4 ms·

>>43% of "industry revenue" not smartphone/tablet revenue. You're not touching the "6%" number, which was what I showed wrong? In what you comments on... Edit

by berntb 14y ago

>>43% of "industry revenue" not smartphone/tablet revenue. You're not touching the "6%" number, which was what I showed wrong? In what you comments on... Edit: Removed discussion of the revenue percentage, which wasn't so obviously wrong (I only questioned it in relation to the market share.)

Steko 14y ago
Well you cited a different number, not the same as showing it was wrong. For the record I think your number is closer to right and I'm inclined to believe what's really meant was 6% of all phones but it could be a different definition on what constitutes a smartphone and/or the lower end of a broad range.
- berntb 14y ago
  >>you cited a different number Sigh, it is not my number -- it is Washington Post's number (and the remaining top hits on Google). And if you're not familiar with the US news market and Washington Post [Edit: Removed wikipedia link since ZeroGravitas wrote a better one in a parallel comment.] Now, go troll someone else. Preferably not on HN.
  - slurgfest 14y ago
    The severity of your tone (go troll someone else, etc.) seems disproportionate... whether it is accurate or inaccurate, you seem to be actually offended by the 6% figure, yet looking over the thread I don't see anyone getting particularly personal with you, just discussing a topic.
    - berntb 14y ago
      I pointed out unreasonsble claims that disagree both with Wikipedia and with media that have serious fact checking -- he keeps arguing. (I stopped checking after the three top results on Google) All that without any real point. Now you claim there is a point?
  - Steko 14y ago
    I'm familiar with the Washington Post. I'm also familiar with the Wall Street Journal which runs AllThingsD. I can see that each post cites a different analyst. And I already said I thought your number was right and the 6% was likely a misquoting. Why you've decided to brand me a troll eludes me but based on your general tone to npguy and now myself I've formed a hypothesis.

by berntb 14y ago

Steko 14y ago

Well you cited a different number, not the same as showing it was wrong. For the record I think your number is closer to right and I'm inclined to believe what's really meant was 6% of all phones but it could be a different definition on what constitutes a smartphone and/or the lower end of a broad range.

berntb 14y ago
>>you cited a different number Sigh, it is not my number -- it is Washington Post's number (and the remaining top hits on Google). And if you're not familiar with the US news market and Washington Post [Edit: Removed wikipedia link since ZeroGravitas wrote a better one in a parallel comment.] Now, go troll someone else. Preferably not on HN.
- slurgfest 14y ago
  The severity of your tone (go troll someone else, etc.) seems disproportionate... whether it is accurate or inaccurate, you seem to be actually offended by the 6% figure, yet looking over the thread I don't see anyone getting particularly personal with you, just discussing a topic.
  - berntb 14y ago
    I pointed out unreasonsble claims that disagree both with Wikipedia and with media that have serious fact checking -- he keeps arguing. (I stopped checking after the three top results on Google) All that without any real point. Now you claim there is a point?
- Steko 14y ago
  I'm familiar with the Washington Post. I'm also familiar with the Wall Street Journal which runs AllThingsD. I can see that each post cites a different analyst. And I already said I thought your number was right and the 6% was likely a misquoting. Why you've decided to brand me a troll eludes me but based on your general tone to npguy and now myself I've formed a hypothesis.