User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Counting the missing

Counting the missing

Posted Feb 26, 2013 22:44 UTC (Tue) by man_ls (guest, #15091)
In reply to: Painfully obvious truths by mathstuf
Parent article: Mozilla announces 18 carriers supporting Firefox OS

Well, that explains it. I would argue that counting the browsers of people who don't browse is useless and even misleading. But ignoring missing data which you don't have and you don't really know how much it is worth, is wise. It would be like trying to guess what browser would have all those people that do not have computers, if they bought computers -- and adding them to the stats.


(Log in to post comments)

Counting the missing

Posted Feb 26, 2013 23:07 UTC (Tue) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link]

I suppose I should have been more clear: it's weird in the sense that there are no error bars on anything. One tries to compensate for the missing data errors while the other says "what we have is good enough". Neither approach is fundamentally good or bad under difference circumstances. SC has a much larger base versus NM based on site counts, so NM has to make up the difference somehow to make as strong an argument.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds