Every time we read one of these reports from some ‘market research’ firm we round around with our hair on fire. Maybe because things like this are immediately picked up by tech media sites with axes to grind against Apple and trumpeted as proof of the Doom™ to come.
Sometimes I think results like this are caused by changes in customer’s attitudes and not Apple policies or procedures. Are people becoming more entitled, more OCD about things, more jaded, more negative in general? Take for example the Apple Discussion forums and the ?Watch. There are a number of threads in which people are obsessing over tiny scratches that have appeared on their watches, either on the screen or the body of the watch. They are outraged at Apple over what they claim is poor quality or false advertising. They throw around terms like waterproof and scratch proof without knowing what they are talking about. Hello! This is the real world calling. You wear a device on your wrist and bump it against something and it can get scratched. Even a Rolex can get scratched. But Apple is vilified as producing defective hardware. What do you think this person will tell StellaService when they call?
I've been having wifi problems and finally tracked it down to a Airport Express on my network. Went to Apple Support page last evening and I have a Genius Bar appointment scheduled for 11:30 am this morning. I'd say that's excellent.
Same here... I began publishing professionally with a Mac IIVX in 1992 and have only found it necessary to call them once in 23 years... five years ago they replaced the motherboard on a MacBook Pro in a couple of days, completely free of charge, even though it was out of warranty.
Same thing happened with my uncle's iMac a year or two ago, only after a couple mo-bo replacements didn't do the trick they just gave him a new machine! Not only was it a new machine it was after they had been updated!! Lucky bastard! It should be noted that the reason I called support turned out to be a non-issue and completely my stupid fault. I have converted several family members to Mac and not one problem. I get that no company is perfect and there are going to be problems here and there, but as far as Apple is concerned, my next Mac could be a total lemon and I'd be totally cool with it because their track record so far for me has been A++.
I've recent.y had to use support to fix an Apple ID problem that was maybe kinda related to our Apple watches (if you squint your eyes), and they were happy to help us fix it. which they did. and gave us their actual email address during the issue to help resolve. and then asked if we had any other issues while we had them on the line. nice.
Camera recall on 6Plus phones being bungled by Apple. Apple store will not replace the camera even after verifying serial number is in defective batch unless you can create a blurry image in the store. Some customer support! Apparently they expect you to archive the evidence of blurry photos to qualify for a new camera in spite of their acknowledged defect.
Camera recall on 6Plus phones being bungled by Apple. Apple store will not replace the camera even after verifying serial number is in defective batch unless you can create a blurry image in the store. Some customer support! Apparently they expect you to archive the evidence of blurry photos to qualify for a new camera in spite of their acknowledged defect.
Very lame support.
Right?¡ It's almost as if they don't want waste everyone's time replacing perfectly good camera modules¡ If only they would have included wording like "If your iPhone 6 Plus is producing blurry photos and falls into the eligible serial number range" and something like, "Your iPhone will be examined prior to any service to verify that it is eligible for this program"¡ Oh, wait, that's exactly what they did.
Clearly they know there is a problem with a certain component or construction of certain camera models within a subset of a large range, but not the entire range. Why would you want to get it replaced if it's working fine? You want to get one over on Apple by costing them the cost of the module and 20 minutes of an Apple Genius' time? Do you have no regard for your own time? Note this warranty will be going for 3 years from the date of purchase and you couldn't have even owned an iPhone 6 Plus for a full year at this point so you have plenty of time to get the module replaced if ever do exhibit any issue.
Camera recall on 6Plus phones being bungled by Apple. Apple store will not replace the camera even after verifying serial number is in defective batch unless you can create a blurry image in the store. Some customer support! Apparently they expect you to archive the evidence of blurry photos to qualify for a new camera in spite of their acknowledged defect.
Very lame support.
Right?¡ It's almost as if they don't want waste everyone's time replacing perfectly good camera modules¡ If only they would have included wording like "If your iPhone 6 Plus is producing blurry photos and falls into the eligible serial number range" and something like, "Your iPhone will be examined prior to any service to verify that it is eligible for this program"¡ Oh, wait, that's exactly what they did.
Clearly they know there is a problem with a certain component or construction of certain camera models within a subset of a large range, but not the entire range. Why would you want to get it replaced if it's working fine? You want to get one over on Apple by costing them the cost of the module and 20 minutes of an Apple Genius' time? Do you have no regard for your own time? Note this warranty will be going for 3 years from the date of purchase and you couldn't have even owned an iPhone 6 Plus for a full year at this point so you have plenty of time to get the module replaced if ever do exhibit any issue.
People are hypochondriacs even with their devices.
The problem here is that somewhat is reporting as bad something that can't be ascertained from this data alone! (change of methodology!).
It's probable that their results are ALWAYS SUSPECT. Because again, how on earth would their sampling reflect reality, especially over a short period like that and precise niche like info they're not directly privy too! Watch buyers are such a small part of Apple's operation that there is no way on earth even a complete snafu with them impact Apple's overall stats. So, why on earth would Apple's customer service go "down" in their slowest months unless they've fired a lot of personel (which would be known) or that company is totally off (like so many are).
At least in quality assessment of car makers, they use massive sampling over a very long time. In this case, trends become more important than
The problem here is that somewhat is reporting as bad something that can't be ascertained from this data alone! (change of methodology!).
It's probable that their results are ALWAYS SUSPECT. Because again, how on earth would their sampling reflect reality, especially over a short period like that and precise niche like info they're not directly privy too! Watch buyers are such a small part of Apple's operation that there is no way on earth even a complete snafu with them impact Apple's overall stats. So, why on earth would Apple's customer service go "down" in their slowest months unless they've fired a lot of personel (which would be known) or that company is totally off (like so many are).
At least in quality assessment of car makers, they use massive sampling over a very long time. In this case, trends become more important than
That's not really the point I was trying to make but I can see why you might make those assumptions about them. And why their data and results might be suspect.
I am not sure if StellaService is good or not. I have no opinion of them or evidence one way or another to be honest. Examining various companies' customer service is their business. You mentioned methodology, from their website:
That's not really the point I was trying to make but I can see why you might make those assumptions about them. And why their data and results might be suspect.
I am not sure if StellaService is good or not. I have no opinion of them or evidence one way or another to be honest. Examining various companies' customer service is their business. You mentioned methodology, from their website:
If you have any evidence that they are not good I would love to read about it.
Thanks.
That's like pointing me to IDC's methodology page (if they have one)... So, what! They're always wrong!
In this case it's even worse since unlike IDC, I can't even prove them wrong unless customer service becomes so bad that it becomes widely held public knowledge (Apple would be in trouble way before that though..)
Even when a large random non biased sampling (say 1000 and up) perfectly reflects the population (say Apple buyers), the margin of error is large enough to most often hide normal variations from quarter to quarter.
The problem is that getting this perfect sampling is both expensive and very hard. So, in real life, those niche companies with a limited budget are most often quite off this perfect sampling even if they get a 10K panel. Self-selection of those surveyed being the most likely cause of error.
Finally, how on earth can I argue with numbers they derive from their own data when there is nothing to compare it too, except their own data. And that will always be the case. Even if I dispute their methodology, litterally throwing the book (on sampling) at them... Will it really convince joe Smoe (or you) who fist read this article as Apple's customer service goes bad,... You read it... So, it must be true!
The fact Apple "news" is routinely used as a way to get free publicity by all companies doesn't help. Doesn't matter if it's right. What matters is that company X has been associated to Apple and as such as gained legitimacy in that process. Fifteen years ago, companies would have used Microsoft and 30 years ago, IBM.
Ilize those reports, but cannot just blame those firms alone. Often, it is obvious that what is said from the data cannot be ascertained with certainty from that same data; analysis goes way beyond the fact. That extension most often comes from those that republish/editorialize, but not always.
I've got some experience in polling, focus groups, interviewing, panels, questionaires. Got a grad degree in Communications/PR (plus Computer engineering and a grad degree in management); yeah, that's too many degrees ;-).
In this case, their own data is not even consistent (by their own ackowledgment), yet those results are used comparatively! That's just amazing!
That's the whole point. Those companies can't prove they're right or anyone really prove their wrong (unless pointing to the huge possible margin of error that seemingly everyone disregard).
They might as well report that god now hates us more in Q2...
Those companies do have a use. Reporting on trends. If you see real consumer service numbers go down for a whole year, even their off kilter sampling will reflect it. This will be a significantly important number, unlike the absolute number.
That's not really the point I was trying to make but I can see why you might make those assumptions about them. And why their data and results might be suspect.
I am not sure if StellaService is good or not. I have no opinion of them or evidence one way or another to be honest. Examining various companies' customer service is their business. You mentioned methodology, from their website:
If you have any evidence that they are not good I would love to read about it.
Thanks.
That's like pointing me to IDC's methodology page (if they have one)... So, what! They're always wrong!
In this case it's even worse since unlike IDC, I can't even prove them wrong unless customer service becomes so bad that it becomes widely held public knowledge (Apple would be in trouble way before that though..)
Even when a large random non biased sampling (say 1000 and up) perfectly reflects the population (say Apple buyers), the margin of error is large enough to most often hide normal variations from quarter to quarter.
The problem is that getting this perfect sampling is both expensive and very hard. So, in real life, those niche companies with a limited budget are most often quite off this perfect sampling even if they get a 10K panel. Self-selection of those surveyed being the most likely cause of error.
Finally, how on earth can I argue with numbers they derive from their own data when there is nothing to compare it too, except their own data. And that will always be the case. Even if I dispute their methodology, litterally throwing the book (on sampling) at them... Will it really convince joe Smoe (or you) who fist read this article as Apple's customer service goes bad,... You read it... So, it must be true!
The fact Apple "news" is routinely used as a way to get free publicity by all companies doesn't help. Doesn't matter if it's right. What matters is that company X has been associated to Apple and as such as gained legitimacy in that process. Fifteen years ago, companies would have used Microsoft and 30 years ago, IBM.
Ilize those reports, but cannot just blame those firms alone. Often, it is obvious that what is said from the data cannot be ascertained with certainty from that same data; analysis goes way beyond the fact. That extension most often comes from those that republish/editorialize, but not always.
I've got some experience in polling, focus groups, interviewing, panels, questionaires. Got a grad degree in Communications/PR (plus Computer engineering and a grad degree in management); yeah, that's too many degrees ;-).
In this case, their own data is not even consistent (by their own ackowledgment), yet those results are used comparatively! That's just amazing!
That's the whole point. Those companies can't prove they're right or anyone really prove their wrong (unless pointing to the huge possible margin of error that seemingly everyone disregard).
They might as well report that god now hates us more in Q2...
Those companies do have a use. Reporting on trends. If you see real consumer service numbers go down for a whole year, even their off kilter sampling will reflect it. This will be a significantly important number, unlike the absolute number.
I certainly appreciate your opinion, passion, and higher education point of view.
However I remain as unsure and unconvinced that either you or StellaService are correct from what you have said as well as what I have read about StellaService.
I am not saying that either you or StellaService are wrong or right. I am just not convinced either way based on the evidence I have read.
Notwithstanding you do make a few decent points so I appreciate that.
I am not trying to weasel out of this discussion, although I think it has run it's course. Originally I was merely pointing out the fact to a couple of other forum members (who claimed they had never heard of StellaService) that Apple Insider has linked to them no less than 5 times in the past.
I am dumbfounded by the lack of customer service by Apple. An Apple rep. locked me out of my phone two weeks ago. It has taken 5 business days (customer service said 24 hours!) for an engineer to initially send me a "do not reply" text telling me they didn't have sufficient information to verify ownership...the information that was provided by an Apple tech who contacted my phone carrier. This happened twice! I am now on week 3 locked out of my phone and when I called today to request a copy of the engineer's report stating the missing verification information so I could provide it a third time, I was told I would be required to subpoena their records!!! If my company provided the same customer service, we would be out of business...Get a Droid!!!!!
Comments
Every time we read one of these reports from some ‘market research’ firm we round around with our hair on fire. Maybe because things like this are immediately picked up by tech media sites with axes to grind against Apple and trumpeted as proof of the Doom™ to come.
Sometimes I think results like this are caused by changes in customer’s attitudes and not Apple policies or procedures. Are people becoming more entitled, more OCD about things, more jaded, more negative in general? Take for example the Apple Discussion forums and the ?Watch. There are a number of threads in which people are obsessing over tiny scratches that have appeared on their watches, either on the screen or the body of the watch. They are outraged at Apple over what they claim is poor quality or false advertising. They throw around terms like waterproof and scratch proof without knowing what they are talking about. Hello! This is the real world calling. You wear a device on your wrist and bump it against something and it can get scratched. Even a Rolex can get scratched. But Apple is vilified as producing defective hardware. What do you think this person will tell StellaService when they call?
Apple is DOOMED. Fire Tim, Angela and Jeff now.
Who is StellaService and has AI reported their stuff before?
Exactly. Why is it we usually have never heard of these companies. At least we know who Consumer Reports is.
First off how are they getting their data? I call bs, looks like another paid/fake group for wall street manipulators.
One of their major clients appears to be Google.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StellaService
https://www.internetretailer.com/2013/10/18/google-beefs-retailer-reviews-data-stellaservice
Same here... I began publishing professionally with a Mac IIVX in 1992 and have only found it necessary to call them once in 23 years... five years ago they replaced the motherboard on a MacBook Pro in a couple of days, completely free of charge, even though it was out of warranty.
Same thing happened with my uncle's iMac a year or two ago, only after a couple mo-bo replacements didn't do the trick they just gave him a new machine! Not only was it a new machine it was after they had been updated!! Lucky bastard! It should be noted that the reason I called support turned out to be a non-issue and completely my stupid fault. I have converted several family members to Mac and not one problem. I get that no company is perfect and there are going to be problems here and there, but as far as Apple is concerned, my next Mac could be a total lemon and I'd be totally cool with it because their track record so far for me has been A++.
I've recent.y had to use support to fix an Apple ID problem that was maybe kinda related to our Apple watches (if you squint your eyes), and they were happy to help us fix it. which they did. and gave us their actual email address during the issue to help resolve. and then asked if we had any other issues while we had them on the line. nice.
so, it's all nonsense in my book.
It's a slight bummer that they'd like to charge for service calls post-warranty, when quality products do last longer.
That said, it's not like they aren't perfectly willing to waive that for good reason, i.e., old machine but new OS, etc.
It's also a slight bummer that Communities seem utterly anemic now - used to be you'd always get a response,
but, personally I haven't, on my last 5-6 questions at least...of course, I might be asking boring questions...
But it's really a bummer that, as Apple has grown, they've been forced to hire folks who seem to have
very little experience with Apple products. I've rarely had a call that didn't eventually require a senior advisor
to be consulted, often for me to be transferred over to one. I've had initial responders admit
they've never used anything Apple, except iTunes, in one case, an iPhone but no computers in another.
I'm not saying I can't see the reason for all these, and certainly not saying that the reason is lack of concern by Apple.
But I do feel there are more cases where service is a bit problematic, and especially so as the capabilities
of machines and devices become more complicated.
I've said this before - sorry - but even Apple can't any longer guarantee there'll be "no step three".
Very lame support.
Right?¡ It's almost as if they don't want waste everyone's time replacing perfectly good camera modules¡ If only they would have included wording like "If your iPhone 6 Plus is producing blurry photos and falls into the eligible serial number range" and something like, "Your iPhone will be examined prior to any service to verify that it is eligible for this program"¡ Oh, wait, that's exactly what they did.
Clearly they know there is a problem with a certain component or construction of certain camera models within a subset of a large range, but not the entire range. Why would you want to get it replaced if it's working fine? You want to get one over on Apple by costing them the cost of the module and 20 minutes of an Apple Genius' time? Do you have no regard for your own time? Note this warranty will be going for 3 years from the date of purchase and you couldn't have even owned an iPhone 6 Plus for a full year at this point so you have plenty of time to get the module replaced if ever do exhibit any issue.
People are hypochondriacs even with their devices.
We need a term for that. Technochondriacs?
Apple is DOOMED. Fire Tim, Angela and Jeff now.
Who is StellaService and has AI reported their stuff before?
Exactly. Why is it we usually have never heard of these companies. At least we know who Consumer Reports is.
A quick search in the AI search box for "StellaService" gives these results:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/184966/apple-takes-top-spot-in-online-order-fulfillment-in-q4-with-average-ship-time-of-2-5-days
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/186017/apple-watch-preorders-cause-spike-in-apple-phone-chat-support-wait-times
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/182447/apple-customer-service-hit-by-massive-traffic-spike-one-day-after-iphone-6-launch <---- @Rogifan you replied in this thread
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/181636/apple-order-fulfillment-ranks-first-among-online-retailers-with-average-delivery-time-of-2-3-days-in-june <---- @Rogifan you replied in this thread too
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/179510/apple-now-using-expedited-shipping-to-cut-down-on-refund-wait-times ;
That works for me.
A quick search in the AI search box for "StellaService" gives these results:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/184966/apple-takes-top-spot-in-online-order-fulfillment-in-q4-with-average-ship-time-of-2-5-days
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/186017/apple-watch-preorders-cause-spike-in-apple-phone-chat-support-wait-times
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/182447/apple-customer-service-hit-by-massive-traffic-spike-one-day-after-iphone-6-launch <---- @Rogifan you replied in this thread
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/181636/apple-order-fulfillment-ranks-first-among-online-retailers-with-average-delivery-time-of-2-3-days-in-june <---- @Rogifan you replied in this thread too
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/179510/apple-now-using-expedited-shipping-to-cut-down-on-refund-wait-times ;
The problem here is that somewhat is reporting as bad something that can't be ascertained from this data alone! (change of methodology!).
It's probable that their results are ALWAYS SUSPECT. Because again, how on earth would their sampling reflect reality, especially over a short period like that and precise niche like info they're not directly privy too! Watch buyers are such a small part of Apple's operation that there is no way on earth even a complete snafu with them impact Apple's overall stats. So, why on earth would Apple's customer service go "down" in their slowest months unless they've fired a lot of personel (which would be known) or that company is totally off (like so many are).
At least in quality assessment of car makers, they use massive sampling over a very long time. In this case, trends become more important than
A quick search in the AI search box for "StellaService" gives these results:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/184966/apple-takes-top-spot-in-online-order-fulfillment-in-q4-with-average-ship-time-of-2-5-days
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/186017/apple-watch-preorders-cause-spike-in-apple-phone-chat-support-wait-times
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/182447/apple-customer-service-hit-by-massive-traffic-spike-one-day-after-iphone-6-launch <---- @Rogifan you replied in this thread
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/181636/apple-order-fulfillment-ranks-first-among-online-retailers-with-average-delivery-time-of-2-3-days-in-june <---- @Rogifan you replied in this thread too
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/179510/apple-now-using-expedited-shipping-to-cut-down-on-refund-wait-times ;
The problem here is that somewhat is reporting as bad something that can't be ascertained from this data alone! (change of methodology!).
It's probable that their results are ALWAYS SUSPECT. Because again, how on earth would their sampling reflect reality, especially over a short period like that and precise niche like info they're not directly privy too! Watch buyers are such a small part of Apple's operation that there is no way on earth even a complete snafu with them impact Apple's overall stats. So, why on earth would Apple's customer service go "down" in their slowest months unless they've fired a lot of personel (which would be known) or that company is totally off (like so many are).
At least in quality assessment of car makers, they use massive sampling over a very long time. In this case, trends become more important than
That's not really the point I was trying to make but I can see why you might make those assumptions about them. And why their data and results might be suspect.
I am not sure if StellaService is good or not. I have no opinion of them or evidence one way or another to be honest. Examining various companies' customer service is their business. You mentioned methodology, from their website:
http://stellaservice.com/methodology/
If you have any evidence that they are not good I would love to read about it.
Thanks.
That's not really the point I was trying to make but I can see why you might make those assumptions about them. And why their data and results might be suspect.
I am not sure if StellaService is good or not. I have no opinion of them or evidence one way or another to be honest. Examining various companies' customer service is their business. You mentioned methodology, from their website:
http://stellaservice.com/methodology/
If you have any evidence that they are not good I would love to read about it.
Thanks.
That's like pointing me to IDC's methodology page (if they have one)... So, what! They're always wrong!
In this case it's even worse since unlike IDC, I can't even prove them wrong unless customer service becomes so bad that it becomes widely held public knowledge (Apple would be in trouble way before that though..)
Even when a large random non biased sampling (say 1000 and up) perfectly reflects the population (say Apple buyers), the margin of error is large enough to most often hide normal variations from quarter to quarter.
The problem is that getting this perfect sampling is both expensive and very hard. So, in real life, those niche companies with a limited budget are most often quite off this perfect sampling even if they get a 10K panel. Self-selection of those surveyed being the most likely cause of error.
Finally, how on earth can I argue with numbers they derive from their own data when there is nothing to compare it too, except their own data. And that will always be the case. Even if I dispute their methodology, litterally throwing the book (on sampling) at them... Will it really convince joe Smoe (or you) who fist read this article as Apple's customer service goes bad,... You read it... So, it must be true!
The fact Apple "news" is routinely used as a way to get free publicity by all companies doesn't help. Doesn't matter if it's right. What matters is that company X has been associated to Apple and as such as gained legitimacy in that process. Fifteen years ago, companies would have used Microsoft and 30 years ago, IBM.
Ilize those reports, but cannot just blame those firms alone. Often, it is obvious that what is said from the data cannot be ascertained with certainty from that same data; analysis goes way beyond the fact. That extension most often comes from those that republish/editorialize, but not always.
I've got some experience in polling, focus groups, interviewing, panels, questionaires. Got a grad degree in Communications/PR (plus Computer engineering and a grad degree in management); yeah, that's too many degrees ;-).
In this case, their own data is not even consistent (by their own ackowledgment), yet those results are used comparatively! That's just amazing!
That's the whole point. Those companies can't prove they're right or anyone really prove their wrong (unless pointing to the huge possible margin of error that seemingly everyone disregard).
They might as well report that god now hates us more in Q2...
Those companies do have a use. Reporting on trends. If you see real consumer service numbers go down for a whole year, even their off kilter sampling will reflect it. This will be a significantly important number, unlike the absolute number.
That's not really the point I was trying to make but I can see why you might make those assumptions about them. And why their data and results might be suspect.
I am not sure if StellaService is good or not. I have no opinion of them or evidence one way or another to be honest. Examining various companies' customer service is their business. You mentioned methodology, from their website:
http://stellaservice.com/methodology/
If you have any evidence that they are not good I would love to read about it.
Thanks.
That's like pointing me to IDC's methodology page (if they have one)... So, what! They're always wrong!
In this case it's even worse since unlike IDC, I can't even prove them wrong unless customer service becomes so bad that it becomes widely held public knowledge (Apple would be in trouble way before that though..)
Even when a large random non biased sampling (say 1000 and up) perfectly reflects the population (say Apple buyers), the margin of error is large enough to most often hide normal variations from quarter to quarter.
The problem is that getting this perfect sampling is both expensive and very hard. So, in real life, those niche companies with a limited budget are most often quite off this perfect sampling even if they get a 10K panel. Self-selection of those surveyed being the most likely cause of error.
Finally, how on earth can I argue with numbers they derive from their own data when there is nothing to compare it too, except their own data. And that will always be the case. Even if I dispute their methodology, litterally throwing the book (on sampling) at them... Will it really convince joe Smoe (or you) who fist read this article as Apple's customer service goes bad,... You read it... So, it must be true!
The fact Apple "news" is routinely used as a way to get free publicity by all companies doesn't help. Doesn't matter if it's right. What matters is that company X has been associated to Apple and as such as gained legitimacy in that process. Fifteen years ago, companies would have used Microsoft and 30 years ago, IBM.
Ilize those reports, but cannot just blame those firms alone. Often, it is obvious that what is said from the data cannot be ascertained with certainty from that same data; analysis goes way beyond the fact. That extension most often comes from those that republish/editorialize, but not always.
I've got some experience in polling, focus groups, interviewing, panels, questionaires. Got a grad degree in Communications/PR (plus Computer engineering and a grad degree in management); yeah, that's too many degrees ;-).
In this case, their own data is not even consistent (by their own ackowledgment), yet those results are used comparatively! That's just amazing!
That's the whole point. Those companies can't prove they're right or anyone really prove their wrong (unless pointing to the huge possible margin of error that seemingly everyone disregard).
They might as well report that god now hates us more in Q2...
Those companies do have a use. Reporting on trends. If you see real consumer service numbers go down for a whole year, even their off kilter sampling will reflect it. This will be a significantly important number, unlike the absolute number.
I certainly appreciate your opinion, passion, and higher education point of view.
However I remain as unsure and unconvinced that either you or StellaService are correct from what you have said as well as what I have read about StellaService.
I am not saying that either you or StellaService are wrong or right. I am just not convinced either way based on the evidence I have read.
Notwithstanding you do make a few decent points so I appreciate that.
I am not trying to weasel out of this discussion, although I think it has run it's course. Originally I was merely pointing out the fact to a couple of other forum members (who claimed they had never heard of StellaService) that Apple Insider has linked to them no less than 5 times in the past.