leeappdalecom wrote: What?
I don't see what was wrong with that post, certainly not trolling?
Nor did I mention firefox. Apparently someone's knee jerked too quickly and made assumptions.
Of course I don't think that he realised by slamming Firefox's use of the same metric he's actually agreed with my point.
First, I didn't slam FF metric. If you read again, I made the point that the metric (whether done by FF or IE) is still a valid relative gauge. My bringing up FF was only to point out that the metric is used by everyone (and not just IE and FF). I didn't assume anything about your post in regards to FF.
As for the point that IE is the only one pushed out by Windows Update... that's only a little relevant. Many other browsers/applications that make D/L claims also have some sort of automatic internet update mechanism that skews the figures in exactly the same manner. The only slight difference is that IE is something you can't get away from easily, and so the skew might be larger. But I don't honestly think that's enough of a factor to invalidate the relative accuracy of the statistic.
Oh, and I believe you're trolling mostly because of point 1 in my original post. Your language and tone indicate a troll more than the content, which could be the basis of a valid opinion on the accuracy of the statistics and thus a reason to question the blog entry, even if I disagree for the reasons I stated.