<snip> > > Their stats unfortunately do not tell you the size of the sample pool > > used. They say they used their logs. But they don't say how many > > logs they use or who is contributing the logs. If they do mention > > this it's not obvious when you visit the site. If this info is > > available I'd be interested in seeing it in order to have some > > perspective to their numbers vs the other site I mentioned. <snip> > > I gather you did not look down the page? > > - ------------------------------------ > Statistics Are Often Misleading > > You cannot - as a web developer - rely only on statistics. Statistics > can often be misleading. > > Global averages may not always be relevant to your web site. Different > sites attract different audiences. Some web sites attract professional > developers using professional hardware, while other sites attract > hobbyists using old low spec computers. > - -- > > > David No, actually I did not. However that only tells us what we already know. It does not tell us anything at all about how they gathered their stats to arrive at their numbers, which was my original point concerning these stats vs the other site I noted. If they aren't telling you what data makes up their stats you can't put it into context and weight them accordingly. At least the other site tells you the number of unique visitors (I presume by IP which doesn't mean unique visitors ultimately, but could also be through using cookies which again is not without its caveats), and the number of sites polled - over 6,000 which of course if they were primarily MS sites or sites using MS proprietary code then that would skew the results same as if they were primarily tech sites where you are likely to find more Linux representation vs the non-techies. But at least it gives some context to the stats. At the end of the day neither should be given too much weight. But in my opinion w3schools even less unless they post on the stats page where the data came from to arrive at those stats. The statement you pointed out at the bottom of their page does not meet that requirement. Not saying the stats are worthless. Just that one cannot decide how much worth to give it in absence of this info. Jacques B.
