Before China iCloud spy chip allegations, Bloomberg published these five incorrect stories...

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 26
    Flensing KnifeFlensing Knife Posts: 1unconfirmed, member
    I'm most definitely NOT an Apple fanboy. I dislike many things Apple does, and I'm disgusted by their planned obsolescence, patent trolling, and their hostility to business and enterprise customers. But Bloomberg's original article is a steaming pile. There's no factual information. Even if you hate Apple, you still need to provide SOME factual information. Is it possible that some sort of hardware hacking may have taken place? Sure it's possible. But the blathering nonsense in the original Bloomberg article makes it clear the authors don't even understand the topics they are writing about. It's a chip, that gets added to the motherboard, and it hacks the OS? How does the chip even know what OS will be installed? And how does it send information out through a firewall that's not even in the same room? Lots of detailed descriptions of vague concepts but no specifics. Bloomberg is a clickbait factory, and most likely either involved in or a patsy for, stock manipulation schemes.
  • Reply 22 of 26
    This factually inaccurate article looks like fan fiction in the guise of serious criticism.

    I subscribe to Bloomberg and have subscribed to Apple Insider, otherwise I have seen what is reported in both places. Bloomberg has a solid record on Apple, especially since Mark Gurman was assigned the beat. 

    When covering a notoriously secretive company like Apple that carefully manages the minutiae of their public image, there will be occasional missteps, but to present Bloomberg’s coverage as has been done here is more than quite a stretch.

    The instance regarding the iPad is, for example, an outright misrepresentation of the reporting at Bloomberg. He appeared repeatedly on Bloomberg Technology -a show I regularly watch- and his advance reporting was by far the most accurate from any mainstream news outlet.

    Bloomberg’s primary customers are the hundreds of thousands of Terminal subscribers who pay a substantial fee for the service. The last quote I saw in reputable media was roughly $25,000 per terminal per year. People do not pay $25k a seat for a service that is as inaccurate as portrayed here.

    The primary journalist covering Apple for Bloomberg is Mark Gurman. He is on Twitter at @markgurman and also lists his email on his Twitter page. I suggest the author contact him.
  • Reply 23 of 26
    plovell said:

     hey - the proof of the pudding is in the eating. 
      
    Thank you very much for using this saying correctly. I keep trying to explain it to people but they won’t listen or change their ways. Some just want to eat their cake and have it too.
  • Reply 24 of 26
    Apple's M&A business apart from Beats is typically around low key small companies. This sort of company is not even on most Wall St advisors radar. These people are really only interested in the 'mega-deal' that mean millions and millions in fees to their company.
    Buying a small startup for say $10M is not even worth them answering the phone for.

    Once upon a time, Bloomberg was regarded as the bastion of factual reporting. Perhaps what goes down to their $25K/per seat/per year subscribers is better, more factual and accurate than what gets broadcast to the world at large? I don't know but from this story they do seem to have descended into the 'National Enquirer' league of gossip/scandal and suggestion sheets.

    I'm waiting for someone to sue BB for the lies they spouted in this story. Apple won't do it for obvious reasons, (discovery)[1] but an investor could do it.

    Then there is the little matter of Stock Manipulation. APPL is the most shorted stock on Wall St.
    So is Tesla (TSLA). There is an excellent write up on the Tesla stock manipulation over on 'cleantechnica'.

    If you read that and then double and even triple the numbers you can get some idea of the sort of manipulation that goes on with APPL.
    I'm not a stockholder in Apple or Tesla so I have no direct axe to grind.

    [1] If you don't know what would happen in the discovery phase of a case and how hard it is to keep what is in the discovery material secret then you really need to go read some books on law cases that went horribly wrong because of leaks.

  • Reply 25 of 26
    davgreg said:
    This factually inaccurate article looks like fan fiction in the guise of serious criticism.

    I subscribe to Bloomberg and have subscribed to Apple Insider, otherwise I have seen what is reported in both places. Bloomberg has a solid record on Apple, especially since Mark Gurman was assigned the beat. 

    When covering a notoriously secretive company like Apple that carefully manages the minutiae of their public image, there will be occasional missteps, but to present Bloomberg’s coverage as has been done here is more than quite a stretch.

    The instance regarding the iPad is, for example, an outright misrepresentation of the reporting at Bloomberg. He appeared repeatedly on Bloomberg Technology -a show I regularly watch- and his advance reporting was by far the most accurate from any mainstream news outlet.

    Bloomberg’s primary customers are the hundreds of thousands of Terminal subscribers who pay a substantial fee for the service. The last quote I saw in reputable media was roughly $25,000 per terminal per year. People do not pay $25k a seat for a service that is as inaccurate as portrayed here.

    The primary journalist covering Apple for Bloomberg is Mark Gurman. He is on Twitter at @markgurman and also lists his email on his Twitter page. I suggest the author contact him.
    Four of the five hysterically wrong pieces detailed here int he article were written by Mark Gurman. His background is blogging leaks, not journalism. 

    But please fill in some details here. Your accusation of "outright misrepresentation of the reporting at Bloomberg" needs some fleshing out. Please name one thing that is misrepresented. 

    Second, your claim that "his advance reporting was by far the most accurate" also demands a shred of evidence. Name some things he accurately reported. So far all you've done is honk your horn. Step up with some facts. 
    derekcurriejony0
  • Reply 26 of 26
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,606member
    What a petty article.  Grow up Dan.
Sign In or Register to comment.