Editing The Inquirer (section)

==Scoops==
===Sony laptop battery scandal===
In 2006 ''The Inquirer'' reported laptop battery problems that affected [[Dell]], [[Sony]] and [[Apple Inc.|Apple]] as of September 2006, with rumours of problems at [[Toshiba]] and [[Lenovo Group|Lenovo]]. In June 2006, ''The Inquirer'' published photographs of a Dell notebook PC bursting into flames at a conference in Japan;<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=32550|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060705062508/http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=32550|url-status=unfit|archive-date=5 July 2006|work=The Inquirer|date=21 June 2006|title=Dell laptop explodes at Japanese conference|access-date=2 September 2006}}</ref> ''[[The New York Times]]'' reprinted ''The Inquirer'''s photographs.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/10/technology/10dell.html|title=Dell's Exploding Computer and Other Image Problems|first=Damon|last=Darlin|date=10 July 2006|work=The New York Times}}</ref> ''The Inquirer'' was also the first publication to report Dell's subsequent decision to recall faulty batteries, according to ''[[BusinessWeek]]''.<ref name="bw-dell-recall"/>

''The Inquirer's'' successful reporting of the story relied on information supplied by readers and later by a confidential source at Dell. "I attribute being on top of the story to old-fashioned print journalism standards – cultivating, and, if you'll excuse the pun, not burning such contacts," ''The Inquirer''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s founder, Mike Magee, told BusinessWeek.<ref name="bw-dell-recall">{{cite magazine| url=https://www.bloomberg.com/bw/stories/2006-08-29/the-battery-recall-a-win-for-the-web|magazine=BusinessWeek| date=30 August 2006|title=The Battery Recall: A Win for the Web|access-date=2 September 2006}}</ref>

===Rydermark===
In July 2006, ''The Inquirer'' posted images to show cheating by [[Nvidia]] Windows device drivers in ''Rydermark 2006''.<ref>[https://archive.today/20130901222117/http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1011446/rydermark-screenshots-back-california-graphics-fudge The Inquirer, 18 July 2006: ''Rydermark screenshots back California graphics fudge''] (cited 4 February 2007)</ref> The images were alleged to be fake by a number of sources.<ref>[http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3400 DailyTech, 19 July 2006: ''"Rydermark" Cheating Allegations Discredited''] (cited 23 August 2006)</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.behardware.com/news/8269/the-inquirer-accuses-nvidia-of-cheating.html|title=The Inquirer accuses Nvidia of cheating|work=BeHardware|date=19 July 2006|author=Damien|access-date=23 August 2006}}</ref> ''The Inquirer'' denied any wrongdoing and quoted the maker of Rydermark calling the allegations against them "irresponsible".<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20060722010351/http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33131 The Inquirer, 19 July 2006: ''Rydermark maker labels hoax allegations 'irresponsible' ''] (cited 23 August 2006)</ref> About 8 months after the original Rydermark article, ''The Inquirer'' ran another article claiming that Rydermark was still being developed, but was near release.<ref>[https://archive.today/20130901222116/http://uk.theinquirer.net/?article=37716 The Inquirer, 19 February 2007: ''Rydermark benchmark lives. It's almost done''] (cited 28 February 2007)</ref> In response, one of its critics offered $1,000 to a charity of the Rydermark articles author's choosing if he could produce (breaching his [[Non-disclosure agreement|NDA]]) a version of Rydermark that showed the alleged screenshots in full-motion video before a set deadline (which gave the author 10 and a half hours, beginning at 6:30PM UK time). No one produced the program before the deadline passed.<ref>{{cite news|author=Kristopher Kubicki|url=http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=6149|title=DailyTech Digest: RyderMark, My take on RyderMark's newest incarnation}}</ref>

Independent verification that RyderMark was genuine, first appeared in TweakTown in May 2007.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1103/1/page_1_introduction/index.html|title=TweakTown: RyderMark Beta 2 Preview - Emerging competition for Futuremark?|author=Lars Göran Nilsson|date=16 May 2007|access-date=17 May 2007|work=TweakTown}}</ref> RyderMark developer Ajith Ram denied ever sending the Inquirer Nvidia cheating allegations.<ref>{{cite news|author=Kristopher Kubicki|url=http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=7396| title=RyderMark Developer: We Never Said NVIDIA Cheated|work=DailyTech|access-date=11 June 2007}}</ref>

===ATI Intel front side bus license revocation===
On 24 July 2006, ''The Inquirer'' wrote that, in response to AMD's announced intent to purchase ATI, "ATI had its chipset license pulled, or at least not renewed by Intel."<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33225| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060815204630/http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33225| url-status=unfit| archive-date=15 August 2006|work=The Inquirer|date=24 July 2006|title=Intel pulls ATI bus licence|access-date=23 August 2006}}</ref> ATI responded by stating that its license had not been revoked and that they continue to ship Intel chipsets under license.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTEyNSwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==|work=H Enthusiast|date=26 July 2006|title=AMD & ATI Answers to Rumormongering|access-date=23 August 2006}}</ref> On 23 August 2006, ATI showed its chipset roadmap to motherboard vendors which showed that next-generation chipsets for the Intel platform are cancelled.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/chipsets/display/20060823235224.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080829125617/http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/chipsets/display/20060823235224.html|archive-date=29 August 2008|title=News - Thursday, August 28, 2008|publisher=xbitlabs.com}}</ref> On 1 March 2007, AMD said that they would continue developing chipsets for Intel platforms.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/MailHome.asp?datePublish=2007/3/1&pages=PD&seq=214|work=DigiTimes|date=1 March 2007|title=AMD keeping open platform strategy: Q&A with sales and marketing vice president Jochen Polster|access-date=3 March 2007}}</ref>

===Windows 10 Technical Preview eavesdropping===
On 3 October 2014, ''The Inquirer'' reported on the privacy policy for the Technical Preview the upcoming Microsoft [[Windows 10]] operating system.<ref>{{cite web|author=Chris Merriman|date=3 October 2014|title=Microsoft's Windows 10 Preview has permission to watch your every move|url=http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2373838/microsofts-windows-10-preview-has-permission-to-watch-your-every-move|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141004162412/http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2373838/microsofts-windows-10-preview-has-permission-to-watch-your-every-move|url-status=unfit|archive-date=4 October 2014|work=The Inquirer|access-date=5 November 2014}}</ref> In the report, it pointed out that the permissions included the ability for Microsoft to monitor individual keystrokes as well as file content from users. The story was picked up by news media around the world causing Microsoft to admit that monitoring was a necessary part of the process, but denying use of a keylogger.

Ed Bott, writing for ZDNet, accused the site of being "a tech tabloid known for its breathless headlines and factually challenged prose" and said of writer Chris Merriman, "there's little evidence that the author has enough background in computer science or security to tell a keylogger from a key lime pie."<ref>{{cite news|author=Ed Bott| date=23 October 2014|title=Windows 10: You've Got Questions, I've Got Answers|url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/windows-10-youve-got-questions-ive-got-answers/|department=The Ed Bott Report (blog)|publisher=ZDNet|access-date=5 November 2014}}</ref>