At 19:08 +0100 8/4/07, James Cridland wrote:
On 4/8/07, Gordon Joly
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OpenBSD 1 visit
Does that mean the user never came back!!?!??!?!
It means that user never came back that month, yes.
Possibly they visited on March 31st, and have been
At 20:36 +0100 6/4/07, James Cridland wrote:
I'm coming late to this discussion, as always, but if you're
interested, here's the information from
http://virginradio.co.ukvirginradio.co.uk (sitewide).
Visits by operating system in March 2007 (compared with November 2005)
Windows: 96.39% (was
On 4/8/07, Gordon Joly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OpenBSD 1 visit
Does that mean the user never came back!!?!??!?!
It means that user never came back that month, yes.
Possibly they visited on March 31st, and have been visiting every day since!
;)
--
http://james.cridland.net/
I'm coming late to this discussion, as always, but if you're interested,
here's the information from virginradio.co.uk (sitewide).
Visits by operating system in March 2007 (compared with November 2005)
Windows: 96.39% (was 97.45%)
Macintosh: 2.87% (was 1.75%)
Linux: 0.48% (was 0.55%)
Unknown:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Bowyer
Sent: 31 March 2007 19:38
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Browser Stats
On 31/03/07, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 31/03/07, Peter Bowyer
It's certainly doesn't work as an argument against
misrepresenting statistics, but as they only person I know
who did double-maths-with-statistics for A-level, I guess I
am uniquely injured!
It takes a certain kind of sadist to do that. It takes another to then
take it to university
Return Receipt
Your RE: [backstage] Browser Stats
document
On 30/03/07, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The next round number above 0.4% is 0.5%.
Yes, but I was stating what I would have expected the value to be, not
stating the value presented with some rounding.
On a sample of visitors to BBC home page - an inflation of over
1000% (as
On 31/03/07, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then maybe there is something to your conspiracy theory. Seem as the
BBC's stats disagree with the BBC news articles. Something is not
quite right wouldn't you agree?
Either:
1. Browser stats are inaccurate
2. BBC news article is wrong
3. The BBC is
On 31/03/07, Peter Bowyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 31/03/07, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then maybe there is something to your conspiracy theory. Seem as the
BBC's stats disagree with the BBC news articles. Something is not
quite right wouldn't you agree?
Either:
1. Browser stats are
On 31/03/07, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 31/03/07, Peter Bowyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 31/03/07, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then maybe there is something to your conspiracy theory. Seem as the
BBC's stats disagree with the BBC news articles. Something is not
Andy wrote:
I can see how it got Netscape, FireFox is derived from the Netscape
code base, but how it got from the word Linux into the word Mac I
don't know. And this was for a user agent that was stating it's OS as
Linux.
Simple - Not Windows probably means Mac OS. In a tiny amount of cases
I think that it depends on what your demographic is. If you are
talking about people who barely know how to switch on a computer,
then you are going to get windows users. For people who actually use
a computer for what it is intended, then, for instance in the
scientific community, 50%
For
people who actually use a computer for what it is intended,
Wow. That's quite some statement.
I'd compose an elegant riposte if I didn't have to go off to IKEA post
haste, because I've just noticed on their website that the chair and
desk I want to set up my desktop PC is in, and I
At 10:00 +0100 30/3/07, Jason Cartwright wrote:
bbc.co.uk uses ActiveX
Where?
Hm, my mistake it was on a BBC site but not under the bbc.co.uk
domain, I could look for other examples on bbc.co.uk but for now this
will suffice.
On 29/03/07, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even 10% is significantly higher than 0.4%
I was using 10% as an upper limit. If the true value was over 5% I
would not be surprised. The next round number above 5% is 10% and over
that would surprise me.
No - this is not evidence.
On 3/30/07, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 29/03/07, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even 10% is significantly higher than 0.4%
I was using 10% as an upper limit. If the true value was over 5% I
would not be surprised. The next round number above 5% is 10% and over
that would
Oh and before I go you used the term significant portion, how many
would be considered significant?
No, I didn't. I used the phrase significant PROportion. I believe
Significant Portion is either a pub rock band from Kings Lynn, or
some kind of euphemism.
Less frivolously, you stated that
Matthew Lamont wrote:
I think that it depends on what your demographic is. If you are talking
about people who barely know how to switch on a computer, then you are
going to get windows users. For people who actually use a computer for
what it is intended, then, for instance in the
- to the point where I can consciously
feel my productivity worsening as a result. That hacks me off.
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Lamont [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 March 2007 15:03
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Browser Stats
I think that it depends
Frank Wales said:
Admittedly, I've only met Jem a few times, but I feel I
ought to defend his honour here by pointing out that I
don't believe he's the misleading type.
I apologise, I did not mean it as a personal attack. Sorry.
I can't recall the last time I was blocked from content on
Richard Lockwood said:
Andy - ordinary people do not generally use Linux as a desktop OS.
Is there such a thing as an ordinary person?
Any way my point was that the true figure may not be quite as low as stated.
I did not say it would be greatly higher, certainly not higher than
WindowsXP (by a
At 14:17 +0100 29/3/07, Brian Butterworth wrote:
To summarise:
Linux is truly intelligent design but no-one uses it as a desktop OS, or
if they do they are too ashamed to connect to the internet and if they do
they fake it as a Windows machine?
Brian Butterworth
Sorry, off topic.
Gordo
On 3/27/07, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 26/03/07, Jeremy Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
0.4% of users at the time used a Linux operating system ;)
That's not entirely true is it?
Please do not try to mislead people.
What is more likely is:
0.4% of users WHERE DETECTED AS using a Linux
] On Behalf Of Andy
Sent: 27 March 2007 17:19
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Browser Stats
On 26/03/07, Jeremy Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
0.4% of users at the time used a Linux operating system ;)
That's not entirely true is it?
Please do not try to mislead people.
What
1) the BBC stats are biased, the site is target at Windows
users and
on certain pages blocks users of other OSes
That's not my experience of it; my usual browser is Firefox
on Gentoo Linux, and I can't recall the last time I was
blocked from content on bbc.co.uk.
Ubuntu user with
would
be right with the world :-)
J
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy
Sent: 27 March 2007 17:19
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Browser Stats
On 26/03/07, Jeremy Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
0.4% of users
.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy
Sent: 27 March 2007 17:19
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Browser Stats
On 26/03/07, Jeremy Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
0.4% of users at the time used a Linux operating system
if you need any more help.
Brian Butterworth
www.ukfree.tv
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kim Plowright
Sent: 28 March 2007 11:04
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] Browser Stats
If you read Martin Belam (hello
count any users that had used both sites.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy
Sent: 27 March 2007 17:19
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Browser Stats
On 26/03/07, Jeremy Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
0.4
On 28/03/07, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suspect you already know this, and perhaps your question is
rhetorical. I'll answer it anyhow :-). Some browsers had different
interpretations of the standards and render pages radically differently
from each other. Testing to the
://www.flickr.com/photos/jasoncartwright/377686574/
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of vijay chopra
Sent: 28 March 2007 12:35
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Browser Stats
On 28/03/07, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED
Is it possible that these stats could be provided
automatically, say on a daily basis so it can be used to
track the use of browsers and platforms.
No.
Slightly longer answer - the stats system is problematic, and doesn't
provide easy ways to route this kind of thing externally. It's under
What is more likely is:
0.4% of users WHERE DETECTED AS using a Linux operating system AT THE
TIME THEY VISITED THE BBC SITE.
Cam we assume that global stats (of random websites) show a higher
number of Linux web clients that this, such as wget and telnet
www.example.com 80?
YMMV,
Gordo
Hey, we just *did* publish it! :)
I'll try and remember to send an update out every month or so, when I'm
noodling through our stats system.
Thank you very much to everyone for sharing this data - it
really is very interesting. And I second the request for the
BBC to publish this data (just
On 26/03/07, Jeremy Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
0.4% of users at the time used a Linux operating system ;)
That's not entirely true is it?
Please do not try to mislead people.
What is more likely is:
0.4% of users WHERE DETECTED AS using a Linux operating system AT THE
TIME THEY VISITED
Andy wrote:
On 26/03/07, Jeremy Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
0.4% of users at the time used a Linux operating system ;)
That's not entirely true is it?
Please do not try to mislead people.
Admittedly, I've only met Jem a few times, but I feel I
ought to defend his honour here by pointing
Just for fun: the february data reworked to show the different flavours
of IE at their appropriate % point. There's not much difference between
Safari (all versions) and IE5.5 share. Again, I can't break out the
different flavours of FF and Safari. Bear in mind this is % of PIs, not
of users, so
Thanks Kim
These are fab. Would be great if the BBC had somewhere where it
published this information on a regular basis?
While we're on the subject of browser testing, is anyone else using
Yahoo's Graded Browser Support method?
G
On 26/03/07, Kim Plowright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just for
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Browser Stats
Thanks Kim
These are fab. Would be great if the BBC had somewhere where it
published this information on a regular basis?
While we're on the subject of browser testing, is anyone else using
Yahoo's Graded Browser Support method?
G
Hello all,
Fantastic information - this is very interesting indeed. Thanks to
Kim for the bbc.co.uk information, Richard and Brain for their
information and James for the virginradio.co.uk and the other sites.
I think this allows us all to build up quite a clear picture of what
the
41 matches
Mail list logo
