3 ms·

Looks like it's the year of bombing demos...even Steve's has been hit!

by jasongullickson 16y ago

muhfuhkuh 16y ago
Steve couldn't get on that vaunted AT&T network. Someone shouted "Verizon". Haha.
- jodrellblank 16y ago
  Hurr Hurr but look at the pictures - it's on WiFi. http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/06/apple-wwdc-2010-187-rm-eng.jpg http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/06/apple-...
  - joezydeco 16y ago
    So the wifi is saturated because there are 500 people streaming photos and tweets from the hall. C'mon. Can't Apple just live stream these keynotes from here on out? Everyone on all sides knows these announcements are in the public sphere 250 milliseconds after Steve says it. For being so controlling of their media message, why let the bloggers run the final leg?
    - enjo 16y ago
      It's a really nice way to get a lot of really influential people on your side I'd think. By letting the media outlets have control over the dissemination of information it gives them a lot of incentive to stay on your good side (see: gizmodo not being invited to the keynote).
      - joezydeco 16y ago
        But the media outlets that really matter to Apple (Newsweek or WSJ/Mossberg for example) get access way before the launch so they can write their articles.
    - herdrick 16y ago
      I think it's to enhance the sense of exclusivity, to help people to get excited about it, to emphasize to people that important this is important. I mean, if people are scrambling to get live updates of something, then it must be important, right? This gives Apple two hours when, anywhere in the world, if someone is reporting on the proceedings, they are going to mention something about the difficulty of getting live updates. Man, what better way to show importance? Helpful isn't sexy. In an era of easy video feeds of everything, the un-videoable seems far more valuable. Seeing photographs from pay-per-view events on the news gives that impression. Or think of the US Supreme Court. They only allow people to sketch the proceedings! Pencil drawings are the ultimate status symbol.
    - jodrellblank 16y ago
      Who would go there and pay to pay full attention to him speaking if they could watch him speak for free online while doing other things too?
    - philwelch 16y ago
      They used to live stream them all the time, but this was many years ago. I don't think making the event more exclusive is part of it--there are already tons of reasons for Apple developers to go to WWDC.
  - tibbon 16y ago
    I was more shocked that they didn't have a separate 'staff' AP setup on a different channel.
- jasongullickson 16y ago
  I thought for a minute that it was intentional, part of an announcement of new carriers/networks/etc. ...too bad.

Looks like it's the year of bombing demos...even Steve's has been hit!

muhfuhkuh 16y ago

Steve couldn't get on that vaunted AT&T network. Someone shouted "Verizon". Haha.

jodrellblank 16y ago
Hurr Hurr but look at the pictures - it's on WiFi. http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/06/apple-wwdc-2010-187-rm-eng.jpg http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/06/apple-...
- joezydeco 16y ago
  So the wifi is saturated because there are 500 people streaming photos and tweets from the hall. C'mon. Can't Apple just live stream these keynotes from here on out? Everyone on all sides knows these announcements are in the public sphere 250 milliseconds after Steve says it. For being so controlling of their media message, why let the bloggers run the final leg?
  - enjo 16y ago
    It's a really nice way to get a lot of really influential people on your side I'd think. By letting the media outlets have control over the dissemination of information it gives them a lot of incentive to stay on your good side (see: gizmodo not being invited to the keynote).
    - joezydeco 16y ago
      But the media outlets that really matter to Apple (Newsweek or WSJ/Mossberg for example) get access way before the launch so they can write their articles.
  - herdrick 16y ago
    I think it's to enhance the sense of exclusivity, to help people to get excited about it, to emphasize to people that important this is important. I mean, if people are scrambling to get live updates of something, then it must be important, right? This gives Apple two hours when, anywhere in the world, if someone is reporting on the proceedings, they are going to mention something about the difficulty of getting live updates. Man, what better way to show importance? Helpful isn't sexy. In an era of easy video feeds of everything, the un-videoable seems far more valuable. Seeing photographs from pay-per-view events on the news gives that impression. Or think of the US Supreme Court. They only allow people to sketch the proceedings! Pencil drawings are the ultimate status symbol.
  - jodrellblank 16y ago
    Who would go there and pay to pay full attention to him speaking if they could watch him speak for free online while doing other things too?
  - philwelch 16y ago
    They used to live stream them all the time, but this was many years ago. I don't think making the event more exclusive is part of it--there are already tons of reasons for Apple developers to go to WWDC.
- tibbon 16y ago
  I was more shocked that they didn't have a separate 'staff' AP setup on a different channel.
jasongullickson 16y ago
I thought for a minute that it was intentional, part of an announcement of new carriers/networks/etc. ...too bad.