Shareholders refused to push the share price up, reviewers said there was nothing to see here move on please, and the view was that the phone was nothing special.
However you would be excused if you thought that you dreamed yesterday's coverage when you woke up this morning.
Reuters turned the yawn of a launch into an "agressive launch plan" which would have been news to those who were there and started to dig up analysts who would say something completely opposite to what was being said before.
FBR Capital markets, for example, said that while the iPhone 5 lacked the mind-blowing innovation the world expects from Apple, it is different enough to maintain a sizable product advantage over its competitors. It predicted that Apple's share price would be $1000 by Christmas. Next it will be declaring that Nick Farrell will buy one and will mortgage his house to get an iPad.
And the lackluster share price now? Reuters claims that shareholders hated the iPhone 4S too but customers loved it and booming sales have pushed Apple stock up 80 percent since. However what Reuters did not say was that the iPhone 4S did not do very well at all. In fact sales of the phone petered out after Samsung released its phone in May and had not picked up since.
Reuters salts its copy with lots of advertising buzz words from the Apple advertising hymn sheet, phrases like: "not be a problem this time for the bigger, faster and slimmer iPhone 5". If they wanted to be accurate the should say "a phone smaller than its rivals" and "extension of similar designs already out there for half the price".
The San Francisco Gate tried to move the plot away from the share prices and insist that sales of the phone will be galactic.
It quoted the over enthusiastic Carl Howe from Yankee Group saying that the iPhone 5 is "going to be the best-selling consumer electronics device of all time, bar none". He said Jobs' Mob will have sold 10 million of them by the end of the month. This comment, by the way, is headed to be the most quoted and can be spotted everywhere, as if it were a common or likely view.
It is this sort of unfettered hysteria, propaganda, and brainwashing which makes videos such as the following possible:
The Gate did hedge its bets a bit by quoting the slightly more sane Anil Doradla, from William Blair, who said that Apple may not have added enough new features and the company had not added the technology needed to work on the network of China Mobile, China's biggest wireless carrier.
Nowhere, however, has a mention been made of the fact, pointed out yesterday, that the iPhone 5 is a more expensive version of technology which is already out there. There are phones with bigger screens that can do more without the price.
However, it seems that for some reason the press is trying to forget that to push an illusion that Apple is still in the game, when it clearly isn't.