The post I misread as George Ou's New Blog:
This was a nothing short of a lynch mob. It invited my critics to a bash of my website on the Macalope's blog. It was uncalled for. It was unnecessary. The Macalope should have just emailed me and let me know my error.
Gruber REGULARLY makes grammar errors that more times than not go uncorrected:
A Gruber Grammar Error:
Gruber's "near invincibility" and immense popularity give him a lot more power than most bloggers. He can withstand a major blow - some of us can't. I don't really know how this would affect Roughly Drafted, but it really doesn't matter. Gruber OWES it to Daniel Eran to allow a correction THEN he also owes it to his readers to report that he emailed Daniel Eran about the mistake and that it was changed or retracted quickly (or if it wasn't).
From Daring Fireball:
‘OS X iPod’ Nonsense
Sunday, 15 July 2007
Daniel Eran at Roughly Drafted published a piece over the weekend claiming that “the iPod is running Mac OS X – with a Mach kernel and a Unix userland – and have been for years”. The story was picked up by Slashdot earlier today, originally with the title “iPods Run OS X and Always Have”.
Eran’s evidence for this claim is based on this April 2004 article in MacTech about a supposed method of developing QuickTime-based applications for iPods, using a programming language called “SNOJOB”, derived from SNOBOL. This MacTech article was a joke. Current iPods do not run OS X, or anything even vaguely resembling it. There is no programming language called SNOJOB. There is no secret “laf” option for the ls command-line tool that will reveal a “hidden” mach kernel on iPod file systems.
Ok, so he was wrong. Ok, so he made a mistake. HOW ABOUT EMAILING HIM DIRECTLY OR CALLING HIM and telling him about it rather than try to capitalize on some kind of news that he was wrong? This is no different than the ethical dilemna that Engadget was in a month ago when Ryan Block (lead editor of Engadget) tried to justify his stance on publishing a story that Apple had delayed the iPhone at the last minute.
All Block had to do was WAIT and just verify the story. Engadget STILL had a great scoop and still could have reported the story. Engadget didn't need the hits - it's one of the highest hit sites on the net! Gruber didn't need to point this out in an almost crucifying manner - he doesn't need the hits - he's the darling of the Mac web at the moment.
Besides, I think the more interesting story is usually how fast, how slow, or how someone tries to cover up a mistake ... any way.
[UPDATE] Apparently there is some sort of "cover up" by Daniel Eran and "a retraction" without any mention of mistake - just a "note for page skimmers" ... I'll let you read:
This article simplified for readers
I think THAT is much more interesting than if he were wrong.
Can't we all just get along?