Apple Rumor Mill Comes Up Empty Again

Techwriter10 0 342 Views

Yesterday was Apple's Keynote, and you would think we would have learned by now that Apple rumors are meaningless. As the buzz grows louder before each of these events, there are rumors so convincing we think they must be a fait accompli. I mean how many of you thought you would wake up this morning to find the iPod Touch still doesn't have a camera? Not many, I'm sure and even fewer hands would go up if you suggested the *Nano* would have one. Yet each keynote, we still believe.

Remember the last one? Sure you do. There was a rumor about the $800 Mac Book. It was so solid it was sure to happen, only it didn't. And the Tablet, that one surfaced this year too, yet there was no Tablet. Why do we fall for it every time? It must be that we want to believe.

What Happened to that Camera?

If we were sure of anything prior to yesterday's Keynote, it was that the Touch would have a camera. What we got was pretty good: a price cut, more power; but we wanted a camera, dammit and we didn't get one. I for one am completely shocked, but not nearly so much as the fact that Nano was given one (along with a pedometer and FM radio). Steve Jobs likes to keep us guessing and this one came out of left field. No iPod has ever had an FM transmitter before (or a pedometer for that matter, a neat but frivolous feature).

The Touch deserved this feature. It's worked hard to be a good solider in the iPod line and Jobs gave it to the Nano?! What a slap in the face that was. Rumor has it (if you still believe Apple rumors) that the Touch is so devastated by this decision that it's in hiding and refusing to see anyone. Consumers who fully expected a camera on our Touch this morning feel the same way.

As for That Tablet

Then there's the Tablet. You know the one. People were actually describing this thing and pricing it. It felt so real, and yet once again the rug was pulled out from under us. Alas, there was no Tablet and we were left empty and wondering why Apple would treat us so badly. And there are clearly people who want to buy this lovely bit of vaporware (can hardware be vaporware too?). A market salivating for a product that doesn't exist (at least not yet). Why would Apple do that? Maybe it just wasn't ready for prime time. Perhaps next time.

The Beatles-iTunes thing didn't happen either, a minor disappointment compared to the other items that were rumored yet never materialized. Sure, what they announced wasn't bad, but the Apple rumor mill is so strong and so convincing, it's hard not to be disappointed by what got left out, even if Apple took no part in generating these rumors.

For now, we are left to sit and wait until the next Keynote when you can be sure we will play this same game all over again. And we will still believe. You know we will.

Dani AI

Generated

As observed, the lead-up to Apple keynotes reliably generates confident-sounding rumors that often miss the mark. Three forces make that happen: supply-chain noise (photos or component lists that represent prototypes), analysts or blogs amplifying thin signals, and the human appetite for a neat, shareable scoop. The result is high volume and high conviction, with actual announcements sometimes taking a very different shape.

A practical way to read the noise is to separate rumor types and weigh their signals. Anonymous tip + a headline is weak. Converging evidence — multiple independent sources, clear component or device photos showing part numbers, developer/firmware references, regulatory filings, or accessory-maker listings — raises confidence. Timing matters too: hardware that appears only weeks before an event is more believable than claims that float for months without corroboration. Remember that prototypes exist; not every prototype becomes a shipping product.

Checklist to judge a rumor:

  • Multiple independent reports that repeat the same technical detail.
  • High-quality photos or component identifiers (not blurry or generic shots).
  • Firmware/SDK/OS beta strings or APIs referencing a new feature.
  • Regulatory filings (FCC/telecom) appearing near launch.
  • Accessory or retail pre-listings from credible vendors.
  • A track record of accuracy from the source(s).
  • If most of the above are missing, treat the claim as speculative.

A practical stance for buyers and planners is low-commitment expectations: delay purchases tied to a single rumor, prefer vendors with good return policies, and wait for official confirmation before changing workflows or budgets. Rumor-watching can be fun and sometimes prescient, but framing decisions around verifiable signals keeps disappointment and wasted money to a minimum.

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.

Edit Preview