“Apple has finally sent out invitations to reporters to an October 4th event, setting the stage for the widely anticipated launch of iPhone 5,” Trefis Team writes for Forbes.
“Moreover, the new iPhone could help expand the number of wireless providers for Apple with Sprint joining AT&T and Verizon as iPhone providers in the U.S. market,” Trefis writes. “Former Vice President Al Gore, now an Apple board member, let slip this month in a speaking engagement that new editions of the iPhone were on the way in October.”
Advertisement: 24 Hours Only! Shop Griffin Technology and Save 25% Off All Cases! Use Coupon Code CASES25 at checkout. Shop Now!
Trefis writes, “To live up to the hype that the former veep helped to stoke, Apple needs to show some big strides.”
Read more in the full article here.
Related articles:
Jason Schwarz: ‘Let’s Talk’ iPhone 5 the most significant upgrade since iPhone’s initial launch – September 29, 2011
Sprint ending bill to account option the day after Apple’s ‘Let’s Talk iPhone’ October 4th event – September 28, 2011
Analysts discount multiple new iPhones at Apple’s October 4th ‘Let’s Talk iPhone’ special event – September 27, 2011
It’s official: Apple announces ‘Let’s talk iPhone’ event on October 4th – September 27, 2011
Uh, but Al Gore didn’t hype anything up. He just mentioned the phones. This is such BS.
Michael A. Robson
+1
Trefis Team
-1
Forbes
-2
MDN
-3
Exactly. What hype?
1.
Q: How do you get “Al Gore”, “Apple”, “iPhone 5”, and “hype” into one sentence?
A: Lie
Dear Trefis Team and Forbes Editors
“Hype”
– ” You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
Apparently, they have a very loose definition of “editor”. Seems they are confusing it with “liar”.
+1 for the movie reference. My favorite line!
If you don’t know by now let me explain. It is exactly based on what Pavlova instilled into his dogs MIND. It was called the Pavlova’s dog response. Once you brainwash someone….be it a dog or even a human being….you can get that brainwashed “thing” to give you the response you want. In Gore’s case, the press has most of the US brainwashed into giving this type of negative reaction. They just have to say something negative, whether its true or a lie doesn’t matter, about Gore and most of the US goes into this frenzy that you see before you. The American press is either very good at this type of brainwashing….or most of the American population is so easily brainwashed. Remember the FLIP-FLOP thing…same thing….it was totally a lie but it got most of the US believing it and the press manipulated the US elections. Wall street uses same kind of effect to manipulate the stock market.
MDN is very transparent about their political and ideological agenda: put up for at least two/three weeks a “should Al Gore stay on Apple’s board”; put up article on a Friday (so political pundits could harp all weekend ) about Obama barring press from Silicon Valley fundraiser (as if this has anything to do with MDN.)
As long as MDN is going to use its’ “cover” as a tech site to promote an agenda (unlike most other tech sites I follow) why not just take the final step and….”come out”….admit journalism is not our number one goal, supporting our ideology is. At least there is honesty in that position.
And the results of the “poll” seem to fall into the same stats as the ideological divide in the US now, proving nothing new, although providing competition to Perez Hilton’s tactics for hit mongering with naked celeb shots.
I’ m sorry, besides letting slip that the iPhones were due in October, did Gore give any other details? No. If he had they would have been reported and dissected ad nausium. So where is the “hype” this story is talking about. No hype. Nothing to “show some big strides” about. STFU!
Forbes must pay peanuts to get monkeys doing the reporting for them.
At least the Forbes monkeys get peanuts. By the looks of it, MDN’s monkeys get only peanut shells. Remarkable amount of hit-whoring of late.
As much as I usually like reading MDN, they are working to perfect the ‘art’ of hit-whoring. Dvorak ought to take lessons, along with Thurrott and Enderle.
Aaannd cue the conspiracy theorists tea party conservative posters who will come out of the woodwork to disparage Al “I invented the internet” Gore.
Nice call
Haha the timing was impeccable. look at the string below this one
Global warming can’t live up to his hype either. This guy says that the California shoreline will be under the sea, then buys beachfront property. He doesn’t even believe his own tripe!
http://www.worldpropertychannel.com/featured-columnists/celebrity-homes-column-al-gore-tipper-gore-oprah-winfrey-michael-douglas-christopher-lloyd-fred-couples-nicolas-cage-peter-reckell-kelly-moneymaker-2525.php
That’s because he knows that when the property is under water he still will be able to sell it to the flat earthers/climate change naysayers who will still be claiming that global warming didn’t happen.
Oh Snap!
Double snap!
Where were YOU when the glaciers in upstate New York melted many, many, many thousands of years ago? Were you running around screaming “The glaciers are melting, the glaciers are melting, and it’s all OUR FAULT!”
I think not. The theory of anthropogenic global warming is a nothing more than a scam, a hoax, a “watermelon” ruse for simple minds to grasp instead of carefully reasoned thought. Al Gore is the snake-oil salesman of the 21st century, and all of his supposed “data” comes from liars and agenda-driven charlatans masquerading as scientists. (Rand-McNally anyone?)
Watch what AlGore DOES, folks, not what he SAYS.
‘Carefully reasoned thought’ – an excellent idea. How about considering what professionals think, people who reason for a living, people who are carefully fact based, carefully measure, write things down for public, peer review? People who insist on double checking, redoing tests, measurements just to be as certain as possible? People like scientists, especially those specialize in this – climate scientists?
What percentage of climate scientists think that global warming is real, serious and caused by human activity? And impacting things already and we, as humans, continue to make it worse?
What percentage of funding for these ‘fact based’ people is available to those who publish results contrary to the desired (in this case supporting climate change)?
Money / political agendas dictate what you read as ‘peer reviewed facts’ and people suck it up.
The truth is available but it’s not subjective nor speculative. It’s a person.
Science is based on the advancement of knowledge thru reliable observation, reproducible experiments, transparency, logic and peer review by other similarly rigorous people.
Funding by outsiders, particularly by those trying to delay, maintain the status quo ( ‘pull a tobacco’) is an issue, but it is dealt with by the peer review process and disclosure of conflicts of interest. And reproducibility, and vigorous debate to achieve a consensus subject to the principles above. Given the massive resources of the fossil fuel industry, it is a very high bar to get research that opposes the fossil fuel industry unless the science is very, very strong. And, now, it is.
You bring up a good point on funding, but the problem is in the other direction – anybody even remotely credible that has a non fossil fuel based scientific explanation for global warming will be drowning in money from the fossil fuel industry
Do you know what percentage of climate scientists feel global warming is real, serious, and happening now?
In the 70s we were warned of man-made “global cooling”. That turned to “global warming”. Then it was “global cooling as a result of global warming” (made popular with ‘The Day after Tomorrow’ movie etc.). Now they’ve finally decided the nebulous term “climate change” is easier to use without having to explain yourself when the world fails to end.
What percentage of climate scientists were concerned about global cooling in the 70’s? Was there a lot of serious, peer reviewed research supporting this? Was it an explanation for a very short term pattern that has long since disappeared, and for a good reason?
What percentage of climate scientists are concerned about global warming today? Is there a lot of serious, peer reviewed research supporting this? Is it part of a big pattern?
(work with me here fellow MacHeads – let’s do some serious thinking)
Your mistake is trying to engage unarmed opponents in a battle of the wits. Randian, DMac, and crew will continuing to believe that climate change is a hoax; neither facts, nor logic will alter their views. Their positions are not based on the body of evidence, just on some carefully chosen factoids and distortions presented to them by those whose economic interests outweigh their humanity and who are callous enough to be willing to sacrifice the future for economic or political gain today. The root cause of Randian et al’s behaviour lies in a lack of critical thinking — an unfortunate trend that is completely swallowing the US electoral process. It’s going to be a nasty election year. sigh.
8^^:
You have to trust that facts and logic will carry the day eventually, and be positive. Plus most people are in the middle, and that is the ultimate audience in any discussion. And sometimes it is fun to anonymously posture polemically.
The big risk, of course, is that by the time humanity faces up to the facts we’re looking at a dinosaur grade mass extinction crisis in a couple of hundred years.
Psychologically getting your head around a huge change like this requires digestion time. In the meantime, denial is not just a river in Egypt; it’s simply an indication that digestion is still underway.
Hooray for pollution!!!!
We are defending pollution, right?
BURN EVERYTHING! We humans are guiltless in everything we perpetrate against the Earth! Gotta be! The Corporate Oligarchy told me so! And why would they lie? Hug an oil well or clean coal mine today! <3 <3 <3
:-Q********
Buying property at age 62 on a shoreline that will “be under water” some time after he’s long gone and dead of old age, why is that a contradiction of ones scruples? Climate change is a nuisance now but will be a real problem in another 75-100 years.
Which is more noble? Seeing a problem and running towards it or seeing a problem and running away.
Just keep it up Gore and you’ll trash Apple Computer exactly like you do everything else you touch.
Keep what up? What has he done to Apple? He said a phone was coming. OMFG I think we all knew that. It would have been bigger news if he said a phone wasn’t coming.
It’s just Apple now, they dropped the “Computer” from the name years ago.
Just plain ol Apple Inc.
I am curious if Apple may only mention one iPhone, the cheap one next week, then after Microsoft and Google announce their next top of the line junk, Apple drops a big bombshell that sucks up all the news like a black hole for weeks with the announcement of a super iPhone 5.
That would be dirty pool for the others but it is how I would hit them where and when it hurts.
Apple doesn’t actually need to do that. Releasing an actual iPhone 5 on Tuesday will suck up all the oxygen for months to come. This new iPhone comes at the same time as the new iOS as well, this is going to be huge.
Then some time early next year they’ll probably unveil a new iPad and the cycle will start again.
What moron wrote that story?
Hype? There are going to be new iPhones-soon. Wow pouring gasoline on a fire. OK, it’s Al Gore so he’s using a log made from recycled construction waste.
Look there’s going to be a new iPhones. A Black one and a White one. Then there’s going to be at least two memory selections so OMG! There’s going to be FOUR new iPhones!
Everyone take a deep breath.
They will be here when they get here and no amount of us wishing it was sooner or with a bigger screen or with what ever feature you need it to have is going to change the date they are released or what features they will actually come with.
We get what we get. Buy it or don’t.
For all you new to MDN, here’s a guide to the themes you can expect to flourish in comments based on keywords in the summary:
-Al Gore: climate change debate, “invented the Internet” cracks
-Rush Limbaugh: hypocritical drug abuse references, 349 instances of the word “neo-con”
-Anything about Steve Jobs’ new house: pro property rights, anti historic preservation
-Anything about the current administration: should be obvious. Suggest avoiding in their entirety.
On a side note….need help in figuring when is it best to sell used iPhone 4. Would I take that much of a hit if I wait till next week once iPhone 5 is released to sell on eBay or is just now the time to sell? TIA
I commented on some blog post two months ago, that there was going to be a new iPhone in the fall. How come no one cares if the new iPhone lives up to my hype?
Wouldn’t be the first time Gore lied.
YEAH! If Gore said it, no iPhone in October! Darn!
Your are exhibiting Pavlova’s dog response. Gore didn’t say anything other than say iPhone(s) coming in october.
Al Gore is a total hypocrite. I can’t believe that guy gets the stock he gets from Apple. It’s amazing to me that anyone believes what that money grubber says anymore. And now all the Global Warming believers go climb into your cars, drive home, Crank the air, and fire up the big 27″ mac… ALL hypocrites. Global Warming is a scam. If true, it could also be great for life itself.. but there is no profit in that… climategate anyone? You’ll NEVER hear Al Gore say anything about all of the energy Apple uses, and the carbon footprint that Apple produces..