
Journal pudge's Journal: Intel Prediction 10
A lot of people have asked me what I think of the Apple-Intel rumors.
I think nothing of it, for two reasons.
First, I generally disregard completely unsubstantiated rumors. And I mean that literally. Unless you can give me a good reason to believe it other than the fact that you believe it, and you say you have an unnamed source, I won't care. Put an actual name to it, or get substantiation some other way, if you want thoughtful people to care.
And no, having a "good track record" for previous rumors is not substantiation. That would be transubstantiation, and I am not Catholic.
Second, this rumor comes up all the time. I saw no reason to believe it before, and see no reason to believe it now.
May I be the first to say... (Score:2)
WRONG! [slashdot.org] :-)
Re:May I be the first to say... (Score:2)
Re:May I be the first to say... (Score:1)
How was he wrong? I read over his entire journal entry, and all I saw was a statement that he ignored the rumor because it was unsubstantiated. That's not the same as saying the rumor is untrue. It's just a statement that there's no reason to believe it.
Just for the sake of argument (Score:2)
Re:Just for the sake of argument (Score:2)
Re:Just for the sake of argument (Score:2)
Re:Just for the sake of argument (Score:2)
Re:Just for the sake of argument (Score:2)
Re:Just for the sake of argument (Score:2)
No, it's actually not. Usually, they say "according to Apple" or "Apple Computer said," etc., if it is an official announcement.
Re:Just for the sake of argument (Score:2)
I assume that they get the info direct from the source
Perhaps that assumption is not always warranted.