| Friday, June 3, 2005 |
21:36 - Breaking! Steve Jobs really secret son of aliens and Bigfoot!
http://news.com.com/Apple+to+ditch+IBM%2C+switch+to+Intel+chips/2100-1006_3-5731398.
|
(top)  |
Hey, it's not Think Secret spilling Apple's dirty little secrets this time, so surely it must be one of those reputable news media outlets we've heard so much about lately:
Apple Computer plans to announce Monday that it's scrapping its partnership with IBM and switching its computers to Intel's microprocessors, CNET News.com has learned.
Apple has used IBM's PowerPC processors since 1994, but will begin a phased transition to Intel's chips, sources familiar with the situation said. Apple plans to move lower-end computers such as the Mac Mini to Intel chips in mid-2006 and higher-end models such as the Power Mac in mid-2007, sources said.
The announcement is expected Monday at Apple's Worldwide Developer Conference in San Francisco, at which Chief Executive Steve Jobs is giving the keynote speech. The conference would be an appropriate venue: Changing the chips would require programmers to rewrite their software to take full advantage of the new processor.
Yyyyyyeah. How likely is it that this is for real, given that all the analysis in the field is just as valid as ever (and the consensus is that Apple would be insane to switch to Intel)? And how likely is it that "CNET News.com's Michael Kanellos and Richard Shim" simply read last week's rumors and figured that hey, since the burden of proof in the mainstream media these days is to show that something is false rather than that it's true, gee, why not post this as a full-fledged "CNET News.com has learned" story?
If this "scoop" turns out to be true, it will catch pretty much everyone in the Mac community and pundit corps by a real booga-booga kind of surprise—nobody thinks Apple switching from the G4/G5 to Intel makes any sense. (Solutions using the ARM processor for some kind of tablet or super-iPod, now, that's got possibilities.) But you know—if the story turns out to be false, which it most likely will, CNET is going to have a whole omelet on its face.
Which by today's standards means it's a "respectable news organization". And surely more responsible in its reporting than those stupid bloggers.
Via Chris and evariste.
UPDATE: Now, as various people have informed me, other organs including local ABC affiliates and even the New York Times are echoing this same story—and covering their tracks by saying "according to CNET.com" and "industry executives informed of the decision said Sunday".
Do these guys even care anymore about being accurate? Or is getting the scoop out the foremost, overriding goal?
UPDATE: Even the Mac news sites are full of "confirmations" of this story, including Wall Street analyses and such. Apparently the Wall Street Journal "confirmed" the story too, on Saturday.
I still can't see how this story can possibly be true—but how can this many news organizations be so credulous of such a freakish decision with no confirmation from any of the companies involved? If it's false, I can't imagine any circumstances under which Steve Jobs will start his keynote more monumentally pissed. I'm picturing with his head inflated to balloon-size over his turtleneck like Mr. Mackey.
Of course, there remains speculation over ways that Apple could (for instance) be tapping Intel for fab and yet not switching to Intel's own processors (via James A.). But I guess we'll find out at 10:00AM...
|
|
Brian Tiemann
