Tim Cook isn't the only one cashing in Apple stock these days; Senior VP of marketing, Phil Schiller, CFO Peter Openheimer, VP of hardware engineering Robert Mansfield, and VP of iOS software Scott Forstall recently had the restrictions on some of their stocks removed, resulting in a sizable sell-off between March 24 and March 26. Even Cook sold off a few more. Here's the breakdown according to the SEC filings.

Tim Cook – Apple CEO

• 200,000 shares sold; stock prices ranging from $596.05-606.80.
• Total value: $119,715,170

Philip Schiller – Senior VP of Worldwide Marketing

• 64,151 shares sold; stock prices ranging from $602.30-603.05.
• Total value: $38,661,014

Peter Openheimer – Senior VP and CFO

• 150,000 shares sold; stock prices ranging from $596.05-599.33.
• Total value: $89,624,444

Robert Mansfield – Senior VP Hardware Engineering

• 56,016 shares sold at $596.05.
• Total value: $33,388,336

Scott Forstall – Senior VP iOS Software

• 55,849 shares sold at $596.05.
• Total value: $33,288,796

Total dollar amount combined: $314,677,763.28

Before anyone freaks out that Apple execs are losing faith in the company, this is actually pretty common practice, and not surprising considering these guys probably have lots more stock (restricted and otherwise) piled up. The timing also lines up nicely with Apple's plans to buy that stock right back. The AAPL stock price approached $615 a pop during the period the execs sold off, compared to around $350 at this time last year. This is the part where you start smacking yourself for not buying stock five years ago when it was down around $90.

Source: SEC Filings, iPhoneinCanada

$. On Autotune." title="Phil Schiller. Kicking @$. On Autotune." width="560" height="373" class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-69109" />

Ever wished you could hear Apple SVP, Phil Schiller on the WWDC 2011 stage, quoting All Things Digital's John Paczkowski saying "the Mac is kicking @$$"... run through autotune?

Us neither.

Then we watched it.

Check out the video after the break.

[YouTube via AllThingsD]

While speaking to Mobilizer about location data, Apple CEO Steve Jobs and SVP of Marketing, Phil Schiller, explained the 10 month delay in launching the white iPhone 4.

“It was challenging. It’s not as simple as making something white. There’s a lot more that goes into both the material science of it–how it holds up over time…but also in how it all works with the sensors.”

"We thought we were there a year ago, or less than that, when we launched the iPhone 4, and we weren’t."

As previously rumored, the white finish caused complications with the internal components (like the proximity sensor, perhaps the camera and flash?) and was also subject to discoloration from UV rays.

Steve Jobs added that solving the problem allowed Apple to launch a white iPad, so it benefitted Apple in the long run.

So, is it better Apple took their time to get it right? We'll see once we get our hands on one!

[Mobilizer]

After yesterday's Verizon iPhone announcement, Apple's Senior Vice President Phil Schiller has weighed in on what it was like building the Verizon iPhone. The two companies began talks to build a CDMA variant for Verizon's network over 2 years ago in 2008. Over 1,000 test models later, we've officially got a Verizon variant.

Schiller says the task was anything but easy. Apple knows their own hardware but sometimes getting software and hardware to work together isn't an easy goal to accomplish.

“A big part of it is the software, I’d say the biggest part,” ... “It uses the hardware in different ways.”

[All Things Digital]

Time Magazine has given their April 12, 2010 cover to Steve Jobs, and features a massive interview of Apple's CEO alongside design SVP Jonathan Ive, marketing SVP Phil Schiller, and internet (iTunes, MobileMe, App Store) SVP Eddy Cue by none other than Stephen Fry. (He also talks to publishers, educators, developers, and more).

Fry meeting with Steve Jobs:

His pleasure in showing me the Winnie the Pooh iBook bundled with every iPad is unaffected and engaging. He demonstrates how the case can be used as a lectern and as a stand. "I think the experience of using an iPad is going to be profound for many people," he says. "I really do. Genuinely profound." That rings a bell. "I've heard it said that this is the device for you," I reply. "The one that will change everything." "When people see how immersive the experience is," Jobs says, "how directly you engage with it ... the only word is magical."

Jonathan Ive on the missing features:

"In many ways, it's the things that are not there that we are most proud of," he tells me. "For us, it is all about refining and refining until it seems like there's nothing between the user and the content they are interacting with."

And Fry's final thoughts:

It is possible that the public will not fall on the iPad, as I did, like lions on an antelope. Perhaps they will find the apps and the iBooks too expensive. Maybe they will wait for more fully featured later models. But for me, my iPad is like a gun lobbyist's rifle: the only way you will take it from me is to prise it from my cold, dead hands. One melancholy thought occurs as my fingers glide and flow over the surface of this astonishing object: Douglas Adams is not alive to see the closest thing to his Hitchhiker's Guide that humankind has yet devised.

Read the full article, it's well worth it, and let us know how you think Fry did with his thus-far unmatched time and access to Apple's iPad brain trust.

[via Apple Insider, thanks pcdsim for the tip!]

Apple Senior VP of Marketing, Phil Schiller, was quoted by the New York Times in an article on the removal of 5000 sex-based app from the iTunes App Store:

“It came to the point where we were getting customer complaints from women who found the content getting too degrading and objectionable, as well as parents who were upset with what their kids were able to see.”

To developers who weren't afforded any warning or options to pre-emptively make changes where such changes would have been possible:

“We obviously care about developers, but in the end have to put the needs of the kids and parents first.”

As to why Sports Illustrated's Swimsuit app, the Playboy app, and a few other publication-associated apps were allowed to remain:

“The difference is this is a well-known company with previously published material available broadly in a well-accepted format.”

Key take aways:

1. Apple's App Store ratings system doesn't work, since Apple classifies anything with unfettered web access as 17+, parents can't block sex-based apps without blocking Twitter apps, Wikipedia, and countless other non-sex-based apps. Apple needs to redo the ratings system and allow more granular parental control. (Though Safari again shows the ridiculousness of most ratings systems -- anyone and everyone can and will find anything and everything in the ratings-free web).
2. This move seems entirely perception-based. Apple likely doesn't believe people will complain about established corporate content like Sports Illustrated [Free/in-app purchase - iTunes link], FHM [$1.99 - iTunes link], and Playboy [$0.99 - iTunes link] where they will about the indie guy who floods the App Store with 3000 variants of the same underwear and swimsuit pics. (Or if someone does complain about SI, Apple can point to its mainstream profile as an easy out).
3. Since Apple has shown no signs of wanting to get out in front of these issues and give developers warning before taking major action in the App Store, developers have to come to terms with the reality that making any application that comes anywhere near a) areas Apple may consider their own or b) areas where Apple may consider their brand/image at stake, means constant uncertainty and the risk of being removed at any point. Or they have to consider Web Apps, or other platforms and give Apple feedback that way.

Stick to safe, friendly games and helpful utilities and you should be find. Push any boundaries corporate or familial and you could be gone. Which is kind of sad, because Apple seems like the one company who could champion as much creativity, innovation, and boundary-pushing in the App Store as they do in their technology.

The New York Times had a huge, gushing, front-page-of-the-business-section story this weekend about the iPhone App Store titled Apple's Game Changer, Downloading Now.

Now the App Store, with over 100,000 apps and 2 billion downloads is a runaway success, no doubt about it, but given the continued problems with developer relations and capricious approval processes, seeing Apple Senior VP of Marketing Phil Schiller, and VP of iTunes Eddy Cue, attack public relations via the New York Times, and not help restore faith the developers via a come-to-jesus-phone open and honest airing of grievances and non-opaque plans for improvement just comes off as... awkward (and perhaps a tad insulting). And the New York Times -- really? If you don't have the guts to go for the story and ask the tough questions of Apple, who's left?

Anyway, here's what we did get from the Apple brass:

There's a 24" (20 LED screen) display in the lobby of 1 Infinite Loop displaying 20,000 top-selling app icons, and each time one is bought, its icon jiggles and ripples the adjacent icons. Yeah, that's pretty cool.

First up, Schiller says the review process is a necessary evil to ensure customers trust that apps won't crash their iPhones, steal their data, or contain illegal content, and that most apps just sail through the process. They received 10,000 apps a week.

“I absolutely think this is the future of great software development and distribution. The idea that anyone, all the way from an individual to a large company, can create software that is innovative and be carried around in a customer’s pocket is just exploding. It’s a breakthrough, and that is the future, and every software developer sees it.”

“I think, by and large, we do a very good job there. Sometimes we make a judgment call both ways, that people give us feedback on, either rejecting something that perhaps on second consideration shouldn’t be, or accepting something that on second consideration shouldn’t be.”

“We care deeply about the feedback, both good and bad,” he says. “While there are some complaints, they are just a small fraction of what happens in the process.”

“Our goal is very simple: We want to have the best platform for applications that there has ever been on any product. We know we’re not perfect, but we know we’re better than anything else that has been and we want to keep improving it.”

Apple is typically considered to be a perfectionist when it comes to aesthetic and experience, however, so a "good enough" argument is hard to process -- that small fraction should be keeping Steve Jobs up at night.

The Times does mention the controversies and offers some developer comments about apps almost a year in limbo, and large gaming companies being treated the same as hobbyists. They also cover the jailbreak alternative. When it comes to Cue, however, we get:

“A rocket ship is even too small of an analogy. We’ve been able to leverage a lot of our iTunes technology for the App Store. But it’s completely different. We’re reviewing all of those apps. We really don’t have to review each and every song.”

Apple told the Times they're "trying" (?) to increase the number of reviewers and streamline the process.

Check out the full article, which also features RIM/BlackBerry, Palm, Microsoft, and Google's take on the App Store and apps in general. And let us know what you think!

Apple Senior Vice President of Marketing was asked what his favorite iPhone Apps were, and here's what he said:

• Shazam [Free - iTunes link] “There’s just something so amazing about being anywhere, and some music starts playing and you just hold up your phone and can find out what it is,” Mr. Schiller said. “You never again have to say ‘That’s a great song! Who is it by?”
• CNN News [$1.99 - iTunes link]: “It’s really cool having the news in your pocket.”
• Facebook [Free - iTunes link]
• MLB.com at Bat 2009 [Currently free - iTunes link]
• NBA Game Time 2009 [$9.99 - iTunes link]
• ESPN ScoreCenter [Free - iTunes link]
• Eliminate Pro [Free - iTunes link]
• geoDefense [$1.99 - iTunes link]
• Best Camera [$2.99 - iTunes link]

Some great apps, if no huge surprises.

[New York Times via Gartenberg]

UPDATE: As expected, Rogue Ameoba's Airfoil Touch has been approved, with the original graphics displayed from Mac OS X. Meanwhile, Gx5 tells us it took over a year to get their one-touch search portal app, iClueless approved following a string of time-consuming (given Apple's process) rejections. Again we wonder if having a "big voice" makes a big difference?

ORIGINAL: Apple Senior VP of Marketing, Phil Schiller, has once again stepped forward to address growing concerns about the iTunes App Store approval process -- but this time he's avoided developers and their complaints about opacity and inconsistency, and instead gone to BusinessWeek to get ahead of the story going mainstream.

Let's think about this for a moment. Schiller's previous, highly publicized comments have been emails addressed to bloggers and Mac developers, and wrung truthy enough to give a tiny glimmer of hope to those who just assumed Apple's upper management was oblivious to the problems around rejected apps. These comments read more like spin; like instead of fixing the App Store, they're worried concerns are spreading beyond developers and the blogsphere, and instead of earnestly working even harder to fix them, they just want to minimize and marginalize the complaints in the minds of the general press and public, who might be hearing about it for the first time following Facebook developer Joe Hewitt's high-profile exodus from the App Store.

The problem is, Apple has historically proven they're terrible at handling bad PR. From the original iPhone price cut to MobileMe's disastrous launch to Steve Jobs' health to everything involving the App Store approval process to date, they come off as wrong-headed and out of touch until it seems almost too late. Case in point, Schiller's comments to BusinessWeek today, where he cites 90% of rejections being related to technical bugs in the app (and contends developers are happy about the "safety net" Apple QA provides). 1% which fall into gray areas Apple hadn't previously considered (example given, apps that help cheat at Casino gambling), and an undisclosed amount that violate trademarks or copyrights:

• "We've built a store for the most part that people can trust. You and your family and friends can download applications from the store, and for the most part they do what you'd expect, and they get onto your phone, and you get billed appropriately, and it all just works."
• "Whatever your favorite retailer is, of course they care about the quality of products they offer. We review the applications to make sure they work as the customers expect them to work when they download them."
• "There have been applications submitted for approval that will steal personal data, or which are intended to help the user break the law, or which contain inappropriate content."
• "We had to go study state and international laws about what's legal and what isn't, and what legal exposure that creates for Apple or the customer."
• "We've had a lot of eyes on us. We've had inquiries from governments and political leaders asking us what we were doing to protect children from inappropriate content,"
• "If you don't defend your trademarks, in the end you end up not owning them. And sometimes other companies come to us saying they've seen their trademarks used in apps without permission. We see that a lot."

Rogue Ameoba's Airfoil Touch rejection is used in the article, and Schiller responds in the abstract:

• "We need to delineate something that might confuse the customer and be an inappropriate use of a trademark from something that's just referring to a product for the sake of compatibility. We're trying to learn and expand the rules to make it fair for everyone."

Apparently it will work out, however, as Airfoil Touch is being re-submitted with the original Mac OS X-pushed artwork restored. And some of Schiller's points are fair enough, we suppose, they're just addressing the wrong forum, and overall (still) avoiding the real problem. And no, it's not Apple being a "gatekeeper".

If Apple wants to run a boutique instead of a flea market, good for them -- the market will decide if end-users ultimately prefer that to the webOS, Android, BlackBerry, Windows Mobile, Symbian, and WebApp alternatives. Just stop being a bad "gatekeeper*. Talk to your developers. Get a dedicated developer point man like Palm has. Take questions about the App Store (especially at WWDC). Spend less time with BusinessWeek and more talking to the great developers, so end users get those great apps. B'okay?

• Our podcast feed
• Download Directly
• Subscribe via iTunes

Join Rene, James, and Chris for more iTablet, iPod touch, and iTunes 9 rumors, Apple VP Phil Schiller's email spree, the latest competition from BlackBerry and Microsoft, and all the news. Listen in!

Featured Accessory

• Plantronics Voyager PRO Hardcore Bluetooth Headset

News

New Product Watch

• Apple Shoots Top Secret Commercial for New Product?
• Updated: Apple Going Social? More iTunes 9, “Social App”, and App Organization
• iTunes 9 to Add iPhone App Organizer, Blu-Ray?

App Store

• Apple VP Phil Schiller Responds to Ninjawords iPhone App Store Incident
• Apple VP Phil Schiller Emails Steven Frank, No E-Book Rejection Policy, Working to Improve App Store
• Google to Launch Google Voice on iPhone as WebApp
• iPhone 3GS-Specific Apps Start to Land in App Store

The Competition

• Zune HD to be Priced $100 Less than iPod touch?
• BlackBerry to Get iPhone-Class Web Browser… Next Summer
• Microsoft Windows Mobile 6.5 Caught on Video
• Sony, Warner, Universal and EMI to Launch iTunes “Cocktail” Album Competitor?

More News

• Would You Give Up Using Your iPhone in the Car for Increased Safety?
• Deposit Checks Via iPhone Photos
• Still No MMS on AT&T — But Would You Use it Anyway?
• Patent Watch: Apple Taking Stand Against Abused iPhones

Forums

• From the Forums: iPhone Jailbreak?, Yahoo vs Gmail, Tom Tom Car Kit, Wallpapers & Ringtones

Credits

Thanks to the the iPhone Blog Store for sponsoring the podcast, and to everyone who showed up for the live chat!

Our music comes from the following sources:

• I Called You -- iPhone Remix by Pete Leidy
via Sneakmove iPhone Ringtone Challenge

Mac developer and Panic luminary Steven Frank's public break-up with the iPhone over Apple's capricious App Store policy was one of the few so grounded in rationale and reason we couldn't discount it, and neither could Apple's Senior VP of Marketing, Phil Schiller.

While Schiller previously responded to Daring Fireball's John Gruber over concerns about the Ninjawords app, Schiller's response to Steve Frank was different in kind, if similar in sentiment:

I haven’t sought Phil’s explicit permission to republish the letter, so I won’t do so here. But to summarize, he said: “we’re listening to your feedback”. Not all of my suggested solutions were viable, he said, but they were taking it all in as they continue to evolve the app store.

He went on to say that the rumors of widespread e-book app rejection I’d heard were false — that specifically one e-book app had been rejected because it facilitated iPhone-to-iPhone sharing of (potentially copyrighted) books. But that otherwise, there was no sweeping ban on e-book readers.

First, it's interesting to see such high level and yet fairly intimate intervention by an Apple executive when it comes to the App Store. It's not an open letter by Steve Jobs -- it's something subtler, and yet seemingly targeted to engender the type of good will that could give Apple the time and good faith they need to fix the App Store approval process if -- and it's a huge if -- they truly take the time to fix it. And that's the fulcrum of actions and results upon which Schiller's intervention will ultimately succeed or fail.

Second, Steven Frank is now left to wonder whether to continue his boycott of the iPhone given the lack of those observable actions visible results, or to extend his hand back to Apple and give them that same second chance.

It will be interesting to see what happens next...

Daring Fireball received a response from Apple Senior VP of Marketing, Phil Schiller, regarding the App Store incident involving the Ninjawords iPhone dictionary app.

Gruber quotes "the salient parts" of the email in full, but the gist seems to be that, unlike other dictionaries approved for the App Store, Ninjawords drew from Wiktionary -- an open internet source -- and thus the App Store suggested they wait until iPhone 3.0 was released with parental controls before re-submitting it. Not knowing the release date of 3.0 and not wanting to wait, the Ninjawords developers went ahead and filtered it themselves, thus ending up with a filtered app that took long enough to approve it timed itself into the 17+ rating anyway.

However, other dictionaries with the same "objectionable content" haven't been flagged as 17+, so the capricious nature of the App Store -- the very thing developers fear most -- remains. Check out the above link to Daring Fireball for more on that aspect.

For his part, Schiller closes his response as follows:

Apple’s goals remain aligned with customers and developers — to create an innovative applications platform on the iPhone and iPod touch and to assist many developers in making as much great software as possible for the iPhone App Store. While we may not always be perfect in our execution of that goal, our efforts are always made with the best intentions, and if we err we intend to learn and quickly improve.

On the heels Tim Cook's comments about improvements needed to the App Store, if observable actions follow the sentiments, perhaps developers and users alike will begin to regain some faith in the approval process. Until then, it remains an unsightly blemish on Apple's otherwise brilliant mobile platform.

(No word yet on whether Gruber asked him about Google Voice...)

As covered in the Apple Q2 2009 conference call, Apple Chief Financial Officer, Peter Oppenheimer, repeated the company line that they "looked forward to [Steve Jobs'] return at the end of June".

Apple's World Wide Developers Conference (WWDC) -- where in 2008 Steve Jobs unveiled the iPhone 3G to the world -- takes place this year June 8-12, which is decidedly before the end of June, and thus the end of Jobs' leave of absence.

Does that make it impossible for Steve Jobs to pull out a surprise appearance, iPhone the Third Generation in pocket? No... but it makes it unlikely.

That leaves Apple marketing honcho Phil Schiller, who handled Macworld 2009, or iPhone marketing head Greg "Joz" Joswiak, who handled part of the iPhone 3.0 Sneak Peek as the likely suspects, doesn't it? (Perhaps with Scott Forstall again on the 3.0 software?)

Apple COO Tim Cook, CFO Peter Openheimer, and Marketing VP Phil Schiller gave an analyst briefing recently, according to Barron's, which said, among other things:

• The trio was “most bullish about the iPhone business,” seeing a chance to gain share, with its software as the principal differentiator.
• In iPods, Apple is pushing the iTouch, which benefits from its ties to the App Store.
• Sacconaghi says the company does not appear to be pursuing his idea of an “iPhone Nano,” and that any new phones will likely include both a browser and ties to the App Store.
• Apple said “emphatically” that it did not believe in fixed keypads for phones, since the touch screen provided more flexibility for alternative keypads and for various App Store offerings, and that it is portable across geographies and languages, providing significant scale economics.

So there we have it, software is king, the nano is a no-no, and the hard keyboard just ain't happening.

(Thanks to The Reptile for sending this in!)