On Sat, 05 May 2007 16:46:10 +0100, B Gruff <bbgruff@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>On Friday 04 May 2007 15:47 OK wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 04 May 2007 01:21:01 -0700, John Locke
>> <johnlocke98513@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 04 May 2007 02:55:40 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
>>><newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>>http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5&qpdt=1&qpct=4&qpcustom=Linux&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=88&qpnp=12
>>>>
>>>>The figures themselves are still far from being real for a large number
>>>>of reasons ( http://tinyurl.com/ypwr2h ). The /TREND/, on the other hand,
>>>>seems very clear.
>>>The chart shows .80 percent for April 2007 and if the trend continues
>>>the figure should be 1.60 by May 2008. (I personally think that the
>>>.80 figure is low).
>>>
>>>In any case, this is pretty significant.
>>
>> Absolutely!!! .57% in March to .80% in April is a big jump (or is it
>> just statistical noise?)
>>
>> Meanwhile...:
>>
>>
>http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5&qpdt=1&qpct=4&qpcustom=Windows%20Vista&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=88&qpnp=12
>> http://tinyurl.com/37qodj
>>
>> Funny how web surveys are "pretty significant" when you like the
>> result and "pretty meaningless" otherwise...
>
>Carry on in that vein, son - and look this up:-
>
>http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5
>
>From Jan to April:-
>
>Vista up by 2.84%
>
>BUT XP *down* by 2.33%
>and Windows 2000 *down* by 0.51%
>
>In fact, a year ago we have:-
>XP + W2K = 89.71%
>and now XP + W2K + Vista = 90.09%
>"Other" has fallen from 5.86 to 3.69, but the Linux part of that has
>increased, so can we assume that the loss comes from W95, W98, ME, etc?
>
>Presumably by coincidence, Vista has gained *exactly* what XP and W2K have
>lost, but didn't make enough to offset the losses from the older MS stuff.
>
>Mac meanwhile has gone from 4.42 to 6.21
>
>That's from "your" site, but quoting rather more of what's actually written
>there.
>
>Tell me. was it you who told us to watch what I.E.7 would do to take-up
>figures of Firefox, or was that some other pillock?
>http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=3
Reading troubles? IE7 is already *far* ahead of FireFox.
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=6
|
|