Seriously. I’ve seen this all over the internet. Mossberg reviews the Pre, makes one questionably-phrased mention of the upcoming iPhone, and suddenly it’s confirmed? Let’s look at the sentence:
I’d note that the new iPhone to be unveiled next week will have lots of added features that could alter those calculations.
Consider that the second sentence of Mossberg’s review is “A new, improved iPhone is expected to be announced on June 8.” That he didn’t include “expected” in the second mention means nothing — it’s just the way the sentence was written. Are we done here?
Of course, it is very likely that the new iPhone will come out next week, that’s not the issue. The issue is that everybody’s freaking out about one ambiguously phrased sentence, the rogue interpretation of which is contradicted within the article. I know us bloggers are wont to jump on every possibility like this, but everybody’s talking about it like it’s some established fact.
http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/06/06…eck-and-check/
you guys last year made it seem like iphone had video chat.
but apparently Matt was drunk.
Poor Hickey got taken hook line and sinker. I remember that night at the Cha Cha.
You’re wrong! Apple will announce the immediate available the next iPhone! It’ll have a 12MP video camera, 128MB of storage, be able to translate your dog’s thoughts into words (”Squirrel!”), walk on water, support 802.11n WiFi, have a battery life of 23 years between charges, a 30″ screen which fits in your pocket, and make cupcakes for the office party.
Those are RUMORS and you know it! Plus, Apple would never limit a device to only one kind of baked good.
Ridiculous – it doesn’t translate your dog’s thought into words, it translates your dog’s emotions into words. Of course, the end result is the same (”hunger”).
Patrick – I think you missed the “Up!” reference.