48
Linux didn't just eat 10% of Windows market share, AI bots are inflating the numbers (www.windowslatest.com)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/linux@programming.dev
15 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 30 points 3 months ago (4 children)

This article is based on this guys opinion and very little objective evidence

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago

    Most of it is. Theres a good portion on cloudflare. Linux its over 4% on desktop marketshare when filtering. Which sounds correct. But the rest of the article is just as you say.

    I wonder if cloudflare includes chrome os, specialty linux distros, ect... are pulling the numbers one way or another?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    He seems to have better evidence than the original claim did, though. He quotes statcounter’s own method of producing their figures, and what they actually mean.

    He points out a very odd anomaly with OSX vs macOS numbers too that highlight the problem even more.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    He points out a very odd anomaly with OSX vs macOS numbers too that highlight the problem even more.

    Is it an anomaly? His point is that "OS X" refers to macs pre-2016 and "macOS" as the newer devices. But that's not accurate, at all.

    OS X at 21.14%, and macOS at 8.6% . This is where I stopped reading. We’re looking at OS X, which was replaced by macOS in 2016, at 21.14%, while macOS itself sits at 8.6%.

    Even if you consider OS X and macOS separate operating systems, it does not make sense for the decades-old ‘OS X’ to have more users than macOS.

    Someone in another thread elsewhere said:

    The OS is the same but the browsers report it differently via UA. For example, Chrome reports it as "Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7" with the usual extra compatibility shit mentioning other browsers/engines (KHTML, Gecko) while the modern Safari dropped all of that shit and reports "com.apple.WebKit.Networking/*** Network/*** macOS/15.7.8", just tested with nginx.

    I can't confirm those results, in fact, I can't confirm the "macOS" bit at all. On my Macbook Neo (obviously a current modern Mac, running macOS Tahoe 26.5.2), I get these results:

    Librewolf: "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:151.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/151.0"

    Safari: "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/26.5.2 Safari/605.1.15"

    Notably The Macbook Neo is not an Intel Mac, and it is not running version 15.7 which was the previous version macOS Sequoia, but that is what it reports to websites. It should report as "macOS" according to that one dude, yet it doesn't in either Librewolf or Safari (I don't have Chrome installed, and I'm not going to just for this shit). The User Agent is actively reporting to websites that it is an older device, even in Safari which does also mention the actual current OS version at near the end.

    So if they are relying solely on User Agent reporting, it's obviously not accurate at a granular level. But at a general-OS level it could be depending on exactly how they're handling it.

    Either way, simply saying "macOS" and "OS X" reporting refers to old and new devices... is plain wrong. And if he's wrong on such a basic assumption right at the top of his opinion piece... why would I trust any of the rest?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •