Jobs Keynote and Gossip Dept.

Published on June 7th, 2005

Apple – QuickTime – WWDC 2005 Here’s the Steve Jobs keynote speech in streaming video.

I now have it on good authority that the leak about the Apple-Intel deal which was first suggested in the WSJ and then picked up by C-Net came from a leak at IBM. The way the story goes, Steve Jobs called IBM last Friday to inform the company about its decision to move to Intel and the deal had been signed. This was at or around 3:30 in the afternoon New York time after the markets closed. It was assumed that nobody would say anything until after the announcement. Then apparently one of the IBM Analyst-relations people decided to tell some of the market analysts about the deal and one of them apparently called C-Net or someone close to C-Net. Whatever the case, C-Net took control of the story. Then the story began to break big when the WSJ followed up on Saturday, Apparently all hell-broke-loose over the weekend with Jobs being the most angered by the whole thing since he has become a freak over secrecy. My source tells me that she doesn’t know why Jobs simply didn’t make the call on Monday morning, but apparently things would be too hectic.

It appears that much of the threats and actions by Apple against the gossip websites was done to deter any of them from getting wind of this deal by scaring them away from gossip.

Some people think that at least one person from IBM is going to lose their job over the episode.

14 users responded in " Jobs Keynote and Gossip Dept. "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Mike Voice said, on June 7th, 2005 at 10:06 am

“It appears that much of the threats and actions by Apple against the gossip websites was done to deter any of them from getting wind of this deal by scaring them away from gossip.”

I was wondering about that. With the furor over the Judge ruling the web-sites didn’t have the protections – in that narrow context – that “real” journalists have, I was wondering how that would apply to C/net and especially the WSJ. ;P

It also was interesting to note that the sites being sued didn’t break this story, or even comment on it during the weekend. Were their sources scared spit-less of being identified? Were the sites leary of pushing their luck?

# 2 site admin said, on June 7th, 2005 at 10:12 am

Yes, the fact that these sites remained mum over the weekend is a sad commentary on what contitutes freedom of speech and freedom of the press in this country. They were indeed cowed and now look like wimps in the process. It’s not a good situation.

# 3 Mike T said, on June 7th, 2005 at 3:09 pm

Hey, John C, your MarketWatch column has been slashdotted…

http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/05/06/07/1420222.shtml?tid=166&tid=3&tid=106

I don’t know if you should be proud or ashamed!

Mike T

# 4 Tim said, on June 7th, 2005 at 9:37 pm

I honestly think it was to Apple’s benefit that it got leaked.

If it had not been for the full weekend of discussion and digestion of the possibility, I think the reaction in the hall would have been very bad from the sheer ’shock and awe’ of it. I’m sure that’s bad press Apple would not have wanted or needed.

# 5 Christopher Coulter said, on June 7th, 2005 at 9:56 pm

There were more touchpoints than just IBM. Nice theory and it seems to fit, but it wasn’t the only direct route up the mountain. You had chatty Apple (and OEM) people way before. And Jobs releasing news early? Historically, he has never does that, hence this was purposeful. Sometimes his ‘blind rage’ isn’t always what it seems. Besides singals in this direction had been in works for more than a year, to anyone listening that is. But the ‘Cult of Mac’ loves to stick fingers in ears, and scream ‘nah nah nah’ as loudly as possible.

# 6 Shashi Prabhakar said, on June 7th, 2005 at 10:06 pm

I think the “leak” was a calculated move- to reveal it on Monday to developers “out of the blue” would be very traumatic. By leaking it ahead of time, everyone was primed to this possibility, therefore shock and trauma is attenuated.
Shashi

# 7 meetsy said, on June 7th, 2005 at 10:39 pm

too bad Jobs isn’t the one to lose his job…..
(but then he’d have to change his name to jobs-less)

# 8 Paul Thurrott said, on June 8th, 2005 at 4:44 am

Actually, John, that’s not what happened.

I first mentioned the Apple/Intel marriage in a WinInfo blog posting on April 26, 2005, almost exactly a month before the WSJ “broke” the story. I had two sources on that day: An Intel engineer I met with at WinHEC (who told me that Intel had OS X running in its labs at that very moment and that an announcement was “imminent”) and a Microsoft evangelist who had heard about the move from a high-level Apple official. Neither of these people have anything to do with IBM.

Conspiracy theories are fun, but often untrue. Just like the “fact” that the WSJ got this story first. They didn’t.

The full timeline is available on my blog:
http://www.internet-nexus.com/2005_06_05_archive.htm#111806202485700856

Thanks,

Paul

# 9 faust said, on June 8th, 2005 at 5:42 am

this might have worked for apple if they would have pulled it off when mr d first suggested it. now i dont see how it helps apple… in fact i think the shadow of gates looms over this… now ms can boast that they have competition on intel computers which we know wont be true and this puts a torpedo right in the engine room of linux. apple should have just bought transmeta and let the chinese make their processor. isnt that the way of the world works now? let the chinese do it.

# 10 Mike Voice said, on June 8th, 2005 at 8:16 am

“Hey, John C, your MarketWatch column has been slashdotted…”

And I can imagine that John is “shocked, shocked I tell you.”

# 11 Mike T said, on June 8th, 2005 at 3:46 pm

Come on, they LUV him over at slashdot……

Mike T

# 12 Pat said, on June 8th, 2005 at 5:45 pm

I couldn’t care less if Apple uses x86 or IBM. Apple has been slowly dieing for 20 years now, only they keep forgetting to tell those who buy Macs.

Linux will end up the premier OS simply because it has the one advantage that neither Windows or Apple has. It is built and serviced by the same people that use it. Linux is a passion, not a business. It is a community, not a company.

I am not an Engineer so I don’t know, but is there any way to go beyond the x86 processor to something else yet still retain the compatibility of the x86? Dual processors and 64 bit sound exciting, but they are all based on 25 yr old architecture.

# 13 Shashi Prabhakar said, on June 12th, 2005 at 6:46 am

Pat:
You are tripping over yourself in your comments; you are forgetting that Apple/Macintosh and now the iPOD is also a PASSION + it is a business- that is a truly potent combination. Just like all the ignoramususes that have been predicting Apples death for all these years- you seem to be speaking from the same place. Dont forget that it is very easy now for Apple to accomodate all software for Linux. Like everyone knows, the OS runs on software applications – Apple has the advantage of having a mature OS, big applications developed for MacOSX, an ability to include open-source as well as being able to provide an unrivaled user experience (not the case with Linux). My take is that Apples decision has put it in a launchpad that can take it to new heights- the greatest potential yet- lets wait and see!

# 14 d.w. said, on June 13th, 2005 at 12:22 pm

Pat:

“Apple has been slowly dieing for 20 years now”

Heh, you’ve stumbled upon one of the classic memes of the Intarweb:

http://www.themacobserver.com/appledeathknell/index.shtml

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!