I know everyone, especially Jim, think that Gruber is infallible and his source is basically Tim Cook himself, but there are a lot of assumptions in his comments. Unless he’s willing to name his sources and publish the actual documents I’m not willing to assume his timeline is 100% correct simply because it’s Gruber
And if my unwillingness to accept everything Gruber stays as confirmed fact gets me banned from this site, so be it.
Most of his timeline is just synthesis of public data. I am not even able to identify the part you might question.
The acquisitions were all widely reported. Maps was pretty well known shortly before WWDC and certainly confirmed after.
He drops the whole “my sources” in there several times. Which implies that he’s confirmed with his secret never wrong sources that the information is correct.
And because it’s Gruber most folks will take it as sacrosanct because Gruber is never wrong. I don’t accept that, especially on this one. Not unless he names names or produces papers to back it up. in part because it is him just ‘confirming’ sketchy stuff from other sites.
If Dalrymple and Gruber started naming their sources and publishing private documents you wouldn’t be hearing any inside information about Apple from them in the future.
I’m thinking Gruber is being honest. I think it’s quite likely Apple would like to put their spin on this story out there now, and they are going through a reliable channel to achieve that.
Banned? How melodramatic.
I’d be interested to hear your preferred choice(s) for tech reporting/analysis. Someone who has their facts straight, generally presents a reasonable argument, and often admits when they were mistaken after having been proven erroneous.
While Gruber does not PERSONALLY own Apple stock (he’s publicly declared he doesn’t), the trick is his wife does and boy does she have a substantial amount (sources close to their financial advisor).
So factor that into everything that comes from that site.
I know everyone, especially Jim, think that Gruber is infallible
It’s easy to “know” something you just made up.
Burn your straw men elsewhere.
You might think that it’s melodramatic but I have been banned from commenting on sites because I didn’t kiss the writer’s ass and tell him how wonderful he is. I called him out for clear tabloid tactics and he didn’t like that.
And if The Loop wants to play that game whatever they can go for it. and I want them to know that.
Things might be a lot better if we didn’t get inside information from anyone but Apple via their announcements, etc.
I prefer reporting with confirmed facts and named sources that can be held accountable for what they said. Not tabloid trash tricks to get page hits etc.
He drops the whole “my sources” in there several times
He mentions his sources twice.
Which implies that he’s confirmed with his secret never wrong sources that the information is correct.
Why the melodrama? He stated nothing that he hadn’t already deduced from public data, and then indicates that he has support for his conjecture regarding the sequence of events. He isn’t claiming to have tapes regarding the Kennedy assassination.
And because it’s Gruber most folks will take it as sacrosanct because Gruber is never wrong
BURN BABY, BURN!
Man, them there straw men issue a blinding white light when needed, don’t they? Especially when you need to obscure your petulant, wholly personal issues with Gruber.
I don’t accept that
Oh, you don’t accept that thing that you just made up? Maybe you shouldn’t have typed it in the first place.
Wear your contrarian badge proudly, then. Don’t ever forget to be preemptively contentious, either. Tech chicks dig that.
And who would you say actually meets your standards?
So factor that into everything that comes from that site.
No.
If you are going to post something as fact then it better be fact.
Yes. Quite often when I write articles that I wish to be taken as gospel truth, I begin said articles with the phrase “Let’s assume…”, sketch out a likely scenario and explain why I think said scenario holds water.
Go get drunk, or go get laid, or both. Whatever it is you need to do to derail, even temporarily, your apparent obsession with Gruber.
“public data”
Using that phrase just provides my point. NOTHING in any of the articles is actual data, actual fact. No names were given to confirm it was said by someone at Apple, no actual contracts were leaked even. It’s rumor and speculation phrased as fact in typical tabloid style. And yet because Gruber put it on his site, it is taken as “data”
IF it is true that Mr Gruber or someone in his family owns a significant amount of stock in Apple, and I don’t believe that based on some blog commenter claiming to have a source anymore than I believe any blog post saying the same, then it would be a point to consider. Such blog postings have been proven to have an effect on Apple’s stock and Mr Gruber might have reason to want to short or inflate that value for his own reasons.
I’ll take his track record as his track record.
I am starting to get an idea as to why you may have been banned on other sites and I am fairly certain at this point that it had nothing to do with you kissing “the writer’s ass and tell him how wonderful he is. I called him out for clear tabloid tactics and he didn’t like that.”
Recess is over, go back to class or I’m telling your momma you’re acting like an ignorant jackass in public.
If we all agree that your e-penis got bigger after posting here today, will you go away?
I know everyone, especially Jim, think that Gruber is infallible and his source is basically Tim Cook himself, but there are a lot of assumptions in his comments. Unless he’s willing to name his sources and publish the actual documents I’m not willing to assume his timeline is 100% correct simply because it’s Gruber
And if my unwillingness to accept everything Gruber stays as confirmed fact gets me banned from this site, so be it.
Most of his timeline is just synthesis of public data. I am not even able to identify the part you might question.
The acquisitions were all widely reported. Maps was pretty well known shortly before WWDC and certainly confirmed after.
He drops the whole “my sources” in there several times. Which implies that he’s confirmed with his secret never wrong sources that the information is correct.
And because it’s Gruber most folks will take it as sacrosanct because Gruber is never wrong. I don’t accept that, especially on this one. Not unless he names names or produces papers to back it up. in part because it is him just ‘confirming’ sketchy stuff from other sites.
If Dalrymple and Gruber started naming their sources and publishing private documents you wouldn’t be hearing any inside information about Apple from them in the future.
I’m thinking Gruber is being honest. I think it’s quite likely Apple would like to put their spin on this story out there now, and they are going through a reliable channel to achieve that.
Banned? How melodramatic.
I’d be interested to hear your preferred choice(s) for tech reporting/analysis. Someone who has their facts straight, generally presents a reasonable argument, and often admits when they were mistaken after having been proven erroneous.
While Gruber does not PERSONALLY own Apple stock (he’s publicly declared he doesn’t), the trick is his wife does and boy does she have a substantial amount (sources close to their financial advisor).
So factor that into everything that comes from that site.
I know everyone, especially Jim, think that Gruber is infallible
It’s easy to “know” something you just made up.
Burn your straw men elsewhere.
You might think that it’s melodramatic but I have been banned from commenting on sites because I didn’t kiss the writer’s ass and tell him how wonderful he is. I called him out for clear tabloid tactics and he didn’t like that.
And if The Loop wants to play that game whatever they can go for it. and I want them to know that.
Things might be a lot better if we didn’t get inside information from anyone but Apple via their announcements, etc.
I prefer reporting with confirmed facts and named sources that can be held accountable for what they said. Not tabloid trash tricks to get page hits etc.
He drops the whole “my sources” in there several times
He mentions his sources twice.
Which implies that he’s confirmed with his secret never wrong sources that the information is correct.
Why the melodrama? He stated nothing that he hadn’t already deduced from public data, and then indicates that he has support for his conjecture regarding the sequence of events. He isn’t claiming to have tapes regarding the Kennedy assassination.
And because it’s Gruber most folks will take it as sacrosanct because Gruber is never wrong
BURN BABY, BURN!
Man, them there straw men issue a blinding white light when needed, don’t they? Especially when you need to obscure your petulant, wholly personal issues with Gruber.
I don’t accept that
Oh, you don’t accept that thing that you just made up? Maybe you shouldn’t have typed it in the first place.
Wear your contrarian badge proudly, then. Don’t ever forget to be preemptively contentious, either. Tech chicks dig that.
And who would you say actually meets your standards?
So factor that into everything that comes from that site.
No.
If you are going to post something as fact then it better be fact.
Yes. Quite often when I write articles that I wish to be taken as gospel truth, I begin said articles with the phrase “Let’s assume…”, sketch out a likely scenario and explain why I think said scenario holds water.
Go get drunk, or go get laid, or both. Whatever it is you need to do to derail, even temporarily, your apparent obsession with Gruber.
“public data”
Using that phrase just provides my point. NOTHING in any of the articles is actual data, actual fact. No names were given to confirm it was said by someone at Apple, no actual contracts were leaked even. It’s rumor and speculation phrased as fact in typical tabloid style. And yet because Gruber put it on his site, it is taken as “data”
IF it is true that Mr Gruber or someone in his family owns a significant amount of stock in Apple, and I don’t believe that based on some blog commenter claiming to have a source anymore than I believe any blog post saying the same, then it would be a point to consider. Such blog postings have been proven to have an effect on Apple’s stock and Mr Gruber might have reason to want to short or inflate that value for his own reasons.
I’ll take his track record as his track record.
I am starting to get an idea as to why you may have been banned on other sites and I am fairly certain at this point that it had nothing to do with you kissing “the writer’s ass and tell him how wonderful he is. I called him out for clear tabloid tactics and he didn’t like that.”
Recess is over, go back to class or I’m telling your momma you’re acting like an ignorant jackass in public.
If we all agree that your e-penis got bigger after posting here today, will you go away?