Originally Posted by sog35
Chill out holmes.
This is a rumor site. This is like getting angry at a movie rumor site that got the plot wrong.
I mean seriously.
Dude, I'm chilled. And, yes, this is a "rumor" site. However, rumors or not, these "reporters" are supposed to be "professionals". I submit that there is no "pro" in their titles at all. Rather than being leaders, they are simply followers, ready to dive on whatever "insider information" comes fraudulently strolling in the door.
The link I posted has been available for over a week, and that knockoff was first shown earlier than that (here is another from mid July). I am not a reporter, nor am I a terribly good researcher. However, it took me exactly 10 seconds to type "iPhone 6 knockoff" into my little Googly thing and see an identical part on a functional knockoff that has been in the wild for at least a month. In the fast-paced world of smartphone tech, a month is forever!
This "rumor" is just poor, and should already be disqualified as trivial garbage for anyone with eyes. A far better story could have been written around the shoddy quality of Chinese "iPhone" knockoffs, with clear proof that the part was from one and that it wasn't holding up terribly well.
Which brings up …
Originally Posted by asdasd
Hmm, went back to look at your site more closely, and it could well be the same thing.
To be fair to AI they are reporting a different source from that link, who claimed it was an iPhone 6. Dickson's credibility should be shot, though.
Sorry for the brashness of my post. I'm not trying to be a dick. Just pointing out the terribly obvious.
I've made my point and will slink back into my cave, now.