Wall Street Journal Tech Blog FAIL

just looking at the author's image made me close the link and not read it
HC-GQ618_Boulto_AV_20120322133607.gif
 
Hehe, the WSJ use to call me for consultation on tech. Guess they moved up in the world.
 
__hollywood|meow said:
how do people this unknowledgeable have jobs?
Click to expand...

fake it till you make it added to the fact that once idiot bosses are put in power, they usually don't want to hire anyone smarter to work under them for fear they might be replaced by them someday, thus the status quo of idocracy is set and the bar onl;y gets lower with time.
 
__hollywood|meow said:
how do people this unknowledgeable have jobs?
Click to expand...

Because they're the only ones the Wall Street Journal could find who were unethical enough to pimp Apple's hipster trash with half-truths and outright lies while consistently bashing the competition? The WSJ is just a part of Apple's marketing department.

I'm more surprised that they had anything bad to say about the retina display at all, rather than by how fundamentally flawed their statement was.
 
IronChef75 said:
Because they're the only ones the Wall Street Journal could find who were unethical enough to pimp Apple's hipster trash with half-truths and outright lies while consistently bashing the competition?
Click to expand...

Weren't (aren't?) they bashing Apple with this article by claiming their new devices will consume all of the network bandwidth at corporations where they are used?
 
Steve said:
This is what you get when the Wall Street Journal tries to talk about tech. Please WSJ, stick to what you know.
Click to expand...

Oh no you didn't. WSJ knows tech :eek:

walt_mossberg.jpg


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Mossberg

Mossberg has been a reporter and editor at the Wall Street Journal since 1970. He is based in the Journal's Washington, D.C., office, where he spent 18 years covering national and international affairs before turning his attention to technology. His Personal Technology column has appeared every Thursday since 1991.

In 1999, Mossberg became the only technology writer to receive the Loeb award for Commentary. In 2001, he won the World Technology Award for Media and Journalism and received an honorary Doctorate of Law from the University of Rhode Island.[1] Mossberg is widely regarded as one of the most influential writers on information technology. In 2004, in a lengthy profile, Wired called him "The Kingmaker", saying "[f]ew reviewers have held so much power to shape an industry's successes and failures."[2] He is also reported to be the highest paid journalist at the Journal with "his annual compensation approaching a million dollars."[3]



 
Seems to me that this was a bad management decision. The editor found these Retina displays and heard/thought that they could be using more bandwidth, then shot this out to some beat reporter to write an article about how this is bad for corporate networks. It was just lost in translation.

As is common, the reporters do not know about what they write about. They are more concerned about attention-grabbing headlines. My favorite/worst was "US Air Force drops nuclear bomb over Central America." Just wrong on so many levels. :rolleyes:

I don't believe ANY headlines anymore. Commercials, marketing, politicians, I am just burnt out. Buy my TV shows on DVD, radio is SirusXM, and well protected web browser. I only go to trusted sources, and support those I use. I do not believe in ad-supported products.

Facebook? Yea, quit that two years ago. Too bad Unthink didn't make it.
 
Well technically, Hi-Res files and videos are larger than their regularly sized counterparts.

So there is SOME truth to it :D
(Although I have seen some people spoof low-res photos and beef them up to a couple MBs when they should be < couple kbs).
 
If they make mistakes like this in tech, it makes you wonder what kind of mistakes they make in other subjects I am not as familiar with, and aren't able to catch it.
 
criccio said:
Makes sense.

I wish you could read the original article. It was quite retarded.
Click to expand...

You guys are in luck; I come bearing gifts. One of my colleagues took a screen cap and circled it around. My only response was picardfacepalm.jpg.
FAIL_WSJ_Retina_Disp_eq_More_Bandwidth.png


WSJ, putting the word "Idiot" in CIO.
 
I have seen tech news stories by the NYT too that were... not good. Most times when I read an article and I think "WTH" I look up and its some reputable news paper that seems to not know much about technology, also thereg I think, I call them them tabloids of the technology news circles and therefore refuse to read them.
 
who are you kidding, oracle? there are hardly any journalists left! lots of folks who write and get published, though! ha ha
 
Nothing funnier than when celebrities that don't know shit, try to educate us on tech.

Rush Limbaugh was on yesterday talking about how good his Mac is and how powerful it was with its 12 core processor. Apparently Intel makes a 12 core that's only available to Apple owners.

He says he needs the most powerful computer for all the demands he puts on them. Like email, printing articles off Fox News and such.
 
IronChef75 said:
If you need to ask for proof, it's obvious you have no idea who he is. The guy is famous for his EXTREME pro-Apple bias.
Click to expand...

He is pro Apple, so what? Still don't prove he is a shill. Not going to even try to save your integrity?
 
I would love to have read the original article! There's not only a retraction, but the WSJ claims the whole article was "recast" to say what the author supposedly meant to say in the first place...;)

The way the article is written now, it makes a halfway salient point--so it must've been gibberish in its original form. This is exactly what happens when a reporter who doesn't understand the technology all that well listens to an "analyst." The reporter thinks he understands what the analyst is saying, but actually gets it all wrong--even if the analyst didn't--which is a fairly rare phenomenon. Most analysts get it wrong, too.

What I wish they'd do is remind everyone that the term "Retina" is just a marketing term without any real meaning--as the ppi density of the MBP is not even close to 300ppi (it's about 220 ppi)...;) But then, the phrase itself was never grounded in science to begin with--it was always only Steve Jobs' personal opinion (RIP). Actually, 300dpi was the old printing standard at which you could not make out the individual dots in printed text. Jobs just kind of "borrowed" the phraseology and applied it loosely to monitors. That's the traditional way Apple "pays tribute" to the things it likes...;)
 
Dude, just use Google and open your eyes. What, are you actually Walt Mossberg or something?
 
What I wish they'd do is remind everyone that the term "Retina" is just a marketing term without any real meaning
Click to expand...
Oh, you mean like Superdrive *cough* DVD-burner.
Or Mighty Mouse *cough* wireless optical mouse.
Or Air Port Extreme *cough* 802.11g/n.

Gotta love marketing terminology and the masses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top