Comments

• Roy Schestowitz

  2009-02-07 14:19:30

  Addendum:
  
  One source made a claim that we could not confirm. It said:
  
  "When net applications was soliciting sites to be part of their counter, it gave a pretty good clue as to why the counts are a bit "off". The wanted sites to serve up this ActiveX control that would got to user's browsers and count the individual users, sending the stats to Net Applications' counter via http post requests.
  
  "This of course is a problem because most people who use other browsers use them because they don't want Active X invading their PCs all the time."

• Jose_X

  2009-02-07 17:13:06

  I won't accuse them of doing this without knowing, but I have almost zero doubt in my mind that active x or similar enough tricks are something of a pre-req.
  
  In short, I expect the 0.8% (Linux) to come from visitors to ms-friendly sites.. and not be a representative figure of the general browsing on the Internet.
  
  When groups hide their methodology, it's difficult to believe their "trust me".
  
  For every such "fact" put out my Microsoft or by journalists repeating those numbers we need to put out the alternative numbers.
  
  Roy, maybe you want to keep here a list of alternative samplings (whether scientific (preferably) or not). This way we can all point to this page each and every single time anyone mentions the 0.8% number. We can be just as honest yet unscientific about this. We can write to such authors quoting the 0.8% figure to state there is doubt about that and point to our page.
  
  Preferably, each entry will include the details of how the stats were accumulated. And Linux numbers don't need to be big. People don't need to be ashamed if some months the numbers are low. We know it's a minority that use Linux daily.
  
  We may even rank the entries based on who appears to have put the most effort to be fair.
  
  Also, preferably the website would be of topics not related to OS or FOSS, but, given the potential to cheat with things like active x (clearly an OS requirement), I wouldn't reject those entries (ie, I'd accept bias entries to help prove a point.. without methodology the deck might be very or even very very stacked against Linux).
  
  Carla (LT) and many others might be willing to do monthly tallies or something. I'll try to bring it up at some point when I'm over there.
  
  Hey, I'll bring this up on thetuxproject.com since this is marketing. We can try to get volunteers to always complain to authors posting the other number and to comment pointing to this alt page.
  
  We can also publish our own methodologies (unscientific most likely since we lack $$) which others may want to use. A weekend breakdown is useful since many businesses require IE use.
  
  You do very decent stats Roy (don't have handy the link to your last breakdown), so perhaps BN will want to kick things off (and host it).
  
  You may want to also tag each entry that requires platform specific things.

• Roy Schestowitz

  2009-02-07 17:42:35

  This sounds like something that would require a lot of work. Can't writers just be told off for referencing figures that are essentially sponsored by Microsoft and are inaccurate (by admission from the 'researchers')?