Specifically, ZDNet reported that Intel Germany chief Hannes Schwaderer at a small gathering in Munich "confirmed" the existence of a larger iPhone at Apple that would employ one of Intel's ultra-mobile Atom processors.
The report gained widespread traction given earlier predictions by AppleInsider and other media outlets that such a device does in fact exist, and has long been under development at Apple's Cupertino-based headquarters. The problem, however, was that Schwaderer appears to have never made the comments suggested by the ZDNet report.
"No Intel exec has said anything about any future Apple product, Atom processor or otherwise," an Intel spokesperson told AppleInsider. "I think thatâs important to note as everyone speculates on future products from Apple."
Since ZDNet's original report hit the net, a couple of other publications on hand for Schwaderer's presentation have offered their interpretation of the events, which also appear to suggest that ZDNet's report was misleading.
An editor for Golem.de claims that he does not recall any mention of an iPhone tablet during the executives speech, while PCGamesHardware.de attests that a reference to an iPhone device was made, but only as an example of a product that could benefit from Atom.
Unfortunately, only 40 or so reporters were on hand for Schwaderer's presentation, AppleInsider has been told, and thus further first-hand accounts are likely to be limited.
Nevertheless, and regardless of misinterpretations this week, AppleInsider maintains that Apple is working on a iPhone-like mini tablet reminiscent of the Newton MessagePad that should surface in due time.
63 Comments
Oh, dear God. Only 40 reporters, most of whom were presumably either taking notes or recording the presentation???? How EVER shall we learn what was really said? Clearly, none of the FORTY reporters could have possibly captured whether the comment was made or not.
[QUOTE=DestructoTex;1252093]
I'm working on it. It's a different time zone. A different language...We'll see if anything comes of it. It was my understanding that it was a 'party' too... So... ya know... not everyone may have been spot on...
K
I believe it was used as an example. ZDNet misconstrued what was said and jumped all over it.
I guess many companies don't take their journalism seriously these days. Every day I come across news articles with mistakes in spelling, grammar and accuracy.
Surely sources could be vetted before reporting them as fact, especially if there is a translation issue.
Sounds like it's the fault of ZDNet in this case, but "rumors" are not facts. Everyone gets a black eye on this one.
I believe it was used as an example. ZDNet misconstrued what was said and jumped all over it.
I guess many companies don't take their journalism seriously these days. Every day I come across news articles with mistakes in spelling, grammar and accuracy.
I agree. There is no such thing as editorial control, nor is there basic 'quality control' in reportage these days. It's a bloody disgrace.