So you are denying what you said yourself earlier, this is the sentence of yours that I responded to:
I guess it doesn't surprise me that you are denying what you said in plain words in your previous post.
No, I'm not denying anything. Do you understand the meaning of the word AND in that statement?
They compared phones to phones AND threw in iPod data because they had it.
The iPod section apparently confuses you so you should ignore it.
Quote:
The link to admob piece by businesswire contains no reference to selection bias, or bias of any kind within the design of the study. This is the only portion of the article that referred to the study:
Methodology, no it's not in the article, except for some vague references such as "opt-in" and "in Februrary", which do not stand up in the standards of any academic work.
I quoted the methodology for you. The link to that is in the ARTICLE. Here is the link provided in the ARTICLE you failed to click on:
Look on page 3 in the PDF you can download from that link. You will find the quoted text there.
You can lead a horse to water...
Quote:
Of course it was conducted by mobile ads, what do you think admob as a company does? Of course, it also doesn't answer the questions that I posed at all, whether it was conducted when the device was purchases, registered, during installation of an app, visiting certain site, etc, etc.
This is completely answered in the quoted text which you apparently did not read:
"Respondents were sourced by responding to mobile ads throughout AdMob's iPhone OS, Android and webOS networks."
Answer: When clicking on an ad they were given an option to fill out a survey. That's how we found them and that's when they took the survey.
Is english your first language?
Quote:
Not relevant to our discussion, almost everyone in the industry knows what markets admob serves anyways, so mostly redundant information.
This is directly quoted from the methodology paragraph in the PDF you did not read because you didn't click on the link that describes Admob's methodology. At least in as much detail as the bother to provide a non-paying public. Given that they aren't submitting that to a peer reviewed journal that's good enough to get the general idea of what they did.
Quote:
My quarrel is not with your iphone vs android phone stats, it's always been with your dragging in another entire category of devices into an irrational comparison, let me refresh your mind on another place where you mentioned (among numerous instances):
So you agree that macrumors is correct in saying that iPhone and Android demographic is largely similar? This was the primary point I made and you keep avoiding. That is why I keep telling you to forget about the iPod for the moment.
Quote:
You apparently have never done any first hand study involving rigorous statistical methods, or statistical inference, and don't know how terms like "extrapolate", "representative" and "inherent" are normally used in such domains. I rest my case.
You still have no data of your own do you? You have no case and you should probably look up what those words mean again.
Quote:
You are right, my saying that iPhone users are typically older is a conjecture (and is a much simpler conclusion to draw than yours, mine simply involves analysis of two bimodal distributions in the same DF), and based on some small sample of data I see around my own life.
Wow...fancy way of stating "I have no supporting data". Does it really take 50 words to say what you can in 5?
Hint: This does not obscure the lack of data/work/effort to professors. A rolling of the eyes is the typical response.
Quote:
Of course it is not a statistically valid conclusion to draw given the small sample that I have, and I never claimed it to be. If I ever have the resources to conduct a large scale data collection, I would, but I'm just an average student.
That's amusing. You're the typical guinea pig we used for our HCI/HSI studies...so yeah, I have published using "rigorous statistical methods" and presented results at a conference...granted the heavy statistical lifting was done by that statistician on my team but we co-developed the experiment. My stat classes are from long long long ago.
Quote:
You on the other hand, try to draw some conclusions from ambiguous and imprecise data that does not in any way warrant the type of conclusions that you want, so you simply push aside all guidelines of sound scientific research to forge toward the conclusion that you want.
Nope. Not at all. I clearly stated that the data available from these surveys, flawed as they may be, do not support your assertion that iPhone users are predominantly older and technically less sophisticated than Android users.
You do understand this is trollish right? I could state that Android users are typically less well educated and have lower income but while true (due to the slight age difference) that implies something completely wrong (that they are dumb and cheap).
Population wise, they pretty much all fit the same smartphone demographic with minor variances that are likely just temporary or a function of what data and how it was collected.
Apple isn't dumbing down the UI to target the old foggies demographic but to make the product better to use. Google...good lord. The UI's are designed by committees of engineers. Providing UI "choice" is the typical coder failure mode for UI design. I dunno what's best so I'm gonna let the users pick what to use.
All ad mob surveys have a bias, as iOS apps will more commonly use iAds.
Actually the situation is even more interesting. Google has an ad driven business model so the Android market (by design or neglect) drives devs toward an ad based vs paid model. At least this is how the Angry Bird devs feel.
If true, all ad based metrics will favor Android over iOS given the different business models of the two app markets.
iAds is simply Jobs firing a shot across Google's bow. Should be amusing if Apple allows iAds onto WP7 and Android...that won't be a shot across the bow but an honest to goodness broadside.
No, I'm not denying anything. Do you understand the meaning of the word AND in that statement?
They compared phones to phones AND threw in iPod data because they had it.
The iPod section apparently confuses you so you should ignore it.
you are the one who brought it up in the first place, good for you that you intend to pretend that I brought it up. I have said multiple times that this is irrelevant and statistically unsound. Up until this moment you have championed its significance.
Quote:
I quoted the methodology for you. The link to that is in the ARTICLE. Here is the link provided in the ARTICLE you failed to click on:
Look on page 3 in the PDF you can download from that link. You will find the quoted text there.
You can lead a horse to water...
This is completely answered in the quoted text which you apparently did not read:
"Respondents were sourced by responding to mobile ads throughout AdMob's iPhone OS, Android and webOS networks."
Answer: When clicking on an ad they were given an option to fill out a survey. That's how we found them and that's when they took the survey.
Is english your first language?
That is mostly given, the real question is at which point in the lifecycle did that happen, and the actual form and wording of the survey itself, which remains unanswered.
yes to the last question.
Quote:
This is directly quoted from the methodology paragraph in the PDF you did not read because you didn't click on the link that describes Admob's methodology. At least in as much detail as the bother to provide a non-paying public. Given that they aren't submitting that to a peer reviewed journal that's good enough to get the general idea of what they did.
those are not rigorous reporting of statistical methodology, and cannot pass from any standard used in academia or the IT industry. Period.
Quote:
So you agree that macrumors is correct in saying that iPhone and Android demographic is largely similar? This was the primary point I made and you keep avoiding. That is why I keep telling you to forget about the iPod for the moment.
I don't agree or disagree with anything from that article. Until they conduct analysis according to some semblance of research, there is nothing to confirm or to falsify.
Quote:
You still have no data of your own do you? You have no case and you should probably look up what those words mean again.
no, as I have said from the beginning, these are not from any statistical data, but my own experience, please read my earlier posts before replying again.
Quote:
Wow...fancy way of stating "I have no supporting data". Does it really take 50 words to say what you can in 5?
Hint: This does not obscure the lack of data/work/effort to professors. A rolling of the eyes is the typical response.
again, read before reply.
Quote:
That's amusing. You're the typical guinea pig we used for our HCI/HSI studies...so yeah, I have published using "rigorous statistical methods" and presented results at a conference...granted the heavy statistical lifting was done by that statistician on my team but we co-developed the experiment. My stat classes are from long long long ago.
good for you that you have good collaboration on your work. I work in hardware system design and AI, and I have some decent grasp of basic stats concepts, not great. I thought that other areas of CS like HCI would have more, but what do I know.
Quote:
Nope. Not at all. I clearly stated that the data available from these surveys, flawed as they may be, do not support your assertion that iPhone users are predominantly older and technically less sophisticated than Android users.
You do understand this is trollish right? I could state that Android users are typically less well educated and have lower income but while true (due to the slight age difference) that implies something completely wrong (that they are dumb and cheap).
Population wise, they pretty much all fit the same smartphone demographic with minor variances that are likely just temporary or a function of what data and how it was collected.
Apple isn't dumbing down the UI to target the old foggies demographic but to make the product better to use. Google...good lord. The UI's are designed by committees of engineers. Providing UI "choice" is the typical coder failure mode for UI design. I dunno what's best so I'm gonna let the users pick what to use.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, read my posts again, all of them, before you reply again.
android users with median lower Income?, I would readily agree.
I don't, know what apple's business strategy would be, and notbeing an HCI person, I don't have inside information on their interface design.
The only one trolling would be you, taking SOMEONE'S STRAIGHTFORWARD OBSERVATION, and turning it into a pissing contest with a slew of shoddy data and even shoddier observations. You are the one who really needs to learn forum posting ettiquette, not me.
So with all the carriers in the U.S plus buy one crap get one crap free, and also with one penny for a crapdroid, and they still behind iOS. This shows that quality over quantity.
I don't agree or disagree with anything from that article. Until they conduct analysis according to some semblance of research, there is nothing to confirm or to falsify.
You certainly do disagree...with significant resistance. Still can't get a straightforward "Yeah, the data doesn't really support my contention" out of you.
Quote:
android users with median lower Income?, I would readily agree.
Why would you readily agree? It's based on the same data you reject as unusable for any sort of analysis. That Android users are only slightly younger than iPhone users.
Quote:
The only one trolling would be you, taking SOMEONE'S STRAIGHTFORWARD OBSERVATION, and turning it into a pissing contest with a slew of shoddy data and even shoddier observations. You are the one who really needs to learn forum posting ettiquette, not me.
It's a biased observation with a biased conclusion we've heard all to often before (iPhones are for grandma). Even when shown there is conflicting data, you insist your personal observations are somehow more relevant than the reported numbers.
But but but...it doesn't match my preconceived notions! They must have done their analysis wrong! They don't know statistics! They didn't report their methodology! They didn't meet the standards of academia! Blah blah blah. Yeah, everyone is clueless but you.
You certainly do disagree...with significant resistance. Still can't get a straightforward "Yeah, the data doesn't really support my contention" out of you.
Why would you readily agree? It's based on the same data you reject as unusable for any sort of analysis. That Android users are only slightly younger than iPhone users.
No the data doesn't support my contention, that's true. It doesn't support yours either. And since the collection of data is left in murky water, and the unprofessional analysis by Fortune/macrumours, it doesn't really support or refute anyone's thesis, it's a simply a failed or at best incomplete piece of research. It's not necessarily your fault of course, but it doesn't help you either.
Quote:
It's a biased observation with a biased conclusion we've heard all to often before (iPhones are for grandma). Even when shown there is conflicting data, you insist your personal observations are somehow more relevant than the reported numbers.
But but but...it doesn't match my preconceived notions! They must have done their analysis wrong! They don't know statistics! They didn't report their methodology! They didn't meet the standards of academia! Blah blah blah. Yeah, everyone is clueless but you.
They are clueless, the people who reported on it, yes, they certainly are. Especially with a site like macrumours; the fact that they are willing to put macRUMORS as part of their name and site url should tell you something about their standard of reporting or treating the veracity of data.
iPhones compete better among older, and less well versed in computing devices, population is actually a large positive, and bodes well for iOS in the future (as I have said from the beginning). As the older population is the largest slice of the untapped market in mobile devices (by the way, a device wed to wifi is not mobile in any practical sense of the word), and could be the huge growth story for Apple in the next 5 years. Only someone who has no idea how the IT industry works would think that it would be meant as a slight. Or perhaps someone who has a profound and viceral bias against older folks; I certainly have never given a whiff of suggestion to that end in this thread; on the other hand, you and a couple others, hmmmmmm......
Comments
So you are denying what you said yourself earlier, this is the sentence of yours that I responded to:
I guess it doesn't surprise me that you are denying what you said in plain words in your previous post.
No, I'm not denying anything. Do you understand the meaning of the word AND in that statement?
They compared phones to phones AND threw in iPod data because they had it.
The iPod section apparently confuses you so you should ignore it.
The link to admob piece by businesswire contains no reference to selection bias, or bias of any kind within the design of the study. This is the only portion of the article that referred to the study:
Methodology, no it's not in the article, except for some vague references such as "opt-in" and "in Februrary", which do not stand up in the standards of any academic work.
I quoted the methodology for you. The link to that is in the ARTICLE. Here is the link provided in the ARTICLE you failed to click on:
http://metrics.admob.com/2010/02/jan...etrics-report/
Look on page 3 in the PDF you can download from that link. You will find the quoted text there.
You can lead a horse to water...
Of course it was conducted by mobile ads, what do you think admob as a company does? Of course, it also doesn't answer the questions that I posed at all, whether it was conducted when the device was purchases, registered, during installation of an app, visiting certain site, etc, etc.
This is completely answered in the quoted text which you apparently did not read:
"Respondents were sourced by responding to mobile ads throughout AdMob's iPhone OS, Android and webOS networks."
Answer: When clicking on an ad they were given an option to fill out a survey. That's how we found them and that's when they took the survey.
Is english your first language?
Not relevant to our discussion, almost everyone in the industry knows what markets admob serves anyways, so mostly redundant information.
This is directly quoted from the methodology paragraph in the PDF you did not read because you didn't click on the link that describes Admob's methodology. At least in as much detail as the bother to provide a non-paying public. Given that they aren't submitting that to a peer reviewed journal that's good enough to get the general idea of what they did.
My quarrel is not with your iphone vs android phone stats, it's always been with your dragging in another entire category of devices into an irrational comparison, let me refresh your mind on another place where you mentioned (among numerous instances):
So you agree that macrumors is correct in saying that iPhone and Android demographic is largely similar? This was the primary point I made and you keep avoiding. That is why I keep telling you to forget about the iPod for the moment.
You apparently have never done any first hand study involving rigorous statistical methods, or statistical inference, and don't know how terms like "extrapolate", "representative" and "inherent" are normally used in such domains. I rest my case.
You still have no data of your own do you? You have no case and you should probably look up what those words mean again.
You are right, my saying that iPhone users are typically older is a conjecture (and is a much simpler conclusion to draw than yours, mine simply involves analysis of two bimodal distributions in the same DF), and based on some small sample of data I see around my own life.
Wow...fancy way of stating "I have no supporting data". Does it really take 50 words to say what you can in 5?
Hint: This does not obscure the lack of data/work/effort to professors. A rolling of the eyes is the typical response.
Of course it is not a statistically valid conclusion to draw given the small sample that I have, and I never claimed it to be. If I ever have the resources to conduct a large scale data collection, I would, but I'm just an average student.
That's amusing. You're the typical guinea pig we used for our HCI/HSI studies...so yeah, I have published using "rigorous statistical methods" and presented results at a conference...granted the heavy statistical lifting was done by that statistician on my team but we co-developed the experiment. My stat classes are from long long long ago.
You on the other hand, try to draw some conclusions from ambiguous and imprecise data that does not in any way warrant the type of conclusions that you want, so you simply push aside all guidelines of sound scientific research to forge toward the conclusion that you want.
Nope. Not at all. I clearly stated that the data available from these surveys, flawed as they may be, do not support your assertion that iPhone users are predominantly older and technically less sophisticated than Android users.
You do understand this is trollish right? I could state that Android users are typically less well educated and have lower income but while true (due to the slight age difference) that implies something completely wrong (that they are dumb and cheap).
Population wise, they pretty much all fit the same smartphone demographic with minor variances that are likely just temporary or a function of what data and how it was collected.
Apple isn't dumbing down the UI to target the old foggies demographic but to make the product better to use. Google...good lord. The UI's are designed by committees of engineers. Providing UI "choice" is the typical coder failure mode for UI design. I dunno what's best so I'm gonna let the users pick what to use.
All ad mob surveys have a bias, as iOS apps will more commonly use iAds.
Actually the situation is even more interesting. Google has an ad driven business model so the Android market (by design or neglect) drives devs toward an ad based vs paid model. At least this is how the Angry Bird devs feel.
If true, all ad based metrics will favor Android over iOS given the different business models of the two app markets.
iAds is simply Jobs firing a shot across Google's bow. Should be amusing if Apple allows iAds onto WP7 and Android...that won't be a shot across the bow but an honest to goodness broadside.
deleted
No, I'm not denying anything. Do you understand the meaning of the word AND in that statement?
They compared phones to phones AND threw in iPod data because they had it.
The iPod section apparently confuses you so you should ignore it.
you are the one who brought it up in the first place, good for you that you intend to pretend that I brought it up. I have said multiple times that this is irrelevant and statistically unsound. Up until this moment you have championed its significance.
I quoted the methodology for you. The link to that is in the ARTICLE. Here is the link provided in the ARTICLE you failed to click on:
http://metrics.admob.com/2010/02/jan...etrics-report/
Look on page 3 in the PDF you can download from that link. You will find the quoted text there.
You can lead a horse to water...
This is completely answered in the quoted text which you apparently did not read:
"Respondents were sourced by responding to mobile ads throughout AdMob's iPhone OS, Android and webOS networks."
Answer: When clicking on an ad they were given an option to fill out a survey. That's how we found them and that's when they took the survey.
Is english your first language?
That is mostly given, the real question is at which point in the lifecycle did that happen, and the actual form and wording of the survey itself, which remains unanswered.
yes to the last question.
This is directly quoted from the methodology paragraph in the PDF you did not read because you didn't click on the link that describes Admob's methodology. At least in as much detail as the bother to provide a non-paying public. Given that they aren't submitting that to a peer reviewed journal that's good enough to get the general idea of what they did.
those are not rigorous reporting of statistical methodology, and cannot pass from any standard used in academia or the IT industry. Period.
So you agree that macrumors is correct in saying that iPhone and Android demographic is largely similar? This was the primary point I made and you keep avoiding. That is why I keep telling you to forget about the iPod for the moment.
I don't agree or disagree with anything from that article. Until they conduct analysis according to some semblance of research, there is nothing to confirm or to falsify.
You still have no data of your own do you? You have no case and you should probably look up what those words mean again.
no, as I have said from the beginning, these are not from any statistical data, but my own experience, please read my earlier posts before replying again.
Wow...fancy way of stating "I have no supporting data". Does it really take 50 words to say what you can in 5?
Hint: This does not obscure the lack of data/work/effort to professors. A rolling of the eyes is the typical response.
again, read before reply.
That's amusing. You're the typical guinea pig we used for our HCI/HSI studies...so yeah, I have published using "rigorous statistical methods" and presented results at a conference...granted the heavy statistical lifting was done by that statistician on my team but we co-developed the experiment. My stat classes are from long long long ago.
good for you that you have good collaboration on your work. I work in hardware system design and AI, and I have some decent grasp of basic stats concepts, not great. I thought that other areas of CS like HCI would have more, but what do I know.
Nope. Not at all. I clearly stated that the data available from these surveys, flawed as they may be, do not support your assertion that iPhone users are predominantly older and technically less sophisticated than Android users.
You do understand this is trollish right? I could state that Android users are typically less well educated and have lower income but while true (due to the slight age difference) that implies something completely wrong (that they are dumb and cheap).
Population wise, they pretty much all fit the same smartphone demographic with minor variances that are likely just temporary or a function of what data and how it was collected.
Apple isn't dumbing down the UI to target the old foggies demographic but to make the product better to use. Google...good lord. The UI's are designed by committees of engineers. Providing UI "choice" is the typical coder failure mode for UI design. I dunno what's best so I'm gonna let the users pick what to use.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, read my posts again, all of them, before you reply again.
android users with median lower Income?, I would readily agree.
I don't, know what apple's business strategy would be, and notbeing an HCI person, I don't have inside information on their interface design.
The only one trolling would be you, taking SOMEONE'S STRAIGHTFORWARD OBSERVATION, and turning it into a pissing contest with a slew of shoddy data and even shoddier observations. You are the one who really needs to learn forum posting ettiquette, not me.
I don't agree or disagree with anything from that article. Until they conduct analysis according to some semblance of research, there is nothing to confirm or to falsify.
You certainly do disagree...with significant resistance. Still can't get a straightforward "Yeah, the data doesn't really support my contention" out of you.
android users with median lower Income?, I would readily agree.
Why would you readily agree? It's based on the same data you reject as unusable for any sort of analysis. That Android users are only slightly younger than iPhone users.
The only one trolling would be you, taking SOMEONE'S STRAIGHTFORWARD OBSERVATION, and turning it into a pissing contest with a slew of shoddy data and even shoddier observations. You are the one who really needs to learn forum posting ettiquette, not me.
It's a biased observation with a biased conclusion we've heard all to often before (iPhones are for grandma). Even when shown there is conflicting data, you insist your personal observations are somehow more relevant than the reported numbers.
But but but...it doesn't match my preconceived notions! They must have done their analysis wrong! They don't know statistics! They didn't report their methodology! They didn't meet the standards of academia! Blah blah blah. Yeah, everyone is clueless but you.
You certainly do disagree...with significant resistance. Still can't get a straightforward "Yeah, the data doesn't really support my contention" out of you.
Why would you readily agree? It's based on the same data you reject as unusable for any sort of analysis. That Android users are only slightly younger than iPhone users.
No the data doesn't support my contention, that's true. It doesn't support yours either. And since the collection of data is left in murky water, and the unprofessional analysis by Fortune/macrumours, it doesn't really support or refute anyone's thesis, it's a simply a failed or at best incomplete piece of research. It's not necessarily your fault of course, but it doesn't help you either.
It's a biased observation with a biased conclusion we've heard all to often before (iPhones are for grandma). Even when shown there is conflicting data, you insist your personal observations are somehow more relevant than the reported numbers.
But but but...it doesn't match my preconceived notions! They must have done their analysis wrong! They don't know statistics! They didn't report their methodology! They didn't meet the standards of academia! Blah blah blah. Yeah, everyone is clueless but you.
They are clueless, the people who reported on it, yes, they certainly are. Especially with a site like macrumours; the fact that they are willing to put macRUMORS as part of their name and site url should tell you something about their standard of reporting or treating the veracity of data.
iPhones compete better among older, and less well versed in computing devices, population is actually a large positive, and bodes well for iOS in the future (as I have said from the beginning). As the older population is the largest slice of the untapped market in mobile devices (by the way, a device wed to wifi is not mobile in any practical sense of the word), and could be the huge growth story for Apple in the next 5 years. Only someone who has no idea how the IT industry works would think that it would be meant as a slight. Or perhaps someone who has a profound and viceral bias against older folks; I certainly have never given a whiff of suggestion to that end in this thread; on the other hand, you and a couple others, hmmmmmm......