OS Stats Removed From Google's Zeitgeist 426
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."
Browser stats also gone (Score:5, Interesting)
I can see why... (Score:5, Interesting)
Good riddance; hope it comes back (Score:3, Interesting)
What I don't get (Score:5, Interesting)
That the OS/browser stats would not be too reliable (I assume they are computed similarly, via the User Agent String) I can also easily understand.
That they took the stats off Zeitgeist, however, that's what I don't get. Wonder if they are now a bit paranoid about all things media after their recent faux pas?
BTW, those who don't like reading the articles would wish all stories were like this ;)
Re:Bets are on... (Score:3, Interesting)
Accuracy (Score:5, Interesting)
It's a real shame (Score:4, Interesting)
I guess things are changing at Google and their free , open and considerate attitude is set to change with the IPO.
The search results I've been getting from Google have been decreasing in usefulness at an alarming rate over the last year - it's sad to see Google go this way.
Erie (Score:1, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
What about slashdot.org statistics? (Score:5, Interesting)
Meanwhile, up north (Score:5, Interesting)
Google has pulled OS stats from the US Zeitgeist but Canada still has them [google.ca]. And Lindsay Lohan has pulled ahead of Avril Lavigne.
Re:What about slashdot.org statistics? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:ha (Score:4, Interesting)
It's actually typical for a public company. Just imagine that someone sues Google because he was indeed using Google Zeitgeist for some scientific research, unaware that it was just for fun. It doesn't matter that this claim is ridiculous. Its very existence will most likely create negative market reaction. Even if the shares drop for just 1%, if you are among the company's top rank, it will generate enormous loss for you. If you have, say, 100.000.000 dollars in company stock, you have just lost 1 megabuck just because of this crazy accusation. So public companies act rather paranoid in situations like this. That's the reason why media in the US were too chicken to say "tobacco is addictive". Just the very thought of being sued by big tobacco companies made every CEO of every media corporation to wet his pants with fear. Expect more "crazy assed" reactions from Google as they continue to "go public".
Will google lose "it"? (Score:2, Interesting)
I've always found Google to be like a fun friend: putting fun cartoons on special days, promoting their employee bicyclist, april fools jokes, Zeitgeist, google-toolbar for the benefit of all humanity. This gave me a sense that not only where there normal (albeit brilliant) humans behind this deceptively simple search engine, but that they were passionate about what they did and really cared about your well-being. They dared to change the world and they refused to be bullied around while doing so.
With the words IPO and Playboy in the air and with them having to answer to shareholders instead of their own wit, will we see a change in the Google we have grown to love? Now that they have sucked us into their happy world will they give us huge banner ads and pop-ups?
With their stock will they sell their dignity? I sure hope not.
Linix/Mozilla = gaining / Apple = flat (Score:1, Interesting)
Looks like Linux is gaining.
Looks like Apple is flat.
All of the competitors have a long way to go to catch IE/Windows.
source: [w3schools.com]
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stat
Re:What about slashdot.org statistics? (Score:3, Interesting)
1) While there may be no excuse for IE, there are still lots of reasons for "real nerds" to use Windows.
2) I imagine a pretty high percentage of Slashdotters are reading at work.
Re:Google Cache? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Do People From GOOGLE Read /.? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The only reason this article was posted... (Score:3, Interesting)
And why does Google suddenly care?
For that matter, why do you think that they are accurate? Most of the konqi browsers that I see out there are set to MSIE due to the fact that so many sites will try to block you if you do not run it. Probably should pick Mozilla to emulate, but I have seen site block that as well (homedepot would only accept MSIE for a time).
Re:Accuracy (Score:5, Interesting)
Premise 1: Mac and Linux users are more likely to have broadband connections than Windows users. (I'm not saying that it's true, but for the sake of argument, we will assume it is.)
Premise 2: Users with broadband have IP addresses that rarely change; users with dialup have IP addresses that change frequently.
Premise 3: Google counted OS usage by the number of IP addresses that used them.
Step 1: Premise 1 + 2 implies that Mac and Linux users are more likely than Windows users to have IP addresses that rarely change.
Step 2: Step 1 + Premise 3 implies that any given Mac or Linux user is likely to be counted by Google's statistics fewer times than any given Windows user.
Now you see how the results would be skewed in favour of Windows, given the three premises (the first of which supplied by the grandparent). I think I did this right... feel free to correct me if I have erred.
Re:Will google lose "it"? (Score:3, Interesting)
Eventually the people there that seem to care will move on or be too rich to care any more. They'll be steadily replaced by folks that were not part of the history and early culture. Then as pressure mounts from the analysts, the markets, and Microsoft, then you start to see minor expediencies, then increasingly more questionable stuff.
It's easy to say "do no evil" when you're rolling in money, but when the pressure's on, that's when Google's real character will be seen. If they can maintain their stated ethics with a huge quarterly loss looming, then they'll be the first company ever to do so.
Re:What about slashdot.org statistics? (Score:1, Interesting)
to *all* of the comments.
"I read Slashdot at work....." Give me a break.
Get a real job, you don't think working on
microsoft boxes all day doesn't affect your
brain. Try reading some of your own posts.
Re:Browser stats also gone (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Browser stats also gone (Score:5, Interesting)
"Hey, just so you know, I surfed your site with (browser) with a hack to fool your site into thinking it was IE, and your entire site worked fine. So, your site is compatible with (browser). You can safely remove your "your browser is incompatible" message for this browser."
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.
Re:Bets are on... (Score:3, Interesting)
As a matter of fact, you could also define and search custom attributes, so you could build a flat file database on top of the BFS filesystem, and your desktop queries would update themselves as records went in and out...
(that's the thing about BeOS I miss the most)
Your Sig (Score:3, Interesting)
1) Slashdot had the same bias well before OSDN (then Andover) expressed interest in buying them.
2) As a general rule, all tech news is biased. You aren't likely to find unbiased news anywhere.
3) Slashdot rose from obscurity at a time when the more mainstream news sources' bias was almost entirely opposing Slashdot's bias.
Granted - that probably won't all fit.
Re:What about slashdot.org statistics? (Score:3, Interesting)
Amongst my coworkers at a technology company, I recently sent out a response to someone's email about IE that said "this is why you should use FireFox", and his response was, "I usually do -- I was testing with IE". An informal poll around the office showed an approximate 30% usage rate. I was surprised and pleased.
Where Mozilla failed in my little circle of the world, FireFox seems to have succeeded.
Re:Accuracy (Score:2, Interesting)
They know that at any given time, a certain percentage of their users will be connected and a certain percentage will not. Thus they will have enough modems and enough IP address to accomodate that number plus some extra slack for "busy" days. Thus, since it is more likely to be Windows users connected to these dialups (premise 1), we can conclude that Windows boxes are counted less often than Mac and Linux boxes.
And if you think about it, AOL and MSN are two example of providers that have MILLIONS of users, but do not have nearly that number of IP addresses available.
Of course, businesses running Windows XP/2000/98/95/NT also have similar problems because they are likely running behind a few gateways to get access to the outside world.
Now you see why the results would be skewed in favor of non-Windows.
Re:osViews is mine... here's the gist of the artic (Score:3, Interesting)
Reality Sucks... (Score:0, Interesting)
http://weblog.siliconvalley.com/column/dangillm
Which begs the question:
Just how far up Microsoft's Ass is google?
Re:Do People From GOOGLE Read /.? (Score:1, Interesting)
Gaming PCs often used for browsing (Score:3, Interesting)
The embarassment probably arises from reading too much into the statistics. Here's one reason why.
Even if people are technically sophisticated and highly pro-Unix/Linux/*BSD, if they play many PC games then they probably have at least one separate box running Windoze. I have three, because I like to multi-box with several accounts in MMOGs. I treat the boxes as games consoles and not as computers, ie. there is nothing of any importance on them besides the games. All my real computers run some flavour of Unix. Such restricted use of Windoze isn't all that rare either --- several of my gaming friends do this too.
When one isn't gaming though, those Windoze boxes would be going to waste if unused, so it's only natural to have Mozilla or Firefox installed on them and use them for browsing. That's a use that creates no investment in the flakey MS platform, so it's acceptable.
Inevitably, this skews the stats gathered by webservers, but hey, I can think of worse problems in the world today. Reading too much into stats never was a safe thing to do anyway.
Re:Browser stats also gone (Score:5, Interesting)
So - sometimes it works!
Re:Browser stats also gone (Score:4, Interesting)
Am I the only one who read that and wondered how anyone can call themselves ANYTHING that implies computer savy at any level and NOT know there are things out there besides windows and apple?
Especially anything web related, next this guy will be shocked to find out apache isn't just a tribe of native americans.
I sincerely hope this isn't your bank or some other site where thier cluelessness can cost you in some way.
Mycroft
Re:The only reason this article was posted... (Score:3, Interesting)
Many browsers support configurable user agent strings to get around all those sites that stupidly block non-ie browsers, often needlesly.
Mycroft
All This Flaming About Linux on the Desktop... (Score:4, Interesting)
Non-US Stats (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Browser stats also gone (Score:1, Interesting)