Twitter heat map shows iPhone use by the affluent, Android by the poor

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 81
    neo42neo42 Posts: 287member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    You'd be surprised at how many don't.


     


    I wouldn't be surprised.  I am closer to 'rich' than 'poor' but I still don't own an iPhone.  Part of the reason is because I'm cheap image  However, I'd say there are plenty of poor people who'd take an iPhone if they COULD afford it.  There's also plenty of poor people who take an iPhone even when they CAN'T afford it.

  • Reply 62 of 81
    neo42neo42 Posts: 287member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ted13 View Post





    To me and a lot of other people holding a 5.5" slab to your face and talking into it is laughable. Yes, I don't doubt that some people prefer a phone with a giant screen, and are ready to leave the iPhone for one, but I think most people prefer a phone that doesn't look ridiculous when talking and can easily fit in any pocket. When I want a big screen I take out my iPad (like now to write this post). The iPad has the advantage of apps optimized for a large screen, giant phones don't.


     


    And some people don't give a damn what a phone looks like next to their head, or use a bluetooth headset, or have huge hands, or just can't read a smaller screen.  Some other people just don't understand personal preferences, I suppose.

  • Reply 63 of 81
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    neo42 wrote: »
    I wouldn't be surprised.  I am closer to 'rich' than 'poor' but I still don't own an iPhone.  Part of the reason is because I'm cheap <img alt="1smile.gif" id="user_yui_3_10_0_1_1371736608685_1067" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies/1smile.gif" style="line-height:1.231;" name="user_yui_3_10_0_1_1371736608685_1067">
      However, I'd say there are plenty of poor people who'd take an iPhone if they COULD afford it.  There's also plenty of poor people who take an iPhone even when they CAN'T afford it.

    Buying things we can't afford is the American way and one of the reasons we're in a multi year recession.
  • Reply 64 of 81
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    ted13 wrote: »
    To me and a lot of other people holding a 5.5" slab to your face and talking into it is laughable. Yes, I don't doubt that some people prefer a phone with a giant screen, and are ready to leave the iPhone for one, but I think most people prefer a phone that doesn't look ridiculous when talking and can easily fit in any pocket. When I want a big screen I take out my iPad (like now to write this post). The iPad has the advantage of apps optimized for a large screen, giant phones don't.

    I remember quite vividly laughing at people when smartphones first came out. The trend in cell phones back then was going small which was made fun of in Zoolander, so what's funny now can very well be the norm in a few years.
  • Reply 65 of 81
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,036member


    I am not sure what this information shows, it could be as the article claims or it maybe an indication of something else going on, I am not sure good causality can be drawn here. 


     


    As one person pointed out it may show who is more narcissists that others. But would it surprise you that people with lots of disposable income are more narcissists and have a need to share every stupid things that do, and thinks the rest of the world also cares. It could also show that narcissists people tend to crowed together. 

  • Reply 66 of 81
    ted13ted13 Posts: 65member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    I remember quite vividly laughing at people when smartphones first came out. The trend in cell phones back then was going small which was made fun of in Zoolander, so what's funny now can very well be the norm in a few years.
    Sure, I agree fashions change, but good grief, I hope cargo pants don't come back in style to fit the giant phones in them. Speaking for myself, I'd much rather be in a world with women wearing tight jeans than one where they wear baggy cargo pants. Heck, I don't want to see guys in cargo pants either. Yuk.
  • Reply 67 of 81
    derekmorrderekmorr Posts: 223member
    This is one of the worst researched articles I've seen on here, which is saying something. It's conclusions would be laughed out of an undergraduate-level research methods class.

    A few basic questions come to mind: Where did this dataset come from? Who collected it? When was it collected? How was it collected? Without knowing answers to these questions, it's hard to take the conclusions seriously. We know, for example, the iOS 6 has built-in Twitter support. Might that introduce bias into the dataset? If so, was that bias controlled for, and, if so, how? We don't know. Also, it's important to note that this map came from Benedict Evans, who is hardly unbiased.

    Let's put those questions aside for the moment, and look at the map. At first blush, it certainly appears that there are a lot more iOS users tweeting than Android users. But the map is misleading -- if a red (iOS) pixel and a green (Android) pixel are in the same location, the red pixel overdraws the green one, masking it. That makes the iOS + Android combined view [I]very[/I] misleading.

    The map lets you toggle individual platforms on and off. If you do that, you see very different results. Here are some screenshots I took showing each platform. Notice that they don't show the difference DED claims there is.

    The continental US:

    [IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/27208/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
    [IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/27209/width/350/height/700[/IMG]

    The San Francisco Bay Area:
    [IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/27210/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
    [IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/27211/width/350/height/700[/IMG]

    The Northeast Corridor:
    [IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/27213/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
    [IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/27214/width/350/height/700[/IMG]

    More to the point, why do Apple fan sites like this regularly publish this sort of "Android is for poor people" nonsense? It's elitist garbage, denigrating anyone who uses a different type of phone as some sort of poor, defective slob. I'm usually hit-or-miss on Dan Lyons, but I think [URL=http://readwrite.com/2013/01/29/why-do-americans-hate-android-and-love-apple]he hit the nail on the head with his explanation[/URL].
  • Reply 68 of 81
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,698member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by derekmorr View Post



    This is one of the worst researched articles I've seen on here, which is saying something. It's conclusions would be laughed out of an undergraduate-level research methods class.



    A few basic questions come to mind: Where did this dataset come from? Who collected it? When was it collected? How was it collected? Without knowing answers to these questions, it's hard to take the conclusions seriously. We know, for example, the iOS 6 has built-in Twitter support. Might that introduce bias into the dataset? If so, was that bias controlled for, and, if so, how? We don't know. Also, it's important to note that this map came from Benedict Evans, who is hardly unbiased.



    Let's put those questions aside for the moment, and look at the map. At first blush, it certainly appears that there are a lot more iOS users tweeting than Android users. But the map is misleading -- if a red (iOS) pixel and a green (Android) pixel are in the same location, the red pixel overdraws the green one, masking it. That makes the iOS + Android combined view very misleading.



    The map lets you toggle individual platforms on and off. If you do that, you see very different results. Here are some screenshots I took showing each platform. Notice that they don't show the difference DED claims there is.



    ...

    More to the point, why do Apple fan sites like this regularly publish this sort of "Android is for poor people" nonsense? It's elitist garbage, denigrating anyone who uses a different type of phone as some sort of poor, defective slob. I'm usually hit-or-miss on Dan Lyons, but I think he hit the nail on the head with his explanation.


     


    I notice you have lots of questions you don't know the answers to, yet you are wiling to declare it garbage before you get the answers. Also, even the pictures you posted, the red looks larger and denser than the green. Lastly, when you start referencing Dan Lyons, you are really scraping the bottom of the barrel for a supporting argument.

  • Reply 69 of 81



    #next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
    "Poor" (pun intended) Android users, can't afford Apple. I've made this observation quite a while ago, for one Slamslung and others using Droid always run a huge discounted price to attract those with a lower income earning. That's why I could give a rats A#@ about the # of phones sold, for me it's all about QUALITY not quantity and Apple wins the QUALITY every time (fact). Apple also wins in Customer Service (fact). Whenever I get into a discussion with a droid boy they spout out their observations, when I ask for facts in which I can produce they get annoyed (anoid) and stop talking or most get into a personal attack. I would add on to the report that Apple users are not only in a higher income bracket but also higher educated and more professional and not "childlike". I was a huge Microsoft fan until I tried my first iPhone a few years ago, since then I have all MAC PC's, iPads and my iPhone 5. I can perform all my Professional Job Tasks and use all of them for entertainment as well. Apple in my Life is the Best!


     

  • Reply 70 of 81
    derekmorrderekmorr Posts: 223member
    anonymouse wrote: »
    I notice you have lots of questions you don't know the answers to, yet you are wiling to declare it garbage before you get the answers.

    You missed the point. Yes, there are questions about where this data came from. That's exactly why you shouldn't draw strong conclusions from it.

    But putting that aside, the maps don't support Dilger and Evans' claim that iOS is for the affluent and Android for the poor. The maps show that both platforms have very similar geographic distribution. So, yes, the claim "Twitter heat map shows iPhone use by the affluent, Android by the poor" is garbage.
    Also, even the pictures you posted, the red looks larger and denser than the green.

    Again, that's not the point here. The issue wasn't how often Android users tweet vs iOS users, or how tightly clustered they are. This piece was about income levels. Stop trying to move the goal posts.
    Lastly, when you start referencing Dan Lyons, you are really scraping the bottom of the barrel for a supporting argument.

    I agree that some of Lyons' pieces have been badly argued (which I said in my post), but what's wrong about the specific one I linked to? Or is this just an ad hominem?
  • Reply 71 of 81
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    derekmorr wrote: »
    A few basic questions come to mind: Where did this dataset come from? Who collected it? When was it collected? How was it collected? Without knowing answers to these questions, it's hard to take the conclusions seriously. We know, for example, the iOS 6 has built-in Twitter support. Might that introduce bias into the dataset? If so, was that bias controlled for, and, if so, how? We don't know. Also, it's important to note that this map came from Benedict Evans, who is hardly unbiased.

    What about the even more basic question: Would you be whining about this at all if it showed Android ahead of Apple?

    Since you decide that you're capable of dismissing the entire study without knowing the answers to your questions, I think I'll dismiss your entire post because I DO know the answer to mine.
  • Reply 72 of 81
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member


    This data, when viewed with all of the other data that is available, such as Android people not paying for WIFI when flying, and with the popularity of Android in third world countries, this clearly shows that Android is the preferred platform for people who are financially disadvantaged, and that is the main reason why most of them end up with Android phones.


     


    One Apple user is far more resourceful and is worth far more as a customer than a whole bunch of Android people put together. X = Y x Z, where X is an Apple user, Y is an Android user and Z is how many more times the Apple user is worth than the Android user.


     


    I mostly pity Android users, because it must be incredibly frustrating to be using tech that is garbage, that most people do not want, unless they are broke, or live in a third world country.

  • Reply 73 of 81
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    derekmorr wrote: »
    You missed the point. Yes, there are questions about where this data came from. That's exactly why you shouldn't draw strong conclusions from it.

    But putting that aside, the maps don't support Dilger and Evans' claim that iOS is for the affluent and Android for the poor. The maps show that both platforms have very similar geographic distribution. So, yes, the claim "Twitter heat map shows iPhone use by the affluent, Android by the poor" is garbage.
    Again, that's not the point here. The issue wasn't how often Android users tweet vs iOS users, or how tightly clustered they are. This piece was about income levels. Stop trying to move the goal posts.
    I agree that some of Lyons' pieces have been badly argued (which I said in my post), but what's wrong about the specific one I linked to? Or is this just an ad hominem?

    First of all, people who investigated this said that it will be evident when zoom in. Have you done that?
    Secondly, in Dallas, you can see the shape of the airport terminal in red. Could you show that area in green for us?
  • Reply 74 of 81
    derekmorrderekmorr Posts: 223member
    What about the even more basic question: Would you be whining about this at all if it showed Android ahead of Apple?

    Here's a better question -- Would AppleInsider even have publishing this "story" if it did? It's really telling that AI constantly runs hit pieces trashing not just Android phones but Android users. I don't see that happen on non-Apple sites.
    apple ][ wrote: »
    This data, when viewed with all of the other data that is available, such as Android people not paying for WIFI when flying, and with the popularity of Android in third world countries, this clearly shows that Android is the preferred platform for people who are financially disadvantaged, and that is the main reason why most of them end up with Android phones.

    I'm not sure why I'm bothering to respond to you, since your posts are just baseless personal attacks against entire categories of people who dare to use a different type of phone, but here goes. You're confusing the issue. Let's say for the sake of argument that more poor people use Android than iOS. That doesn't mean that Android is for poor people. You'd have to look at other income levels and see what devices they use. It could very well be that more poor people use Android and iOS, but the middle-class has a different distribution, like 50/50, or 75/25. And you can't make that conclusion by looking at a (distorted) map or byte counts from WiFi routers.
  • Reply 75 of 81
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    [quote name="derekmorr" url="/t/158143/twitter-heat-map-shows-iphone-use-by-the-affluent-android-by-the-poor/40#post_2349814"]Here's a better question -- Would AppleInsider even have publishing this "story" if it did?[/QUOTE]

    'Course they would. Now how about answering mine?

    [QUOTE] It's really telling that AI constantly runs hit pieces trashing not just Android phones but Android users.[/QUOTE]

    It's even more telling that you're ignoring all the stories they post that show Android (or even Samsung) ahead of Apple or Apple in a bad light.

    [QUOTE]I don't see that happen on non-Apple sites.[/QUOTE]

    Maybe if you visited some on your unpaid breaks, you'd notice that. :p
  • Reply 76 of 81
    derekmorrderekmorr Posts: 223member
    'Course they would. Now how about answering mine?

    I find that extremely hard to believe. If they did, they'd just use it as clickbait to wind up the faithful into raging against Google and "Lamesung"/"Scumsung"/"Samesung" in the comments.

    But, yes, I do care about bad stories, and I regularly call out pro-Google/Android stories on other social networks. Of course, all of this is getting pretty far off topic.
  • Reply 77 of 81
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,698member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by derekmorr View Post





    You missed the point. Yes, there are questions about where this data came from. That's exactly why you shouldn't draw strong conclusions from it.



    But putting that aside, the maps don't support Dilger and Evans' claim that iOS is for the affluent and Android for the poor. The maps show that both platforms have very similar geographic distribution. So, yes, the claim "Twitter heat map shows iPhone use by the affluent, Android by the poor" is garbage.

    Again, that's not the point here. The issue wasn't how often Android users tweet vs iOS users, or how tightly clustered they are. This piece was about income levels. Stop trying to move the goal posts.

    I agree that some of Lyons' pieces have been badly argued (which I said in my post), but what's wrong about the specific one I linked to? Or is this just an ad hominem?


     


    I think you've missed the point. You're the one who declared it "garbage" without knowing anything about it.


     


    You've also missed, or ignored, the point that simple "geographic distribution" isn't the story. Density within that distribution is entirely relevant, and to the point. No one's moving the goalposts, you apparently just can't see them.


     


    As for Dan Lyons, yes, it's an ad hominem. He has, time and time again, proven himself to be an idiot with an axe to grind. So, as a reliable source of information, especially for a citation, he's made himself worthless. If you think he's got a point, argue it here. If it's nothing more than what you've already said, he doesn't have a point. If you can't present your own cogent argument, you shouldn't be posting since you are just wasting everyone's time and bandwidth.


     


    Edit: Posting links as a main component of one's argument is a) lazy and b) worthless. If you can't make the argument here yourself, then you don't even know what the information you are linking to means. A link should never be more than a footnote to a discussion, not one's argument.

  • Reply 78 of 81
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    [quote name="derekmorr" url="/t/158143/twitter-heat-map-shows-iphone-use-by-the-affluent-android-by-the-poor/40#post_2349826"]I find that extremely hard to believe.[/QUOTE]

    Again, maybe take a look at the many stories here that don't portray Apple as descended from heaven.

    [QUOTE]If they did, they'd just use it as click bait to wind up the faithful into raging against Google and Lamesung"/"Scumsung"/"Samesung" in the comments.[/QUOTE]

    And yet that makes absolutely no sense. How could such a story be a platform for that? :???:
  • Reply 79 of 81
    derekmorrderekmorr Posts: 223member
    anonymouse wrote: »
    I think you've missed the point. You're the one who declared it "garbage" without knowing anything about it.

    You've also missed, or ignored, the point that simple "geographic distribution" isn't the story. Density within that distribution is entirely relevant, and to the point. No one's moving the goalposts, you apparently just can't see them.

    As for Dan Lyons, yes, it's an ad hominem. He has, time and time again, proven himself to be an idiot with an axe to grind. So, as a reliable source of information, especially for a citation, he's made himself worthless. If you think he's got a point, argue it here.

    This is really getting tedious.

    The data, such as it is, doesn't support the conclusions. Hence, the conclusions are garbage.

    As for density, can you provide screenshots showing density differences that support your claims?

    Since you can't be bothered to read Lyon's post, I'll summarize. He was responding to the "Android is for poor people" meme by saying it's just another way for Apple users to feel elite, privileged and superior to everyone else. It's classism, plain and simple. The litany of comments on this story only prove the point. This article wasn't about trying to understand the dynamics of mobile device use and how they vary geographically. It was about reinforcing a smug superior attitude among iOS fanboys.
  • Reply 80 of 81
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,698member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by derekmorr View Post





    This is really getting tedious.



    The data, such as it is, doesn't support the conclusions. Hence, the conclusions are garbage.



    As for density, can you provide screenshots showing density differences that support your claims?



    Since you can't be bothered to read Lyon's post, I'll summarize. He was responding to the "Android is for poor people" meme by saying it's just another way for Apple users to feel elite, privileged and superior to everyone else. It's classism, plain and simple. The litany of comments on this story only prove the point. This article wasn't about trying to understand the dynamics of mobile device use and how they vary geographically. It was about reinforcing a smug superior attitude among iOS fanboys.


     


    It is getting tedious, especially since you just keep repeating the same points, and if that's what the Lyon's article you linked to, it is beside the point, and doesn't address the question at all: based on your summary, he's arguing that it's a question that ought not be asked. You already provided the evidence you are asking for.

Sign In or Register to comment.