Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 19th Oct 2012 13:56 UTC
Apple "Looking at the stats for all our apps (we have 4 universal apps with almost 3 million downloads) and for all versions after a month gives an interesting picture." Close to 70% is on iOS 6 already. In the meantime, Sony just announced it's going to leave loads of users in the cold by not upgrading their phones to Jelly Bean. Those that do have an update in the pipeline will have to wait until next year.
Thread beginning with comment 539166
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Interesting but...
by jared_wilkes on Fri 19th Oct 2012 16:03 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Interesting but..."
jared_wilkes
Member since:
2011-04-25

You decided to look at a link that's not posted and are crying foul that the data represents exactly what it says it does? That's silliness.

And I don't understand why you think any, consistent data collection widely-accepted by one and all as reliable and effective, applied across both platforms is going to show anything other than Android uptake being much, much, much worse than iOS uptake. Trying to discredit reasonable evidence that only purports to be exactly what it is doesn't change reality.

I didn't say this was a better measure. I believe it is a reasonable estimate. The question posed to you by your assertions is: is this estimate so unreasonably inaccurate as to point to the belief that a more accurate estimate would show Google uptake comparable to iOS uptake? The answer is clearly no. Otherwise, you are just handwaving.

Edited 2012-10-19 16:06 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Interesting but...
by gpsnoopy on Fri 19th Oct 2012 17:12 in reply to "RE[5]: Interesting but..."
gpsnoopy Member since:
2007-04-17

The question posed to you by your assertions is: is this estimate so unreasonably inaccurate as to point to the belief that a more accurate estimate would show Google uptake comparable to iOS uptake?


I'm pointing out that the sampling method is highly biased and that it gives huge variation in the results, and must be considered as such.

A more realistic view may lead to a completely different conclusions. For example, on iOS fragmentation or others.

Google provides a good market overview of each Android version that is regularly updated, which is why I mention it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Interesting but...
by jared_wilkes on Fri 19th Oct 2012 17:40 in reply to "RE[6]: Interesting but..."
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

No, you are not. Don't throw around words like "highly biased". Your only initial basis for such a claim is that it measured updaters so people who update are likely to update other things as well. But you now know you are incorrect on that matter. I see no bias in one source providing data from the only source available to them.

You haven't shown huge variation. Their data showing highly penetration in the updates to one app is not a "huge variation" from the data set measuring all of their apps and all of their versions: that is an expected result of the data set.

You have not presented any evidence, any realism, or any logic to support the claim that this data set is disparate from any other data set. There is no reason to believe that you could likely arrive at a completely different conclusion.

And the point of the article is to tell us that Google is more fragmented and slower to be updated than iOS. But you won't accept this because you are living in denial. Everyone knows this and innumerable data sets show the same thing as this data: iOS is the most rapidly updated platform ever and completely crushes Android with regard to uptake and fragmentation.

Reply Parent Score: 1