Apple: We didn't send iPhone/Leopard e-mail
updated 04:10 pm EDT, Fri May 18, 2007
Apple denies iPhone e-mail
The momentous faux email that send Apple's stock price plummeting down more than $5 and prompted a retraction from its original publisher (Engadget) is now the subject of dispute by Apple officials. According to a report from eWeek, Apple spokesperson Natalie Kerris flatly denies the claim that the email triggering the inflammatory story originated internally. Kerris also reiterated earlier statements indicating that the iPhone is on track for a June launch, while Leopard is still scheduled for October with a public beta of the new operating system due during the week of Apple's Worldwide Developer conference (WWDC), starting June 11th.
Some industry watchers are crying out for an SEC investigation, which would almost certainly result if the memo was determined to originate from an individual seeking to manipulate Apple's stock price.
Helping to buoy Apple's share price to levels seen prior to the incident is the announcement that the iPhone was officially awarded FCC approval.
Um *public* beta?
05/18, 04:41pm reply
From whence came your claim of a public beta? The article says "Kerris added that developers can expect to see a full-featured developer release of Leopard at this June's WWDC".
The fact that some unscrupulous people will make it public is neither here nor there, it's not officially a public beta.
Geobunny
Grizzled Veteran
Joined: Oct 2000
IWork 7
05/18, 05:02pm reply
Going so I can get IWork 7
starwarrior
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Mar 2006
re: public beta
05/18, 06:32pm reply
Well, it'll be on all the P2P sites in no time, and since attendees are technically "the public", it could be called a public beta.
testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Aug 2001
re: public beta
05/18, 06:32pm reply
Then again, no one said it was in beta state yet....
testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Aug 2001
ADC != the public
05/18, 06:36pm reply
Those getting ADC previews of leopard are most certainly not "the public". If that were true, they'd be legally allowed to divulge information about the contents of said previews.
Spacemoose
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Feb 2004
non public
05/18, 06:54pm reply
The people who receive the software at the Apple WWDC are strictly and legally bound to non-disclosure regarding the information (printed, presented, software) they get there. The only things outside of that legally binding contract, are those specific items Apple releases as "Public". You could be sued into oblivion for divulging information, or allowing someone else to divulge the information (knowingly or otherwise), before Apple announces it to the public.
MacNN does a disservice to its readers by referring to the software, Apple will make available to the developers, as "public".
Flying Meat
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Jan 2007
Re: non public
05/20, 03:10pm reply
THey might be under legally binding agreements, but that doesn't mean they aren't part of the 'public'. I guess it depends on someone's definition of 'public' or 'public beta'.
LouZer
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Nov 2000
And about blogs...
05/21, 02:05am reply
Topic blogs, even blogs with advertising and some brand cache, are nothing but collected, unsubstantiated, often unmoderated yammer, open to scams, news plants and bias. Don't go to a blog for news, go to a news site like MacNN. Responsible news sites check their scoops with more than one, and often three, sources.
Go to topic blogs for a reasonably varied spectrum of mass opinion. That's all.
Loren
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Mar 2001
grammar
05/21, 09:03am reply
Does no one edit these articles before posting?
"The momentous faux email that send Apple's stock price...."
Wrong verb tense, a grammar school error from a professional news site. I see a lot of this in the Macnn posts. I'm not even sure if "momentous" is really used correctly in this context,,,
trowelblister
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Dec 2005