Not many rumors came out this week. I guess most of the analysts were off at their annual retreat in New Mexico, out of their gourds on peyote and brainstorming what sort of egregious nonsense they’ll try to pass off as “analysis” over the coming months.
Chinese site you’ve never heard of before today makes completely unverifiable claim about Apple product whose existence is pure speculation. Stop me if you’ve heard this before.
Apple Adds Suppliers to Boost Smartphone, Tablet Production (Wall Street Journal)
“People familiar with the supply chain” are claiming that Apple is diversifying its overseas suppliers. I’d sure like to believe them, but I no longer trust the Wall Street Journal or its sources unless there’s an Apple event within the next 48 hours.
What some analyst “believes” or “predicts” very rarely aligns with what Apple eventually ends up doing. And by “very rarely” I mean “almost never.” Since this analyst works for a big-name company and gets to ask questions during Apple’s quarterly earning calls, though, let’s all pretend her predictions are newsworthy.
Everybody hold your breath for bug fixes and stability improvements!
“The question mark in the headline lets us retain our powers of legitimacy!” –9to5 Mac editors
From the article: “One of the barriers to widespread adoption of smartwatches is that existing models are not exactly sleek.” That’s one of the barriers, yes. Another is that existing models suck. Another barrier is that no one has come up with a justifiable use case for a smartwatch. Like, at all. It sounds like something out of an episode of Pimp My Ride. “Yo dawg, I heard you like touchscreens, so now you got one you can wear on your wrist, and you can read your email without having to take your iPhone out of your pock- dude, where are you going? Come back!”
Also, the “iWatch concept” image that heads this 9to5 Mac story makes me incredibly glad that it’s Jonathan Ive who’s doing design for Apple and not… not whoever this was. Ugggh.
This story is heavy on technical details, which strongly suggests it’s not the typical BS that circulates out of the Far East publications.
“A person familiar with the plans” claims next year’s iPhones will have glass that curves downward at the edges and – okay, I’m gonna stop right there. The next iPhone probably isn’t coming out until September of next year. That’s over 10 months away. No one claiming to have knowledge of the next iPhone actually has any clue what they’re talking about.
And by the way, seriously? The iPhone 5S came out two months ago, and the rumormongers are already jumping up and down claiming to have knowledge of the next model? That’s philosophically equivalent to decking out a retail chain in Christmas decorations in February.
Some analyst quoted in the story says, “Screen size is one of the things where Apple has to catch up to the Android camp.” Like it’s a case of Apple being incapable of making an iPhone with a bigger screen, rather than it being a case of the company not blindly following the latest idiotic trend in tech and making an iPhone 90 percent the size of an iPad mini just to appease analysts and checklist freaks. No, Apple has to “catch up” to the Android camp, because just look at how pathetically small its iPhone screens are. Tiny four-inch screens on a device that’s selling by the millions every week. Stick a fork in Apple, it’s done.
“The new Apple handsets are still in development and plans haven’t been completed,” according to Bloomberg’s source. Well, duh. I doubt Apple will finalize the next iPhone’s design until the first quarter of next year. Meanwhile, when this story turns out to be utter nonsense next year, Bloomberg can just do the typical rumormonger dance and say Apple changed its plans in mid-year. Extra bonus points if they can spin it in a way that makes it sound like insurmountable technical issues – issues that darling Samsung has handily solved, of course – are what’s preventing Apple from fulfilling analysts’ fantasies.
Ten more months of this until the next iPhone. I picked a bad week to quit drinking.