I know my "internet" usage dropped substantially because of the apps that were available.
These are a small sampling of all websites that I used to visit using Safari, that I don't anymore:
nytimes.com
yelp.com
seamlessweb.com
imdb.com
rottentomatoes.com
appleinsider.com (thru newsreader)
etc...
But aren’t they all still pulling the data using HTTP? Wouldn’t StatCounter still count them if they monitor those sites or is this really only about the dedicated Safari browser in iOS and no other app being counted?
But aren?t they all still pulling the data using HTTP? Wouldn?t StatCounter still count them if they monitor those sites or is this really only about the dedicated Safari browser in iOS and no other app being counted?
Seeing this was only in the US, could this just siimply be the fact that ATT no longer offers unlimited data. Maybe iPhone users are just more aware of their data usage now that there is a cap.
Seeing this was only in the US, could this just siimply be the fact that ATT no longer offers unlimited data. Maybe iPhone users are just more aware of their data usage now that there is a cap.
Not sure if that plays into this.
I’d say that is highly unlikely. When AT&T mentioned first mentioned the tiered data plans posters on tech forms stated their usage, and I had people i know send me their usage stats from AT&T’s sites. No one was using over 2GB unless they were illegally tethering and most we’re using under 200MB, and those people would have just continued using the unlimited plans, as well as others who didn’t want to let it go for the $5 to $15 month savings.
I think this change isn’t less data being used per iPhone, but StatCounter’s measuring not accounting for all cellular data or missing some other key element.
PS: I used 90GB last month. New personal best. hehe (Yeah, I’m the reason AT&T had to moved to a tiered plan).
I?d say that is highly unlikely. When AT&T mentioned first mentioned the tiered data plans posters on tech forms stated their usage, and I had people i know send me their usage stats from AT&T?s sites. No one was using over 2GB unless they were illegally tethering and most we?re using under 200MB, and those people would have just continued using the unlimited plans, as well as others who didn?t want to let it go for the $5 to $15 month savings.
I think this change isn?t less data being used per iPhone, but StatCounter?s measuring not accounting for all cellular data or missing some other key element.
PS: I used 90GB last month. New personal best. hehe (Yeah, I?m the reason AT&T had to moved to a tiered plan).
But aren?t they all still pulling the data using HTTP? Wouldn?t StatCounter still count them if they monitor those sites or is this really only about the dedicated Safari browser in iOS and no other app being counted?
Would it not have to have the code embedded in the app?
Quote:
What is STATCOUNTER?
A free yet reliable invisible web tracker, highly configurable hit counter and real-time detailed web stats. Insert a simple piece of our code on your web page or blog and you will be able to analyse and monitor all the visitors to your website in real-time!
Every so often, generally proceeding from a succession of favorable Apple news and objective reports, the tech blogosphere goes on a rampage with Apple's doomsday scenarios. Let's feed some comfortable retorts to non-Apple readers, we can almost hear them say...
"Google nearly ready to challenge Apple, Amazon with e-bookstore.
..., posing a threat to Apple's new iBookstore, according to a new report."
"RIM's BlackBerry overtakes Apple's iPhone in US browser usage"
It doesn't feel right because it mostly ain't. It's purely a matter of readership retention and it should be taken in as some soothing metaphor for a grieving anti-Apple sore. Bias sorta foots the Blogosphere's bills like Truth could never dream to do.
Let the real metrics speak for themselves, ...and without further ado.
Would it not have to have the code embedded in the app?
Don?t HTTP requests sent from apps include the User Agent, and therefor would be picked up by these 3M sites? (I?m asking, it?s the impression I had, but I honestly don?t know how the apps that access the internet are sending and receiving the data).
This is more believable. The stats quoted in this article seem a bit fantastic, putting RIM ahead of both iPhone (apparently just iPhone, not iOS, but still not credible) and Android. Most likely their methodology is entirely flawed, or the stats are just completely bogus.
That's bullshit, hardly anyone uses a blackberry for web browsing. Web browsing on a blackberry is pure hell. I'll be surprise if Rim had even more web market share than Palm.
I find this very hard to believe. So Apple with iPhone and iPad has less web usage than RIM, with its reportedly mediocre browser on a few models of their phones?
He also said that they would be able to develop apps that worked as well as apps already on the phone, so he contradicted himself in the same speech! I love my Apple products and follow the company probably a little too closely, so don't take these posts as troll-ish, but Steve does have a way of bashing or dismissing something and then coming back with a better version of said thing a little while later. Maybe we should just expect Apple to release anything they specifically say they don't like. (Hello, bigger screen on the iPhone 5!!! )
And some people need to get over the fact that companies frame things in a way that suits their needs best at the moment, and things change.
They also have to dissuade themselves of the conceit that a multi-billion corporation that plans years down the road just threw an API together in a few months because of the hissy-fits of developers.
Anyone who doesn't believe that apps weren't a part of the plan from day one is hopelessly naive.
Would it not have to have the code embedded in the app?
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Don’t HTTP requests sent from apps include the User Agent, and therefor would be picked up by these 3M sites? (I’m asking, it’s the impression I had, but I honestly don’t know how the apps that access the internet are sending and receiving the data).
This sounds like the basic 1px x 1px invisible/transparent GIF stuck on the web page. It's retrieved from the tracking company's site, so they just count how many times it's retrieved by each user agent. Similar to the way companies track emails to see if they are opened. (Another reason to set your mail client not to load images.) The problem with this is that it only tracks participating sites, which aren't necessarily representative. All it would mean is that, for those sites, which are unknown to us, there was x amount of traffic from individual browsers. Most likely, the browser traffic to "participating sites" in this case is overrepresented by RIM browser traffic, which could well be because iOS and Android offer apps to retrieve the same content, apps which don't hit the tracking pixel or where the user agent doesn't exactly match Safari for iPhone.
Personally I wouldn't want to browse web on most of RIM phones.
I don't want to be an Apple fanatic & defend them at all costs, but something is definitely strange about these stats. iPhone continues to sell like crazy as does the iPad yet they are dropping in usage? So either all the new iPad & iPhone users are not using their devices for web at all or something is severely skewing this data.
Google & RIM's gains however ought to be a wakeup to Apple that they are not so far ahead that the others can't catch up. If they don't break exclusivity from AT&T soon it's really going to hurt them.
And some people need to get over the fact that companies frame things in a way that suits their needs best at the moment, and things change.
They also have to dissuade themselves of the conceit that a multi-billion corporation that plans years down the road just threw an API together in a few months because of the hissy-fits of developers.
Anyone who doesn't believe that apps weren't a part of the plan from day one is hopelessly naive.
Clearly, Cocoa Touch was already under development with the initial release of the iPhone, since that's what Apple's apps were using. My guess is that Cocoa Touch was still very rudimentary at that point, and that they didn't have the App Store infrastructure in place (and maybe hadn't fully decided how they were going to handle 3rd-party app distribution).
Web apps in most cases totally suck, and always will in comparison to native apps. And I don't think Apple has any illusions about this. Which is not to say they don't believe in an open, standards based web; an open, standards based web still has great strategic importance for Mac and iOS.
Don’t HTTP requests sent from apps include the User Agent, and therefor would be picked up by these 3M sites? (I’m asking, it’s the impression I had, but I honestly don’t know how the apps that access the internet are sending and receiving the data).
It wouldn't be picked up if the App developer didn't insert the required StatCounter code on their own site that is being visited.
Comments
What does being Irish have to do with your accusations that they are liars? Are you saying that Irish people are liars in general?
paging Ireland....
I know my "internet" usage dropped substantially because of the apps that were available.
These are a small sampling of all websites that I used to visit using Safari, that I don't anymore:
nytimes.com
yelp.com
seamlessweb.com
imdb.com
rottentomatoes.com
appleinsider.com (thru newsreader)
etc...
But aren’t they all still pulling the data using HTTP? Wouldn’t StatCounter still count them if they monitor those sites or is this really only about the dedicated Safari browser in iOS and no other app being counted?
But aren?t they all still pulling the data using HTTP? Wouldn?t StatCounter still count them if they monitor those sites or is this really only about the dedicated Safari browser in iOS and no other app being counted?
Seeing this was only in the US, could this just siimply be the fact that ATT no longer offers unlimited data. Maybe iPhone users are just more aware of their data usage now that there is a cap.
Not sure if that plays into this.
What does being Irish have to do with your accusations that they are liars? Are you saying that Irish people are liars in general?
No. What I was suggesting is that Ireland has a lot of problems as we speak and perhaps they got a little confused...
Seeing this was only in the US, could this just siimply be the fact that ATT no longer offers unlimited data. Maybe iPhone users are just more aware of their data usage now that there is a cap.
Not sure if that plays into this.
I’d say that is highly unlikely. When AT&T mentioned first mentioned the tiered data plans posters on tech forms stated their usage, and I had people i know send me their usage stats from AT&T’s sites. No one was using over 2GB unless they were illegally tethering and most we’re using under 200MB, and those people would have just continued using the unlimited plans, as well as others who didn’t want to let it go for the $5 to $15 month savings.
I think this change isn’t less data being used per iPhone, but StatCounter’s measuring not accounting for all cellular data or missing some other key element.
PS: I used 90GB last month. New personal best. hehe (Yeah, I’m the reason AT&T had to moved to a tiered plan).
I?d say that is highly unlikely. When AT&T mentioned first mentioned the tiered data plans posters on tech forms stated their usage, and I had people i know send me their usage stats from AT&T?s sites. No one was using over 2GB unless they were illegally tethering and most we?re using under 200MB, and those people would have just continued using the unlimited plans, as well as others who didn?t want to let it go for the $5 to $15 month savings.
I think this change isn?t less data being used per iPhone, but StatCounter?s measuring not accounting for all cellular data or missing some other key element.
PS: I used 90GB last month. New personal best. hehe (Yeah, I?m the reason AT&T had to moved to a tiered plan).
how did you use 90GB?
how did you use 90GB?
Long story short, I had a lot of UN documents to upload to Wikileaks.
But aren?t they all still pulling the data using HTTP? Wouldn?t StatCounter still count them if they monitor those sites or is this really only about the dedicated Safari browser in iOS and no other app being counted?
Would it not have to have the code embedded in the app?
"Google nearly ready to challenge Apple, Amazon with e-bookstore.
..., posing a threat to Apple's new iBookstore, according to a new report."
"RIM's BlackBerry overtakes Apple's iPhone in US browser usage"
It doesn't feel right because it mostly ain't. It's purely a matter of readership retention and it should be taken in as some soothing metaphor for a grieving anti-Apple sore. Bias sorta foots the Blogosphere's bills like Truth could never dream to do.
Let the real metrics speak for themselves, ...and without further ado.
Would it not have to have the code embedded in the app?
Don?t HTTP requests sent from apps include the User Agent, and therefor would be picked up by these 3M sites? (I?m asking, it?s the impression I had, but I honestly don?t know how the apps that access the internet are sending and receiving the data).
NetMarketShare has iPhone at 0.85%, Blackberry 0.11%, iOS total at 1.37%, Android total at .31%.
iPhone growth and Android growth rates are about even, Blackberry growth is falling behind both of them. iOS is faster than Android given ipad and ipod touch usage. Symbian is not growing at all.
This is more believable. The stats quoted in this article seem a bit fantastic, putting RIM ahead of both iPhone (apparently just iPhone, not iOS, but still not credible) and Android. Most likely their methodology is entirely flawed, or the stats are just completely bogus.
I find this very hard to believe. So Apple with iPhone and iPad has less web usage than RIM, with its reportedly mediocre browser on a few models of their phones?
No way.
Irish company huh? Hmmm.
I agree. This sounds like total nonsense.
He also said that they would be able to develop apps that worked as well as apps already on the phone, so he contradicted himself in the same speech! I love my Apple products and follow the company probably a little too closely, so don't take these posts as troll-ish, but Steve does have a way of bashing or dismissing something and then coming back with a better version of said thing a little while later. Maybe we should just expect Apple to release anything they specifically say they don't like. (Hello, bigger screen on the iPhone 5!!!
And some people need to get over the fact that companies frame things in a way that suits their needs best at the moment, and things change.
They also have to dissuade themselves of the conceit that a multi-billion corporation that plans years down the road just threw an API together in a few months because of the hissy-fits of developers.
Anyone who doesn't believe that apps weren't a part of the plan from day one is hopelessly naive.
Would it not have to have the code embedded in the app?
Don’t HTTP requests sent from apps include the User Agent, and therefor would be picked up by these 3M sites? (I’m asking, it’s the impression I had, but I honestly don’t know how the apps that access the internet are sending and receiving the data).
This sounds like the basic 1px x 1px invisible/transparent GIF stuck on the web page. It's retrieved from the tracking company's site, so they just count how many times it's retrieved by each user agent. Similar to the way companies track emails to see if they are opened. (Another reason to set your mail client not to load images.) The problem with this is that it only tracks participating sites, which aren't necessarily representative. All it would mean is that, for those sites, which are unknown to us, there was x amount of traffic from individual browsers. Most likely, the browser traffic to "participating sites" in this case is overrepresented by RIM browser traffic, which could well be because iOS and Android offer apps to retrieve the same content, apps which don't hit the tracking pixel or where the user agent doesn't exactly match Safari for iPhone.
Hard to believe.
Personally I wouldn't want to browse web on most of RIM phones.
I don't want to be an Apple fanatic & defend them at all costs, but something is definitely strange about these stats. iPhone continues to sell like crazy as does the iPad yet they are dropping in usage? So either all the new iPad & iPhone users are not using their devices for web at all or something is severely skewing this data.
Google & RIM's gains however ought to be a wakeup to Apple that they are not so far ahead that the others can't catch up. If they don't break exclusivity from AT&T soon it's really going to hurt them.
And some people need to get over the fact that companies frame things in a way that suits their needs best at the moment, and things change.
They also have to dissuade themselves of the conceit that a multi-billion corporation that plans years down the road just threw an API together in a few months because of the hissy-fits of developers.
Anyone who doesn't believe that apps weren't a part of the plan from day one is hopelessly naive.
Clearly, Cocoa Touch was already under development with the initial release of the iPhone, since that's what Apple's apps were using. My guess is that Cocoa Touch was still very rudimentary at that point, and that they didn't have the App Store infrastructure in place (and maybe hadn't fully decided how they were going to handle 3rd-party app distribution).
Web apps in most cases totally suck, and always will in comparison to native apps. And I don't think Apple has any illusions about this. Which is not to say they don't believe in an open, standards based web; an open, standards based web still has great strategic importance for Mac and iOS.
Don’t HTTP requests sent from apps include the User Agent, and therefor would be picked up by these 3M sites? (I’m asking, it’s the impression I had, but I honestly don’t know how the apps that access the internet are sending and receiving the data).
It wouldn't be picked up if the App developer didn't insert the required StatCounter code on their own site that is being visited.