The theme for this week's rumors: "leaked spyshots" of iPhone parts that look pretty much identical to the existing iPhone. Maybe it's the iPhone 5S. Maybe it's just parts for the existing iPhone 5. Either way, pageview gold.
Stop me if you've heard this one before (for the past three years in a row). "TSMC will replace Samsung as Apple's CPU maker" is the new "Apple to unveil streaming music service at (x) event" rumor. Sure, it'll probably be true eventually, but you guys are just embarrassing yourselves by repeating the same rumor every year only to have it not come true. And you're not doing yourselves any additional favors by citing Digitimes as a source for this story, with or without this disclaimer paragraph:
"It should be noted that DigiTimes is notorious for reporting rumors from the technology industry supply chain that prove incorrect. However, the publication does on occasion relay accurate claims on Apple and other companies."
In this case, "on occasion" means, "with roughly the same periodicity as a unicorn appearing in front of a double rainbow during a transit of Venus."
Apple's Prototype iPhone 5S Based on New A7 Chip (MacRumors)
Normally I make fun of rumor blogs when they get all CSI on leaked parts, but this is actually a fairly impressive writeup. It is indeed looking like the next iPhone will just be a better/faster version of the existing iPhone 5. The all-too-predictable reactions to this development:
- Idiot tech pundits: "DISAPPOINTING, Apple is DOOMED"
- Me and millions of other consumers: "SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY"
Will a product that hasn't even been confirmed to exist displace an existing product from the pipeline? We have no idea -- and, critically, no proof either way -- but let's speculate a whole bunch anyway!
From the article: "We don't yet know what the plastic iPhone will cost" -- yes, or if it's even a real product and not the result of months worth of analyst fever dreams.
BGR has more BREAKING EXCLUSIVE pictures of ribbon cables to show you. Here, hold your excitement in this Dixie cup.
Looks familiar. Almost exactly like an iPhone 5. Wait... does that mean these could just be photos of iPhone 5 parts? Naaaaah...
That's a bold headline, BGR. What's your proof?
"Oppenheimer analyst Ittai Kidron cut his fiscal third-quarter sales estimates in a note to clients on Tuesday."
...Really? That's all you've got? Well, in that case, congratulations for winning the "Stupid Sensationalist Headline of the Week" award for the 84th week in a row.
From the article: "It may seem a little premature to already start talking about the deaths of smartphones and tablets." BUT AND HOWEVER: some analyst said some B.S., and regardless of whether or not it makes any rational bloody sense whatsoever, since it came out of the food hole of some analyst we are contractually obligated to pass it on.
This quote from the analyst is a gem of insight to be sure: "Essentially, we hope to take the computers out of computing."
Why the hell not? It can't be any more difficult than taking the analysis out of analysts.
From the article: "Their identity as iPhone 5S batteries can not be confirmed due to a lack of markings on them." So, how do you know this isn't a photo of iPhone 5 batteries, then? *holds hand to ear* What's that you say? You don't know? Well, why (pageviews) didn't you (pageviews) say so to begin with (pageviews)?
This happens every year: some "trusted source" makes a claim regarding the alleged date of the next iOS beta release. Every rumor blog passes the story around in the world's worst and dumbest game of telephone. The date passes... and nothing happens. Every year. Like clockwork.
Apple Finds It Difficult to Divorce Samsung (Wall Street Journal)
This deceptively long article is mostly just a recap of the long history of the Apple-Samsung rivalry. The only new piece of info is alleged claims from a TSMC executive claiming that Apple ditching Samsung for production of its iOS device CPU chipsets is finally a done deal. Or at least it will be a done deal starting next year.
There was a time, not too long ago, when the WSJ's record on Apple reporting was unassailable. If it was printed in the Journal, you could pretty much take it as read. That hasn't been true for a while now. As with pretty much everything else the Journal prints about Apple these days, I'll believe it when I see it.
From the article: "The site acknowledges that the part could simply be a Chinese clone of an iPhone 5 rear shell." You don't say.
From the article: "It should be noted that case makers have in the past obtained schematics claiming to show the design of a next-generation Apple product, only for those documents to prove incorrect." Hmm, why all the (token) skepticism? Whatever happened to the good ol' days when this kind of story got published without an ounce of contrarianism? I wonder.
From the article: "With Apple seemingly amping up the regulation processes for launching a new product, it seems likely that Apple is moving towards a launch for its long-rumored wrist device sometime soon."
Here's an alternate explanation: Apple has pre-emptively trademarked the name "iWatch" to stop Samsung or some other tragically unoriginal hacks from piggybacking off the well known "iDevice" branding by releasing a terrible smartwatch with that exact name.