77 take the tin foil hat off noboddy is listening.


RE: Nooooo, really?
By trajan24 on 2/17/2012 6:11:44 PM , Rating: 2
Is English your second language? The NY Times, once a great paper, has become an ever declining cautionary tale of resting on laurels decades old. Plagiarists, fabulists, sophomoric political hacks masquerading as news, all inhabit their pitiful front page with tragic regularity. They also don't care much for hard won success that is achieved fairly. I have toilet paper better written than this rag.


Does anybody check their facts anymore?
By Tony Swash on 2/17/12, Rating: -1
RE: Does anybody check their facts anymore?
By hexxthalion on 2/17/2012 2:08:26 PM , Rating: 2
nope, they don't. all they do is just go through other articles on other blogs/columns/whatever, rehash it and publish. DT isn't what it used to be 5 years ago. Used to read it daily, then I stopped for a year or two and now I came back and it's bad.


RE: Does anybody check their facts anymore?
By sprockkets on 2/17/2012 3:45:22 PM , Rating: 2
Thank you for confirming that Daniel Dillinger is a stupid appletard.

We all knew that but thanks anyway.

Thanks for also reading the source articles, where again, it states:

quote:
This afternoon, New York Times tech reviewer David Pogue posted a review of the new stuff. It’s a solid piece of work. But it carries no quotes from a guy trying to wax visionary like his predecessor. And it hit the web late.


But whatever. If you don't like it Tony Swash, why don't you just leave? I dare you to never post here again if it is such a waste of everyone's time to read these articles.

I know you can't, because you have such a void in your life that without posting apple PR you would die of a mental breakdown.


By testerguy on 2/18/2012 3:22:12 AM , Rating: 1
The fact the site is so inexplicably biased and misleading could very well be the reason he posts in the first place.

A lot of kids on here start to buy in on the massively pathetic anti-Apple agenda and lose any rationality. Perhaps Tony is trying to help people by providing them the other half of the story which is always ignored by DT.

As always, I say lets continue the campaign to have DT removed from the side of Anandtech.


RE: Does anybody check their facts anymore?
By Tony Swash on 2/18/12, Rating: 0
By sprockkets on 2/19/2012 12:19:49 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
What's so striking is the large number of comments generated to discuss something that didn't happen but if it had would have fitted into the weird iPhobic cultist mindset. What's so amusing is that strenuous attempts to shut out reality change nothing. Reality persists.


And what's so striking to you is why you give a fck. Why? This site will never reform to your ways nor will it ever like apple products. Why don't you join your loonies over at the walled garden unicorn paradise? Ever cross your mind that the *reality* of the situation here is, no one here will ever agree with you even if you are right, and will rate you till your bloody red because you are such a annoying POS tattletale?

quote:
Danid Pogue's own tweet confirms that he (and thus the NYT) were give, just aike all the other tech reports, a one week preview copy of the new OS.


Good for you! Go tell your fellow buddies at appleinsider.com, since they were the dumbasses who asserted that and are appletards and applelovers who fap at Daniel's articles!


By hexxthalion on 2/21/2012 7:42:39 AM , Rating: 1
I'm going to quote John Gruber here:

"By sheer coincidence, I can report that this is nonsense. When I left my briefing with Schiller last Wednesday in New York, waiting in the hallway for the next briefing was: David Pogue."

link: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2012/02/18/jumpin...


"The Space Elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing" -- Sir Arthur C. Clarke














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki