Why it's wrong/misleading is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
Isn't that the entire argument you brought up?
I got the impression that you think because it has the word "Apple" or "Safari" in it that someone would be stupid enough to call it an Apple browser and give "false results" to the number of iOS devices out there.
"The study included mobile traffic for 10 of the top 100 mobile websites, including Answers.com, Tumblr, ChaCha, Examiner, LinkedIn, Bleacher Report, Hubpages, White Pages, Squidoo and Dictionary.com."
So, I was always curious how they calculate this stuff. I would think android users would be more inclined to use Google than they would any of these websites:
* Answers.com (google search)
* ChaCha (google search)
* Squidoo (google sites)
* Examiner (google news)
So what are these statistics really telling us? That visitors of THESE ten sites... only TEN... show more iOS visitors. Not the whole internet.
Yeah, the sites seem weird to me. The browser is, by far, the most used feature on my phone (I average about 2.5gb per month on the browser alone) and with the exception of tumblr, I've never visited any of those sites. I would be interested to see usage from more well know sites, like Wikipedia, WordPress, the Google/yahoo homepage, reddit/imgur, etc.
Generally speaking, iOS users are smarter, richer, more successful and make better technology buying decisions than Android users. These iOS users are willing to pay for content, they are willing to pay for mobile data and they make full use out of their devices. This is the group that developers and others wish to cater to, as this is where the money is.
Android users on average are whinier, cheaper, dumber and more likely to have a third world mentality to go along with their third world Android device. These Android users are not willing to pay for content, they are not willing to pay for mobile data and they do not make full use out of their miserable devices. Many developers are not too keen on catering to this group and they tend to avoid it like cancer.
And perhaps part of the reason why Android is so under represented on various web traffic stats, is because Fandroids spend the majority of their time on Apple centric sites (such as this one), lying, trolling and constantly making ridiculous excuses for their horrible platform.
Yeah, the sites seem weird to me. The browser is, by far, the most used feature on my phone (I average about 2.5gb per month on the browser alone) and with the exception of tumblr, I've never visited any of those sites. I would be interested to see usage from more well know sites, like Wikipedia, WordPress, the Google/yahoo homepage, reddit/imgur, etc.
They can only give you stats on websites that they have a commercial relationship with and have a script in the webpage. Clearly, Google, Wikipedia and the like are not going to allow them to put a script in their pages.
Data show iOS leads over Android maybe because iOS users are glued to their iDevices 24/7.
"OH NO I'M LOSING! I KNOW! I'LL INSULT THE COMPETITOR'S USERS INSTEAD OF GRACIOUSLY ACCEPTING MY PATHETIC DEFEAT BY CLAIMING THEY HAVE NOTHING BETTER TO DO THAN USE THE PRODUCTS WHOSE EQUIVALENTS I WISH MY TEAM WAS ACTUALLY USING!"
People denied this all they wanted but this kind of data didn't restrict to web traffic. When BBC released official Olympic app the majority of UK population using Android but the download on iOS exceeded the Android platform by a high margin. Almost double.
I have a hard time drawing any meaningful conclusion from this data. How about all top 100? Does 'web traffic' include access from apps?
It means the people who are buying smartphones with the pointed intent of using it extensively for accessing the internet are overwhelmingly choosing iOS. It also supports the conjecture that people getting Android devices are mostly buying whatever the sales clerk are pushing and are mostly using their smartphones as feature phones. Further down the speculative chain, it feeds into the assertion that as first time smartphone users, a lot of whom are on Android, discover the utility of their smartphones, they decide to switch to the smartphone that works best and runs smoothly when their conract expires and this invariably means IPhone.
How is it irrelevant when you want us to believe it skewed the result?
What was done is relevant to this. Why it was done is not.
It looks like Chrome is by default not identifying itself as Android because some developers have a redirect to stripped down mobile sites when they see Android in the UA which is not what users want to see. My first assumption was that Google was trying to gain access to iOS specific sites but it turns out it is the reverse.
Sniffing the user agent string isn't really a very good way to identify browsers anyway and the mobile stats should not be significantly affected with Google's default, claiming to be Android or by Chrome claiming to be Mac OS X (in order to be able to access full desktop version of sites). In either case it is not being identified as iPhone or iPad so the mobile stats should remain unchanged.
Sniffing the user agent string isn't really a very good way to identify browsers anyway and the mobile stats should not be significantly affected with Google's default, claiming to be Android or by Chrome claiming to be Mac OS X (in order to be able to access full desktop version of sites). In either case it is not being identified as iPhone or iPad so the mobile stats should remain unchanged.
Plus all other statistics confirmed with more or less the same result: that iOS users are much more activity-hungry than their Android counterparts. I don't know why some people still deny this.
Actually he is talking about changing the UA string, or perhaps I should say lying about changing it because that is not the default string. This is:
So are you going to be a man and apologize to the poster you wrongly slammed out of your own ignorance? Or do you have no honor?
PS. Those of you who engage in personal attacks simply point out to everyone else, that you think your position is weak and you're terrified of defending your opinions with actual discussion.
<span style="line-height:1.231;">So are you going to be a man and apologize to the poster you wrongly slammed out of your own ignorance? Or do you have no honor?</span>
PS. Those of you who engage in personal attacks simply point out to everyone else, that you think your position is weak and you're terrified of defending your opinions with actual discussion.
Common sense said he's a liar. Of course that's because we all think Google is honest.
Comments
Originally Posted by Robert Bray
Why it's wrong/misleading is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
Isn't that the entire argument you brought up?
I got the impression that you think because it has the word "Apple" or "Safari" in it that someone would be stupid enough to call it an Apple browser and give "false results" to the number of iOS devices out there.
Was that wrong?
How is it irrelevant when you want us to believe it skewed the result?
Yeah, the sites seem weird to me. The browser is, by far, the most used feature on my phone (I average about 2.5gb per month on the browser alone) and with the exception of tumblr, I've never visited any of those sites. I would be interested to see usage from more well know sites, like Wikipedia, WordPress, the Google/yahoo homepage, reddit/imgur, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Bray
Its primary goal isn't satisfying human curiosity.
You're right. Its primary goal is deceit.
No. Haven't you heard? It because Google's browser IDed itself as an Apple's devices. I know it sound so silly but...
Generally speaking, iOS users are smarter, richer, more successful and make better technology buying decisions than Android users. These iOS users are willing to pay for content, they are willing to pay for mobile data and they make full use out of their devices. This is the group that developers and others wish to cater to, as this is where the money is.
Android users on average are whinier, cheaper, dumber and more likely to have a third world mentality to go along with their third world Android device. These Android users are not willing to pay for content, they are not willing to pay for mobile data and they do not make full use out of their miserable devices. Many developers are not too keen on catering to this group and they tend to avoid it like cancer.
And perhaps part of the reason why Android is so under represented on various web traffic stats, is because Fandroids spend the majority of their time on Apple centric sites (such as this one), lying, trolling and constantly making ridiculous excuses for their horrible platform.
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo
Yeah, the sites seem weird to me. The browser is, by far, the most used feature on my phone (I average about 2.5gb per month on the browser alone) and with the exception of tumblr, I've never visited any of those sites. I would be interested to see usage from more well know sites, like Wikipedia, WordPress, the Google/yahoo homepage, reddit/imgur, etc.
They can only give you stats on websites that they have a commercial relationship with and have a script in the webpage. Clearly, Google, Wikipedia and the like are not going to allow them to put a script in their pages.
Originally Posted by bleh1234
Data show iOS leads over Android maybe because iOS users are glued to their iDevices 24/7.
"OH NO I'M LOSING! I KNOW! I'LL INSULT THE COMPETITOR'S USERS INSTEAD OF GRACIOUSLY ACCEPTING MY PATHETIC DEFEAT BY CLAIMING THEY HAVE NOTHING BETTER TO DO THAN USE THE PRODUCTS WHOSE EQUIVALENTS I WISH MY TEAM WAS ACTUALLY USING!"
You need to leave our website.
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07
How is it irrelevant when you want us to believe it skewed the result?
What was done is relevant to this. Why it was done is not.
Originally Posted by bleh1234
Wow, I guess I ruffled someone's feathers.
Thanks for confirming I was correct!
It means the people who are buying smartphones with the pointed intent of using it extensively for accessing the internet are overwhelmingly choosing iOS. It also supports the conjecture that people getting Android devices are mostly buying whatever the sales clerk are pushing and are mostly using their smartphones as feature phones. Further down the speculative chain, it feeds into the assertion that as first time smartphone users, a lot of whom are on Android, discover the utility of their smartphones, they decide to switch to the smartphone that works best and runs smoothly when their conract expires and this invariably means IPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Bray
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07
How is it irrelevant when you want us to believe it skewed the result?
What was done is relevant to this. Why it was done is not.
It looks like Chrome is by default not identifying itself as Android because some developers have a redirect to stripped down mobile sites when they see Android in the UA which is not what users want to see. My first assumption was that Google was trying to gain access to iOS specific sites but it turns out it is the reverse.
Sniffing the user agent string isn't really a very good way to identify browsers anyway and the mobile stats should not be significantly affected with Google's default, claiming to be Android or by Chrome claiming to be Mac OS X (in order to be able to access full desktop version of sites). In either case it is not being identified as iPhone or iPad so the mobile stats should remain unchanged.
Plus all other statistics confirmed with more or less the same result: that iOS users are much more activity-hungry than their Android counterparts. I don't know why some people still deny this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Actually he is talking about changing the UA string, or perhaps I should say lying about changing it because that is not the default string. This is:
So are you going to be a man and apologize to the poster you wrongly slammed out of your own ignorance? Or do you have no honor?
PS. Those of you who engage in personal attacks simply point out to everyone else, that you think your position is weak and you're terrified of defending your opinions with actual discussion.
Common sense said he's a liar. Of course that's because we all think Google is honest.
PS. This is only my observation.