That's not a stat that's a picture. You can't use an advertisement as evidence. :)
That's an interesting assumption. Except no carrier was ready for the boom in mobile internet consumption.
Read what I wrote and explain to me how this is a response. Whatever.
No carrier was ready for the mobile internet boom? The boom didn't occur until years after the iPhone's release (certainly not immedietly after its launch like you suggest https://hughescom425.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/mobile-internet-usage-jan08.png) despite the fact that AT&T was unable to handle the load from the original iPHone's launch.
Um? How do devices go from concept to manufacturing? There's a total process to that. It has to perfected and adapted over time.
What are you talking about? You reference manufacturing. Apple does not manufacture its iPhones. It's as simple as that. You're just wrong here.
Apple iPhone originally value proposition was to combine phone and music together. At the time most people had iPods, and if they were smart phone users they'd have a blackberry. Blackberry was fantastic at phone core functions, plus it had huge network of BBM users. What it could not do was internet, which Blackberry eventually fell behind on. So yes, biggest and most pervasive innovation for iPhone was the combination of phone and music together. This was tried many times, but failed miserably by all manufactures. Mainly because other manufactures didn't have an easy way to get music on to the phone. That one innovation laid the ground work for other innovations. In fact, iTunes itself made aps a natural consequence, and also a decided advantage for iPhone users, and Apple. You just don't remember the people of that time.
There's no way to know what would have happened. But you can't change that their alliance with AT&T was key factor in the success of iPhone.
You keep on saying this but you refuse to support it. You're begging the question. I can deny it and I've explained why.
Eventually. it was a success globally. Well that could be debated, but at any rate it helped strengthened Apple's brand. Additionally, Laid further ground work for other products. But the Alliance with AT&T helped facilitate that global trend, that's hard to ignore. You know that AT&T has alliances around the world, right?
What are you saying? Apple made partnerships with other carriers around the world as it made the AT&T deal. The iPhone was just as much of a success globally as it was in the US at launch. Also, how can you definitively call the iPhone a success in America when you think its global success is debatable? For the last time, America is not Apple's largest iPhone market. Even without America (and by extension AT&T), the iPhone would still be in the hands of hundreds of millions of users.
My point is only that it's odd. It's hard to be wrong in this situation. You could just say it isn't odd. That's really your only argument. Do you feel that insulting improves your argument?
Nope. How could you have possibly forgotten what this discussion is about? Read my first reply to you. I've never said anything about it being "odd". I replied to your statement about Apple's owing AT&T for its success with its iPhone. Jesus, dude.
And I'm sorry if you feel insulted but you're stating a lot of things that are just not true. Furthermore, of your phrasing makes it really hard for me take you seriously.
