Talk:Net Applications

This article was nominated for deletion on 1 November 2024. The result of the discussion was merge.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

California: Los Angeles Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Greater Los Angeles portal This article is supported by Los Angeles area task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Marketing & Advertising Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Marketing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Marketing & AdvertisingWikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingTemplate:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingMarketing & Advertising articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Complaint

This article sounds like a brochure.

Gabe (talk) 17:27, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I tagged it as such. --icambron (talk) 22:01, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious: what does it mean to tag an article and how does it improve content on Wikipedia? Ottawahitech (talk) 16:57, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Accuracy

Statistics of Net Applications cannot be accurate at least because the not parsed "Others" browsers constitute 1/2 part of the statistics, and, as we can see, it strongly correlates with firefox and chrome percents. --2.60.47.100 (talk) 12:27, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that the data from netmart should be taken seriously. Seems to favor Apple products. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.147.97.14 (talk) 10:34, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Net Applications. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/12/02/safari-tops-7-global-browser-market-share-sort

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:28, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Criticism" section

The Criticism section only cites TechRights (a notoriously anti-Microsoft website) for sources of said critique, while using "some" as a weaselword. The other two cites for this section is noting that NetApplications has Microsoft and Apple as their clients (which basically means they pay for their marketshare reports) and a sentence that misleadingly implies that the company admitted it skews its statistics with its algorithm - checking the source reveals that the company actually said that the results were skewed without any weighting (because the servers it collects data from are mostly in Europe and North America, causing disproportionate results - something that is also true of its competitor, StatCounter) and that it would start weighting the results to remove the bias.

I remember there was this argument a while ago between StatCounter and NetApplications in the press a few years back about their methodology, so it shouldn't be terribly hard to find better sources. The cite for the "skew" should be integrated into the main article as a description of its change in methodology. -MarkKB (talk) 23:06, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, settle down there Steve Ballmer. Don't making your shilling too obvious...