Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 19th Oct 2012 13:56 UTC
Permalink for comment 539165
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-04-17
I missed the first graph picture due to an office filter. But I found it funny that it proves my point that the sampling is biased.
The second paragraph that I pointed out earlier, gives 77% iOS6 on the 10 October as it's only considering the latest version of Discovr Music. While the graph in the new post states ~60% on the same date as it consider a larger sample (four apps and several versions). That's a pretty large difference. And the larger sample is still heavily biased as it's related to one vendor with its user base, and not randomly sampled across every iPhone/iPad owner.
I don't understand why you think that the Google method is so flawed. All Android devices apart from the Kindle regularly connects to Google Play for automatic updates.
How is considering only 4 apps from one vendor in the App Store better?
iOS 6 adoption rate might be great, but I still long for Apple to publish results, and if possible on a larger less biased sample. For the moment, only Google does.