Czech Carrier Dumps iPhone Over Apple's 'Business Terms'

[voonyx]

Yap, you're confirming that you don't know nothing about statistics and populations. That's...cool

haha...k. So to confirm again, if I know 20 people who are in my circle, they don't count. But if you know those same 20 people and you met them at the bar, they do count? You're hilarious.

 

[Oletros]

haha...k. So to confirm again, if I know 20 people who are in my circle, they don't count. But if you know those same 20 people and you met them at the bar, they do count? You're hilarious.

No, it is hilarious that you haven't understood nothing about what I have said.

Please, relax, read again and if you still doesn't understand what I have said, ask and I will try to explain you.

Ps. A little hint, try to find where I have said that I know someone or that I'm talking about people I know.

 

[voonyx]

No, it is hilarious that you haven't understood nothing about what I have said.

Please, relax, read again and if you still doesn't understand what I have said, ask and I will try to explain you.

Ps. A little hint, try to find where I have said that I know someone or that I'm talking about people I know.

Maybe you have difficulty understanding what you're reading? Did I say you know these people that you're talking about?

Wasn't my saying "random person at the bar" an indication that you don't know these people? what part confused you? what part made you think i thought you were talking about people you know?

You're talking about random people, he's talking about people he knows. Both of you are talking about a group of people that applies only to yourselves. His "circle" is no more statistically sound then your "random people at the bar".

Are you suggesting that your "random" group is somehow scientifically indicative of the population? Do you not see that your "random" group isn't random at all? The only difference between your "random" group and his group is that they don't know you. Wouldn't his circle be a "random" group from your perspective too? Why does your group trump his?

Your understanding of statistics and population is laughable. Your continued insistence that you're correct is sad.

 

[Oletros]

Your understanding of statistics and population is laughable. Your continued insistence that you're correct is sad.

Really? Well, now is totally clear why do you have the link to ignore you.

The last thing because since now someone like you will be ignored, learn about populations and statistics because you don't know a s... And yes, the people I know is not a random group and is skewed and a large group of unrelated people is NOT skewed. Stop wasting time of other people like you do always

 

[voonyx]

Really? Well, now is totally clear why do you have the link to ignore you.

The last thing because since now someone like you will be ignored, learn about populations and statistics because you don't know a s... And yes, the people I know is not a random group and is skewed and a large group of unrelated people is NOT skewed. Stop wasting time of other people like you do always

Right, because saying something makes it so

Here let me try something, since by your flawed logic what I'm about to say will not be skewed: I went to the bar yesterday and out of 40 random people 39 had iphones.

For the third time: Anecdotal evidence is always the best.

 

[D4F]

Right, because saying something makes it so

Here let me try something, since by your flawed logic what I'm about to say will not be skewed: I went to the bar yesterday and out of 40 random people 39 had iphones.

For the third time: Anecdotal evidence is always the best.

Still... same bar. Visual impulse can trigger certain behavior within that "group" and such can't be considered as random statistic. Why? Because theres a binding point on all subjects. You really don't get it do you?

 

[voonyx]

Still... same bar. Visual impulse can trigger certain behavior within that "group" and such can't be considered as random statistic. Why? Because theres a binding point on all subjects. You really don't get it do you?

I understand what a random population is, what I don't understand is how anecdotal evidence is being passed on as scientific fact. Like I said, I can sit here and say "I saw 40 people with an iPhone and 2 with an android"...you know how you can discount what I said? You can say "I say 40 people with an android and 2 with an iPhone". Which one of us is right?

I'm not discussing random populations, I'm discussing the fact that Oletros called out this guy as unscientific for mentioning his circle, and then bolstered his claim by using anecdotal evidence. How exactly does that work?

If the guy had not included the words "in my circle" would Oletros suddenly agree with him? I'm not trying to rewrite statistics, I'm trying to point out how silly it is to call something unscientific and then provide anecdotal evidence as proof of that.

 

[D4F]

Dude, are those louder fanboys also obnoxiously acting like they know for a fact what are the proportion of iOS/Android devices in the cafeterias I go to? If they do, then I know one!

Another fact you will like: last I am hearing from my circle in Spain, there are lots of people buying into the recent dump of cheap Blackberrys. And yet, I still heard of no one buying Androids.

Will you also tell me now how many people in my circle are in fact buying Android? C'mon, make my day!

Read my previous post. I don't care about your circle which is why I stated so you get out of starbucks. You know Starbucks AS a place where people of similar attitude/approach (not generalizing just global observation) meet. It can be Joe's Crib or Mommas Belly if you want it that way.

 

[thekev]

Very interesting, some pushback from a carrier that does not take being pushed around easily. It's why Verizon originally took a pass, and AT&T ended up with multi-year exclusive. And look at how AT&T's reputation was destroyed.

I'm sure this will be roundly trashed as anything that holds Apple responsible, is against the grain of those who idolize the company.


(one is not truly free to express their opinions here )

Yeah... I noticed that. In the end if the terms drive their costs too high, they should be willing to walk on the deal. AT&T was always a very boring company though. Complaints with their service didn't originate with the iphone.

 

[D4F]

I understand what a random population is, what I don't understand is how anecdotal evidence is being passed on as scientific fact. Like I said, I can sit here and say "I saw 40 people with an iPhone and 2 with an android"...you know how you can discount what I said? You can say "I say 40 people with an android and 2 with an iPhone".

I'm not discussing random populations, I'm discussing the fact that Oletros called out this guy as unscientific for mentioning his circle, and then bolstered his claim by using anecdotal evidence. How exactly does that work?

If the guy had not included the words "in my circle" would Oletros suddenly agree with him? I'm not trying to rewrite statistics, I'm trying to point out how silly it is to call something unscientific and then provide anecdotal evidence as proof of that.

Simple. How long did it take you to come up with your conclusion?
For me I take notice on daily basis. I develop for iOS and android. I don't care which is better but I pay a lot of attention to what people use.
You have no idea how many times I approach people in sub or cafes and ask what games/apps they like to use.
My observation goes for close to 3 years now. It's my bread and butter
Is it anecdotal still or fact you be the judge but I clearly know what I encounter more often on a 110% random occasions.

 

[voonyx]

Simple. How long did it take you to come up with your conclusion?
For me I take notice on daily basis. I develop for iOS and android. I don't care which is better but I pay a lot of attention to what people use.
You have no idea how many times I approach people in sub or cafes and ask what games/apps they like to use.
My observation goes for close to 3 years now. It's my bread and butter
Is it anecdotal still or fact you be the judge but I clearly know what I encounter more often on a 110% random occasions.

haha of course its anecdotal in fact it may be the very definition of anecdotal. Look, I've been doing this for 5 years, and I clearly know what I encounter more often on a 130% random occasion. See what I did there? Absolutely nothing, which is what you did. You're simply stating something with zero proof, zero science behind it and trying to pass it along as fact. Telling me, "the random group I saw has android" doesn't tell me anything. Why? Because I can just say "the random group I saw has iPhone"

You can't have it both ways. If you don't accept his anecdotal circle evidence, why in the world do we have to accept your "I saw random people" evidence?

 

[D4F]

haha of course its anecdotal in fact it may be the very definition of anecdotal. Look, I've been doing this for 5 years, and I clearly know what I encounter more often on a 130% random occasion. See what I did there? Absolutely nothing, which is what you did. You're simply stating something with zero proof, zero science behind it and trying to pass it along as fact. Telling me, "the random group I saw has android" doesn't tell me nothing. Why? Because I can just say "the random group I saw has iPhone"

You can't have it both ways. If you don't accept his anecdotal circle evidence, why in the world do we have to accept your "I saw random people" evidence?

Because a circle is a state in which people are for one or more similar reasons. There is no more random factor to it It's quite simple if you understand what it means.
I could show you my app sale statistics based on platform to give you a general idea but this is not a place I want to show my work lol. People down rank you just because and I like my iTunes/android store reviews thank you very much.
There you go. A fact.

PS. If you really want to get some hard facts just search for sale #s for both iOS and android. They are all over the place and tell me how would be possible for general population to have more iOS devices if android is xxx millions in sales ahead?? Show me some logic here to deny a simple fact.
Everything else ONLY applies to certain circles no matter how you approach it.

 

[voonyx]

Because a circle is a state in which people are for one or more same resins. It's quite simple if you understand what it means.

Yes I know. I'm not saying his circle is the norm, or that his circle isn't skewed. What I'm saying is, you're not providing any proof other then saying "I saw this". That becomes baseless because I could just say "Oh yeah? Well I saw this". How do you prove me wrong? How do I prove you wrong? I can't, and you can't either.

It's anecdotal evidence. Oletros called out this guy for saying "my circle" and then pretty much said the same thing without saying the words "my circle". It doesn't work like that.

No matter how popular you say Android is based on what you see, I can counter with iPhone is more popular based on what I see. It becomes a useless point because neither one of our assertions has any scientific basis to it. That's my point. You can't call someone out for saying "my circle" and then bolster your claim by saying "random people I see".

Addendum: Yes, if you showed me your app sale statistics that would be proof, and that would bolster your claim. That's my point. Oletros implied "your circle is not the world, but the random people I see are" (at the very least that was the implication). Had he provided an actual population survey, he would be correct.

 

[mijail]

Read my previous post. I don't care about your circle which is why I stated so you get out of starbucks. You know Starbucks AS a place where people of similar attitude/approach (not generalizing just global observation) meet. It can be Joe's Crib or Mommas Belly if you want it that way.

That's the problem: you don't even ask about any concrete data to make my anecdotal evidence any more useful. Neither do you simply state your own anecdotal evidence.

No, you just suppose that either I am wrong or in a some specific context, and that your context is somehow more valid/more representative.

And then you top it mumbling about statistics and populations. Good, man, good.

Funny how you started talking about fanboys.

 

[voonyx]

That's the problem: you don't even ask about any concrete data to make my anecdotal evidence any more useful. Neither do you simply state your own anecdotal evidence.

No, you just suppose that either I am wrong or in a some specific context, and that your context is somehow more valid/more representative.

And then you top it mumbling about statistics and populations. Good, man, good.

Funny how you started talking about fanboys.

Precisely.

 

[mijail]

PS. If you really want to get some hard facts just search for sale #s for both iOS and android. They are all over the place and tell me how would be possible for general population to have more iOS devices if android is xxx millions in sales ahead?? Show me some logic here to deny a simple fact.
Everything else ONLY applies to certain circles no matter how you approach it.

I can give you a very simple fact: iOS devices do get a much bigger percentage of browser usage than Android.
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/11/02/web-browser-market-share

If there are so many Androids out there, it means that the Androids are not being used as much as the iOS devices... by far.

And that also matches my next anecdotal evidence: a colleague has recently bought an Android phone, some Samsung Galaxy. Why? Because it was the cheapest phone in his carrier with GPS, he has no plans to use it for browsing or apps. So I guess I will not see him any time soon using it in any cafeteria (oops, sorry, that's Starbucks for you)

 

[D4F]

I can give you a very simple fact: iOS devices do get a much bigger percentage of browser usage than Android.
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/11/02/web-browser-market-share

If there are so many Androids out there, it means that the Androids are not being used as much as the iOS devices... by far... and you didn't reply to my question which means a you don't have an answer b not only you don't have one but you'll try to mask it. So which one is it?

And that also matches my next anecdotal evidence: a colleague has recently bought an Android phone, some Samsung Galaxy. Why? Because it was the cheapest phone in his carrier with GPS, he has no plans to use it for browsing or apps. So I guess I will not see him any time soon using it in any cafeteria (oops, sorry, that's Starbucks for you)

Wrong. It means certain feature is used more frequently on given os. That's a big difference and tells a lot about how you process facts. On top of that you didn't answer my questions which means that there's nothing more to discuss here.




----------

That's the problem: you don't even ask about any concrete data to make my anecdotal evidence any more useful. Neither do you simply state your own anecdotal evidence.

No, you just suppose that either I am wrong or in a some specific context, and that your context is somehow more valid/more representative.

And then you top it mumbling about statistics and populations. Good, man, good.

Funny how you started talking about fanboys.

You use two countries first and THEN your circle. One kills the other and I knew that right from the start due to my never ending research .

In public forums people usually discuss without posting links to actual data and such. Everybody has google after all and technically should at least learn how to use it. But, once you start contradicting yourself that usually leads to a very simple conclusions. It's basic observation

 

[mijail]

Wrong. It means certain feature is used more frequently on given os.

I LOL'd.
Yeah, it means that in Android the most used feature is ... the phone.

That's a big difference and tells a lot about how you process facts. On top of that you didn't answer my questions which means that there's nothing more to discuss here.

I'm glad that you can keep your belief system unaltered. Good job.

You use two countries first and THEN your circle. One kills the other and I knew that right from the start due to my never ending research .

Erm... what?
If you try to make that understandable, I promise to reply.

In public forums people usually discuss without posting links to actual data and such. Everybody has google after all and technically should at least learn how to use it. But, once you start contradicting yourself that usually leads to a very simple conclusions. It's basic observation

I posted a link to the statistics showing that Mobile Safari browsers account for 60% of worldwide mobile browsing vs. 18% of Android browsers.
And your answer is... that??

 

[AppleScruff1]

The chips in the armor are appearing day by day.

 

[D4F]

I LOL'd.
Yeah, it means that in Android the most used feature is ... the phone.



I'm glad that you can keep your belief system unaltered. Good job.



Erm... what?
If you try to make that understandable, I promise to reply.



I posted a link to the statistics showing that Mobile Safari browsers account for 60% of worldwide mobile browsing vs. 18% of Android browsers.
And your answer is... that??

Are you really that troubled with thinking?
I use android phone for most tasks yet pretty much never ever use the browser. For that I have the iPad. Ooops! There goes your argument. If you still don't get it read that part where you concluded that android is used less... by far. Rofl!
Android is not a web browser nor is any smartphone out there. I think not realizing this (which is quite obvious from what you write) you have just proven that you have issues with managing simple logic based equations.

And to sum it all... Wtf does safari usage have to do with global smartphone sales?? Lol.

I am going to stop now. Enjoy your time.

 

[mijail]

Are you really that troubled with thinking?
I use android phone for most tasks yet pretty much never ever use the browser. For that I have the iPad. Ooops! There goes your argument. If you still don't get it read that part where you concluded that android is used less... by far. Rofl!

Man, this feels like talking to someone from Wonderland.
What you say aligns perfectly with everything I said: the statistics of browser usage, the (reported) selling numbers, and the perception of "more iOS devices in cafeterias".
So this could be an agreement. But instead you are still angling for the "I won I won lololol". WTF?
If that was the goal, I can send you a PDF with some sort of nice certificate that you can hang in your room. I will sign it! Or would you prefer a t-shirt?

Android is not a web browser nor is any smartphone out there.

No, it is an OS. And the sky is blue. And your point is...?
(I'm beginning to doubt there is one after all)

I think not realizing this (which is quite obvious from what you write) you have just proven that you have issues with managing simple logic based equations.

And to sum it all... Wtf does safari usage have to do with global smartphone sales?? Lol.

Mhm, so looks like you didn't even stop enough to read the title of the graphs. Which say "Mobile/tablet". So that Safari you mention is Mobile Safari... you know, the standard browser in iOS.
No "logic based equations" needed to understand that, I think.

What does it have to do with global smartphone sales?
Sigh. Nothing, that's the point. It only has to do with real usage, not with sales nor with phone activations. And the real usage says that iOS devices are being used as internet devices about 3 times more than Android devices. But that should be no news to you, since you just said you use your Android for calling and your iPad for browsing.

Again, it looks like we should be agreeing by now. But while I discuss the numbers, you seem more interested in defending... who knows what exactly. Hope that's floating your boat, anyway.

 

[divinox]

Man, this feels like talking to someone from Wonderland.
What you say aligns perfectly with everything I said: the statistics of browser usage, the (reported) selling numbers, and the perception of "more iOS devices in cafeterias".
So this could be an agreement. But instead you are still angling for the "I won I won lololol". WTF?
If that was the goal, I can send you a PDF with some sort of nice certificate that you can hang in your room. I will sign it! Or would you prefer a t-shirt?



No, it is an OS. And the sky is blue. And your point is...?
(I'm beginning to doubt there is one after all)



Mhm, so looks like you didn't even stop enough to read the title of the graphs. Which say "Mobile/tablet". So that Safari you mention is Mobile Safari... you know, the standard browser in iOS.
No "logic based equations" needed to understand that, I think.

What does it have to do with global smartphone sales?
Sigh. Nothing, that's the point. It only has to do with real usage, not with sales nor with phone activations. And the real usage says that iOS devices are being used as internet devices about 3 times more than Android devices. But that should be no news to you, since you just said you use your Android for calling and your iPad for browsing.

Again, it looks like we should be agreeing by now. But while I discuss the numbers, you seem more interested in defending... who knows what exactly. Hope that's floating your boat, anyway.

You do know that you further invalidated your thinking right? iOS use accounts for both iphone and ipad. Without any reliable means of extracting iphone share of said data stack, we cannot make any conclusions (at all) when doing a phone to phone comparison.

That said, such a comparison would still - as pointed out - hold little relevance for the ongoing argument. All it says (assuming it did) is that people who has an iphone tend to browse the web more than people not having an iphone. There is no way of concluding WHY that is. (And no, it does not mean that they instead use their phone more as a phone... after all, its not a binary choice now, is it?)

p.s. i'd like a t-shirt, please.

As for anecdotal evidence, i can share some too - in fact, i guess i might already have, but here goes:

In Sweden were seeing somewhat of a shift. Perhaps not a drastic one. I still see tons of iphones. But some of the hype seems to have died off. I saw nothing in the news about people lining up for the 4s. Havent heard anyone talk about it. Havent seen one in the wild. Undoubtedly, Apple will continue to do well. Heck, Sweden is one of the strongest Apple markets in the world. But, something has changed. And i dont think i am the only one to have noticed. Why? God only knows. Part of it is probably the need to be "different". With "everyone" having an iphone, its not as cool anymore. Another, and part because of this, people perhaps do not care as much anymore. They basically want a phone, and contrary to public (MR) belief, that phone can be a non-iphone one and still get you through the day.

That said, where i am at MSFT is... absent. I know one guy that has one. And he is a gold msft partner, and as such... well, having an iphone would look bad. Then again, i havent seen any marketing either. Heck, if i asked 100 people on random, 99% would probably say - Windows, huh? They make phones too?

 

[mijail]

You do know that you further invalidated your thinking right? iOS use accounts for both iphone and ipad. Without any reliable means of extracting iphone share of said data stack, we cannot make any conclusions (at all) when doing a phone to phone comparison.

I always talked about iOS devices vs Android devices, so I don't see how my thinking is invalidated. Feel free to elaborate.

That said, such a comparison would still - as pointed out - hold little relevance for the ongoing argument. All it says (assuming it did) is that people who has an iphone tend to browse the web more than people not having an iphone.

No, it's not "iPhone vs no-iPhone".
What it says is that people having an iOS device browse on average the web 3 times more on the device than people having an Android device. (No, my mistake! what it says is that, even though there is a much bigger quantity of Android devices out there, iOS devices are detected 3 times more surfing the web. That's even more impressive than what I originally said!)

There is no way of concluding WHY that is.(And no, it does not mean that they instead use their phone more as a phone... after all, its not a binary choice now, is it?)

Agreed. That's why I didn't conclude anything about the reasons.
And of course it isn't binary, but I can only readily imagine 3 use cases:

1. phone user,
2. phone + internet device (browsing is a big part of that, since most apps which open web pages will be using the OS-provided browser internally),
3. purpose-specific phone (like my colleague with the Android phone being used only as a GPS)

Looks like iOS devices, according to the statistics, fall mostly into the (2) category, while Android devices would fall then much more frequently on the other categories.

p.s. i'd like a t-shirt, please.

May I recommend a bib?

As for anecdotal evidence, i can share some too - in fact, i guess i might already have, but here goes:

In Sweden were seeing somewhat of a shift. Perhaps not a drastic one. I still see tons of iphones. But some of the hype seems to have died off. I saw nothing in the news about people lining up for the 4s. Havent heard anyone talk about it. Havent seen one in the wild. Undoubtedly, Apple will continue to do well. Heck, Sweden is one of the strongest Apple markets in the world. But, something has changed. And i dont think i am the only one to have noticed. Why? God only knows. Part of it is probably the need to be "different". With "everyone" having an iphone, its not as cool anymore. Another, and part because of this, people perhaps do not care as much anymore. They basically want a phone, and contrary to public (MR) belief, that phone can be a non-iphone one and still get you through the day.

Interesting, and in fact I already mentioned the case of the colleague buying an Android phone for the GPS usage; he is actively resisting using it as a real smartphone.

That said, where i am at MSFT is... absent. I know one guy that has one. And he is a gold msft partner, and as such... well, having an iphone would look bad. Then again, i havent seen any marketing either. Heck, if i asked 100 people on random, 99% would probably say - Windows, huh? They make phones too?

Interesting too, and will be nice to see the evolution of that.
Here I know only one person with a Win phone, still 6.5 at that.

 

[divinox]

I always talked about iOS devices vs Android devices, so I don't see how my thinking is invalidated. Feel free to elaborate.

The overall context of the discussion seems to have been focused on phones. At least, that is the impression i got from reading it.

No, it's not "iPhone vs no-iPhone".
What it says is that people having an iOS device browse on average the web 3 times more on the device than people having an Android device. (No, my mistake! what it says is that, even though there is a much bigger quantity of Android devices out there, iOS devices are detected 3 times more surfing the web. That's even more impressive than what I originally said!)

Actually, its not. For example, one could easily imagine that browsing is far more common and that people spend more time browsing while doing it on a tablet, than on a phone. Given the numbers of iOS v. Android tablets, one could then quite easily conclude - given the premise - that such a result is to be expected.

Which leads us back to my original point. The data itself is quite useless. At least in the way it has been used in the discussion thus far.

Agreed. That's why I didn't conclude anything about the reasons.
And of course it isn't binary, but I can only readily imagine 3 use cases:

1. phone user,
2. phone + internet device (browsing is a big part of that, since most apps which open web pages will be using the OS-provided browser internally),
3. purpose-specific phone (like my colleague with the Android phone being used only as a GPS)

I can think of several more. Watching videos. Playing games. Chatting. Listening to music. Browsing catalogues. Reading newspapers (Go mag+!), and the list goes on.

While some of these in one way or another may rely on data transfered over TCP/IP: a) data is not necessarily proportional to use, and b) data is not necessarily captured as part of the analysis - for example, if i wrote an app that connected directly to my content server, which was then used to pull (read: stream) massive data sets to the client device, how would the survist know? (answer: most likely, they wouldnt).

Looks like iOS devices, according to the statistics, fall mostly into the (2) category, while Android devices would fall then much more frequently on the other categories.

Which, as mentioned above, could for example be explained by iOS dominant position in the tablet space. Not saying that is the answer, but it very well might be. Point is, it (the data alone) says very little (read: nothing) about a) Androids capabilities, b) how said capabilities are being used by the end user, and c) why this is so.

May I recommend a bib?

Sure, but ill stick with the shirt. Shirts are better when going t-shirt ninja!

Interesting, and in fact I already mentioned the case of the colleague buying an Android phone for the GPS usage; he is actively resisting using it as a real smartphone.

Didnt know there were such a thing as "a real smartphone", or a defined way of using one. To each his own. Thats the beauty of (somewhat) general purpose computing, isnt it?

Interesting too, and will be nice to see the evolution of that.
Here I know only one person with a Win phone, still 6.5 at that.

6.5 is win mobile, not win phone. Guess the difference is moot to a non geek though - but then again, there werent very many non geeks using win mobile to begin with.

 

[mijail]

The overall context of the discussion seems to have been focused on phones. At least, that is the impression i got from reading it.

Well, then maybe what should get invalidated is your impression.

Actually, its not. For example, one could easily imagine that browsing is far more common and that people spend more time browsing while doing it on a tablet, than on a phone. Given the numbers of iOS v. Android tablets, one could then quite easily conclude - given the premise - that such a result is to be expected.

Yep, one could easily imagine lots of things.
But I prefer referring to the real numbers.
In http://www.netmarketshare.com/brows...=1&qpcustomb=1&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=132&qpnp=11 you can see that the number of iOS browsers in the wild didn't change significantly on January 2010 (introduction of the iPad). Since then, Android has surged in selling numbers to the point of dethroning Apple not long ago.
That should be (but isn't!) reflected in the graph for this year: http://www.netmarketshare.com/brows...=1&qpcustomb=1&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=143&qpnp=11

So: your theory was that iOS devices includes tablets, so that explains the (MUCH!) greater proportion of iOS browsers being detected. But as shown, statistics from before the introduction of the iPad and the evolution of said statistics suggest otherwise: looks like iOS users, tablet or not tablet, end up using their devices as web devices astonishingly more frequently than Android users.

(one thing I don't understand is why that seems so... painful? to you; to me just is something interesting, food for thought)

Which leads us back to my original point. The data itself is quite useless. At least in the way it has been used in the discussion thus far.

You see, some interesting things can be seen if you are careful. Or willing.

I can think of several more. Watching videos. Playing games. Chatting. Listening to music. Browsing catalogues. Reading newspapers (Go mag+!), and the list goes on.

Yep, or buying them in bulk and using them as ballast. (Hey, it's possible! )

While some of these in one way or another may rely on data transfered over TCP/IP: a) data is not necessarily proportional to use, and b) data is not necessarily captured as part of the analysis - for example, if i wrote an app that connected directly to my content server, which was then used to pull (read: stream) massive data sets to the client device, how would the survist know? (answer: most likely, they wouldnt).

You're right; as an example, data transmitted over a BTP (Ballast Transfer Protocol) wouldn't appear on any statistic.

Which, as mentioned above, could for example be explained by iOS dominant position in the tablet space. Not saying that is the answer, but it very well might be. Point is, it (the data alone) says very little (read: nothing) about a) Androids capabilities, b) how said capabilities are being used by the end user, and c) why this is so.

It doesn't say anything about (a) nor about (c).
But about (b), it DOES say, clear and loudly, that iOS devices are... (let's repeat once more...) MUCH more frequently used to browse the web than Android devices.
Meanwhile, maybe Android users are somehow, for some reason, careful not to do so.

Sure, but ill stick with the shirt. Shirts are better when going t-shirt ninja!

A bib will it be then.

Didnt know there were such a thing as "a real smartphone", or a defined way of using one. To each his own. Thats the beauty of (somewhat) general purpose computing, isnt it?

Well, I tend to think one important difference between a smartphone and, say, a piece of ballast, is that one is used to browse the web and the other isn't. I'll let you decide which is which.