This isn't the place for critiques of journalism as a whole. We were discussing strong speculation of Nocona slipping a quarter, Itanium 667 9GB slipping into Q1 05, and Tejas having 'hideous' power consumption. Those topics should be of interest to Intel investors.
This is a debate and discussion forum, granted. Furthermore, I'll grant it is ostensibly about Intel corporation. However, the level of journalistic quality (or relative level of journalistic quality) is of extreme importance to that discussion.
Why?
... because none of us are primary sources for any of that information.
We are obtaining that information from second and third parties. When obtaining information from second and thrid hand parties, one has to critically analyze the credibility of that source. Poor journalism technique in general, and specifically as evidenced by many internet computer news pages, is one of the key pieces of data needed to analyze the accuracy of the account...
... has Nocona been pushed out to Q3? Maybe... Is it a "big deal"... probably not in the grand profit/loss scheme of things...
... does Tejas have 'hideous' power consumption? Maybe... what about K8 cores on 90nm?
The bottom line is this: it's useless to discuss a topic if the source isn't credible. Full stop. Only if the source is credible, or even somewhat credible, is a topic worth looking into and talking about...
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
