« Has Intel Given up on the UMPC as a Mass Market Device? | Main | It's Comforting to Know The Librarian is Still a Journalist's Best Friend »



There's really no reason to believe the line that the story was killed because it might upset advertisers. McCracken himself has said things to the contrary. Most likely Crawford killed it because it was a poor article. Both lists are. (The 1998 hockey puck mouse?)

Daringfireball posits a equally plausible scenario:



Thanks for the comment and the link. It's an interesting piece, although mostly speculation. As for your comment, you could be right. None of us knows, but we can all agree that these were poor articles.

Thanks again,


Clearly in both articles they had to dig deep to make it to ten. The later items were pretty lame.

Except the statement about the mini not being upgradeable is just plain wrong. The internet is rife with instructions and success stories about upgrading the processor, swapping out the hard drive and upgrading the wifi card.

Lame articles and shoddy journalism don't really give an editor much of leg to stand on. If this really was the reason the editor left then it was time for him to go.

I don't think he was defending these particular articles so much as his own editorial integrity and independence from the business side of the publication, but you're right that these were bad articles on to which to take his final stand.

Thanks for the comment.


The comments to this entry are closed.

Follow Me Online


My Twitter Stream

    follow me on Twitter