John Gruber on a Bloomberg article stating Apple "pushed back" their VR headset to 2023:

It’s a semantic argument, but “pushed back” feels fair for an unannounced product. Shipping is hard, COVID makes everything harder. “Delayed” and “setback” don’t feel fair, though. When it actually does get announced, do we get a “finally”?

The infringing bit from Mark Gurman's report is:

Apple Inc. is considering pushing back the debut of its mixed-reality headset by at least a few months, potentially delaying its first major new product since the Apple Watch in 2015, according to people familiar with the situation.

I get the semantic argument, but in my opinion, this is a 100% accurate way to talk about what Gurman is reporting. I work on projects at my day job that get delayed beyond our original estimates and we internally say they were "delayed" or "going to miss their target" or "pushed back to next quarter" or a whole host of other things. Gurman is using language that makes total sense to me in how Apple likely talks about this interally.

I think the best defense of this is that Gruber doesn't propose an alternate phrase that he thinks is more accurate. Frankly, if we can't use language like this to discuss what may be going on inside Apple, then the entire Apple rumors world may as well not exist, but that's basically the backbone of Apple discourse, so that ain't happening.