Reader Reacts to Rumor: iWalk Figment

Posted by:
Date: Thursday, January 3rd, 2002, 16:35
Category: Archive

SpyMac is the same highly reputable source that brought us the iWalk just before the intro of the iPod. They are pretty skillful mockup artists, but have no credibility that I’m aware of. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me. Although I do have to admit this version of the iWalk looks considerably more realistic than the last one.

SpyMac is the same highly reputable source that brought us the iWalk just before the intro of the iPod. They are pretty skillful mockup artists, but have no credibility that I’m aware of. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me. Although I do have to admit this version of the iWalk looks considerably more realistic than the last one.

AppleTurns scooped me on this one. They even used the same Fool me twice line I did ;-). but they also had some more in depth info than I did.

My reactions are just common sense. Such as: how believable is a rumor site that has consistently covered only one rumor, and how credible is their rumor considering that they are the sole source for information on the iWalk. Every other rumor site I’ve read hit’s and misses on any number of common Mac rumors, and yet the only times they’ve mentioned the iWalk SpyMac has been the source… On the other hand, with SpyMacs great sources, how did the iPod, or any number of other Mac related rumors go under their radar? How come THEY didn’t warn me not to buy a G4 PowerBook until the Combo drive came out?! Bastards.

The only thing I can’t figure out is what is their motivation? To see how many people they can fool? Surely next Monday even IF the iWalk does materialize SpyMac will lose some credibility when it looks nothing like the photos they showed. Every time their rumors don’t materialize they just blame their “sources” Look at what they said after the iPod turned out NOT to be the iWalk, now look at what they are saying on their current front page when readers called them on fabrications about “AirSurf”.

Most “credible” rumor sites are big enough to admit when they are wrong, that’s the nature of the game when your in the future predicting biz. SpyMac always blames their “sources”. If you were the webmaster of a rumor site (it’s a stretch I know, but try to imagine it) would you believe sources “claiming to be a member of the iWalk-design-team”. What could they possibly have to gain by leaking information to the webmaster of a heretofore nonexistent web site? It would be like Mom & Dad leaving the presents out so the kids could get a glimpse before Christmas. The just wouldn’t do that on purpose. Not only don’t I believe their sources are credible, I don’t believe they HAVE any sources. If they did have great sources they would go to great lengths to protect their identity. SpyMac by contrast sounds more like they are name dropping than protecting their sources.

One last thing… If this rumor were even remotely true, how long do you think it would be before Apple Legal shoved those videos where the sun don’t shine?

I do have to give credit where it’s due though. SpyMac has learned a LOT about photo mock-ups since their last try and I would LOVE to know how they did those videos!

Recent Posts

Comments are closed.