The Oft-Unhappy Marriage of Apple and AT&T: "We're Apple. We Don't Wear Suits."

[baggss]

"We're Apple. We don't wear suits." Welcome to the cult. Nice manners Steve.

Cult? Nah. Why should Apple act as if they are the junior partner to AT&T? After-all, it's their device that brought AT&T a huge influx of business that otherwise never would have occurred and AT&T knows it. Not that AT&T owes them anything, it was a 2 ways street and a good deal for both parties. Manners often mean little in the business world and this is just another example.

 

[XJ-linux]

Just an opinion - no offense to Steve and crew. I just don't give any special kudos to someone because they decide they feel they need to make a statement with their clothing. It adds nothing of value to the relationship for me. I guess I'm fortunate that the business partners I work with still value manners by and large.

 

[baggss]

Just an opinion - no offense to Steve and crew. I just don't give any special kudos to someone because they decide they feel they need to make a statement with their clothing. It adds nothing of value to the relationship for me. I guess I'm fortunate that the business partners I work with still value manners by and large.

Put that way, I do agree.

 

[osxx]

Never judge a book by its cover only its contents and a well read book is seldom pristine.

 

[Chris1111]

I just don't give any special kudos to someone because they decide they feel they need to make a statement with their clothing. It adds nothing of value to the relationship for me.

Wait, isn't that the OPPOSITE of what you're saying?

You DO give special kudos to someone because they feel they need to make a statement by wearing suits. And wearing those suits DOES add to the value of your relationship with your current partners.

Or am I reading that completely wrong?

 

[XJ-linux]

You are reading it completely wrong. I wouldn't give someone kudos for wearing full dress blues and white gloves while serving a warrant either.

 

[Daddy Elmis]

What slays me is AT&T thinking that wireless broadband wasn't going to be a tsunami (with or without the iPhone). Mobile hardware mfg'rs have been talking "mobile content" since the dotcom bubble burst. How could any rational company not understand that demand for wireless data was going to be THE issue? There have been plenty of historical precedents to go by (not the least of which was how much RAM anyone could ever need in a PC).

Sheesh.

 

[schweb]

There have been plenty of historical precedents to go by (not the least of which was how much RAM anyone could ever need in a PC).

So please tell me one single historical precedence that relates to the iPhone that a wireless carrier could have looked at?

RAM cannot possibly count a "precedence" in this case, so I'll let you have another chance.