The info about who they worked for. You'll have to ask the mods they talked to on that. Arkam, who it sounds like VGLeaks got this from, was the first person to give us info that pointed to the CPU issues devs were running into. Obviously I can't 100% vouch for them, but at the same time I think it's unfair to 100% write them off as well. Especially when you're asking for stuff you may never get.
Your last sentence is kind of like saying "barely accurate, uncorroborated information is better than no information at all". Imo, not really. But there is a very strong chance that we will receive the information in approximately 2 months time, whether Nintendo likes it or not.
So it's a secret who Arkam works for. That's fine if he doesn't wish to divulge his place of employ, but the consequences of that are less reasons to take his leaks at face value and needs to be independently confirmed. No offense to Arkam but that's just the nature of discerning information.
I take it that some of the gafers who commented saying "These are the same specs I heard also." that they more than likely heard those specs, either directly or indirectly, from the exact same source, instead of an independent corroboration, from a different Wii U developer working for a different company. So we may have a situation where different "insiders" are saying that they heard the same specs, maybe not even knowing that the source is the same. To me that is more believable than each one of them having a different buddy working in the industry, on the final Wii U dev kits, describing the specs the exact same way.
I just find it a little unlikely that Wii U developers, with final specification dev kits, are independently describing Wii U specs as "enhanced Broadway", and only acknowledging half of the available ram which should be in the newest dev kits.
I believe there is a reason why only certain developers are allowed to talk publicly about the Wii U hardware. The ones who are allowed to publicly comment are the developers whom Nintendo has entrusted with the latest and most up to date dk specs. Developers who are not privy to that information, nor privy to the best and newest dev kits, are asked to keep quiet because the information and dev kits that they have aren't representative of the final hardware. Then the developers, who are not so happy about having the older and weaker units, decide to leak how disappointing the hardware is.
Do you really think people are going to risk their jobs just to satisfy your need to know who they work for?
I believe I answered that question just a few sentences down from where you quoted me.
me said:
I don't expect actual Wii U developers to break NDA, but when your rumors are this vague, nondescript and even inaccurate through omission. then you don't have a lot of credibility for people to take you seriously.
I honestly didn't know what kind of situation this person was in because the rumor was so vague. People were telling me that the information in the op was already independently corroborated by other developers. I asked who those people were and who they worked for. Seemed like a sensible question to ask at the time.
You can believe what they say or not. They have been verified by the MODS. Nuff said.
With all due respect to the mods and the wonderful gaf administration, I personally don't think that they are a definitive source of insider industry info, especially when it comes to a company as secretive as Nintendo, who go through great lengths to keep their hand close to their chest. I'm not saying that I don't appreciate when they do drop stuff, because I do. But when it comes to the topic of Nintendo hardware, I always remain skeptical. That goes for anyone who isn't Nintendo or a confirmed Nintendo partner.
The impression that I am getting, from bgassassin and others, is that the mods are simply willing to vouch for the fact that the source is "within the industry", which is fine. That may be enough for certain people, but not myself. Unless they can confirm that the source of this rumor is not just "in the industry", but an actual Wii U developer who has access to the final spec Wii U dev kits, then to me it is far from being something that I am willing to give credence.
Usually when rumors like this happen, right before a reveal, gaf will use any new information, officially confirmed by the company, in order to compare to the rumor and then gauge how accurate the information most likely is. Nothing new in this leak was corroborated by Nintendo, but rather several glaring omissions draw the leak into question, since this rumor was suppose to be "final Wii U specs".
How could someone with a final spec Wii U dev kit not know about the 2gig total system ram? If they did know, then why did they only mention half of the ram? Since over time more memory can be reallocated from the OS into the games, I see no logical reason to omit this information, even if the answer was that currently developers can only use 1gig for games. In other words, the Wii U information, that was officially confirmed after the posting of this rumor, does not lend itself to the credibility of the rumor. I just can't pretend that it did.