OS Stats Removed From Google's Zeitgeist

Kelly McNeill writes "Google's Zeitgeist service is sometimes used by news sources as a resource to generate install-base (don't call it market share!), statistics for operating systems. osViews contacted Google to bring some clarity to questionable aspects of the OS statistic, to which Google said that Zeitgeist is only a fun search inquiry resource and should not be used to generate statistical information. A couple days after that inquiry, we found that Google has since removed the OS stats from the Zeitgeist service."

ha

[Quasar1999]

I have a question for slashdot... can I use your polls for scientific research? Will my request result in slashdot removing their polls section? What kind of a crazy assed reaction is this? Why not just put a disclaimer up on the page that says, not scientific.

Please put `em back!

[Anonymous Coward]

I think I speak for everyone when I say...

Please put `em back!

Not in Google's interest

[SeaFox]

Who needs an operating system when you run all your services through a portal on a cross platform environment like the web?

Going Public...

[peasleer]

With Google getting it's ammended statements accepted, it means that Google stock will start being traded as early as tomorrow. They already dropped the initial IPO, and I'm sure they are being very cautious about causing any investor worries.

I bet that after their stock has had a couple months to stabilize, this will be addressed.

Other sources of stats...

[Anonymous Coward]

So, if Google Zeitgeist is not available, where can one get stats on OS and browser use?

Corporate world growing pains

[whovian]

Sadly, this removal had to happen given who Google's competitors are going to be in search space. No doubt they will continue to record the information, but it won't be public anymore.

Re:Browser stats also gone

[Nos.]

I don't understand while people do this. I'm proud of the fact that I use firefox over IE. I know some pages did display different results if you were using a browser other than IE (didn't Opra get a big payout from MS for this?), but just to fool people and throw off stats doesn't seem like a good reason to me. Like most people on Slashdot, I'd like to see Firefox's market share increase to a point where IE didn't (at least try to) define standards for html,css,xhtml, etc.

The only reason this article was posted...

[rd_syringe]

...was so people can't refer to Zeitgeist's damning 1% Linux usage statistic anymore when discussing desktop Linux. If you disagree, let me know why.

Re:Browser stats also gone

[McDutchie]

I don't understand while people do this.

Because there are websites that won't let you in unless you make it think you are using Internet Explorer. If that website happens to be essential to you, you are left without a choice.

I do think it would be better if it were possible to change the UID string for specific sites, and perhaps even to make it impossible to change it for all sites.

Re:The only reason this article was posted...

[mindfucker]

I don't think there's anything "damning" about that figure at all. We all know gnu/linux is still a niche phenomenon on Desktops, and 1% of all people accessing Google is _millions_ of people. That's pretty a damn respectable figure in my book.

Re:The only reason this article was posted...

[rd_syringe]

Well, it's not damning to you, but to the "Linux on the desktop will over take Mac within a year" people, it's a damning statistic. I believe the article was accepted as a general discrediting of that statistic. We don't know why Google removed the statistic or how accurate or innaccurate it was. The implication by this article is that the statistic was meaningless or somehow so faulty that Google felt the need to remove it. Unless Google officially states such, I think it's premature to make such assumptions. Just my opinion.

Re:Browser stats also gone

[Isbiten]

Well by doing so, the people responsible for the site will see that they have about 100% hits from Internet Explorer, so why bother changing? Better would be to bug them with an email threatening to take your business elsewhere.

Sigh

[Anonymous Coward]

w3schools stats are not useful for seeing what average users are doing. They draw a specific audience (developers and other technically minded people). Yes, it's good they're going up, but it doesn't tell you the same thing Google's Zeitgeist did.

another nail in the coffin of US culture

[mindfucker]

While you may be correct as to the reasoning that prompted them to do this, it begs the question...

How fucked up of a society do we live in that people can't provide interesting statistics out of fear of being sued?

This legal bullshit is the same reason that the US Park Service refuses to release any kind of estimates on crowd sizes for protests in Washington D.C. .... they were sued by Louis Farakahan when they did a crowd size estimate of the Million Man March, that Farakhan said, was intentionally smaller than it really was.

Insanity.

Re:Bets are on...

[anactofgod]

I think that if Google's leadership were to try such a thing, they'd be more interested in positioning Google to create an entirely Web-based desktop that is platform agnostic, than a traditional OS.

During the dotcom era, there was a company out of Maryland (sorry, can't remember the name...WorldOS, maybe?) trying to do this very thing. And there was the Network of Workstations [berkeley.edu] project, that was started at UC-Berkeley (1996 to 1998).

Why would Google write an OS specific to any one hardware architecture, when, as we all know, "The network is the computer"?

Re:Browser stats also gone

[Anonymous Coward]

Better would be to bug them with an email threatening to take your business elsewhere.

Better yet would be to take your business elsewhere - and then send a mail saying exactly why you did.

Re:Browser stats also gone

[rusty0101]

It's also possible that the stats would go up as a result of exploits using the installed IE to continuously send requests to the site, to artificially inflate the IE appearance.

Not likely perhaps, but a thought to consider...

Re:Browser stats also gone

[chris_mahan]

What do you mean bug them with an email? I just take my business elsewhere and let them wallow in their blissful ignorance.

They don't pay me to give them business advice.

Re:Browser stats also gone

[petabyte]

The User Agent Switcher Extention makes changing the agent as simple as a click. If you set it to IE for all sites you're just bumping up IE's user share which makes it harder to get sites to support standards as opposed to POS software.

Re:Microsoft WinFS

[starnix]

I love how people keep saying Microsoft has already done this when the product won't be out for another 2 - 3 years.

I think it is more correct to say, "Microsoft is trying to do this with WinFS."

I still think Google would be able to get this "Out the door" before Longhorn arrives if they wanted to since they are in the data searching business.

Stop believing the hype. Longhorn is NOT a product yet.

Re:Browser stats also gone

[Anonymous Coward]

What do you mean bug them with an email? I just take my business elsewhere and let them wallow in their blissful ignorance.

They'll just blame the loss on piracy, and demand legislation to restore their market share.

Re:Accuracy

[callipygian-showsyst]

hich is probably true of Mac and Linux users, they get counted less because their IP address changes less frequently.

ROTFLMAO! I love how the Apple Army has all these made-up silly reasons that, while Google Zeitgeist shows a 3% share, it's REALLY 43% if you correct for some overlooked factor.

C'mon now! Just because your little niche platform doesn't fare well on Google's stat page doesn't mean it's inferior. The real problem is *your* inferiority complex, or your desire to be in a "persecuted minority." Maybe you should see a psychiatrist instead of agonizing over how you're unfairly miscounted!

Re:Browser stats also gone

[drawfour]

Right, because as we all know, taking the word of someone outside the company that Browser X is supported is exactly what bosses do. They won't pay for new testing, but they'll approve that the website works with that browser based on unsubstantiated claims.

That "site-maintaining wonk" still has to convince his boss to do the testing whether someone says they used an "incompatible" browser or not.

Re:Browser stats also gone

[Anonymous Coward]

How stunning that OSS fanboys have to resort to things like this to even register on the global radar. It takes the legendary OSS pretention to a whole new level.

Many of the zealots won't use Windows because they hate the people involved with Microsoft, and now a surprising number of people I have spoken to won't use Linux because of the type of person who already does. How does it feel to become what you hate?

Reality Check: Why Stats are Often Ignored

[Anonymous Coward]

Client pays me to make website. I give a list of supported browsers, client wants to see the site on THEIR browser (IE) and really doesn't give a f**K about X,Y,Z browser meaning that they won't pay me to test or debug. I build the site and test only on supported browsers. Client calls me and is pissed off because Billy Bob is out in the Boondocks and the site is screwed up on his latest copy of Netscape 4.1. Client won't pay me to fix, even though they signed off, because I was supposed to "know" this would happen. I explain we can display a "friendly" error message which is better then it looking all f*ct up. To wrap it up, I'm paid to make websites and I only support what the client will pay me to build, test, and debug. Sadly enough, it really only matters if CEO and his cousin can see the animated character in their logo waddle across the screen. If you don't have Internet Exploder 7 you just might miss out on the cutting edge ActiveX technology brings true innovation to today's web experience.

Re:Browser stats also gone

[Anonymous Coward]

and now a surprising number of people I have spoken to won't use Linux because of the type of person who already does.

You are probably going to get modded troll for saying that but I have noticed some truth to what you said. At the CS dept of the school I work at many students associate Linux with sweaty arrogant zealots and loudmouthed dorks and thus don't use it when they can get by without using it (certain courses require it). They put Linux in the same category as D&D, Star Trek conventions and X-files slash fanfiction. It is a hard pill to swallow but like it or not many people think this way about Linux.

I would think that those Linux users who really want to see Linux on the desktop would try to clean up the image somehow and quit making Linux users look like a bunch of obnoxious ESR fanboys. Plenty of Linux users are smart, successful professionals who are a total inspiration to everyone who meets them but they don't get the spotlight. Instead thousands of idiots come out yelling "Micro$oft sucks dude!" and people just shrug and walk away. I don't have a solution to this problem. I wish I did though because it is a real problem.

Re:Browser stats also gone

[AnyoneEB]

Not all websites are fooled by this. For instance, Expedia refuses to allow disgused Opera users.

That's probably because the Opera user agent string is the MSIE string and then "Opera", so a normal check will find that the browser is MSIE, but looking specifically for Opera will show that it is in fact Opera. Opera may have an option to set the user agent string exactly, but if not you can always use a proxy server like Privoxy [privoxy.org] or Proxomitron [cjb.net] to do it for you.

Re:Browser stats also gone

[Joe Tie.]

At the CS dept of the school I work at many students associate Linux with sweaty arrogant zealots and loudmouthed dorks and thus don't use it when they can get by without using it

I think when one gets to the point of judging someone by what operating system they use, no matter what it is, they lose the right of acusing anyone of being more of a dork than they are. And the real pity is I'm sure they think they're somehow different than someone who judges anothers character by the brand on their shoes or pants.

Re:Browser stats also gone

[JAD lifter]

I don't think that they are judging someone by the operating system they use. I think that they are judging the operating system by the people who use it.

Re:Reality Check: Why Stats are Often Ignored

[Canberra Bob]

"Think about mobile devices, macs, hell even old audreys, but don't just pin your customers into active x."

If the customer asks for their site to be compatible with internet explorer, then unless you want to take up the slack and pay for testing that the client is not paying for, the developer will not test things for free. A developer will not spend several days testing a site with every configuration known to man for free - how do you expect them to pay their bills?

"Really they just want text, links that work, lots of pictures, availability to their customers and security"

I take it you have never done web development for customers? Availability, security and links that work are assumed. What they ask for is a site that stands out from their competitors, usually they have a very large idea and have to cut it down somewhat when you quote them. If all you offer is a site with links and pictures then they will go elsewhere. You would be surprised what they ask for, (I have had a client insist that I use frames, even after I had developed a perfectly good non-frames site that worked very well). This of course brings up the problem - the flashier the site, the harder it is to make cross-platform. If the contract states for the site to work in IE only, and making some flashy shiny thing work in Mozilla is going to be a pain, then the developer will make the thing work in IE only, as that is what they are paid to do.

You seem to forget that a lot of these developers are paid on a per job basis, not wage or salary. If you were developing a site for your boss, and he only asked for it to work in IE, would you volunteer to work for half a week without pay just so it would also work in Mozilla, on mobile devices etc? I think not.

Platform warriors misused the info anyway

[inkswamp]

No great loss. Windows advocates/zealots always pointed to Google's zeitgeist OS numbers as proof that nobody uses OS X or Linux, but consider this. It's known that people do a great deal of their web surfing at work. It's also no secret that corporations seem to have an indefatigable love affair with Microsoft which means that Windows machines are predominant in the workplace.

Many, many, many times have I been counted as a "Windows user" by Google's zeitgeist, but I've never owned a Windows machine. This is even worse for Linux. At least OS X has some foothold on the corporate desktop which means OS X gets some "at work" hits on Google. Linux, not typically used as a desktop machine, doesn't even get that benefit.

So anyway, I'm not unhappy to see one of the many FUD tools taken from the hands of so many MS zealots.

Re:Reality Check: Why Stats are Often Ignored

[FictionPimp]

No, really, unless you are using vbscript or activeX, there is really no reason why your site cant display properly in mozilla. Mozilla can display flash, it can do tables, divs, etc. There is no reason to use activeX for menus and forms. I dont buy that it takes too much time to make a seperate css file and put in a detect browser script to use the right css file.

But looking right really isn't the problem. If you dont use IE only html and activeX. You can design a site to look exactly like what you want without using IE only functions. It might not look the same in Mozilla, but its going to look damn close. Hell if you do web design properly you could even let mozilla view your page without a css file so its unformatted. Of course IE only web designers still dont do layout with css, even though it will work in IE just fine.

Re:Browser stats also gone

[silicon not in the v]

They might do it, they might not, but in this case you've done the work for them -- if you don't validate the site, some site-maintaining wonk has to convince their boss to pay for the new browser testing -- and many bosses won't do that.

Um yeah, he's going to have a great time telling his boss that they can make a software change without testing it because some anonymous dude on the internet told him it was OK. I'm not saying that it's actually wrong in this case--just pointing out that bosses don't skip testing on the word of some guy who doesn't even work there.