≡ Menu

Daring Fireball: Plugged Leaks

Daring Fireball: Plugged Leaks

Keeping these minor iPod updates out of the rumor mill pales in comparison to the nearly airtight lid Apple kept on the news regarding their upcoming switch to Intel processors for all Macs. This was quite probably the biggest Mac news in 10 years, and the Mac rumor sites had nothing.
In fact, until the Wall Street Journal broke the story two weeks prior to the announcement, the only person who had anything about it was, of all people, Paul Thurrott. Yes, the same Paul Thurrott whom I’ve long-berated as being always wrong regarding all things Apple. Except, this time, he was right. (And I was wrong.)

I think John posts great stuff, but this one has me scratching my head. So Apple has plugged its leaks – yet, somehow, the Wall Street Journal can break the story two weeks before it happens, and CNet get the detail days before? That doesn’t sound like plugged leaks to me.

Perhaps John is intimating that both the WSJ and CNet sources must have been from Intel. Yet, the WSJ’s original story (paid sub required) cited both “industry executives” (note the plural) and “former Apple engineers”. It’s unlikely that both the executives cited were from Intel: as a journalist, there would be no point in simply getting a second source from the same company to confirm the facts. Of course, the source could have been in a third company – Microsoft and Adobe would certainly have known, at least at very senior level.

But the more likely explanation is simply that someone at Apple leaked the details. And, it should be remembered, there’s an old saying at Apple: It’s a strange ship that leaks from the top.

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • http://www.ipod-dj.com JOnny Rocket

    Apple have let info loose in the run-up to big deal things in the past. This was (IMHO) an attempt to inform the market to prevent too many heart attacks during Jobs’ keynote.

    I’m a freelance as of THursday



  • Zato

    Apples plan to switch to Intel must have been run past some Wall street traders in advance to judge what might happen to the stock price. This may be where the leak came from.

  • http://daringfireball.net/ John Gruber

    My gut feeling is that the CNet story was a deliberate, authorized leak, perhaps simply because people’s heads might have popped if Jobs had simply announced it as a total surprise during the keynote. The Wall Street Journal story two weeks prior, however, I’m not sure about.

    Note also that CNet’s story wasn’t published until after the markets closed on Friday.