Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

DeepIn2U

macrumors G5
May 30, 2002
12,821
6,876
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
We're seeing the future, folks.

In any case, though, Apple sells a great deal more iOS devices than Macs.

Not the future really, just the past repeating itself.

Mobile devices, smartphones are inherently more accessible for Internet by design. This shows that users are more readably able to surf with something in their pocket to the hand MUCH quicker than their backpack/bag/sleeve to the hand.

What would make this more meaningful is:
What is the average site by mobile device: iOS (iPhone/iPad) vs PC (iMac, MBA, MBP, Mac Pro).
What was the browser of choice?
How many where hacked/themed (just curious)?
How many of those users where roaming?
How many of the users continually used their mobile more than the PC over a 30/60/90/120 day period (trending)?
 

Exhale

macrumors 6502a
Sep 20, 2011
512
145
How many where hacked/themed (just curious)?
How many of those users where roaming?
How many of the users continually used their mobile more than the PC over a 30/60/90/120 day period (trending)?
Unfortunately you cannot collect info on the latter 3 in any way.

Operating system and browser is something the useragent informs the website on its own every time it requests something. But themers and hackers do not modify what the browser reports.

If you wonder what the useragent is, take a look at the string of text that shows up here every time someone posts on a mobile device.
 

Awfisch

macrumors regular
Feb 1, 2011
101
49
Remember that iOS is only seeing HALF of the internet; and it can never be successful because it doesn't have FLASH.

(sorry, I had to say it.)

This couldn't be more incorrect. Flash is dying, and it's dying fast. Even Google, known for making their operating system 'open' isn't going to support flash on future versions. Even Adobe has acknowledged that flash is giving way to HTML 5. Flash is slow, insecure, and not as compatible with mobile browsers. Very soon flash will be gone all together.
 

*LTD*

macrumors G4
Feb 5, 2009
10,703
1
Canada
This couldn't be more incorrect. Flash is dying, and it's dying fast. Even Google, known for making their operating system 'open' isn't going to support flash on future versions. Even Adobe has acknowledged that flash is giving way to HTML 5. Flash is slow, insecure, and not as compatible with mobile browsers. Very soon flash will be gone all together.

I think you missed his sarcasm.
 

PracticalMac

macrumors 68030
Jan 22, 2009
2,857
5,242
Houston, TX
It did. Its the 'Other 84%' that remained perfectly static throughout the entire graph. Thats kind of what highlights a problem. If Apple's devices are beating the market average - their share should increase. But its failed to grow at all. iOS has increased, but it has come effectively purely at the cost of Mac OS.

That's an assumption.

Flaws I see in this method:
Does the browser accurately indicate the OS despite the browser used?

It is also possible Mac's are not making in roads into business, and that is likely where more web activity is taking place.

Still...
 

Exhale

macrumors 6502a
Sep 20, 2011
512
145
Does the browser accurately indicate the OS despite the browser used?
Uh, yes. The job of the useragent is to send basic information of the machine itself. Two things always present is operating system (and version) along with the browser (and version).

Intel Mac OSX 10.7.2 running Chrome 14:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_7_2) AppleWebKit/535.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/14.0.835.202 Safari/535.1

Windows 7 installation running Opera 11.61:
Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 6.1; U; en) Presto/2.10.229 Version/11.61

Windows 7 installation running Firefox 7:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/7.0.1

iPad (running version 3.2 apparently) running Safari version 4.0.4:
Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/531.21.10 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.4 Mobile/7B334b Safari/531.21.10

iPhone iOS 5.0.1 running Safari version 5.1:
Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A406 Safari/7534.48.3

Even Internet Explorer will identify the Windows version it is running on. (Windows 7, IE9, running 64-bit)
Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 9.0; Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; Trident/5.0)

You will find that most phones go so far as to even identify their own model number. You can easily spot a Galaxy S2 because the string will contain "GT-I9100". Likewise the BlackBerry 9800 will identify itself in the same position, as will an Omnia W I8350.
 
Last edited:

PracticalMac

macrumors 68030
Jan 22, 2009
2,857
5,242
Houston, TX
Uh, yes. The job of the useragent is to send basic information of the machine itself. Two things always present is operating system (and version) along with the browser (and version).

Intel Mac OSX 10.7.2 running Chrome 14:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_7_2) AppleWebKit/535.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/14.0.835.202 Safari/535.1

Windows 7 installation running Opera 11.61:
Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 6.1; U; en) Presto/2.10.229 Version/11.61

Windows 7 installation running Firefox 7:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/7.0.1

iPad running iOS version 4.0.4:
Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/531.21.10 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.4 Mobile/7B334b Safari/531.21.10

Thanks. :)
 

Shrink

macrumors G3
Feb 26, 2011
8,929
1,727
New England, USA
If everyone had an ad-blocker the internet couldn't operate as it does now. Using an ad-blocker for every site is essentially the same as piracy.

You don't think "piracy" is a little strong?

You're saying that if I don't have to have ads all over my pages, that I'm stealing something?

If so, I'm surprised that places like Google and other web sites wouldn't raise a stink about adblock apps. Safari Extension AdBlock would then be a way to steal?

I'm not being facetious. I am considering your point. But I do think that blocking the clutter of ads doesn't quite represent piracy.

It is an interesting point that you make. To be honest, I'm not ready to dump AdBlock, however.:D
 

mrsir2009

macrumors 604
Sep 17, 2009
7,505
156
Melbourne, Australia
You don't think "piracy" is a little strong?

You're saying that if I don't have to have ads all over my pages, that I'm stealing something?

If so, I'm surprised that places like Google and other web sites wouldn't raise a stink about adblock apps. Safari Extension AdBlock would then be a way to steal?

I'm not being facetious. I am considering your point. But I do think that blocking the clutter of ads doesn't quite represent piracy.

It is an interesting point that you make. To be honest, I'm not ready to dump AdBlock, however.:D

Well, when you think about it, if you're using a service or a product without paying the "price" (in this case, viewing the ads) then that's stealing, really. I agree with you on the point that the word piracy may seem a little strong for blocking ads, however the word piracy also seems a little strong for downloading a YouTube video.

This will end in either a few ways:

1) Ad-blockers won't take off, so websites will continue as they do now; displaying ads for revenue but taking a hit in their pocket from those using ad-blockers.

2) Websites will find a way of detecting ad-blockers, so they can deny access to those using them. In fact, some websites have gone as far as denying access to all FireFox users back when FireFox had the only popular ad blocking extension.

3) Websites will have to change their business model because ads won't pay the bills. So have fun paying $$$ to view almost every website you visit ;)
 

Shrink

macrumors G3
Feb 26, 2011
8,929
1,727
New England, USA
Well, when you think about it, if you're using a service or a product without paying the "price" (in this case, viewing the ads) then that's stealing, really. I agree with you on the point that the word piracy may seem a little strong for blocking ads, however the word piracy also seems a little strong for downloading a YouTube video.

This will end in either a few ways:

1) Ad-blockers won't take off, so websites will continue as they do now; displaying ads for revenue but taking a hit in their pocket from those using ad-blockers.

2) Websites will find a way of detecting ad-blockers, so they can deny access to those using them. In fact, some websites have gone as far as denying access to all FireFox users back when FireFox had the only popular ad blocking extension.

3) Websites will have to change their business model because ads won't pay the bills. So have fun paying $$$ to view almost every website you visit ;)

Your points are interesting. They give me food for thought.

On another thread we could check what Google knows about us. I had "no ID cookie". I wonder if one reason is AdBlock, but I certainly can't prove that. I am suggesting that avoiding ads helps protect my privacy. However, I cannot be sure of this.

In any case, I found your response well considered and reasonable.

Thanks for taking the time to respond.:D
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.