Multiple instances of publications contradicting one another, and sometimes even themselves? That would get writers fired relatively quickly in any other field, but it's pretty much par for the course when it comes to Apple rumors.
When hardware references like these show up, they are usually -- but not always -- indicative of forthcoming new hardware. 9to5 Mac admits they have no idea of the possible timeframe involved, however.
Buried five paragraphs deep into this article: "The source of Monday's rumor does not have an established track record with regard to rumors about future Apple products." Okay, then. Glad to see the blogosphere continues to vet its sources so thoroughly prior to passing on whatever they've written about Apple that afternoon.
The latest nonsense from Digitimes contradicts nonsense they published last month. For some reason, MacRumors once again neglects to mention the publication's consistently awful accuracy record, so I'll do it for them: Digitimes got exactly one thing right in 2013. They are not a reputable source of Apple news. Full stop.
From the article: "The rumors cropped up on a number of Chinese websites." And we all know how reputable those sources are. Considering Apple is (apparently) going to produce sapphire supplies in a factory it will own outright, this claim that "price is the deciding factor" doesn't make a lick of sense. Busted.
iPhone 6 Said to Adopt 'Bezel-Free' Display (MacRumors)
The source for this report, The Korea Herald, has yet to say anything about Apple's future plans that is remotely credible. According to MacRumors, "No significant details about Apple's plans for the iPhone 6 are shared in the report," which therefore leads me to wonder why they and all the other rumor blogs plastered this non-story all over the internet.
From the article: "It does not appear that the Sony-sourced front-facing camera sensors will make it into the iPhone 6 given the timeline specified in the article, and will instead be included in a future iPhone." In other words, the potential fruits of this rumor are comfortably far enough in the future that if this never happens, no one will remember.
Some Asian publication makes completely unverifiable claims about the next-gen iPhone, and 9to5 Mac is on it. This is the kind of not-news "reblogging" I took them to task for at the end of last year. They should stick to their own original reporting (which is both accurate and well-researched) and leave these types of junk stories on the cutting-room floor.
This article proves two things I've said on multiple occasions:
- Nothing CNET writes about Apple is worth taking seriously
- "Analysts" have no idea what they're talking about when they talk about Apple
Seriously, this guy thinks an iOS-OS X convergence device is only 12-18 months away. This despite Apple's entire executive team loudly (and recently!) taking this idea out behind the woodshed and turning it into hamburger.
Anyone who says iOS and OS X will converge is either being willfully ignorant or is simply oblivious to the reality of the market. An example of such a convergence device already exists, and it's been a tragic sales failure: Microsoft's Surface. You may have heard of it. But then again, based on the sales numbers, perhaps you haven't.
Imagine the opposite headline: "Apple likely to bulk up iPhone and iPad with thicker and heavier backlights." That would be news. This? This is not news.
The first sign that this report is BS: the source is Bloomberg. They've posted so many inaccurate things about Apple's supposed future plans that they're no longer worth taking seriously.
The second sign that this report is BS: it claims Apple will introduce a product in April but won't actually launch it until just before Christmas. Do you remember the last time Apple unveiled a product to the public and then waited eight months before actually putting it on sale? Yeah, me neither.