Slashdot Mirror
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."
I know a lot of people were waiting to see the July browser stats to see if Internet Explorer share dropped off after the vulnerability announcements last month.
Google doesn't index user sigs, so stop trying to "Google Bomb" with them.
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.
---
Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Looooooooonix?
I think I speak for everyone when I say...
Please put `em back!
how is that related to the article?
Hopefully MSN will pick up where Google left off and provide free unbiased stats.
How do you like that. I didn't even know that Zeitgeist existed! I do use their calculator and Google Sets though.
:-(
I would use their personalized web search, but it needs some work. Having both interests in "Sci-Fi" and "Naval military" causes problems when I'm looking up specs on the carrier Enterprise (CVN-65 & CVN-6). I suggested that they allow you to choose a specific category at search time, but I never got a response.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
If people are citing Google's "just for fun" figures as something to base critical decisions on, Google could be subject to liability for the accuracy of the figures. Granted, it's not likely that a lawsuit would succeed, but simply having to defend against one wouldn't be very good.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Good riddance, as I agree with OsViews that the statistic was scarcely credible. All the same, I'd like to see a more finely-tuned version come out someday that does reflect the OS of google users come out someday. That truly would be a useful rubric with which to track the 'zeitgeist' of the net.
Who needs an operating system when you run all your services through a portal on a cross platform environment like the web?
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 ;)
The revolution will not be televised.
I've been considering that for awhile. I think Google would do really well if they produced a complete operating system that leveraged their web services and PageRank technology. Imagine if you could finally get rid of those annoying directory structures and just used "Google Hard Drive Search"! And all your bookmarks could be searched in a similar fashion! No need to bother with organizing them!
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
The big problem with the Zeitgeist stats, from what I've heard, is that they only recorded the same IP address once. For people who are more likely to have a broadband connection, which is probably true of Mac and Linux users, they get counted less because their IP address changes less frequently. As Google said, it's just for fun.
It's a real shame Google have removed this interesting stat as it is as good as any browser/os statistic available due to the huge an ecletic user base of Google.
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.
----
Mozilla finally gains market share and ...(poof) ... Google stops collecting evidence.
Is there a Google cache of Google's Zeitgeist?
quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I, for one, would be very interested in seeing the browser and OS breakdown on Slashdot. IIRC, slashdot has not given out this info in the past?
Problem in Database Connection
This Website is powered by PostNuke
Web site powered by PostNuke ADODB database libraryPHP Scripting Language
Although this site is running the PostNuke software
it has no other connection to the PostNuke Developers.
Please refrain from sending messages about this site or its content
to the PostNuke team, the end will result in an ignored e-mail.
You surely do live in the greatest country in the world.
<!-- Fastest rising stock prices:
1. Google
2. Google
3. Google
4. Google
-->
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.
Mythos : Logos
Of course they removed it. After last week's story suggesting more Linux users than Mac users, they didn't want to fan the flames by providing evidence that the Mac is three times more popular than Linux.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
...and they still don't know what irony is:
Searches for Tour de France far outnumbered searches for Wimbledon, but ironically, the Wimbledon winner was the more popular search among Google users.
That's not irony, that's just strange.
Apple used to make silly claims like their computers last longer in the field (i.e, less turnover) so while they may be a sliver of the pie, they're a bigger chunk of the machines being used. Google Zeitgeist squashed that silly claim.
So now that Zeitgeist is gone, maybe Apple will try that old lie once again!
So, if Google Zeitgeist is not available, where can one get stats on OS and browser use?
How about: 0?
that BSD was dying ...
Schadenfreude !
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.
To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
Yes, google's stats are not totally accurate. For instance, my web site says that someone keeps browsing it using Opera on NetBSD, and as everyone knows, BSD is dying... so no
However, they're not going to be far off and most importantly they are unbiased. That makes them the best stats we have (had).
Google also has remove the statistics language box. Why do they unwilling to show comparative data? Is like culture war seems, and eliminating. I am unsure still yet.
Read journal when you are not understand
Many companies have policies fobiding their employees from commenting on public discussion boards about their company or products. It would not surprise me if Google had this.
I think I speak for everyone when I say, thanks for ruining it for the rest of us, you insensitive clods.
...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.
According to this page:
http://www.illuminedgaming.com/eogoogle.htm
(What google will look like in 10 years)
Google will OWN the earth...so what is the need for OS?
Hmmm...now that this is on /., will the search for "Natalie Portman" stay on the Top 10 Declining Queries?
Inquiring minds want to know!
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Couldn't they just add a disclaimer or something so if anyone was taking the stats seriously they could be told: "Hey! These are just for fun. They are not scientific.. so fuck off!"
(well words to that effect anyway...)
Friends don't let Friends use Internet Explorer.
http://www.google.ca/press/zeitgeist.html
Get one of these....
;)
Google Apppliance and index all the HDD in your enterprise
----
Google has pulled OS stats from the US Zeitgeist but Canada still has them. And Lindsay Lohan has pulled ahead of Avril Lavigne.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Will relevant text ads be displayed based on the content of your files? Or will you have to pay to run Google OS?
Win a signed Stephen Carpenter ESP Guitar from the Deftones: http://def-tag.com/?r=0008781
"GoogleGuy" (a real, verified Google employee) was a regular poster on WebmasterWorld prior to all the IPO stuff. He's been pretty quiet the past few months.
I'm thinking that they'd only do it as a combination hardware/software platform. Trying to add support for all existing hardware platforms will get them in as much hot water as Sun is in with JDS.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
But but but... how am I going to know how many Amiga and BeOS users use Google!? I don't know if I can survive without knowing that...
Comment of the year
I think a simple legal disclaimer would have been more appropriate. As some of us find the OS stats intesting and useful for comparison against our own server stats...
All the torrents you could want.
Well the URL in the story is right... it's "postnuked", Slashdot style...
Yes, we need gLinux! The OS that analyzes our open files and presents us with adverts related to what we are working on.
Sig heil! Sig heil!
It's from June. They appear to not be producing the July browser stats.
That's just the previous Zeitgeist with a few Canadian things thrown in.
got the info from google still
thanks google!
Microsoft has already done this with WinFS, and Apple has their own solution in the works.
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.
Most of the search results I get are either from online stores or from those_annoying_underscore_urls.
Google's algorithm places higher priority on hits that have the search term in their URLs. What should matter is the content, not the URL! Why Google doesn't tweak this, I don't know. I guess that's what annoys me about Google now--you don't really know what they're thinking and why anymore.
I wonder if this is the first string of changes we can expect from Google?
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.
can't sleep. clowns will eat me.
Ok, I really hope that was tongue-in-cheek. Otherwise, it's laughable that you're complaining about spelling errors.
*engineer
*actually
*ready (though you did spell it right later one... I'll let it slide)
*response
*something (again, probably just a typo)
*measurements
*poorly
*spelled (spelt isn't a word)
*providing
*sentence
I think your writing speaks for itself.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
While you may be correct as to the reasoning that prompted them to do this, it begs the question...
.... 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.
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.
Insanity.
they dont have august's stats on cache, but they do have this for june's http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:xrgKzSjvI7gJ:w ww.google.ca/press/zeitgeist.html+Zeitgeist+june+2 004&hl=en&lr=lang_en
/* No Comment */
Looks like Mozilla is gaining.
s .a sp
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:
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stat
You can get them Google.com, too. Just click on the previous Zeitgeist archive link.
bad idea imo. it's like RFIDing all the books in a library and then just putting them back on random shelves cos you can do a scan for the one you want anyway.
getting rid of directories is then like getting rid of the shelves and just throwing all the books on a big pile.
Dialup providers have fewer IPs / modems than they have subscribers (or at least they used to, with the drop in customers taht may be true). The problem is that with an ISP with more customers than IPs FEWER computers are counted and vice versa.
I think the real problem is that at my household there are 3 computers on one IP with nat operated by 4 different people. Yes, it's a useless statistic.
I think a better statistic for a website is to just count each browser once per session. You want to see how much of these USE of your website comes from each browser. I'd wager that'd be a more useful stat; although it doesnt' tell you much about which OS how many people run due to usage variances.
Photos.
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 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"?
---anactofgod---
"Equal opportunity swindling - *that* is the true test of a sustainable democracy."
I am the owner of osViews.com and the individual that submitted this slashdot post. It appears as if the article got slashdotted.
Unfortunately, I don't have a second copy of the article otherwise I would post it here. My Slashdot summarization pretty much captured the gist of the editorial, however there is one part that should be mentioned.
In Google's Zeitgeist statistic there was a 5% figure that represented what the OS statistic as "other". I thought that this was bizarre because the Linux and Mac statistics even combined were less than the "other" which encapsulated them all.
I don't believe that the more obscure OSes make up a number that is larger than both Linux and mac combined. This is what prompted me to call Google to get some clarity.
i thought that perhaps Google was doing some subdivisions within the Linux or Mac stats.
For example, Google might have only been reporting 3% to represent the OS X installations as opposed to all Mac users and then grouped the non OS X users (Mac Pre OS X) into the aforementioned "other" category.
Way to fricking go, OSNews. You scared Google into dropping a small but interesting service.
Monthly updates in HTML format, here: http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist/archive.html
Google has GoogleGuy who responds on a lot of forums. From what I understand, it mostly one guy, but it's a generic name so that anyone that works at google can step up and fill in for him.
I think your writing speaks for itself.
Wouldn't that be "your writing spake for itself"?
You mean like Apple is planning to do with Spotlight in Tiger?
p
In Korea, long hair is for old people!
Slashdot might be biased?? How long have you been aware of this??
This changes everything!! No one will want to read slashdot anymore!!
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. -- Many of us are familiar with Google's Zeitgeist resource which analyses search patters, trends and miscellaneous surprises as how it relates to the way people search the Google search engine. Up until recently, the company also provided operating system statistics of those that accessed Google. Many news sources have started using Zeitgeist as a means to get statistics that suggest operating system install base. Because of this, osViews repeatedly contacted Google to get clarity for the statistic, which provided some odd stats. (example: 5% of the OS demographic was comprised of multiple OSes which Google categorized as "other." We thought this odd because Mac and Linux OSes TOGETHER didn't reach 5%. How could the more obscure OSes (even combined) create a larger group unless Linux or Mac were being subdivided by the Google stat. Example: Google's 3% Mac statistic might theoretically only represent OS X users as opposed to all Macintosh users. Google replied back saying that they are not to talk to the media in any way throughout the "quiet period" that must precede a company's initial public offering, but did say that Zeitgeist is not meant to be regarded as a statistical resource to gauge a demographic of any type. Rather, it is simply a fun resource to analyze search patterns. After alerting the search company to the fact that many news organizations have started using Zeitgeist's OS stats resource as a means of generating operating system install base statistics, the company replied back with the same response. Today we noticed that Google has removed the OS stats from the Zeitgeist service.
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.
--
Many of us are familiar with Google's Zeitgeist resource which analyses search patters, trends and miscellaneous surprises as how it relates to the way people search the Google search engine. Up until recently, the company also provided operating system statistics of those that accessed Google.
Many news sources have started using Zeitgeist as a means to get statistics that suggest operating system install base. Because of this, osViews repeatedly contacted Google to get clarity for the statistic, which provided some odd stats. (example: 5% of the OS demographic was comprised of multiple OSes which Google categorized as "other."
We thought this odd because Mac and Linux OSes TOGETHER didn't reach 5%. How could the more obscure OSes (even combined) create a larger group unless Linux or Mac were being subdivided by the Google stat. Example: Google's 3% Mac statistic might theoretically only represent OS X users as opposed to all Macintosh users.
Google replied back saying that they are not to talk to the media in any way throughout the "quiet period" that must precede a company's initial public offering, but did say that Zeitgeist is not meant to be regarded as a statistical resource to gauge a demographic of any type. Rather, it is simply a fun resource to analyze search patterns.
After alerting the search company to the fact that many news organizations have started using Zeitgeist's OS stats resource as a means of generating operating system install base statistics, the company replied back with the same response.
Today we noticed that Google has removed the OS stats from the Zeitgeist service.
There are others OS's, and not all of them are desktop OS's. There are amazingly some Windows 3.1 users out there, plus *BSD, OS/2, BeOS and Amiga users. Then there are all the WAP platforms (ie Palm), odd things like WebTV, Dreamcast, and more. They may also group things they can't identify into that 5%.
I was under the impression that it was semi-canon that it was the Yorktown that was renamed to USS Enterprise NCC-1701-A.
C -1701-A%29
Semi-canon, because it was never said in the show or movies, but Roddenberry suggested it.
Here's the story from the Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_%28NC
Adam
Check out my blog: My Galaxy is Milky Way Adjacent
that 5% is mostly BSD.
There are others OS's, and not all of them are desktop OS's. There are amazingly some Windows 3.1 users out there,
... in combination with the more obscure OSes are accessing Google to reach a 5% figure.
Google's OS stats broke down each of the Windows operating systems (including 3.1) into a seperate figure. if memory serves... it was approximatel 3%.
"*BSD, OS/2, BeOS and Amiga users."
I don't believe these operating systems... even combined total 5% of those that access google.... That is assuming we adopt the notion that Linux and Mac operating systems combined only generated 4%.
"Then there are all the WAP platforms (ie Palm), odd things like WebTV, Dreamcast, and more. They may also group things they can't identify into that 5%."
While this is more plausable, I still don't believe that this number
In Google's Zeitgeist statistic there was a 5% figure that represented what the OS statistic as "other". I thought that this was bizarre because the Linux and Mac statistics even combined were less than the "other" which encapsulated them all.
There's a large network traffic generated not by human surfers but by various bots, scanning the Web for whatever purpose. The bots often identify themselves in a strange way - a comprehensive list of their user-agents can be found here and I always thought that this is actually the majority of the mysterious "other". They are not human users of desktop OS'es, but bots running automated google searches. What do you think?
I haden't thought of that.
That makes more sense. Would those bots characterized by an operating system though?
Windows 3.1 was not listed in June. Windows 95 was the oldest version shown, with 1%.
This is the kind of stuff that Microsoft promises in Longhorn. I provide something similar, only for web pages you've already visited, in Recall Toolbar
A man, a plan...a canal, Panama
/I'll get my coat
Shouldn't that last word be goatse?
... if there was a problem with it, they decided to take it off so they could fix it. If you tell somebody that part of their site isn't working properly, should they just leave it? OSViews.com would be complaining about this even if Google did leave it.
Unless you have proof that they were going to pull those numbers to begin with and the timing of your "request for clarification" was a coincidence, I'd like to offer my most sincere thanks. Irrelevant as it may have been, it's another part of Google that needs to be sanitized because some fringe group of people can't deal with reality. I mean, god forbid Microsoft or some other evil corporation had asked Google to "clarify" something and it ended up being pulled.
One of these days Google will die the death of a thousand stupid complaints and we'll all have to go back to effin' Altavista. Thanks to you, the braindead California legislature and everyone else.
Hope you sleep well tonight, you hard-hitting "journalist".
I contacted google this afternoon about the issue and this was their response.
a rchive.html .
"Thank you for your inquiry regarding the Google Zeitgeist.
As a result of user feedback we have decided to focus our efforts on the
international expansion of the Google Zeitgeist and will no longer be
publishing data about Web browsers, operating systems and languages used to
access Google. You can view historic data in the Google Zeitgeist archives,
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist/
Best regards,"
So email them press@google.com
and let them know you want it back
Hmmm... you're right.
It's not really a zealot thing. People were using Google Zeitgeist's 1% number for Linux to compare with actual studies done by research companies that suggested Linux desktop usage was close to 2-3%. A lot of people trust the Google name, and people aren't the brightest cookies in the world, so I think they realized it'd probably be best to remove something that was misleading people.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
BeOS was very cool in this regard. You could keep a window open on your desktop with a search string, and as you updated/deleted/moved/renamed files on your machine, the window would update itself live.
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)
There's a few things you're missing on your sig.
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.
The Canadians must like their anime. Inuyasha was the 3rd most popular query in the month of July.
Usually the "replacement" for directories in these FSs is considered "Saved Searches". i.e. You have a set of what appears to be folders, but they're really just result sets from a pre-saved search. This provides an easy way to have the same files show up in multiple categories.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Cupertino's only 15 minutes away from Mountain View.
No! OS/Browser! stats!, but! Yahoo! has! their! weekly! Buzz! Index! for! anyone! that! cares!
That'e because it hasn't been updated yet.
.com has July's stats, the .ca only has June's.
The
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Somehow I fail to see how 1% vs. 2-3% is "misleading". Perhaps they should have used the term "Insignificant" instead of a percentage, but I suppose that's not very PC.
Google's stats NEVER said that the Mac was less than 3% of computers in use.
Someone who works at osViews.com submits an article about osViews.com. Jeez, people, buy an ad!
It's a very dark ride.
No..., only Zarathustra "spake"...
Hey never know it's probably still in google cache!
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist/jan04_pie.gi f i f i f i f i f i f i f
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist/feb04_pie.g
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist/mar04_pie.g
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist/apr04_pie.g
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist/may04_pie.g
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist/jun04_pie.g
July doesn't seem to be there
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist/aug04_pie.g
As is the UK version.
Now can anyone explain why on earth the top searched query in the UK for June 2004 was "european spear fishing". I mean WTF?? The top google link for that is even a googlebomb advertising page for the swiss version of iFriends (at least that's what it looks like, I haven't clicked).
My mind boggles.
---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"
I work in tech support. If you expect people who have tremendous difficulty even describing what's going wrong on their computer to actually perform a relevant keyword search, then you're -- well, I'll be polite and just say "unjustifiably optimistic".
Every day, I lose count of the number of people I have to explain to that the folders in the Outlook folder list are not file folders, that attachments are not files and that by making elaborate hierarchies of subfolders based on sophisticated topical ontologies all within ONE freakin'
And people wonder why I use Linux when I get home...
-- I could tell right away that she was impressed with my HUGE Slashdot Karma.
"*spelled (spelt isn't a word)"
;) shouldn't claim that archaic english (a.k.a real english) isn't real.
Yes it is. People who use american english (a.k.a stupid english
Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)
Spell \Spell\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Spelled or Spelt; p. pr. &
vb. n. Spelling.] [...]
Check out the w3schools stats for Moz. 8% to 14.6% since January.
Colour me impressed, although as everyone will now respond to me, take those stats with a grain (mountain) of salt.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Not every "browser" follows the same user-agent format. In fact, the "User-Agent" header field (as specified in RFC 2616) can contain just about anything. There is a "product" token format, but this doesn't specifically include operating system information. And then the spec allows for a "comment" token, which is really just a string inside parentheses. Google [most likely] used the "other" field for all those bots which don't report an operating system in any identifiable way.
This just proves the rule that "statistics alone are meaningless."
Alas, they probably cannot right now due to their IPO and the rules requiring them not to talk to the media for a while :(
Usually the "replacement" for directories in these FSs is considered "Saved Searches". i.e. You have a set of what appears to be folders, but they're really just result sets from a pre-saved search. This provides an easy way to have the same files show up in multiple categories.
That's going to be real fun when trying to support people who make multiple versions of the same document. Talk about help desk job security...
-- I could tell right away that she was impressed with my HUGE Slashdot Karma.
Once again, the threat of litigation is being used to censor information. It was inevitable, since power corrupts.
Google is simply starting down the wide and easy road of excess affluence and absolute corruption. Of course, executives and lawyers are just flocking to the money. If Brin and Page were really smart, they'd be running like hell. I really feel sorry for them.
I just wish we actually had capitalism rather than just a facade masking an non-democratic and evil plutocracy.
Words to men, as air to birds.
You could keep a window open on your desktop with a search string, and as you updated/deleted/moved/renamed files on your machine, the window would update itself live.
KDE's "Find" window does that right now on linux via dnotify and/or famd (at least on systems with unmangled KDE i.e. not redhat).
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...
KDE does not do that bit yet, as it involves coordinating KDE,GNOME, freedesktop.org and Linux-kernel filesystem authors. People are working on it though.
Can someone list some of those suppose important sites that only IE can use?
It's far from comprehensive. There's no listing of Safari. Firefox has exactly one listing. It's a nice list, but I wouldn't call it comprehensive.
I feel compelled to warn that the W3Schools' browser statistics tend to reflect the browsers that web developers use more than the browsers that web consumers use. In order to get a more Fair and Balanced(tm) view of all your install base, you'll need to find a site with broader demographics than W3Schools or, better yet, a site that presents stats from multiple sites.
That's funny, because I sure see them on my machine. Maybe yours is broken? Look at the "June 2004 [HTML]" link under Monthly Updates, and in the upper right corner on the first screen, you can see "Operating systems used to access Google". This is the same statistic that the article references.
Couldn't 'other' just qualify as anything that didn't fit the exact match of Mac/Win/Lin? I don't know what goes into making a web browser spit out what OS it runs on, but if that string of text, for whatever reason, was not matching the exact result expected from Google's stats machine, than it would just drop to other. I would assume many of the 'other' category were Win/Lin/Mac, but for whatever reason, failed to be categorized as such.
Ok, let's think for a moment. If folders are merely the results of searches... the document would be the same! Oh joy, we figured it out!
Listen, I know tech support is hell. But we are talking about things that could make your job easier. For one, Microsoft software that corrupts everything is bad. I remember supporting people with their massive PST files when I was in tech support. To be perfectly honest, they shouldn't have to worry about it. It's only because of Microsoft's short-sightedness (and unwillingness to fix such a major issue) that you have to tell customers not to manage everything in Outlook!
Image instead, if the PST file really WAS mounted to the file system! People could read their email just by opening a file! That's a basic concept behind the way Unix works. It's only because Microsoft doesn't think that way that your job is so hard.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Top 10 Declining Queries
Week Ending Aug. 16, 2004
4. natalie portman
Top 10 Queries
Week Ending Aug. 19, 2004
1. natalie portman
"Comedy's a dead art form. Now tragedy, that's funny."
"later one" indeed!
Unfortunately, spelt is in the dictionary.
A valiant effort, B-!
As you can see, the user agent string gets quite silly as you go down the list, but Internet Explorer is definately losing popularity.
Back in 2002, I mirored another story; the breakdown is available here.
The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
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.
What exactly is a "web based desktop"? Am I supposed to send messages halfway around the planet just to rename a file on my local HD? Would I have to upload and then download files from the 'net if I wanted to move them from one disk to another? What if I need special software for my (insert obscure/obsolete computer-interfaced consumer electronic device here)?
WorldOS was, if I recall, an idea not for an OS as such but a "central" bank of applications that were non platform specific (in Java) and distributed via a P2P system similar to Gnutella. That's all fine and good but without local storage it's kinda pointless.
If the "OS" is web-based, what happens when I press my computer's power button in the morning? How can I access the web without loading network interface drivers, protocol wrappers and a rendering program? Wouldn't that sorta require code specifically tailored to *my* computer's architecture, code designed to handle files on a local storage devices, code to manage user interface IO, and code to manage memory? Isn't that what an "Operating System" is?
So there is still a need for a traditional OS, and there eems to be little reason for a "web-based desktop" unless I have misunderstood the concept. If I have then please explain it to me.
=Smidge=
If you really want to know why google remove that particular statistic, stuff this in your eyeballs and smoke it:
o r/ archives/010335.shtml
http://weblog.siliconvalley.com/column/dangillm
Which begs the question:
Just how far up Microsoft's Ass is google?
They probably did that because they knew that they would get avalance of "My browser is spoofed, so please change your statistics accordingly" from hundreds of disaffected geeks (as can plainly be seen from your post and hundreds others). I'm sure that somebody up top just rolled his eyes and said "oh shit, here comes the geek email." when they got their first email about the article. He probablyt turned it off so his customer service people wouldn't have had to spend so much time answering emails about this.
I don't respond to AC's.
no, its goonix
How are corporate firewall or web caching systems, sometimes with thousands of users behind them, reported?
it was embarassing to show 75% Windows hits
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.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
Pity about the targeted ads down the right hand side, though...
Hal Spacejock: Science Fiction with Nuts
> Google is developing their own OS. Anyone want to provide the odds?
What a bunch of fucking bullshit!
I never heard about sets. I'm not sure how it works, but they got this (mom & apple pie) right.
Drop this into /usr/share/services/useragentstrings and you can conveniently select it from Konqueror's "Tools/Change Browser Identification" menu at once. In 51 different languages. (-:
If you like melting webmaster brain cells, use this instead.
My mailserver used to answer as a "Commodore 64 (with anti-spam cartridge)".
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
That the linux/Mac browser is telling the truth.
My linux one is one big fat lieing machine. Keeps telling sites that it is internet explorer 6 running windows XP. And sites believe it.
And most times Linux users looking for programs will go sourceforge or freshmeat not google as most windows users do. So yes linux users on average will use google less.
No way! Slashdot, biased for linux and open source! That little picture of a borg Bill Gates was so subtle it just slipped right by me!
Thanks a lot for causing the demise of a useful tool. (Everybody with more than half a brain knew it was inevitably inaccurate as a tool for measuring the actual market penetration of operating systems or browsers, but it was a very good indicator of trends.) I'm sure the world appreciates your whining.
They yanked the aug04_pie.gif
/press/zeitgeist/aug04_pie.gif was not found on this server.
The requested URL
I love how people keep saying Microsoft has already done this when the product won't be out for another 2 - 3 years.
It doesn't matter, the beta is out and the WinFS API is in it and works perfectly.
I think it is more correct to say, "Microsoft is trying to do this with WinFS."
Download the latest beta and try it yourself.
Stop believing the hype. Longhorn is NOT a product yet.
But the technology exists in the developer preview betas. That's why I said they had it in the present tense. I'm not "believing the hype," I'm stating a real fact.
When people talk about Longhorn features, I often see Linux enthusiasts pointing to 0.1 version product after 0.1 version product to say "See, we're already doing this too!" The difference here is that WinFS already does exist in the betas.
I'd love to see them pull a Micro$oft... errmm.. on Micro$oft... OS + Office (that should cut into redmond's wallet nicely)
Ironically, it's been taken down from google.fi too. A conspiracy, to be sure...
Google is developing their own OS. Anyone want to provide the odds?
If Google does this, Microsoft will feel threatened and attempt to build an OS of their very own!
1% vs 2-3% is misleading. In absolute numbers, it's a difference of several million people. In terms of relative position, it's the difference between being much smaller than the Mac market and bigger than the Mac market. This last point is important because the size of the Mac market represents a critical mass in getting vendor support.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
What does it matter if Linux is used by 1% of the visitors to Google or not? In the end, regardless of how many people use Linux, isn't it more important that those of us who do are happily being productive, saving money on software and and (if you are so inclined) being a bit more ethical? I use Linux pretty much exclusively at home and at work. I use Windows at work when I need to as well as Solaris, HP-UX and VMS. I've toyed with the BSDs, and I even pull out my Atari ST for notalgia. The soon-to-arrive baby is getting my wife's old Mac for the nursery. It's all good. For me the biggest selling point for Linux is that all the money I save on software allows me to spend more of my money on hardware. Now who can argue that more money for hardware is a bad thing? Stats be damned. For those of us who enjoy Linux, there is nothing that can be said to take away that feeling. Many of us are willing to help others get accustomed and aren't lunatic fanboys. I think in the end, there will be more of us than there are those types of people.
Un-news
Australia does too
insecurity asks the wrong question irritation gives the wrong answer
I had noticed the browser/OS stats thing the other day and sent an email about it. To my surprise I got back an answer from "David Lemin" (dlemin@google.com) within a couple hours: Thank you for your inquiry regarding the Google Zeitgeist. As a result of user feedback we have decided to focus our efforts on the international expansion of the Google Zeitgeist and will no longer be publishing data about Web browsers, operating systems and languages used to access Google. You can view historic data in the Google Zeitgeist archives, http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist/archive.html . ...Which is interesting, though I'm having trouble believing the thing about "user feedback". Were there that many people complaining about the stats in some way?
This is great. It is so sickening to see MANY discussions in which Zeitgeist is used as some kind of indication of marketshare. Now, that's finally over. Hurray!
For sure. My bet is that Google will be adquired by M$. I hope they still keep Linux for running their search engine (as yahoo does with FreeBSD). The power, if exist, will be used to keep it's own existence alive, usually.
try the image location instead
Move Sig. For great justice.
They basically replied and said, "what do you think you are, some kind of expert or something?" when I expressed my frustration that their shopping cart decided to lose about 4 hours worth of record shopping (and the fact that the back button is broken). Oh well, at least they don't ship opened, fingerprinted records like satelliterecords does.
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.
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
Not very good security, but would be rather effective.
Note: The first requirement for Security by Obscurity is OBSCURITY.
Anything ubiquitous is NOT OBSCURE.
The advantage of standards should be that, other than a few select cases you choose to give special treatment, you shouldn't have to care which User Agent it is or claims to be. This is completely the wrong place to put self-advertisements.
because I never saw their methods for determining client OS clearly and thoroughly explained. Then consider some fishy results such as Other (BeOS, OS/2, Solaris, etc.) allegedly having a combined install base greater than all Mac OS and Linux. In the end, I was left wondering why people touted these numbers of questionable origin as gosple.
lol i cant keep up with all of slashdots fanciful phrases and lame attempts to sound eloquent
For google that's quite possible. But I've seen quite a bit of "other" on my personal website as well. I have a hard time believing that some obscure personal website would be spidered so much as to eat that far into my statistics.
Maybe I'm wrong, I donno.
Depends on how they're set up.
If they were set up to fake their request, like "Bob's BotOS version 1.337" then that would obviously be classified as "other", but I would expect large datacenter systems doing this (maybe a company's website uses a script to query Google for information) would be likely to run on Solaris, AIX, IRIX, etc... Some flavor of Unix, not Linux.
I don't think that the 5% other statistic is that unreasonable, but I do agree it's frustrating that they took it down rather than responding to the question.
Nobody wants Linux on the desktop. Some people want Gnome (the GNU desktop project) or KDE on the desktop. Linux on the desktop might be a nightmare!! How would you talk to a kernel using standard input?? I'm not saying it couldn't be done, but i'd much rather use my bash, at least.
If there were OEM built computers including BSD+Gnome, those "Linux on the desktop" fans would have what they want, and not Linux. Linux is great, because it is here, and is a very important part of the system, but the power is in free software as a whole, not just the most convenient kernel at the time.
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.a sp
Also, realize that the world is diferent in Germany
http://gemal.dk/mozilla/geckostats.html
Prefbar has it too.
... the exact time when you post another plagiarized review of a movie like you did with your bonch account.
Can't wait to see you at -1 yet again. It will happen. It's only a matter of time before the moderators around here clue in.
Don't be taken in by this idiot--he has accounts under the names bonch and Overly Critical Guy. He has a history of astroturfing for Microsoft, bashing anything Open Source, using lies and half-truths to get modded up, karma whoring, and the usual trolling (under his bonch account, he got a troll posted to the front page of Slashdot).
All you have to do to check the veracity of this is to look at the posting history of his two old personnae (linked above) and his current one to figure it out.
Please do not mod up this jerk--every time you do the S/N ratio goes down while bonch/Overly Critical Guy/rd_syringe just laughs at you.
This has been a public service announcement
... is because you're upset that you can't quote that bogus statistic anymore. It's all too convenient that you ignore the fact that most people fake their user agent ID string in their browser so that the statistic they showed was basically meaningless. But then ignoring the facts is your forte.
How the hell this kind of uninsightful crap gets modded up as insightful is beyond me.
Mods: Note that rd_syringe is simply the latest account from the same guy that brought you bonch and Overly Critical Guy. Both of those accounts are currently at -1 (as they should be). Mod this jackass up at your own risk.
You can really fundamentally change the way you work when you've got good desktop search/indexing support. I've been using Scopeware Vision for over a year, then they croaked. I was really lost for a while.
Kind of frightened me a bit for how incompetent I became when I couldn't search my local index quickly...
I got over it 8-), now I use X1 search. Its the "best" one I've found so far. Its extra simple, lightweight, supports sufficient file formats/email clients and functions exactly as advertised.
Is it just me, or they really removed other statistics like language stats?
I can't seem to find them anywhere.
-- SouNerd.com
Not really. The mac is a stable target. You have two choices really, just like Windows. Support the old architecture (OSX 10.0, >2000). Linux on the other hand, changes APIs and breaks driver binary compatability between *MINOR* kernel versions. Yes, your drivers may need to be recompiled 2.6.2 and 2.6.3. So there could be dozens of versions that need to be completed. It requires a truly herculean effort to even support Linux (see NVidia), and even then it comes out half-assed (tried to install Fedora Core 1 at release- sure just drop to single user mode, recompile my headers, pass some arbitrary parameters, and it "just works!"). Come out of your little academic bubble and step into the real world, Rayiner.