2012年2月28日 星期二

Ivy Bridge只有延後3週,並非8-10週

新聞媒體是重要且必要的資訊來源,但有時候,只依賴單一資訊來源也有其危險性,一篇報導的危險性來自於(1)沒有說明消息來源(例如業界表示、法人表示)讓讀者無法判斷重要性和可信度,(2)新聞和評論不分、事實陳述和看法分析之混淆,(3)沒有平衡報導,只憑單一來源就定調,(4)標題和內文不一致(主編下標題,記者寫內文)的誤會,(5)太多推演想必、太少歸納整理,(6)間接資訊再轉述報導(例如引用研討會資料就說某人說)之偏誤。但今天有一則有趣的報導,就是今天媒體引用Financial Times的報導說,Intel Ivy Bridge相關產品將延後8~10週上市,這則報導本身沒有問題,第一有消息來源Intel執行副總裁Sean Maloney,第二有親自採訪(北京),第三有忠於並引用受訪者原文“I think maybe it’s June now,” ,第四這是簡單的問題(有沒有延後),沒有牽涉評論,又是採訪事件主角Intel的高層主管,並不需要平衡報導,看起來是很OK的一則消息,照理應該沒有問題。(Financial Times的新聞網址 http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/c3c3c2b6-602f-11e1-8de4-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1ngBjfBuu )

可惜的是,這篇報導還是有問題,這篇Sean Maloney採訪報導發佈之後,2012/2/27日 Intel CFO Stacy Smith在Morgan Stanley Technology, Media & Telecom Conference上的Q&A時段中,被問到這個問題,Stacy Smith的回答是: 只有延後三週,而不是8~10週,有人筆記問答如下:

Q:Okay. And on the topic of (inaudible) I want to give you a chance, there's been a lot of press about the Ivy Bridge timing and Financial Times today saying - Sean Maloney saying maybe it was related - when is Ivy Bridge coming, how important is it where in Q2 that falls?
A:Yes. So, I read the Financial Times article. It was inaccurate and I'm not sure why. It talked about an eight week change to Ivy Bridge.That's not the case.We're about three weeks behind where we wanted to be, but it's still spring(也有人記錄成spreading,但spring比較合理).We've been talking about spring the whole time. It still is well in time for back to school. And it certainly is a very fast ramp. Just to put the ramp of Ivy Bridge in perspective, it's 50% higher than the corresponding quarters for Sandy Bridge and that was a fast ramp right there. It's a fast ramp. It'll hit cleanly hit back to school. A few weeks later than where we wanted it to be and we're seeing great customer demand, particularly in the Ultrabook segment of the market which is one of those things that really gives me a lot of confidence that we're on to something that's pretty extraordinary in that space of the market.

至於為何Financial Times的報導會說延後8~10週? Intel CFO都說不知道了,Richard又怎會知道呢? 對吧! 但是,在各種大量而矛盾的資訊/看法/分析中做判斷,本來就是常態,這個事件,本文選擇相信只延後3週這一個版本,但猜測明天很多研究報告會寫8-10週這個版本。

1 則留言:

匿名 提到...

業務單位通常會抓些buffer Sean與CFO不同調也不令人意外了

張貼留言

注意:只有此網誌的成員可以留言。