3 ms·
> can the failure rate be that big? yes? have you seen my post? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28538595 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28538595 ou
by theamk 5y ago
> can the failure rate be that big?
yes? have you seen my post? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28538595 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28538595
out of 6 major websites I thought of (gitlab, github, microsoft, youtube, amazon), it got all of them wrong.
I dug a bit further and while I could not find the recent data, I found some details:
- For Jan 2013, Netcraft said "244M sites" running PHP: 244M sites: https://www.php.net/usage.php https://www.php.net/usage.php
- For Jan 2013, Netcraft said they had 630M sites total: https://news.netcraft.com/archives/2013/01/07/january-2013-web-server-survey-2.html https://news.netcraft.com/archives/2013/01/07/january-2013-w...
- That means that according to Netcraft, in Jan 2013, 39% of sites were running PHP
- For the same date, w3techs were showing 75% of websites their scanner works on were running PHP
This means that w3techs can be easily more than 100% off -- and I don't think it got better over time. I bet if we saw "unknown" figure, then PHP would get less than 50% of the sites, and dropping fast.
- tored 5y ago6 out of 10 to 11 million websites that is. The Netcraft survey has a different sample, where w3tech test the 10 million largest websites of Alexa and Tranco top 1 millions websites, it seems like Netcraft samples every host they know of to get sites and in 2013 it was about 630 million sites tested and then either look at php file extension or response header. Thus you are comparing apples to oranges. Both can still be true.