4 ms·

>　Most iOS devices being sold are, in fact, not iPhones! Pedantic reply: half ≠ most, half = half But that aside, I see your point: clearly iOS can still be i

>　Most iOS devices being sold are, in fact, not iPhones! Pedantic reply: half ≠ most, half = half But that aside, I see your point: clearly iOS can still be influential regardless of the shift in the cellphone market space. What will be interesting to see is how (or if) that changes when Verizon gets the iPhone...

ugh 16y ago
Half plus one is most.
- shinkansen 16y ago
  It's a majority, certainly. But isn't it more elucidating to say sales are nearly split between the iPhone and iOS devices other than the iPhone? 'Most', at least colloquially, seems slightly misleading to me. The difference after all is less than 10%.
  - jasonlotito 16y ago
    No, not in this context. "Most iOS devices are not iPhones" is an accurate statement. It's also accurate in attempting to get the point across: iOS doesn't necessarily mean iPhone, and that iPhone isn't the only source of iOS platform that should be considered. It's like the idea of significant. All too often, people confuse significant with majority. This is not the case. Significant rarely means majority, except when used in the all too cumbersome "significant majority". Finally, most people would agree even a 5% different is a significant difference. =)
    - shinkansen 16y ago
      Regardless, saying ~5% is more instructive than simply saying 'most', which might confuse people who aren't reading closely or if it becomes quoted out of context. It's poor form to miss an opportunity to be more specific about data rather than less.
      - ugh 16y ago
        “It's poor form to miss an opportunity to be more specific about data rather than less.” I don’t agree at all. It’s usually a good idea to summarize data and in the process of doing so being less specific. Most is perfectly understandable in the context. It actually is very surprising and interesting that most iOS devices that were sold in the last quarter are not phones so saying just that is perfectly fine. There is no strange and arbitrary 5% condition for the usage of most and there never has been. Most is an exact term.
- mikeklaas 16y ago
  Most humans in north america are women.
  - ugh 16y ago
    I see nothing wrong with that statement, it certainly wouldn’t confuse me or seem strange to me. I would take it to mean that there are slightly more woman in north america than man. The context (i.e. the ratio of men and women is usually very close to 50:50) would tell me that there are likely not many more women in north america than men.
    - shinkansen 16y ago
      > I would take it to mean that there are slightly more woman in north america than man. That's a terrible assumption. The problem with 'most' is it doesn't imply an exact number, it could be 0.01% more or 99.9% more and either is 'most'. Nothing about that statement tells you it's near a 50:50 ratio. Since we're not dealing with exact numbers (obviously 17 and 16 million units is rounded off) and because the difference is fairly small ~5%, it's less confusing to note a more specified relationship rather than an ambiguous and potentially confusing 'most'. Esp if later it's quoted out of context: "Most iOS device sales are not iPhones," (how many is most? how close is the margin?) is less informative than, "IDevices excluding the iPhone comprise about 5% more sales, with iPhones selling 16m units and other devices selling 17m."
      - ugh 16y ago
        The usage of “most” was completely correct and not in any way wrong or ambiguous since the comment contained pretty exact estimates and didn’t only use “most” to describe the relationship. Context matters and it is prudent to assume that HN readers possess basic reading skills. Take “most” for what it is and always has been, a simple description of plurality or relative majority. (You are quite correct that I cannot just assume that the gender ratio in North America is close to 50:50 but you are at the same time also completely missing the point. Context matters and context makes “most” a useful word. It’s alright to make use of term “most” in the context of gender ratios of geographic areas because everyone knows that gender ratios are always close to 50:50. “Most” is a very broad term but if used in the right context perfectly appropriate and not confusing.)
- vacri 16y ago
  Not the way it's used in day-to-day casual language. If your boss told you that you would be getting "not all, but most of your bonus this year" and you got half plus one dollars (or whatever you're paid in), chances are you'd be feeling cheated, no matter how 'technically right' your boss was.
  - ugh 16y ago
    It was used in conjunction with exact numbers in this case, that’s just not a casual context.
- shinkansen 16y ago
  Now for a quick lesson in grammar, sorry it had to come to this but besides the colloquial instinct, the grammatical roots of 'most' will show, unequivocally, 'most' should not be used as it was. 'Most' is the superlative form of 'many' or 'much'. 'Many' is defined as 'a large number of' and 'much' is defined as 'a large amount'. This naturally implies a statistically significant large majority, not a simple majority such as 51 to 49. When there is a close division we don't say, 'most of the Senators' we say 'just more than half of the Senators'. This is because we haven't reached a point where we can adequately say that a 'a large number' (as compared to those voting against) 'has voted for'. For this reason we reserve 'most' for situations where more than a simple majority, e.g. often a supermajority, comprises one of the two or more things we are comparing. Actually, grammatically speaking, superlative adjectives should _only_ be used when three or more things are being compared, however this is a commonly ignored rule. There is one final point, when one of the two or more things you are comparing reaches a point where it is greater than two thirds of the total, we begin to say 'nearly all,' "Nearly all of the Senators voted to pass the finance reform bill today, voting 89-11."

ugh 16y ago

Half plus one is most.

shinkansen 16y ago
It's a majority, certainly. But isn't it more elucidating to say sales are nearly split between the iPhone and iOS devices other than the iPhone? 'Most', at least colloquially, seems slightly misleading to me. The difference after all is less than 10%.
- jasonlotito 16y ago
  No, not in this context. "Most iOS devices are not iPhones" is an accurate statement. It's also accurate in attempting to get the point across: iOS doesn't necessarily mean iPhone, and that iPhone isn't the only source of iOS platform that should be considered. It's like the idea of significant. All too often, people confuse significant with majority. This is not the case. Significant rarely means majority, except when used in the all too cumbersome "significant majority". Finally, most people would agree even a 5% different is a significant difference. =)
  - shinkansen 16y ago
    Regardless, saying ~5% is more instructive than simply saying 'most', which might confuse people who aren't reading closely or if it becomes quoted out of context. It's poor form to miss an opportunity to be more specific about data rather than less.
    - ugh 16y ago
      “It's poor form to miss an opportunity to be more specific about data rather than less.” I don’t agree at all. It’s usually a good idea to summarize data and in the process of doing so being less specific. Most is perfectly understandable in the context. It actually is very surprising and interesting that most iOS devices that were sold in the last quarter are not phones so saying just that is perfectly fine. There is no strange and arbitrary 5% condition for the usage of most and there never has been. Most is an exact term.
mikeklaas 16y ago
Most humans in north america are women.
- ugh 16y ago
  I see nothing wrong with that statement, it certainly wouldn’t confuse me or seem strange to me. I would take it to mean that there are slightly more woman in north america than man. The context (i.e. the ratio of men and women is usually very close to 50:50) would tell me that there are likely not many more women in north america than men.
  - shinkansen 16y ago
    > I would take it to mean that there are slightly more woman in north america than man. That's a terrible assumption. The problem with 'most' is it doesn't imply an exact number, it could be 0.01% more or 99.9% more and either is 'most'. Nothing about that statement tells you it's near a 50:50 ratio. Since we're not dealing with exact numbers (obviously 17 and 16 million units is rounded off) and because the difference is fairly small ~5%, it's less confusing to note a more specified relationship rather than an ambiguous and potentially confusing 'most'. Esp if later it's quoted out of context: "Most iOS device sales are not iPhones," (how many is most? how close is the margin?) is less informative than, "IDevices excluding the iPhone comprise about 5% more sales, with iPhones selling 16m units and other devices selling 17m."
    - ugh 16y ago
      The usage of “most” was completely correct and not in any way wrong or ambiguous since the comment contained pretty exact estimates and didn’t only use “most” to describe the relationship. Context matters and it is prudent to assume that HN readers possess basic reading skills. Take “most” for what it is and always has been, a simple description of plurality or relative majority. (You are quite correct that I cannot just assume that the gender ratio in North America is close to 50:50 but you are at the same time also completely missing the point. Context matters and context makes “most” a useful word. It’s alright to make use of term “most” in the context of gender ratios of geographic areas because everyone knows that gender ratios are always close to 50:50. “Most” is a very broad term but if used in the right context perfectly appropriate and not confusing.)
vacri 16y ago
Not the way it's used in day-to-day casual language. If your boss told you that you would be getting "not all, but most of your bonus this year" and you got half plus one dollars (or whatever you're paid in), chances are you'd be feeling cheated, no matter how 'technically right' your boss was.
- ugh 16y ago
  It was used in conjunction with exact numbers in this case, that’s just not a casual context.
shinkansen 16y ago
Now for a quick lesson in grammar, sorry it had to come to this but besides the colloquial instinct, the grammatical roots of 'most' will show, unequivocally, 'most' should not be used as it was. 'Most' is the superlative form of 'many' or 'much'. 'Many' is defined as 'a large number of' and 'much' is defined as 'a large amount'. This naturally implies a statistically significant large majority, not a simple majority such as 51 to 49. When there is a close division we don't say, 'most of the Senators' we say 'just more than half of the Senators'. This is because we haven't reached a point where we can adequately say that a 'a large number' (as compared to those voting against) 'has voted for'. For this reason we reserve 'most' for situations where more than a simple majority, e.g. often a supermajority, comprises one of the two or more things we are comparing. Actually, grammatically speaking, superlative adjectives should _only_ be used when three or more things are being compared, however this is a commonly ignored rule. There is one final point, when one of the two or more things you are comparing reaches a point where it is greater than two thirds of the total, we begin to say 'nearly all,' "Nearly all of the Senators voted to pass the finance reform bill today, voting 89-11."

> Most iOS devices being sold are, in fact, not iPhones! Pedantic reply: half ≠ most, half = half But that aside, I see your point: clearly iOS can still be i

> Most iOS devices being sold are, in fact, not iPhones! Pedantic reply: half ≠ most, half = half But that aside, I see your point: clearly iOS can still be i

>　Most iOS devices being sold are, in fact, not iPhones! Pedantic reply: half ≠ most, half = half But that aside, I see your point: clearly iOS can still be i

>　Most iOS devices being sold are, in fact, not iPhones! Pedantic reply: half ≠ most, half = half But that aside, I see your point: clearly iOS can still be i