5 ms·

Net Applications apparently have a sample of 40,000 websites, whereas StatCounter have a sample of 3,000,000 [1]. StatCounter shows radically different numbers

Net Applications apparently have a sample of 40,000 websites, whereas StatCounter have a sample of 3,000,000 [1]. StatCounter shows radically different numbers (e.g. Chrome by far the most used, whereas NA shows IE majority). IMO, StatCounter's numbers are more likely to be accurate. [1] http://gs.statcounter.com/press/open-letter-ms http://gs.statcounter.com/press/open-letter-ms

filipedeschamps 13y ago
Net Applications stats doesn't match at all my websites stats, not even close.
- Pacabel 13y ago
  Do the StatCounter stats match better?
ricardobeat 13y ago
Exactly. Statcounter puts IE9 at 3.6% and IE10 at 4% which matches actual stats for most websites. It is true that in some countries IE has a much higher share than reported, but the aggregate is correct.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
azakai 13y ago
The size of the sample is irrelevant for its accuracy. That seems odd and statistics can be counterintuitive, but consider how a random sample of a few hundred people is enough to estimate who will win the elections within a few %. What matters - beyond a certain reasonable minimum size, which is a few hundred - is if the sample is random and unbiased. Both NetApps and StatCounter are far, far above the minimum size, so the only questions are the other factors. But more important to realize here is that they measure different things. StatCounter measures pages viewed, NetApps unique users. There is no reason to expect those to match up.
- FootballMuse 13y ago
  It is very important for accuracy. Otherwise there wouldn't be a consistent bias between the two. Uniques vs page views doesn't account the large differences. As you said, independent random sampling would certainly result no significant difference, but neither Net Applications' nor Stat Counter's samples are random. Also, their samples are mostly consistent. When there vast differences between different countries, site topic, and market, sample size is very important. To your other point, election statistics is much more delicate than you make it out to be. They are also not truly random samples, but they are different for each poll--which helps. They also weight the results by location and expected turn out which is a whole different set of assumptions. If surveying the first 1000 people to answer their phone with consent and using the raw numbers was enough, then there wouldn't be any significant differences in the polls.
  - azakai 13y ago
    > It is very important for accuracy. Otherwise there wouldn't be a consistent bias between the two. As mentioned above, they measure different things - page views vs. unique users. That is, usage vs users. There is no reason to expect them to be identical.
  - cpleppert 13y ago
    >>neither Net Applications' nor Stat Counter's samples are random. Then they have no statistical relevance. None. You can't make up for not having a random sample by having more results. >>They are also not truly random samples, but they are different for each poll--which helps. They are very close to random samples, which can be proved statistically after an election.
    - FootballMuse 13y ago
      A population is a population and a 1% sampling has much less meaning than a 99% sampling, whether or not it is random. A larger sample always has more statistical relevance/confidence.
      - 13y ago
pippy 13y ago
Net Applications was taken off the wikipedia page about browser market share because their information sources contained fabricated data. They even admitted in their technical documents. I wouldn't trust any blogspam that references the data, it's so out of align with other sources that reference billions of pageviews.

filipedeschamps 13y ago

Net Applications stats doesn't match at all my websites stats, not even close.

Pacabel 13y ago
Do the StatCounter stats match better?

ricardobeat 13y ago

Exactly. Statcounter puts IE9 at 3.6% and IE10 at 4% which matches actual stats for most websites. It is true that in some countries IE has a much higher share than reported, but the aggregate is correct.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

azakai 13y ago

The size of the sample is irrelevant for its accuracy. That seems odd and statistics can be counterintuitive, but consider how a random sample of a few hundred people is enough to estimate who will win the elections within a few %. What matters - beyond a certain reasonable minimum size, which is a few hundred - is if the sample is random and unbiased. Both NetApps and StatCounter are far, far above the minimum size, so the only questions are the other factors. But more important to realize here is that they measure different things. StatCounter measures pages viewed, NetApps unique users. There is no reason to expect those to match up.

FootballMuse 13y ago
It is very important for accuracy. Otherwise there wouldn't be a consistent bias between the two. Uniques vs page views doesn't account the large differences. As you said, independent random sampling would certainly result no significant difference, but neither Net Applications' nor Stat Counter's samples are random. Also, their samples are mostly consistent. When there vast differences between different countries, site topic, and market, sample size is very important. To your other point, election statistics is much more delicate than you make it out to be. They are also not truly random samples, but they are different for each poll--which helps. They also weight the results by location and expected turn out which is a whole different set of assumptions. If surveying the first 1000 people to answer their phone with consent and using the raw numbers was enough, then there wouldn't be any significant differences in the polls.
- azakai 13y ago
  > It is very important for accuracy. Otherwise there wouldn't be a consistent bias between the two. As mentioned above, they measure different things - page views vs. unique users. That is, usage vs users. There is no reason to expect them to be identical.
- cpleppert 13y ago
  >>neither Net Applications' nor Stat Counter's samples are random. Then they have no statistical relevance. None. You can't make up for not having a random sample by having more results. >>They are also not truly random samples, but they are different for each poll--which helps. They are very close to random samples, which can be proved statistically after an election.
  - FootballMuse 13y ago
    A population is a population and a 1% sampling has much less meaning than a 99% sampling, whether or not it is random. A larger sample always has more statistical relevance/confidence.
    - 13y ago

pippy 13y ago

Net Applications was taken off the wikipedia page about browser market share because their information sources contained fabricated data. They even admitted in their technical documents. I wouldn't trust any blogspam that references the data, it's so out of align with other sources that reference billions of pageviews.