AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Rumor: iPhone made up 66% of sales at AT&T corporate stores, Android 9%
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rumor: iPhone made up 66% of sales at AT&T corporate stores, Android 9% - Page 6

post #201 of 223
1/4/12 at 4:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy

_cut for space_

Great post.
Reply
Reply
post #202 of 223
1/4/12 at 2:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

My understanding is that Apple have never used focus groups or surveys in this way. If that is indeed correct, then it is a good illustration that they are at best unnecessary, and, at worst, a really bad idea.

They say they don't, and I hope that's true. When a company has more than a couple of employees, they can do work internally. The real question that was often brought up by Jobs was whether marketing surveys, etc would tell you what you needed to know, and his conclusion was that they didn't.

Apple's success in the past ten years has been that Jobs and a few others decided on what THEY would want to use, and figured that if they wanted it, then others might as well. As the people in Apple are interested in the areas in question at least as much as the average person, that assumption has proven to be correct.

We see a lot of stuff online that says that there is a certain amount of "interest" in a product, usually quoting some percentage. But interest doesn't translate into sales. At least, not directly.
Reply
Reply
post #203 of 223
1/4/12 at 2:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post

Wikipedia says Andy Rubin worked for Apple 1989-1992.

That's back when Steve Jobs was gone. Steve also said they were working on the fundamentals of the iPad in the early 2000's.... not the early 1990's

I seriously doubt Apple was working on anything to do with the iPad while Andy Rubin was there.

Hell... Apple was selling this kind of computer when Andy worked there:


This has been quoted, and used in a number of articles. It has nothing to do with whether Jobs was there of not. Don't forget that the first tablet to use a partially Apple developed ARM chip was the Newton, and some principles from that are still used in iOS. At any rate, Runbin's tenure has been seen as a problem for Google.

http://www.macrumors.com/2011/09/02/...work-at-apple/
Reply
Reply
post #204 of 223
1/4/12 at 3:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Some off Mel's other "circumstantial evidence" falls apart on closer inspection too. Rumors that Google might be entering the phone business have been around since 2004. http://theponderingprimate.blogspot....s-to-go.html\\

Claiming Apple didn't know about Google and Android. Garbage! It was reported in Bloomberg for crying out loud, August of 2005.
http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...0949_tc024.htm

Rumors of an actual phone in development started appearing in the press in mid-2006, with even the high-profile Engadget getting in on the stories.
http://www.engadget.com/2006/08/03/a...lk-wifi-phone/

All of those stories (I have more if you need 'em) were published before Schmidt became a member of Apple's BOD.

Pushing the idea that Apple, and particularly Steve Jobs "who took long walks with Google's founders discussing business" didn't know about Android development or Google's plans to enter the smartphone business, and doing so with a straight face, is plain silly.

When all is said and done you have an Eric Schmidt, asked to join Apple's board in spite of Google's purchase of Android and telegraphed smartphone and mobile plans. Who was trying to use who?

The question wasn't whether Google was working on a phone, which, at the time was questioned as to whether it was real, or just another of Google's many projects that never reached conclusion. The question was whether it was leeching off Apple project, which as we see, it did. But ONLY AFTER Schmitt's time on the board. after all, how could they have switched from a BB configuration to an iPhone one, which even Schmitt said they did, AFTER the time he saw Apple's plans.

You can find any excuse you want, but nothing you linked to proves anything of this. And there are doubts as to Schmitt's truthfulness in this matter, as in others.

I don't think one can trust anything Schmitt says. I'm not alone in this.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjack...th-steve-jobs/
Reply
Reply
post #205 of 223
1/4/12 at 3:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

My understanding is that Apple have never used focus groups or surveys in this way. If that is indeed correct, then it is a good illustration that they are at best unnecessary, and, at worst, a really bad idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

They say they don't, and I hope that's true. When a company has more than a couple of employees, they can do work internally. The real question that was often brought up by Jobs was whether marketing surveys, etc would tell you what you needed to know, and his conclusion was that they didn't.

Apple's success in the past ten years has been that Jobs and a few others decided on what THEY would want to use, and figured that if they wanted it, then others might as well. As the people in Apple are interested in the areas in question at least as much as the average person, that assumption has proven to be correct.

We see a lot of stuff online that says that there is a certain amount of "interest" in a product, usually quoting some percentage. But interest doesn't translate into sales. At least, not directly.

Apple has in fact used surveys but they tend to be geared towards usage patterns of products purchased by its customers as opposed to requested/future features.
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
post #206 of 223
1/4/12 at 3:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

The question wasn't whether Google was working on a phone, which, at the time was questioned as to whether it was real, or just another of Google's many projects that never reached conclusion. The question was whether it was leeching off Apple project, which as we see, it did. But ONLY AFTER Schmitt's time on the board. after all, how could they have switched from a BB configuration to an iPhone one, which even Schmitt said they did, AFTER the time he saw Apple's plans.

No, the question revolves around your statement "Schmitt joined the board some time before Android came out, and even before Apple knew Google was working on it. . .". That's beyond a reasonable claim IMHO.

As for seeing Apple's iPhone and realizing that it was a much better idea than their Windows Mobile challenger, code-named Sooner (which Apple knew all about), why would that be any surprise? The only surprise would have been Google continuing Sooner plans instead of changing the focus to Dream, their touchscreen project that was originally planned for a later launch. Apple's iPhone moved the timeframe up as would be expected, pushing the focus to touchscreen smartphones.

Even still Google respected Mr. Jobs requests, doing as he asked and initially removing the multi-touch features they had built in to Android. That eventually became a problem for Google when Palm released multi-touch features of their own and Apple failed to challenge them. That left Android without a major feature that both Palm and Apple would be using and the odd man out.

It doesn't take much understanding of business to see why Google chose to go against Mr Jobs wishes and include multi-touch of their own. And that Mel is where the smoldering problems between Apple and Google got serious. You know enough of the history to know it's true.

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
post #207 of 223
1/4/12 at 3:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by freckledbruh View Post

Apple has in fact used surveys but they tend to be geared towards usage patterns of products purchased by its customers as opposed to requested/future features.

Sure, that's to see if what they're doing is being used by customers. That's different. We usually get those when buying a product.
Reply
Reply
post #208 of 223
1/4/12 at 4:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

No, the question revolves around your statement "Schmitt joined the board some time before Android came out, and even before Apple knew Google was working on it. . .". That's beyond a reasonable claim IMHO.

As for seeing Apple's iPhone and realizing that it was a much better idea than their Windows Mobile challenger, code-named Sooner (which Apple knew all about), why would that be any surprise? The only surprise would have been Google continuing Sooner plans instead of changing the focus to Dream, their touchscreen project that was originally planned for a later launch. Apple's iPhone moved the timeframe up as would be expected, pushing the focus to touchscreen smartphones.

Even still Google respected Mr. Jobs requests, doing as he asked and initially removing the multi-touch features they had built in to Android. That eventually became a problem for Google when Palm released multi-touch features of their own and Apple failed to challenge them. That left Android without a major feature that both Palm and Apple would be using and the odd man out.

It doesn't take much understanding of business to see why Google chose to go against Mr Jobs wishes and include multi-touch of their own. And that Mel is where the smoldering problems between Apple and Google got serious. You know enough of the history to know it's true.

Ok, you got me there. I didn't mean it exactly that way. As I said later. Google works on many projects, many of them publicly known, but drops most of them. They've done that recently. Knowing that Google is working on something, and knowing that they do intend to have a real product are two different things. The time line still works against Schmitt.

Well, now you're just saying things as to what Google MAY have removed because Apple MAY have asked them, BEFORE Android came out. We know that Apple asked them to remove features AFTER Android came out, and they didn't. That's why Apple is suing now, because Google didn't take out features Apple asked them to.

I'm sure Google didn't put some features in in the beginning, because they would have been so blatant that they knew Apple would sue. But they were willing to take the chance on others, as they've done with other companies.
Reply
Reply
post #209 of 223
1/4/12 at 8:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Ok, you got me there. I didn't mean it exactly that way. As I said later. Google works on many projects, many of them publicly known, but drops most of them. They've done that recently. Knowing that Google is working on something, and knowing that they do intend to have a real product are two different things. The time line still works against Schmitt.

Well, now you're just saying things as to what Google MAY have removed because Apple MAY have asked them, BEFORE Android came out. We know that Apple asked them to remove features AFTER Android came out, and they didn't. That's why Apple is suing now, because Google didn't take out features Apple asked them to.

I'm sure Google didn't put some features in in the beginning, because they would have been so blatant that they knew Apple would sue. But they were willing to take the chance on others, as they've done with other companies.

questions:

Despite the fact that no direct evidence supports your strongly held belief, why do you choose to believe it? And what, if anything, could change your mind to the more logical "well he had the opportunity, maybe, but no evidence supports the super-mole Schmidt theory so I'm going to not buy into it because I do not want to act like a completely irrational being?"

The more this issue is looked into the less it looks like it actually happened...You are even postulating on the mindset of Apple executives, "Well Google starts and drops stuff all the time so this phone business will probably be dropped almost immediately."

The evidence points towards any "Copying" (see: inspiration in the pre-Apple dominated world) occurring well after the iPhone being introduced (hence the half assed Android 1.0 which still was rather unusable without a keyboard and trackball).
Reply
Reply
post #210 of 223
1/4/12 at 8:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

questions:

Despite the fact that no direct evidence supports your strongly held belief, why do you choose to believe it? And what, if anything, could change your mind to the more logical "well he had the opportunity, maybe, but no evidence supports the super-mole Schmidt theory so I'm going to not buy into it because I do not want to act like a completely irrational being?"

The more this issue is looked into the less it looks like it actually happened...You are even postulating on the mindset of Apple executives, "Well Google starts and drops stuff all the time so this phone business will probably be dropped almost immediately."

The evidence points towards any "Copying" (see: inspiration in the pre-Apple dominated world) occurring well after the iPhone being introduced (hence the half assed Android 1.0 which still was rather unusable without a keyboard and trackball).

I too would really like to see something, anything, that is more than purely circumstantial evidence of opportunity. While I think that Apple has been extensively copied, and that Android was an obvious attempt to duplicate much of iOS (as Jobs himself said), that does not require Schmidt to have passed technical or design information, and even Apple didn't accuse Schmidt of that.
Reply
Reply
post #211 of 223
1/4/12 at 9:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

I too would really like to see something, anything, that is more than purely circumstantial evidence of opportunity. While I think that Apple has been extensively copied, and that Android was an obvious attempt to duplicate much of iOS (as Jobs himself said), that does not require Schmidt to have passed technical or design information, and even Apple didn't accuse Schmidt of that.

There is no denying Android being a response to iOS shifting the industry. To do so is foolish (I've read people denying but those people are the Apple ][s of the Android world). No one ever denies that with a real argument.

What is denied is that android is an iOS clone. That it is stolen or even truly functionally similar.

Also the whole notion of copying v. Inspired by and lastly the general apparent idea of Apple existing in a void.
Reply
Reply
post #212 of 223
1/5/12 at 9:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

questions:

Despite the fact that no direct evidence supports your strongly held belief, why do you choose to believe it? And what, if anything, could change your mind to the more logical "well he had the opportunity, maybe, but no evidence supports the super-mole Schmidt theory so I'm going to not buy into it because I do not want to act like a completely irrational being?"

The more this issue is looked into the less it looks like it actually happened...You are even postulating on the mindset of Apple executives, "Well Google starts and drops stuff all the time so this phone business will probably be dropped almost immediately."

The evidence points towards any "Copying" (see: inspiration in the pre-Apple dominated world) occurring well after the iPhone being introduced (hence the half assed Android 1.0 which still was rather unusable without a keyboard and trackball).

No, the more it's looked into, the more it looks as though it did happen. You two guys believe what you want, and I'll believe what I want. None of us is going to convince the other, so there's no point to it any longer.
Reply
Reply
post #213 of 223
1/5/12 at 9:51pm
Eric Schmidt made a presentation during the Keynote address that launched the first iPhone. He said basically Google and Apple have been working very closely to integrate Google services into the iPhone and it was a long and complicated process, blah blah blah. He did Steve the same way Bill did in the 80's when MS was writing for the Macintosh. And his shit sucks just like the shit MS made, and they will eventually lose just like MS is losing now.
Reply
Reply
post #214 of 223
1/6/12 at 3:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

No, the more it's looked into, the more it looks as though it did happen. You two guys believe what you want, and I'll believe what I want. None of us is going to convince the other, so there's no point to it any longer.

So in your mind Super Mole Schmidt infiltrated the Apple headquarters (via invite) and stole Apple secrets (and implemented them in an OS that hardly looks or works like iOS even superficially) then surprised them by showing off a phone OS (despite it being public that Google was entering the phone business in 2005) and then to further muddle the situation the same OS had public showings and demos in late 2007-2008 continued to look unlike iOS in any way...then released a phone like the G1 at the end of 2008, which doesn't look or work like the iPhone?



Yes a possibility exists that all of what you believe is indeed true...but that possibility is about as high as there being an invisible intangible pink unicorn typing this to you.
Reply
Reply
post #215 of 223
1/6/12 at 3:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slow Cheetah View Post

Eric Schmidt made a presentation during the Keynote address that launched the first iPhone. He said basically Google and Apple have been working very closely to integrate Google services into the iPhone and it was a long and complicated process, blah blah blah. He did Steve the same way Bill did in the 80's when MS was writing for the Macintosh. And his shit sucks just like the shit MS made, and they will eventually lose just like MS is losing now.

Apple sued MS...why didn't the much more powerful at the time Apple sue Google to oblivion if all of this is a) obvious, b) actually happened.
Reply
Reply
post #216 of 223
1/6/12 at 6:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

No, the more it's looked into, the more it looks as though it did happen. You two guys believe what you want, and I'll believe what I want. None of us is going to convince the other, so there's no point to it any longer.

I'm really disturbed by your statement "none of us is going to convince the other". I'm certainly willing to be convinced in either direction by evidence, or accept that we don't have enough information to decide if that turns out to be the case (which is where I am now). If you have made your mind up that's fine, but the only evidence you shared was circumstantial, and Gatorguy shot most of that down as far as I could tell. So why are you so convinced? Please share.
Reply
Reply
post #217 of 223
1/6/12 at 6:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

Apple sued MS...why didn't the much more powerful at the time Apple sue Google to oblivion if all of this is a) obvious, b) actually happened.

If you'll remember, Apple lost that, even though they were right. I'm sure they were terrified of the same thing happening.
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #218 of 223
1/6/12 at 8:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

So in your mind Super Mole Schmidt infiltrated the Apple headquarters (via invite) and stole Apple secrets (and implemented them in an OS that hardly looks or works like iOS even superficially) then surprised them by showing off a phone OS (despite it being public that Google was entering the phone business in 2005) and then to further muddle the situation the same OS had public showings and demos in late 2007-2008 continued to look unlike iOS in any way...then released a phone like the G1 at the end of 2008, which doesn't look or work like the iPhone?



Yes a possibility exists that all of what you believe is indeed true...but that possibility is about as high as there being an invisible intangible pink unicorn typing this to you.

You're using your same tired arguments, except that as they aren't working, you're now also saying really silly things in addition. They don't make your argument stronger, they make it weaker. Perhaps you are some pink unicorn, no real person could believe what you're saying.
Reply
Reply
post #219 of 223
1/6/12 at 8:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

I'm really disturbed by your statement "none of us is going to convince the other". I'm certainly willing to be convinced in either direction by evidence, or accept that we don't have enough information to decide if that turns out to be the case (which is where I am now). If you have made your mind up that's fine, but the only evidence you shared was circumstantial, and Gatorguy shot most of that down as far as I could tell. So why are you so convinced? Please share.

I don't believe you are willing. Saying you are doesn't cut it. It's like a drug addict saying that they can stop at any time, but that they don't want to.

I might believe you if you considered the argument carefully, point by point, but you aren't.

There are three guys here who will believe everything bad about Apple, but who refuse to believe anything bad about Google.
Reply
Reply
post #220 of 223
1/6/12 at 8:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

There are <some> guys here who will believe <some> bad about Apple, but who refuse to believe <everything> bad about Google.

Fixed that part.
Balance is good. . .

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
post #221 of 223
1/6/12 at 9:03am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't believe you are willing. Saying you are doesn't cut it. It's like a drug addict saying that they can stop at any time, but that they don't want to.

I might believe you if you considered the argument carefully, point by point, but you aren't.

There are three guys here who will believe everything bad about Apple, but who refuse to believe anything bad about Google.

That's a hard argument to refute since I can't prove what I'm thinking. But actually you are projecting - you have already declared your mind closed, and now are insisting mine is too. That's bullshit, if you'll excuse my French. Consider your arguments point by point? That's what I asked you for, but you haven't made any cogent arguments - all you have done is regurgitate rumors and innuendo, the last batch of which were refuted, and by your own admission - validly.

So I don't post a huge amount, but if you look at my posting history it is pretty clear that I am definitely pro-Apple. And I'm not even anti-Apple on this one - just anti-muddled thinking, anti-flawed arguments and frustrated by your reluctance to engage.
Reply
Reply
post #222 of 223
1/6/12 at 11:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

You're using your same tired arguments, except that as they aren't working, you're now also saying really silly things in addition. They don't make your argument stronger, they make it weaker. Perhaps you are some pink unicorn, no real person could believe what you're saying.

You have no evidence to support your "side" yet there is a lot of evidence to at least cast enough doubt on your position that any rational being would dismiss it as possible but not likely.

Every point of evidence you did have has been shot down earlier in this thread...yet, instead of being a rational humble being you still hold onto your position.

Why?
Reply
Reply
post #223 of 223
1/6/12 at 12:31pm
Back to ATT iPhone/Android sales, I came across a channel sell-thru chart from Canaccord over at BGR. It shows the number one selling smartphone at ATT to be the 4S, as expected.

I thought the iPhone 3GS or iPhone 4 might be number two. Nope, not according to them. Samsung's Galaxy S2 took that slot for the past two months. They have the 4S as number one at all three big US carriers, with the S2 in second place at both Sprint and ATT, while the Nexus is number two at Verizon, who doesn't sell the Galaxy.

It's nearly turning into a two horse race for now.

http://www-bgr-com.vimg.net/wp-conte...d-dec-2011.jpg

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Rumor: iPhone made up 66% of sales at AT&T corporate stores, Android 9%
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Rumor: iPhone made up 66% of sales at AT&T corporate stores, Android 9%