Hello, I'm the guy that, I suppose, instigated this whole mess by sending around emails and translating the PCWatch article.
Anyway, I'd just like to say the in the article in question (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=5300
), that the Inquirer did indeed report false information (explained below). While, if you do read the whole article, they do appear to arrive at the proper conclusion that everything is rumor and speculation, this does not, however, negate the fact that there is one HUGE gaping error in the article.
Here is the quote in question from the Inquirer article:
"A JAPANESE WEB SITE claims to have inside information that indicates Nvidia will introduce its next graphics chip technology in the first quarter of new year, so missing the hectic Yuletide selling season."
Reading the rest of the article, I see no reason to assume that 'a Japanese web site' refers to anything other than PC Watch, as it is the only Japanese web site linked to in the article. I have emailed the Inquirer regarding this matter, and despite my having posed a completely explicit question asking them to confirm or deny whether 'a Japanese web site' is in fact PC Watch, the replies that they have sent me thus far amount to nothing more than 'I don't see what you are talking about'-type responses. I sincerely hope they are not this ignorant.
As for why the above quote is completely incorrect, I am sure any competent person can understand quite easily if they read my translation of the PC Watch article in question. The fact remains that PC Watch did in no such way claim "to have inside information that indicates Nvidia will introduce its next graphics chip technology in the first quarter of new year, so missing the hectic Yuletide selling season." And since the portion of the Inquirer article that I have quoted is apparently the words of the Inquirer itself, I see no reason not to issue a scathing criticism of the Inquirer.
Granted, VR Zone, which is linked to later in the Inquirer article, is also guilty of misinterpreting PC Watch, however, it is not quite to the same degree of the Inquirer's misinterpretation, which went so far as to fabricate the part saying that PC Watch "claims to have inside information".
All I want in the end, I suppose, is to have the Inquirer issue a correction and, even better, an appolgy, however, as they seem to have some kind of problem in responding to the entirety of the emails which I have sent thus far, it would appear that I will not be able to get them to do so.