PDA

View Full Version : Operating System Market Share for December, 2006


MacBytes
Jan 2, 2007, 02:33 PM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: News and Press Releases
Link: Operating System Market Share for December, 2006 (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20070102153327)
Description:: none

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

Mudbug
Jan 2, 2007, 02:34 PM
there doesn't appear to be any info provided with these statistics, so take with a hefty grain of salt.

Dont Hurt Me
Jan 2, 2007, 02:38 PM
5% sounds about right if you look at new sales. Its a shame Apple never marketed its superior OSX.

DMann
Jan 2, 2007, 02:38 PM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: News and Press Releases
Link: Operating System Market Share for December, 2006 (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20070102153327)
Description:: none

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

Seems (out) dated...

mkrishnan
Jan 2, 2007, 02:39 PM
there doesn't appear to be any info provided with these statistics, so take with a hefty grain of salt.

They explain themselves if you hit the help button....

Operating System Market Share


This report lists the market share of the top operating systems in use. This data is derived by aggregating the traffic across our network of websites that use our service.

Data is aggregated monthly and is available to subscribers for the prior month shortly after the current month begins.



Data is aggregated monthly and is available to subscribers for the prior month shortly after the current month begins.

About Our Market Share Statistics

This data provides valuable insight into significant trends for internet usage. These statistics include monthly information on key statistics such as browser trends (e.g. Internet Explorer vs. Firefox market share), search engine referral data (e.g. Yahoo vs. MSN vs. Google traffic market share) and operating system share.

We use a unique methodology for collecting this data. We collect data from the browsers of site visitors to our exclusive on demand network of small to medium enterprise live stats customers. The sample size for these sites is more than 40,000 urls. The information published is an aggregate of the data from this network of hosted website statistics. The site unique visitor and referral information is summarized on a monthly basis.

In addition, we classify 300+ referral sources identified as a search engine. Aggregate traffic referrals from these engines are summarized and reported monthly. The statistics for search engines include both organic and sponsored referrals. The websites in our population represent dozens of countries in regions including North America, South America, Western Europe, Australia / Pacific Rim and Parts of Asia. Users should note that no double byte search engines are included in the search engine referral population.

The data is made available free of charge on a monthly basis that includes monthly browser market share trends, top search engine referrals, and operating systems trends.

# Additional estimates about the website population: 76% participate in pay per click programs to drive traffic to their sites.
# 43% are commerce sites
# 18% are corporate sites
# 10% are content sites
# 29% classify themselves as other (includes gov, org, search engine marketers etc..)

This report also compares your site's data vs. the aggregated date. If your site has tracked data during the timeframe of the report, a side-by-side comparison is provided.

The difference between this report and the 'Search Engines' reports on the 'Client' menu is this report displays total search engine share across our entire network of sites and the 'Client' report reports only on your site's search engine share.


Maybe I need to look more carefully, but I observed this:

In the OS share, OS X (all flavors) is listed at 4.15 %

But when you go to the Browser page, you see entries for different versions of Safari with percentages = 3.31 + 0.81 + 0.06 + 0.05 + 0.01 + ... = about 4.23.

Even given rounding errors, we know a good ~25-30% of Mac users don't use Safari (i.e. use a Mozilla variant, or perhaps Opera).

We also know Safari doesn't really exist outside of OS X.

So... how is it that the Safari users by themselves outnumber the OS X users altogether?

:rolleyes:

*adds another grain of salt*

DMann
Jan 2, 2007, 02:51 PM
5% sounds about right if you look at new sales. Its a shame Apple never marketed its superior OSX.

The reason this would not work well is
that the OS X user experience would be
substantially compromised while running
on cheap machines like Dell and other PC
hacks and knock-offs, not to mention the
enormous amounts of additional code and
drivers which would be necessary to support
a wide and diverse spectrum of compatibility.

By not marketing OS X, Apple has maintained
a true integrity between hardware and OS,
resulting in an optimal user experience.

DMann
Jan 2, 2007, 02:53 PM
They explain themselves if you hit the help button....



Maybe I need to look more carefully, but I observed this:

In the OS share, OS X (all flavors) is listed at 4.15 %

But when you go to the Browser page, you see entries for different versions of Safari with percentages = 3.31 + 0.81 + 0.06 + 0.05 + 0.01 + ... = about 4.23.

Even given rounding errors, we know a good ~25-30% of Mac users don't use Safari (i.e. use a Mozilla variant, or perhaps Opera).

We also know Safari doesn't really exist outside of OS X.

So... how is it that the Safari users by themselves outnumber the OS X users altogether?

:rolleyes:

*adds another grain of salt*

So much for speculative and dated data....

whooleytoo
Jan 2, 2007, 02:53 PM
Odd that they have separate Mac OS and MacIntel categories, I presume by "Mac OS" they mean "all versions of OSX on PowerPC"?

mkrishnan
Jan 2, 2007, 02:55 PM
Odd that they have separate Mac OS and MacIntel categories, I presume by "Mac OS" they mean "all versions of OSX on PowerPC"?

Oh, I didn't notice the MacIntel category... :o That might explain my question....

And yet, even there... The ratio of PPC to Intel Macs is almost 2:1? That seems hard to believe given the size of the installed PPC base.

I wonder about all kinds of non-random sampling issues with this type of analysis.

WildCowboy
Jan 2, 2007, 02:58 PM
So... how is it that the Safari users by themselves outnumber the OS X users altogether?

Note that there is a separate category for MacIntel...I assume (like whooleytoo below) that "MacOS" is only PPC systems. But it is also interesting to see the MacOS share rebounding if it is in fact only PPC systems. Month-to-month trend for 2006 here (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5).

Odd that they have separate Mac OS and MacIntel categories, I presume by "Mac OS" they mean "all versions of OSX on PowerPC"?

bousozoku
Jan 2, 2007, 03:10 PM
There are 0.89 % of people still being counted as using WinME? That's difficult to believe that anyone would stick with that mess.

I think we have to look at where they're getting their information. Most of these require the server to gather statistics. Obviously, if the server is only for Windows-based clients, you'll see 99.9 % or so using Windows and a curious 0.1 %.

iMeowbot
Jan 2, 2007, 03:18 PM
Note that there is a separate category for MacIntel...I assume (like whooleytoo below) that "MacOS" is only PPC systems. But it is also interesting to see the MacOS share rebounding if it is in fact only PPC systems. Month-to-month trend for 2006 here (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5).

Thanks to Rosetta and late-arriving universal plugins, any attempt to tell PPC and Macintel apart from user agent strings during 2006 is doomed.

kanker
Jan 2, 2007, 03:59 PM
So... how is it that the Safari users by themselves outnumber the OS X users altogether?

:rolleyes:

*adds another grain of salt*

Safari is a VERY fast browser... :p

I find the MacIntel numbers to be encouraging and surprising considering the relative newness of the Intel Macs - basically in less than a year Intel Macs have accounted for more than 1% of the entire installed computer market. That is substantial, and points to a LOT of new users.

aranhamo
Jan 2, 2007, 04:04 PM
There are 0.89 % of people still being counted as using WinME? That's difficult to believe that anyone would stick with that mess.

A friend of mine got a free computer from his parents when they bought a new one. It doesn't meet the minimums for Win2k or XP, so he's still running WinME on it until he gets around to buying a new computer. However, his company provides him with a sweet desktop at work and a laptop to take home, so he'll probably never get around to replacing that WinME desktop, which still gets occasional use. Plus, for the year that we were roommates during college, it worked better than the computers of all my other roommates that were using Win 98 SE (networked flawlessly with my Mac running OS X; never did get those Win 98 PCs to work with my Mac).

What happened to that "5% down, 95% to go" thing Apple was doing? Seems like we're still at that 5% (or just now actually made it there).

centauratlas
Jan 2, 2007, 04:42 PM
On our sites (http://www.halloween.com/, http://www.santaclaus.com, http://www.hurricane.com, http://www.phonebook.com/ etc) we are seeing similar ratios - about 5.x% MacOS (Intel and PPC added together) which is up somewhat.

It is encouraging to see the rebound and I hope that it continues substantially.

FF_productions
Jan 2, 2007, 07:00 PM
The Mac Os is REALLY a minority compared to windows. Whatever, just because 95 percent of the world is using Windows doesn't mean I have to use Windows. I'm of the 5 percent that do not want to deal with the **** that Windows has had to offer.

bousozoku
Jan 2, 2007, 08:01 PM
A friend of mine got a free computer from his parents when they bought a new one. It doesn't meet the minimums for Win2k or XP, so he's still running WinME on it until he gets around to buying a new computer. However, his company provides him with a sweet desktop at work and a laptop to take home, so he'll probably never get around to replacing that WinME desktop, which still gets occasional use. Plus, for the year that we were roommates during college, it worked better than the computers of all my other roommates that were using Win 98 SE (networked flawlessly with my Mac running OS X; never did get those Win 98 PCs to work with my Mac).

What happened to that "5% down, 95% to go" thing Apple was doing? Seems like we're still at that 5% (or just now actually made it there).

I'm not sure whether it was 5 % worldwide or just in the U.S.A. but it's all dependent on how you look at the numbers. They reached 12 % in one category and 6 % in another and yet, still 2.5 % in another category.

If the people buying computers were all buying their own software, I'd think that more would go for Macs. Free software is a big draw.

Strange about WinME vs. Win98 SE, though I ran Win98 SE through Virtual PC and it up-ended about 3 hours into its first run and I had to re-install it. There were a lot of patches later.

Nermal
Jan 2, 2007, 08:36 PM
The reason this would not work well is that the OS X user experience would be substantially compromised while running on cheap machines like Dell and other PC hacks and knock-offs

Nobody mentioned running it on non-Apple hardware. Apple should promote their OS by showing what it can do, rather than just saying "Macs are good".

FF_productions
Jan 2, 2007, 08:55 PM
Nobody mentioned running it on non-Apple hardware. Apple should promote their OS by showing what it can do, rather than just saying "Macs are good".

I think it would be difficult to show what the Mac OS can do in commercials. It would be hard to explain how it's better than Windows w/out being too technical/boring. The easiest way to compare the Mac OS and Windows OS is by showing how easy it is for Windows to be compromised by spyware/virus and stuff like that and how OSX is rock solid.

NaMo4184
Jan 3, 2007, 12:05 AM
Nobody mentioned running it on non-Apple hardware. Apple should promote their OS by showing what it can do, rather than just saying "Macs are good".
As much sense as this makes. It absolutely doesn't work with most people.