spamtrap at arumes.com
Tue Jul 29 11:59:10 UTC 2008
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 05:42:24 -0600, Karl Larsen wrote:
>> I can't quite make out if you're asking me to give you statistics on
>> where you were wrong or not.. But if it'd make you happy send me an
>> e-mail off-list and I'll do it for you. Not sure it's going to make
>> your life any better for it.
>> Here's one to get you started with regards to an acceptable sample
>> size. This will at least tell you if your 100 messages is sufficient.
> Your building a case for errors to occur due to the sample size and
> the source of the data. I have never said it was perfect. Yes there are
> all the problems you point out.
> But are you saying that in the general Ubuntu population use of
> Evolution is greater than the use of Thunderbird? That makes the users
> of this list weird. And it is not supported by any statistics I have
Then open your eyes!
#<name> is the package name;
#<inst> is the number of people who installed this package;
#<vote> is the number of people who use this package regularly;
#<old> is the number of people who installed, but don't use this package
#<recent> is the number of people who upgraded this package recently;
#rank name inst vote old recent
443 evolution 509363 80793 404082 24432
587 thunderbird 141871 45359 91515 4937
> The other method that gets this result seems to use how often the
> software is downloaded. This gives Evolution a big edge because it is
> not downloaded and the number of users are those who didn't download
> Thunderbird. This has real error built in.
The popularity contest measures _usage_ too. For the third time, check
the _vote_ column.
And speaking of downloads: note that 72% of Ubuntu's users do _not_
download Thunderbird at all, let alone use it regularly.
Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com
More information about the ubuntu-users