Interesting observation about Chris Porritt.
Author of the original report here. You sure about that.
Almost all articles about him allegedly being recruited by Apple cite the website Electrek.co, which is basically a 9to5mac side project/blog. Most of the websites highlight the word allegedly.
Why talk about all articles as if it adds any weight to the statement. I hope you are not learning anything when I tell you that they are all using words like "reportedly" and "allegedly" because they all working off the same report (from us at Electrek, which is not a "side project" but the most read EV news website on the internet) and therefore their only source is us so they can only report based on what we are saying.
On the other hand, we are stating it as fact because we have the original sources and we can confirm what they are saying is true.
That's how every article you read works. Someone reports some new information and every other publications report "hey those guys are SAYING that" and not "those guys SAID that so it is now true".
Chris Porritt's LinkedIn page doesn't mention Apple. Also, none of the articles appear to include a statement from any credible person at Apple
When we published this morning, Porritt's LinkedIn page was still stating that he works at Tesla. No one had reported that he left the company until we did (and it was then confirmed by Tesla).
Now our sources were right about him leaving Tesla, but you don't want to believe us when we say he joined Apple? OK sure.
The only quote from the original article citing an alleged person familiar with the matter sounds less credible than the phrase, "a person familiar with the matter. "
What? How can you say that when we clearly stated:
"He joins Apple a lot more quietly than with a press release. We are told by sources with knowledge of the matter at Apple that he joins the company as “Special Projects Group PD Administrator” – an intentionally vague title."
In most other instances where Apple hired someone significant, Apple at least acknowledges that the person is now working for Apple. I can't find any website with a comment of any sort from Apple.
That's absolute bullshit. Especially when we are talking about a secret (or unofficial) project, like Titan.
This almost sounds like 9to5mac is trying to lure Apple into confirming the existence of an Apple Car Project..
For someone quick to scream speculation, you make wild ones yourself.
The author of the article, using the name md, appears to have admitted the article was not well written and that the "updates" that were supposed to confirm the validity of the articles claims were added without any consideration for if they made sense. (Was the article even edited or fact checked?).
The author makes the awkward assumption that because Porritt left Tesla in September "They (Elektrek) can confirm Porritt didn't make a direct transition from Tesla to Apple.
Again, what? MD? Where do you see MD? My name is Fred Lambert and clearly stated in the article.
Also where have I admitted anything?
Also what update was suppose to confirm the validity of anything? The only update is about when exactly Porritt left Tesla. We said "a few month" ago because sources (at Apple) weren't clear and said about 6 months. Then Tesla confirmed it was in September. So ~7 months. We added only a small update for precision but didn't even have to because it technically still matches our original timeline.
And again, I'm not make any "awkward assumption". We know for fact that there was a gap.
I don't know what your problem is here with my report or our publication but you'll have to do a better job in refuting our reports in the future because that was gibberish and/or unsubstantiated.