So let's see, the reporter was there for his JOB of reporting on the iPHone. So insead of not getting his job done, you know the thing he gets paid for, he had to put up with Apple mistreating him?
What exactly in your fanboi mind would be the OTHER side of the story? That professional reporters are treated like children rather than professionals for what? Why are you saying "supposedly" are you saying they are lying about their treatment?
Quote:
Originally Posted by blursd
And notice how no one even makes an issue of the fact this reporter PUT UP with the repeated treatment. If he were really so mistreated and offended why didn't he just leave ...? Oh wait, its because he wanted to see the iPhone. So I guess its okay to whore out your morals as long as you get something you want in the end - then when you get what you want you can complain about how you voluntarily placed yourself into a situation where you were supposedly mistreated
Remember ... you're only getting half the story here.
The only IP custom on the iPhone *IS* the software. You know the software that is already publically available to anyone.
All the other components are OFF THE SHELF.
There is no IP to protect. Frankly Nokia and others already HAVE 3G phones with cameras that have a higher megapixel resolution AND they have rear and front facing cameras as well.
That is all generic technology buddy. Treating the reporters like children is just foolishness.
And if the Apple employees HANDPICKED to be on station at Moscone don't have the discipline to keep their mouths shut then fire them. If you know which reporters leak your info then don't give them credentials or allow them into the secure press areas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408
This is awesome. If you're a shareholder (raising my hand), you love these stories of paranoia and protecting IP.
After all, all Apple wants to do at the expense of everything and anything else, just like any other publicly traded company, is return a profit to its shareholders.
If you think a corporation should be or do anything else (be nice, help old ladies cross the street, not spill hazardous material into the ocean, kiss the asses of visitors to its campus, etc.) at the expense of returning a profit to its shareholders, then you're the wrong species of animal.
It's all fun and games until we see Samsung or HTC with a cheap ripoff of the iPhone hitting the streets in a few weeks...I wonder how they got access to the hardware so fast.
I wonder why Apple doesn't want iPhone to be photographed untill July 11? I mean the first iPhone was all over the news with videos and pictures. This time is very secure. Hmm ... very strange. Perhaps Apple is holding a secret.
Such as a front-facing camera + video conferencing, and new various carriers such as t-mobile and Verizon. Hah... I wish
I can't believe that you got to have that experience. And you bitch about it. I bet 1000 people would gladly have an bathroom escort in order to have been there.
Paranoia on the part of Apple reached a new high this week when the company refused to allow journalists covering its annual developers conference to use the restroom facilities on site without a personal escort.
Unless you read the original blog, you miss what is probably the underlying reason why the security.
As the blogger, Hamblen, states near the end of his blog, "On a serious note, I presume that Apple wanted to prevent me and other reporters from sneaking off to one of the interview rooms where the new iPhone 2.0 was being displayed. (Apple also kicked reporters out of the developer's conference following the Jobs keynote and posted warnings to developers not to share proprietary information from their conference)" REF: Matt Hamblen. http://blogs.computerworld.com/user/matt_hamblen
Perhaps we should take into account, the conference was not for reporters, and all participants were subject to the conditions of Apples non-disclosure agreement; which, however did not apply to the media.
As we can see, there is no "live" news being fed from the WWDC following the keynote. As a third-party developer, I would be equally hesitant having the media loose on the premises. The security strategy was not just for Apple, the iPhone or any of its other products or applications, but also for the protection of those developers in attendance and their applications.
Thank you Apple.
Get a life guys. You don't hear any of the 5,000 plus paid attendees complaining.
Unless you read the original blog, you miss what is probably the underlying reason why the security.
As the blogger, Hamblen, states near the end of his blog, "On a serious note, I presume that Apple wanted to prevent me and other reporters from sneaking off to one of the interview rooms where the new iPhone 2.0 was being displayed. (Apple also kicked reporters out of the developer's conference following the Jobs keynote and posted warnings to developers not to share proprietary information from their conference)" REF: Matt Hamblen. http://blogs.computerworld.com/user/matt_hamblen
Perhaps we should take into account, the conference was not for reporters, and all participants were subject to the conditions of Apples non-disclosure agreement; which, however did not apply to the media.
As we can see, there is no "live" news being fed from the WWDC following the keynote. As a third-party developer, I would be equally hesitant having the media loose on the premises. The security strategy was not just for Apple, the iPhone or any of its other products or applications, but also for the protection of those developers in attendance and their applications.
Thank you Apple.
Get a life guys. You don't hear any of the 5,000 plus paid attendees complaining.
I've had to deal with the press on many, many occasions. The one thing that's common among the 'seasoned' pros is ego. They somehow believe they are above and beyond all that we simple common folk have to endure... like rules, for example.
The press are used to getting their way and not being constrained by rules.
So, basically, this article is just talking about a bunch of rich kids who got temporarily placed in a "regular kid's" school and are bitching about how crappy it is they have to follow the rules.
I especially like the part where they all thought they would use the 'storm the castle' approach and all just go at the same time. They act like they've been in a war camp for years in cruel conditions and they need to escape. What a bunch of idiots!!
If you don't like the conditions, take a different job -- or don't accept requests to cover Apple any more. Babies.
If you don't like the conditions, take a different job -- or don't accept requests to cover Apple any more. Babies.
I don't understand how your little anecdote applies to this situation. Why do you think it's appropriate to be followed and watched in the bathroom as a standard part of the job? I've not heard of anything like that in civil situations. Moscone Center isn't Gitmo.
I was a floor bathroom escort at WWDC and we were given tasers. We had a betting pooling going about who could tase the most people. I won, 15 people tased on day one alone!
I have a feeling that using a taser on someone would be considered criminal assault unless you are in fear of your life and you would wind up in jail and Apple would likely be sued.
Even law enforcement has to follow specific rules about when they are allowed to use a taser.
Unless you read the original blog, you miss what is probably the underlying reason why the security.
As the blogger, Hamblen, states near the end of his blog, "On a serious note, I presume that Apple wanted to prevent me and other reporters from sneaking off to one of the interview rooms where the new iPhone 2.0 was being displayed. (Apple also kicked reporters out of the developer's conference following the Jobs keynote and posted warnings to developers not to share proprietary information from their conference)" REF: Matt Hamblen. http://blogs.computerworld.com/user/matt_hamblen
Perhaps we should take into account, the conference was not for reporters, and all participants were subject to the conditions of Apples non-disclosure agreement; which, however did not apply to the media.
As we can see, there is no "live" news being fed from the WWDC following the keynote. As a third-party developer, I would be equally hesitant having the media loose on the premises. The security strategy was not just for Apple, the iPhone or any of its other products or applications, but also for the protection of those developers in attendance and their applications.
Thank you Apple.
Get a life guys. You don't hear any of the 5,000 plus paid attendees complaining.
Not to mention that the journalist swine where F*cking lucky to have bathroom privileges at all. If it was me, they'd each be issued a pair of depends.
Perhaps we should take into account, the conference was not for reporters, and all participants were subject to the conditions of Apples non-disclosure agreement; which, however did not apply to the media.
From what I understand, tech journalists are asked to sign NDAs all the time. That would be much more appropriate.
Sometimes I think people get a little TOO into the "fun" of being a security guard, or police, or whatever. Power corrupts!
I'm sure they were following orders... but the WAY they followed them was just uncalled for.
I find it fascinating that so many people are interested in protecting the representatives of the media. Perhaps if the members of the media/press, or whatever you choose to call them, learned to act both responsibly and honestly (to report and not spin the information they sell) one get more excited about the way they are treated. Unfortunately, members of the media, just like members of the judiciary, have taken their constitutionally guaranteed rights and prostituted them. Remember that the Founding Fathers warned of this i(both the media and the judiciary assuming too much power) in the Federalist Papers shortly after our Constitution was written.
Note to the media: If you don't like being treated like out of control children, then stop acting like out of control children.
Would press members have agreed to sign it though?
Or would they have signed it and then blogged about how
unamerican it was to have been required to sign it?
I don't think so. As I understand it, Intel Developer Forum and similar conferences require an NDA for press entry. The same goes for any piece of hardware or software that's tested, benchmarked or reviewed. The NDA applies until a certain date that the company allows stories to be printed or posted. If you want early access, you get the NDA, otherwise, you get access on release day, meaning you're a week behind.
There are some that refuse to sign NDAs, but I haven't heard of any complaining about it.
Comments
Bottomline: Insider information has leaked, in the past, via the bars, bathrooms and more during these events.
Since we are on the subject of bathrooms, was that pun intentional?
What exactly in your fanboi mind would be the OTHER side of the story? That professional reporters are treated like children rather than professionals for what? Why are you saying "supposedly" are you saying they are lying about their treatment?
And notice how no one even makes an issue of the fact this reporter PUT UP with the repeated treatment. If he were really so mistreated and offended why didn't he just leave ...? Oh wait, its because he wanted to see the iPhone. So I guess its okay to whore out your morals as long as you get something you want in the end - then when you get what you want you can complain about how you voluntarily placed yourself into a situation where you were supposedly mistreated
Remember ... you're only getting half the story here.
All the other components are OFF THE SHELF.
There is no IP to protect. Frankly Nokia and others already HAVE 3G phones with cameras that have a higher megapixel resolution AND they have rear and front facing cameras as well.
That is all generic technology buddy. Treating the reporters like children is just foolishness.
And if the Apple employees HANDPICKED to be on station at Moscone don't have the discipline to keep their mouths shut then fire them. If you know which reporters leak your info then don't give them credentials or allow them into the secure press areas.
This is awesome. If you're a shareholder (raising my hand), you love these stories of paranoia and protecting IP.
After all, all Apple wants to do at the expense of everything and anything else, just like any other publicly traded company, is return a profit to its shareholders.
If you think a corporation should be or do anything else (be nice, help old ladies cross the street, not spill hazardous material into the ocean, kiss the asses of visitors to its campus, etc.) at the expense of returning a profit to its shareholders, then you're the wrong species of animal.
It's all fun and games until we see Samsung or HTC with a cheap ripoff of the iPhone hitting the streets in a few weeks...I wonder how they got access to the hardware so fast.
I wonder why Apple doesn't want iPhone to be photographed untill July 11? I mean the first iPhone was all over the news with videos and pictures. This time is very secure. Hmm ... very strange. Perhaps Apple is holding a secret.
Such as a front-facing camera + video conferencing, and new various carriers such as t-mobile and Verizon. Hah... I wish
Paranoia on the part of Apple reached a new high this week when the company refused to allow journalists covering its annual developers conference to use the restroom facilities on site without a personal escort.
Unless you read the original blog, you miss what is probably the underlying reason why the security.
As the blogger, Hamblen, states near the end of his blog, "On a serious note, I presume that Apple wanted to prevent me and other reporters from sneaking off to one of the interview rooms where the new iPhone 2.0 was being displayed. (Apple also kicked reporters out of the developer's conference following the Jobs keynote and posted warnings to developers not to share proprietary information from their conference)" REF: Matt Hamblen. http://blogs.computerworld.com/user/matt_hamblen
Perhaps we should take into account, the conference was not for reporters, and all participants were subject to the conditions of Apples non-disclosure agreement; which, however did not apply to the media.
http://blogs.computerworld.com/sites...ip_warning.jpg
As we can see, there is no "live" news being fed from the WWDC following the keynote. As a third-party developer, I would be equally hesitant having the media loose on the premises. The security strategy was not just for Apple, the iPhone or any of its other products or applications, but also for the protection of those developers in attendance and their applications.
Thank you Apple.
Get a life guys. You don't hear any of the 5,000 plus paid attendees complaining.
Unless you read the original blog, you miss what is probably the underlying reason why the security.
As the blogger, Hamblen, states near the end of his blog, "On a serious note, I presume that Apple wanted to prevent me and other reporters from sneaking off to one of the interview rooms where the new iPhone 2.0 was being displayed. (Apple also kicked reporters out of the developer's conference following the Jobs keynote and posted warnings to developers not to share proprietary information from their conference)" REF: Matt Hamblen. http://blogs.computerworld.com/user/matt_hamblen
Perhaps we should take into account, the conference was not for reporters, and all participants were subject to the conditions of Apples non-disclosure agreement; which, however did not apply to the media.
http://blogs.computerworld.com/sites...ip_warning.jpg
As we can see, there is no "live" news being fed from the WWDC following the keynote. As a third-party developer, I would be equally hesitant having the media loose on the premises. The security strategy was not just for Apple, the iPhone or any of its other products or applications, but also for the protection of those developers in attendance and their applications.
Thank you Apple.
Get a life guys. You don't hear any of the 5,000 plus paid attendees complaining.
best post yet. and i totally agree.
Sometimes I think people get a little TOO into the "fun" of being a security guard, or police, or whatever. Power corrupts!
I'm sure they were following orders... but the WAY they followed them was just uncalled for.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
I love that quote
The press are used to getting their way and not being constrained by rules.
So, basically, this article is just talking about a bunch of rich kids who got temporarily placed in a "regular kid's" school and are bitching about how crappy it is they have to follow the rules.
I especially like the part where they all thought they would use the 'storm the castle' approach and all just go at the same time. They act like they've been in a war camp for years in cruel conditions and they need to escape. What a bunch of idiots!!
If you don't like the conditions, take a different job -- or don't accept requests to cover Apple any more. Babies.
If you don't like the conditions, take a different job -- or don't accept requests to cover Apple any more. Babies.
I don't understand how your little anecdote applies to this situation. Why do you think it's appropriate to be followed and watched in the bathroom as a standard part of the job? I've not heard of anything like that in civil situations. Moscone Center isn't Gitmo.
He should have pissed on the floor: wow:
Why not piss in the bathroom and aim poorly and hit the escort's shoes?
I was a floor bathroom escort at WWDC and we were given tasers. We had a betting pooling going about who could tase the most people. I won, 15 people tased on day one alone!
I have a feeling that using a taser on someone would be considered criminal assault unless you are in fear of your life and you would wind up in jail and Apple would likely be sued.
Even law enforcement has to follow specific rules about when they are allowed to use a taser.
Unless you read the original blog, you miss what is probably the underlying reason why the security.
As the blogger, Hamblen, states near the end of his blog, "On a serious note, I presume that Apple wanted to prevent me and other reporters from sneaking off to one of the interview rooms where the new iPhone 2.0 was being displayed. (Apple also kicked reporters out of the developer's conference following the Jobs keynote and posted warnings to developers not to share proprietary information from their conference)" REF: Matt Hamblen. http://blogs.computerworld.com/user/matt_hamblen
Perhaps we should take into account, the conference was not for reporters, and all participants were subject to the conditions of Apples non-disclosure agreement; which, however did not apply to the media.
http://blogs.computerworld.com/sites...ip_warning.jpg
As we can see, there is no "live" news being fed from the WWDC following the keynote. As a third-party developer, I would be equally hesitant having the media loose on the premises. The security strategy was not just for Apple, the iPhone or any of its other products or applications, but also for the protection of those developers in attendance and their applications.
Thank you Apple.
Get a life guys. You don't hear any of the 5,000 plus paid attendees complaining.
Not to mention that the journalist swine where F*cking lucky to have bathroom privileges at all. If it was me, they'd each be issued a pair of depends.
When you were a child, your parents probably taught you to wash your hands after going to the bathroom.
He probably didn't wash his hands because his parents taught him not to pee on his hands when he goes to the bathroom.
Old but good.
I like to use the rest rooms at Best Buy...they have those high velocity air, hand dryers. It blows the piss off your hands real good.
Perhaps we should take into account, the conference was not for reporters, and all participants were subject to the conditions of Apples non-disclosure agreement; which, however did not apply to the media.
From what I understand, tech journalists are asked to sign NDAs all the time. That would be much more appropriate.
Sometimes I think people get a little TOO into the "fun" of being a security guard, or police, or whatever. Power corrupts!
I'm sure they were following orders... but the WAY they followed them was just uncalled for.
I find it fascinating that so many people are interested in protecting the representatives of the media. Perhaps if the members of the media/press, or whatever you choose to call them, learned to act both responsibly and honestly (to report and not spin the information they sell) one get more excited about the way they are treated. Unfortunately, members of the media, just like members of the judiciary, have taken their constitutionally guaranteed rights and prostituted them. Remember that the Founding Fathers warned of this i(both the media and the judiciary assuming too much power) in the Federalist Papers shortly after our Constitution was written.
Note to the media: If you don't like being treated like out of control children, then stop acting like out of control children.
From what I understand, tech journalists are asked to sign NDAs all the time. That would be much more appropriate.
Yes, it seems like an NDA would be sufficient.
Yes, it seems like an NDA would be sufficient.
Would press members have agreed to sign it though?
Or would they have signed it and then blogged about how
unamerican it was to have been required to sign it?
Would press members have agreed to sign it though?
Or would they have signed it and then blogged about how
unamerican it was to have been required to sign it?
I don't think so. As I understand it, Intel Developer Forum and similar conferences require an NDA for press entry. The same goes for any piece of hardware or software that's tested, benchmarked or reviewed. The NDA applies until a certain date that the company allows stories to be printed or posted. If you want early access, you get the NDA, otherwise, you get access on release day, meaning you're a week behind.
There are some that refuse to sign NDAs, but I haven't heard of any complaining about it.