So? Why? The second statement doesn't support the first. You have to provide something to support your assertion to have even a semblance of credibility. All you've asserted here is that you don't believe them, but not why. You've said nothing of substance here.
Even assuming the "marketshare" claims for Android are in fact representative, "impossible" is a very absolute term. Had you said "unlikely", that might've carried your argument a little, but as it stands, you've got nothing as I can prove your first statement false with a simple edge-case scenario. Assuming iOS has anything more than zero marketshare, if only one iOS device was used to make an online purchase, then it could still be responsible for more purchases (absolutely or as a percentage) than Android if Android devices were used to make none. The second statement is also unsupported and as easily proved false, so you've done nothing but make a null statement.
First of all, one can easily generate hypotheticals all day long (not just two), so that's just false to say there's only two possibilities. Next, the first "reason" could as easily say Google is being supported by Android, so the numbers are "adjusted" to make Google look good. However, without support, it's just a hypothetical with no weight. Third, without proof and only the numbers in the article (which is all you have), even in the best-case (and wholly unlikely) scenario for your second "proof", the entirety of the 63% other mobile purchases were in fact attributable to Android users who changed their user agent, bringing the total mobile purchasing to ~69.7% for Android versus 30.3% for iOS. Ignoring the absolute lunacy of this argument, as this implies that approximately 90% of all Android users change their user agent, how do you support the assertion with the data at hand and the support you've provided (which is nothing)?
Here are some quotes from Jay Henderson from IBM in regards to how they get their data:
"We are able to determine the source of online retail shopping traffic, where sales are coming from, breakouts between devices (tablets versus smartphone), and even differences between operating systems (Apple vs. Android),"
"For example, in the early part of November, IBM noticed that even though Android devices have a greater market share, online shopping was dominated by consumers using iPhones, indicating device market share doesn’t necessarily translate into shopping behavior."
"In contrast, the IBM Digital Analytics Benchmark campaign uniquely provides real-time, detailed results by channel and device. This enables marketers and retailers to adjust their plans on-the-fly in a way they have never been able to do before."
Can you believe the garbage he's spewing? The only company that can provide that kind of real-time data is Google. Not Apple, MS or even IBM. Proof that they were paid by Apple to come up with these fake numbers.
Edited by GoodGrief - 11/30/13 at 10:20am