Onus, let me see if I've got this right. You are equating your made up guess with something a manufacturer specifically told us. That manufacturer showed a picture from a marketing document, told us we'd see this at Computex next week, and that we could publish this information. Do we, or they, have a reputation for misleading people? We published it not because they said we could, but because we thought it was interesting.
If I follow your logic, then, perhaps it has been equally misguided of us to publish anything about the next Radeon, about Zen, about high bandwidth memory, about the Oculus Rift, about USB 3.1, or anything that anyone tells us, or shows us, but that does not have a ship date or a price. Maybe nobody should write about a new iPhone or a Samsung phone or an Apple Watch. Maybe we shouldn't write about Skylake, even if Intel tells us how it works and that it's coming some time in 2015, just because there's no price yet or an actual ship date. In fact, maybe we shouldn't believe anyone without those two factors in hand. Is that what you're suggesting?
Companies tell us things all the time, things they want published, for a variety of reasons -- to keep buyer's on the hook, to immobilize them until something is ready, to preempt one another. And sometimes because they want their information out there. Our filters involve determining if something is real, and if people will find it interesting, if people will at some point want that thing we're writing about. We cannot always intuit intent, and just because a company might not be ready to share the exact details (maybe they're figuring it out, maybe they are debating it internally, I don't know) doesn't automatically suggest that they should be doubted. Burning us in the past, or implausible contentions are good reasons to doubt. I don't see either of those here.