3 ms·
You're saying, now, that it is statistically relevant.
by qqq 18y ago
You're saying, now, that it is statistically relevant.
- unalone 18y agoAnd it's not. Because from the data I've looked at, 10% is a vastly high number. You can't make numbers up and call them statistically relevant. And you can't disregard the fact that 3 out of 4 could just as easily be the statistical anomaly. However, the other comment I've made still stands. Can we all drop it? Nobody cares, nobody will prove anything either way. I like the MacBook Pro, love it, think it's the best machine I've ever used. You, Matt, don't. Neither of our opinions matter to the other person, and this entire thread was started pointlessly and seemingly with intent to inflame. Let's drop it and go argue our operating system of choice somewhere that invites actual DISCUSSION.
- mattmaroon 18y agoNo, I'm not saying that. I'm simply saying a small sample of failures (assuming failures are significantly less likely than non) gives you more information than a large sample of non.
- qqq 18y agoStatistics take into account any valid ways of getting more information. And they also take into account what we know about how to avoid making crap up. You need to either claim to have a statistically relevant amount of information, or to know nothing about overall failure rates of apple laptops.