Great article Jon,
I think that most of the problems OEMs face could be either solved or managed through communication.
As you said, many power users can understand technical difficulties simply because they they have a broader view of the nature of technology. As a software engineer, I know that things go wrong. So while I may be disappointed, I've met
Murphy many times and we have an understanding.
Most corporations have discovered that from the perspective of employees, if you give them a sense of ownership they become invested emotionally. Loyalty increases. Hence the name
Associate. I think many of the Windows Mobile software companies have it right. While, I'm not saying that OEM's should go as far as a WebIS or a SBSH, I think their model definitely works. Assemble a (volunteer) team of beta testers. This increases your coverage at little cost. Perhaps put them under a light NDA if you feel the need. Then let them defend the companies efforts in the forums with statements like "I can't say too much, but I can tell you OEMx is working very hard to get product/feature X out. There are a few issues to be resolved." Done. Peer confirmation.
As to rumors... I agree with you about the responsibilities of editors in this manner. But rumors wouldn't sting so much if companies had a policy of communication. While I'll be the first one to say that corporate denials aren't worth the paper or bytes they take up, communications still carry some weight.
And for goodness sakes, its okay to go where the users are. Software companies by and large are better at this than OEMs are. Matter I was shocked when the registered user VIPN showed up in
this thread about their device.
Lets how OEMs take a note from some of software companies. Sometimes you have to take it to the streets.